Posted on 08/19/2005 3:06:17 PM PDT by Chicos_Bail_Bonds
KRUGMAN TRIES TO PULL A FAST ONE [John Podhoretz] Paul krugman tells a whopper today in his column about media recounts in the 2000 election: "Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida's ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore." Um--no. Wrong. Bzzzzz. One of those groups was led by USA Today, and here's what they found in a May 15, 2001 USA Today story headlined "Newspapers recount show Bush prevailed": "George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes."
This will be the subject of about a billion blog entries today. Did Krugman really think he could get away with this?
Posted at 06:28 AM
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
I saw this on an earlier thread and called BS on it then too.
Krugman can't be lying. he has a Nobel Prize in economics. He's an honorable guy, right?
When isn't Krugman lying? He is such a little wuss. He has only ONCE actually sat across from somebody in a real confrontation on anything he has said and he was pummelled (O'Reilly - not a good person to start boxing with). Krugman is a pantywaisted weasal. Its a symptom of the disease which is the NYTimes.
Filthy libs never stop lying.
Called BS on what?
bttt
He's a liberal. Dishonesty is, by definition, part of his being.
Krugman has probably lied all his life and doesn't know anything different. Now that he gets busted almost everyday you would think he would stop writing altogether.
These liberals cannot stop crying over 2000. Yet if you had asked them on 09/14/01 if they were glad that Bush won and Gore lost, 90% would of said yes.
I remember one newspaper count having Gore win by exactly 3 votes using, ironically, a method of counting the Bush campaign wanted. Every other count I saw had Bush winning.
I saw this on an earlier thread and called BS on it then too.
------
Just another left-wing loon who believes that lying turns folly into fact. Welcome to the MSM. It is getting almost comical that these fools are so lost, that they must invent their own reality to get through the day....
That moron Krugman claiming the newspapers that counted the votes AFTER Bush won in 2000, found that Gore won, not Bush.
Man, it is getting to the point it would be easier to point out when this moron tells the truth since he seems to have adopted the Clinton "lie all the time" strategy.
You sure? I spend a lot of time watching the media and never saw this.
Old scumbags like Krugman must constantly slap themselves in the head like Homer Simpson every time they get caught brazenly lying in their old-media newpaper columns: "D'oh! Stupid new media!"
Liar Bump
I'm surprised I found it this quickly.
I wish Rush Limbaugh would do something he did in years past on his radio program. Telephone this guy, while live on the radio, and ask him how he can state such lies. Put the guy into a corner and let him defend himself, and let him show everyone for the liar that he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.