How many times do I have to explain myself?
Okay, I”ll give you another example of Diogenesis’ lies. Diogenisis posted numerous times that a certain candidate “attacked” and “hurt” Sarah Palin’s “little children.” Now, don’t you have a problem with that like I do? Diogenesis’ crap has got to stop. And, like I said, I don’t care who the lies are about — lies are lies.
Posting references to the posts and reports of others,
could not possibly be in itself "lies".
In fact, such an obvious false distortion, made in the absence of facts to rebut,
such as made repeatedly by GOP_Lady (indeed),
are the last refuge of scoundrels unable to rebut anything.
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"
"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"
Similar to Romney's other scortched earth tactics:
Novak: "Fred Thompson drop-out rumors traced to Romney campaign"
Said Novak: "The rumors were traced in part to Mitt Romney's campaign,
trying to stir up strife between McCain and Thompson."
"Despite outspending his rivals by huge margins throughout the primaries,
(Mitt Romney, Carpetbagger UT,CA,MA,NH,Mexico) lost Iowa, South Carolina, Florida and California.
The only primaries he won were in Michigan, where Dad was governor; LDS states;
and a few states on Super Tuesday in which his California-obsessed rivals
couldn't spare the cash to advertise.
Only John Connolly in 1968 had a worse cash-to-delegates ratio.
And John McCain rightly did not like Romney's tactics during the primaries.
(W)hen (Romney's early leads) started slipping away, he resorted to unfair,
distorted, scorched-earth negative ads, betting that his opponents couldn't
afford to spend enough for the truth to catch up to his charges."
[Romney: A Mistake for McCain, 7/23/2008, Dick Morris]
How many times do you have to do it? Every time, just like any political warrior does. You have to do it every time, all the time, and when you do, you cannot just say, "You're lying!" without something to back it up. You think you should be able to cry "liar!" once or twice and then sit back and be done with it? Then you are thinking like a little girl. What I really suspect it is is that you're too lazy to put the effort of researching and then writing up your claims. Diogenesis and fieldmarshaldj have obviously put a lot of time and work into their research and writing, and it shows -- it's effective. You don't want to go to the work, time, and trouble of actually researching and finding things to
prove what you charge, but you want to be treated as if you did. In that, you're behaving like a spoiled third-grade girl.
How many times do I have to tell fellow FReepers that Romneybots lie about "endorsements" from Rush Limbaugh, Mike Reagan, and who knows who else? I have to do it everytime I see it come up. And if you notice, I am always ready to back it up -- I don't just say that Limbaugh and Reagan never endorsed Romney, I go to the trouble and time of either explaining or posting the details that prove no endorsements were intended or given, because I have done the work of finding the proof myself. And if anyone challenges me on it, I have the real stuff to back it up.
You think Diogensis is lying. Fine. SHOW US some proof the links and articles about the Palin charges aren't genuine, instead of just saying that he's lying and when whining when people don't believe you because you cannot or will not back it up.
You really do behave like a third grade girl on this forum with your expectations. Again, if you're going to say "lies are lies," SHOW HOW AND WHY you think they are lies. You think you can just say it and be taken on faith. It is extremely arrogant and stupid of you to take that attitude.
When I say that certain posters here lie, I back it up with PROOF.
You say Diogenesis has lied about a particular item. PROVE IT.