quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

quote:


Name someone who voted with a fraudulent registration submitted by ACORN. If there was even a hint of such surely someone was prosecuted.

quote:

ACORN was legally forced to permanently surrender it's business licenses in Ohio.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

ACORN was legally forced to permanently surrender it's business licenses in Ohio.

Hey ... fill me in on this... since I know on this topic, regardless of interpretation you're continually reading the news that comes forward.... Has there been any public outcry to have Compasspoint GPS curtail it's activities. Because in addition to dumping millions in advertising into the battle ground states, they're engaging in the same basic activities ACORN was frowned upon for.
I have no specific info in regard to Ohio, which is why I ask you. In Mass and NH they are spending huge amounts of money for feet on the ground... mainly cause it's a tough call in NH at this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

Video? Don't see any link for a video.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

Video? Don't see any link for a video.

You're really claiming not to know about the Shirley Sherrod fake scandal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_Shirley_Sherrod

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

Video? Don't see any link for a video.

You're really claiming not to know about the Shirley Sherrod fake scandal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_Shirley_Sherrod

There is no proof that Breitbart knew the video was edited prior to his putting it on his site. He even agreed that the video took her out of context.

So, where is the condemning evidence of Breitbart?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

Video? Don't see any link for a video.

You're really claiming not to know about the Shirley Sherrod fake scandal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_Shirley_Sherrod

There is no proof that Breitbart knew the video was edited prior to his putting it on his site. He even agreed that the video took her out of context.
So, where is the condemning evidence of Breitbart?

He edited the tape and put the placards on the front. He admitted having the entire speech. That's why the anti-SLAPP motion failed.

quote:

Excerpted video
On July 19, 2010, two different video clips [A] were posted by the conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart to his BigGovernment.com website, along with a nearly 1,000-word blog post in which he accused Sherrod of carrying out her duties "through the prism of race and class distinctions." He says that she discriminated racially against a white farmer by referring him to a white lawyer, and notes the audience reaction of NAACP members seemed to approve of her actions.[14]
The first video showed Sherrod describing an experience of working with a white man seeking help to save his farm. She struggled with helping him at a time when many black people were losing their land. The excerpt suggests she did just enough, especially by taking him to a white lawyer -"his own kind would take care of him."[14] She said she realized it was about the poor versus "those who have."[14]
Subsequent events showed that the posted video was an excerpt of broader comments that conveyed a very different meaning, in which Sherrod learned from her experience.[15] Breitbart said he did not edit the video excerpt which he released and did not have a copy of the entire speech.[16] The full 43-minute video[B] was produced by a Douglas, Georgia, company that filmed the banquet for the local Georgia chapter of the NAACP. The owner of the video company, Johnny Wilkerson, said on July 20 that he was sending the full video to the national NAACP and would post it in full once he got permission to do so.[17] Breitbart's source for the excerpt remained confidential as of July 2010.[18]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The text at the start of the Sherrod video.

Video? Don't see any link for a video.

You're really claiming not to know about the Shirley Sherrod fake scandal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_Shirley_Sherrod

There is no proof that Breitbart knew the video was edited prior to his putting it on his site. He even agreed that the video took her out of context.
So, where is the condemning evidence of Breitbart?

He edited the tape and put the placards on the front. He admitted having the entire speech. That's why the anti-SLAPP motion failed.

From your link:

quote:

