Regardless of true or not true, I would never vote for Obama.

 

No kidding. Would have never guessed that with the pic of slant head Hannity.

This situation is not a rumor, it is an allegation.

Completely ridiculous.

This situation is not a rumor, it is an allegation.

:thumb:

This situation is not a rumor, it is an allegation.

 

al·le·ga·tion

1. the act of alleging; affirmation.

2. an assertion made with little or no proof.

 

I can agree with that.

LINK

 

 

ru·mor

–noun

1. a story or statement in general circulation without confirmation or certainty as to facts: a rumor of war.

 

But I can see why some would consider it a rumor as well.

al·le·ga·tion

1. the act of alleging; affirmation.

2. an assertion made with little or no proof.

 

I can agree with that.

LINK

 

 

ru·mor

–noun

1. a story or statement in general circulation without confirmation or certainty as to facts: a rumor of war.

 

But I can see why some would consider it a rumor as well.

The allegation has been made and so far has not been refuted. The allegation is not a rumor.

The allegation has been made and so far has not been refuted. The allegation is not a rumor.

 

Other than one meaning said by one person, and the other being circulated in general, what to you feel that the difference is? Which is worse?

The allegation has been made and so far has not been refuted. The allegation is not a rumor.

 

I'm not arguing with you. I simply said I can see why some would call it a rumor.

Other than one meaning said by one person, and the other being circulated in general, what to you feel that the difference is? Which is worse?

Anybody can start a rumor anonymously. An allegation requires somebody to step forward and deliver it. Untrue rumors are much more difficult to refute because their source cannot always be determined.

 

If the New York Times or other major media outlet wanted to objectively investigate the allegation against Obama along with the accuser's credibility, they could conceivably disprove the allegation. That will not happen because the New York times is not objective, as evidenced by the McCain hit piece.

Anybody can start a rumor anonymously. An allegation requires somebody to step forward and deliver it. Untrue rumors are much more difficult to refute because their source cannot always be determined.

 

If the New York Times or other major media outlet wanted to objectively investigate the allegation against Obama along with the accuser's credibility, they could conceivably disprove the allegation. That will not happen because the New York times is not objective, as evidenced by the McCain hit piece.

 

When did we start arguing about the New York Times objectivity? I could find tons of newspapers around the world conservative and liberal alike that are not objective. Who cares?

 

How many times do I have to tell you that I'm not arguing with you on the fact that it is an allegation? I simply am saying I can see why some would confuse the two.

Anybody can start a rumor anonymously. An allegation requires somebody to step forward and deliver it. Untrue rumors are much more difficult to refute because their source cannot always be determined.

 

If the New York Times or other major media outlet wanted to objectively investigate the allegation against Obama along with the accuser's credibility, they could conceivably disprove the allegation. That will not happen because the New York times is not objective, as evidenced by the McCain hit piece.

 

Thanks for your interpretation. :thumb:

When did we start arguing about the New York Times objectivity? I could find tons of newspapers around the world conservative and liberal alike that are not objective. Who cares?

 

How many times do I have to tell you that I'm not arguing with you on the fact that it is an allegation? I simply am saying I can see why some would confuse the two.

I am not arguing with you at all. I was responding to True blue (and gold)'s question posed to me. There is a distinction between a rumor and an allegation and I agree that some people do not know the difference.

 

As for who cares about the New York Times' objectivity, the answer is many people care and that is why its circulation numbers have tanked. NYT stories are picked up and reprinted around the country and around the world. When organizations like CBS and the NYT attempt to influence elections through intentionally biased reporting, we all lose.

I am not arguing with you at all. I was responding to True blue (and gold)'s question posed to me. There is a distinction between a rumor and an allegation and I agree that some people do not know the difference.

 

As for who cares about the New York Times' objectivity, the answer is many people care and that is why its circulation numbers have tanked. NYT stories are picked up and reprinted around the country and around the world. When organizations like CBS and the NYT attempt to influence elections through intentionally biased reporting, we all lose.

 

And what about Fox News? They don't do the same at all, huh?

And what about Fox News? They don't do the same at all, huh?

Has Fox News run a hit piece on Obama? According to Hillary, she has gotten more fair coverage from FNC than any of the other alphabet networks.

Has Fox News run a hit piece on Obama? According to Hillary, she has gotten more fair coverage from FNC than any of the other alphabet networks.

 

I'm not sure if they have or not.

 

However you try to make it seem like Democrats/Liberal supporters are the only ones who have these shady tactics, and that is simply not true. It happens on both sides whether you like it or not.