“Hmmm...but that doesn’t mean it’s not true, does it? Radar also has stories about Huckabee’s South Carolina appearances in the top stories list, and CNN, Fox News, ABC Radio and my local newspaper all run stories about both Huckabee and Lindsay Lohan. Strike one!”
It’s a dumb tabloid/blog. You posted an article that claims something that isn’t written about anywhere else on the interweb, and fails to mention it’s not involved with the campaign.
Strike 1 for you!
“Radar says they received a notice. If they did not do so and they publlish a retraction, I will ask the mods to pull this thread. If the mods don’t pull it, I will post an notice of the retraction to everyone who posted to this thread.”
Produce the notice. The preponderance of proof is on the asserter. Not the defender. Since when does it matter if a website with 7 readers posts a retraction? They just move on to the next tabloid article.
Strike 2 for you!
I did find one blog where they mentioned the band was “signed” for the concert but that they didn’t have enough money to pay the deposit for the campground!
So, as of now, there is no concert.
Major strike 3 for you!
“Right the Paul campaign has nothing to do with this...”
If they do, PROVE IT. The FEC will come down on all of them like a ton of bricks.
It’s much easier to smear than support your idiotic false claims though. SO you’re going to just keep it up. Figures.
The Paul-Haters are the real Paultards. The name Ron Paul makes you act like a total retard, foaming at the mouth and having a fit.
Strike 4 for you!
“or with Don Black’s donation...”
I guess you’d rather he give the money back to Black - then when black did something else dumb, Paul can be attacked for helping fund Black’s activities. You guys are so slick! Paul is using that losers money for good, and totally repudiated him and other people like him who sent him money, mistakenly. The fault isn’t Paul’s - it’s Don Black’s problem for being so dumb he doesn’t understand Paul’s message isn’t for him.
Strike 5 for you!!!!!
“or with racist newsletters (the guy’s qaulified to be commander in chief, but he can’t read a newsletter he published for five years)...”
Cite the so-caalled racist quotes? To the TNR idiot who wrote the article, attacking the welfare state for causing the conditions that led to the LA riots is “racist.” And Paul must be some kinda militia whacko for defending the 2nd amendment.
Strike 6!
You have 2x the strikes as you claimed I did, on the same amount of information.
“the guy’s qaulified to be commander in chief, but he can’t read a newsletter he published for five years)...or with any of these. Strike three!”
and
“Their money does, and so does money raised at Stormfront.”
Fred Thompson represented Aristide for free. For free! 2 weeks after he advocated putting a gas soaked car tire over people heads and lighting them on fire - and went on to talk about how nice that smelled. When asked about the content of his call with John Sununu to lobby for Aristide the marxist dictator/murderer, he said he “can’t recall.” Just what we need, another clinton!
You defended the TNR article - that’s all pinned on you now. Live with it.
Strikes 7 and 8!
“I and almost every other person on FR who opposes Paul talked issues from the beginning, particularly about the war that Dr. Paul would like to lose in Iraq.”
Another lie - strike 9! you’re on a roll.
“We were smeared as haters of the Constitution because we wanted to kill Al Qaidaa there, and just a coupple of days ago I was accused of being on the payroll of the Giuliani campaign since early last year even though I have never posted anything in support of him, and much that attacks him.”
I can’t figure out what you are babbling about here so you get the benefit of the doubt.
Your logic is astounding.
Normally I agree with that (I love it when people make some outrageous claim and then tell me I'm "giving them homework" when I ask for a cite) but there are three big problems with your assertion:
1. If we apply your standard, every post on FR from a news outlet would have to be backed up by a second confirmation document. For example, if someone posted a thread about the number of Iraqis killed in a car bombing, they would have to produce death certificates. If someone posted the Radar story about Huckabee's rally with Chuck Norris and Rick Flair, they would have to post a video link to the entire rally. Same thing if the NYT, Fox News or Human Events did a similar story.
2. I am not the asserter, Radar is, and I have already agreed to broadcast it if they are not being truthful.
3. Now you're asserting that Radar cooks up false stories...don't you need an original docuument for that, like a memo from a Radar editor to a reporter saying "Get Ron Paul"?
Paul took the money. If you go to bed with dogs you wake up with fleas.