Excerpted video
On July 19, 2010, two different video clips [A] were posted by the conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart to his BigGovernment.com website, along with a nearly 1,000-word blog post in which he accused Sherrod of carrying out her duties "through the prism of race and class distinctions." He says that she discriminated racially against a white farmer by referring him to a white lawyer, and notes the audience reaction of NAACP members seemed to approve of her actions.[14]
The first video showed Sherrod describing an experience of working with a white man seeking help to save his farm. She struggled with helping him at a time when many black people were losing their land. The excerpt suggests she did just enough, especially by taking him to a white lawyer -"his own kind would take care of him."[14] She said she realized it was about the poor versus "those who have."[14]
Subsequent events showed that the posted video was an excerpt of broader comments that conveyed a very different meaning, in which Sherrod learned from her experience.[15] Breitbart said he did not edit the video excerpt which he released and did not have a copy of the entire speech.[16] The full 43-minute video[B] was produced by a Douglas, Georgia, company that filmed the banquet for the local Georgia chapter of the NAACP. The owner of the video company, Johnny Wilkerson, said on July 20 that he was sending the full video to the national NAACP and would post it in full once he got permission to do so.[17] Breitbart's source for the excerpt remained confidential as of July 2010.[18]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Here is Breitbart admitting he had the entire tape and lying about what it contained. He also admits that he put the placards in the tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty3yyWchnDk
It is only after it became clear the whole tape was going to be in the public domain and that it proved his wrong doing did Breitbart start tap dancing around who did what with the tape.

quote:

I have not heard of them. Got a link or anything? Through Google, not much at all comes up that pertains.

quote:

There is no proof that Breitbart knew the video was edited prior to his putting it on his site. He even agreed that the video took her out of context.

So, where is the condemning evidence of Breitbart?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Here is Breitbart admitting he had the entire tape and lying about what it contained. He also admits that he put the placards in the tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty3yyWchnDk
It is only after it became clear the whole tape was going to be in the public domain and that it proved his wrong doing did Breitbart start tap dancing around who did what with the tape.

Um, you must not have heard the audio outside of what you wanted to hear. While he did tapdance quite a bit, he also stated that he just got the full video.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

There is no proof that Breitbart knew the video was edited prior to his putting it on his site. He even agreed that the video took her out of context.
So, where is the condemning evidence of Breitbart?

Oh, bow people have to PROVE Breitbart wasn't a malevolent PISS YELLOW 'JOURNALIST''?
Please tell me you are fucking kidding.
His life and career are evidence unto themselves that he was a no account lowlife scumbag, who merely played at journalism, and lowered the bar for an entire medium.
I have to laugh right in the face of anyone who comes around trying to exonerate that piece of shit.
[image]http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-violent023.gif[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Here is Breitbart admitting he had the entire tape and lying about what it contained. He also admits that he put the placards in the tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty3yyWchnDk
It is only after it became clear the whole tape was going to be in the public domain and that it proved his wrong doing did Breitbart start tap dancing around who did what with the tape.

Um, you must not have heard the audio outside of what you wanted to hear. While he did tapdance quite a bit, he also stated that he just got the full video.

He said several times that he was going to release more vieo and that it would reinforce his claims against Sherrod. How precisely could he do that without more of the tape than the one segment? Now that the entire tape is public it is also clear that he lied when he claimed the rest of the tape would support his claims.

quote:

So he ither lied when he claimed he got only the one segment or he lied when he claimed he had more.
He also must have lied when he said the rest of the tape would support his claims, either because he had not actually seen the rest or because he had and would have known the speech blew his claims out of the water.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
So, let me distill this, so I can make a rational decision.
A man whos claim to fame was botching the fuck out of a news story, and drunkenly yelling 'stop raping' into a new york news camera shortly before he cakked due to a gob of fat running thru his heart has an organization dedicated to his same shitbreathing principles of blogging yellow journalism and we are sifting out if it has any valid information to offer us?
Did I get this about right, or have I over complicated the issues?   

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Yup if any vitroilic lying bloggers 'journalism' is two massive fuckups and nothing else, I dont consider them a source of information.
That is any media, I hold them all to that standard, and more.
Breitbart is a second cut, Boortz a first as is Rassmussen, and Drudge didnt make the third.  Faux is still good for a laugh, but they are not credible.....
Anything else?  

quote:

Initial media reports
The first news outlet to report on the Breitbart video was FoxNews.com, which posted an article about the story on its website.[20] The New York City affiliate for CBS posted a report on its website later that afternoon.[20] The Atlanta Journal Constitution website soon picked up the story.[21] In addition, the story was picked up and reported widely in the blogosphere.[20]