well, fox viewers cant tell the difference between truth and fiction, so how surprising is it that fox announcers cant either? that is assuming they dont purvey this crap on purpose, and some, of course, they do. but sprinkles? thats like the idiocy, fast disproven, clung to by the likes of drudge and not-very-breitbart. example: reporter calls congressional aide for interview and asks, among other things, whether the congressperson would support a candidate who was known to give money to terrorist organizations. aide doesnt understand the question. reporter says, for example, if the congressman found out that, say, obama was giving money to (or it might have been taking money from -- i forget) friends of hamas, what would the congressman do? the aide tells the congressman that obama is taking money from (or giving money to) friends of hamas. breitbart picks it up and reports it. problem: there is NO SUCH ENTITY. it was just an example innocently made up by a reporter trying to help a rather dull aide understand the question. when this is pointed out, breitbart doubles down on its declaration and insists that obama is having financial transactions with this now-proven-to-be-nonexistent group, friends of hamas. it suits their purpose to continue to purvey this to people who mistake breitbart for, um, you know, actual news. anyway, fox is the same: easy to fool, and doubles down on their errors when caught at them. SPRINKLES! g
Posted on: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 12:04:38 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015