[stupendousman]

I"ve already posted in numerous threads the factual rebuttal to the lies concerning the "Sex ed" ad, which was as factual as political ads get (they all exaggerate to some extent).

Here's an interesting article by Stewart Taylor (no right-wing conservative or apparent fan of McCain) that illustrates the dishonesty that pervades the MSM and especially anything having to do with Obama's campaign.

National Journal Magazine - Campaign Lies, Media Double Standards

In the article, Taylor gives many examples where the media not only supports distortions made by the Obama camp and his supporters, but goes even further by making dishonest distortions and misrepresenting candidates views themselves. That is in comparison to their support of every claim (true or false) of distortions by McCain and his camp.

Taylor points out in regards to the "sex ed" ad that the New York Times "overstated the case in saying that "the kindergarten ad flat-out lies" and that "at most, kindergartners were to be taught the dangers of sexual predators." In fact, whatever Obama's intention, the bill itself was designed "to mandate that issues like contraception and the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases be included in sex-education classes for children below sixth grade, and as early as kindergarten," as Byron York demonstrates in a detailed National Review Online article."

It also outlines other instances where Obama pretty much told huge whoppers and the media was silent. This in addition to the distortions and dishonest inventions made up by the media themselves.

Sad.

[Dual Porpoise]

Let's take a look at the text of that bill. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...on_sex_ed.html has a pretty thorough analysis if you're actually interested in what's going on rather than presenting just-about-technically-true statements that paint whichever candidate you don't like in a bad light.

[Dakar V]

This really needed it's own thread? It's just going to be a rehash of what's been argued in two other threads.

[Dual Porpoise]

It does look like exactly the same nonsense as was in the other two.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Dual Porpoise 

Let's take a look at the text of that bill. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...on_sex_ed.html has a pretty thorough analysis if you're actually interested in what's going on rather than presenting just-about-technically-true statements that paint whichever candidate you don't like in a bad light.

I've already covered factcheck.org's distortions. They've updated their site with a second article that backtracks some, but they still are getting it wrong:

http://mccainindependents.blogspot.c...orrection.html

[Dork.]

Yes, this thread is redundant. So is this post.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Dakar V 

This really needed it's own thread? It's just going to be a rehash of what's been argued in two other threads.

I posted a new article for discussion, where a member of the mainstream media actually goes on record as stating that most of the media is lying for Obama. It does correlate to the other threads that contain evidence that the Obama campaign and the mainstream media are engaged in a dishonest attempt to deceive America, but figured we'd discuss this partical article in this thread.

I was giving democrats the benefit of the doubt that they'd agree that the media has gone too far in showing their partisanship. I guess I was wrong.

[Dual Porpoise]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I guess I was wrong.

In every way possible.

[Dakar V]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I posted a new article for discussion, where a member of the mainstream media actually goes on record as stating that most of the media is lying for Obama. It does correlate to the other threads that contain evidence that the Obama campaign and the mainstream media are engaged in a dishonest attempt to deceive America, but figured we'd discuss this partical article in this thread.

Seems like an excuse to post more sensationalized thread titles. The new article could be discussed perfectly fine as an addendum to the other thread, whose content it already deals with wholly.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I was giving democrats the benefit of the doubt that they'd agree that the media has gone too far in showing their partisanship. I guess I was wrong.

Spare me your mock platitudes.