more "conservative" bs debunked

[dagon]

• Tweet

Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy made a statement on the show on Friday to clarify that the show's earlier report that President Obama had planned to apologize to Japan for Hiroshima was, in fact, not true.

"We'd like to clarify a story we reported on yesterday on this program," Doocy said. "The story was about a possible apology from President Obama to the country of Japan for the United States dropping bombs on that country during World War II.

"Well," he continued, "we want to make sure this is very clear. There was never a plan for President Obama to apologize to Japan. We should have been clearer about this, and we're sorry for any confusion."

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-and-friends-clarifies-its-false-reporting-about-hiroshima-apology-wikileaks-cable/

peace

[Pepsi]

Fancy that.. I was listening to right wing radio on my way to work the other day and they were going on about this mockingly how Obama was going to do this.   

That's how it works, some bs put out by anyone in the right wing echo chamber becomes fact to these people and regurgitated over and over - facts or no facts

[Observer]

I would like to see the actual cable from which the original information was obtained. It certainly would not be out of character for Obama to grovel before the Emperor of Japan like he as before everyone else. It would also not b out of character for him to use the power of his office to force a retraction from the press.

Let's see the cable.

[SufferedMoreThanJesus]

Fuck Doochey...whoever he is.

I heard it from the Mouth of God, Sean Hannity.

*Case Closed*

[johnhp]

Amazing that these guys admit that there "never was a plan" and Observer doubles down.

[Observer]

Amazing that these guys admit that there "never was a plan" and Observer doubles down.

John, I realize you are not particularly bright, but I have not claimed there was a plan.

The information that caused people to conclude that such a plan existed was apparently contained in some diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks. Obviously, there was language in those cables that made people think such a plan existed. I suggested the cables be published in order to allow others to determine whether that conclusion was a reasonable one.

I also suggested quite openly that it would not be out of character for Obama to formulate such a plan, nor would it be out of character to pressure people to recant their statements after exposing it.

What part of that confused you?

If you weren't such an egotistical blowhard with a single digit IQ, you might also find the language contained in the retraction rather curious. The word plan was given more emphasis than you would normally expect in a simple retraction. The report I originally heard was that the idea was floated before Japanese officials who rejected the idea. If that is true, it would mean the idea was rejected before an actual plan was formulated. This would make the Obama administration's contention that no such plan existed true, although it would require some semantic juggling for most people to see it that way. It would also explain the curious wording of the retraction.

The only way to know for sure is to read the actual cables.

Now, I know it makes your head hurt when you actually have to think, but when you are totally confused, you could at least save a little face by asking someone to dumb down the discussion for you instead of making an ass of yourself by pretending you "get it".

[johnhp]

John, I realize you are not particularly bright, but I have not claimed there was a plan.

The information that caused people to conclude that such a plan existed was apparently contained in some diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks. Obviously, there was language in those cables that made people think such a plan existed. I suggested the cables be published in order to allow others to determine whether that conclusion was a reasonable one.

I also suggested quite openly that it would not be out of character for Obama to formulate such a plan, nor would it be out of character to pressure people to recant their statements after exposing it.

What part of that confused you?

If you weren't such an egotistical blowhard with a single digit IQ, you might also find the language contained in the retraction rather curious. The word plan was given more emphasis than you would normally expect in a simple retraction. The report I originally heard was that the idea was floated before Japanese officials who rejected the idea. If that is true, it would mean the idea was rejected before an actual plan was formulated. This would make the Obama administration's contention that no such plan existed true, although it would require some semantic juggling for most people to see it that way. It would also explain the curious wording of the retraction.

The only way to know for sure is to read the actual cables.

Now, I know it makes your head hurt when you actually have to think, but when you are totally confused, you could at least save a little face by asking someone to dumb down the discussion for you instead of making an ass of yourself by pretending you "get it".

Observer,

i find it amusing that you pretend that you know what you are talking about or that there is even a reason to have a discussion about this after even Fox admitted their error.  Apparently, "never was" and the culpability of Faux's part is beyond your ability to comprehend things.

[Observer]

What you find amusing is of no importance.

Have you read the original cables?

[vel]

What you find amusing is of no importance.

Have you read the original cables?

I disagree.

John's amusement is reality. Your bullshit about how an admitted FoxPAC piece of disinformation is somehow true and somehow justifies your Obama Derangement Syndrome is sad and pathetic but inevitable, so one is.justifed in finding amusement.

[Observer]

Where, exactly, did I say the initial claim was true?

You really are a stupid little shit.

I said the only way to determine the truth is to examine the evidence. Something neither you nor John have any interest in doing. The reasons for this are obvious. Neither of has any real interest in the truth.

[IM2]

So what if Obama apologizes for Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

Apologizing does not show weakness. Nor is it groveling. Arrogance is a weakness, but it seems like you right wingers, even though you have absolutley nothing to be arrogant about, think its a stregnth for our president to display arrogance to everyone else on earth.

[SufferedMoreThanJesus]

Apologizing does not show weakness.

It isn't in this country, but it certainly is in the Middle East, Asia and in many areas of Europe, sir.

It is a FACT that apologizing to Irabians is viewed as a total exercise in capitulation and weakness.

The end.

[vel]

Where, exactly, did I say the initial claim was true?

You really are a stupid little shit.

I said the only way to determine the truth is to examine the evidence. Something neither you nor John have any interest in doing. The reasons for this are obvious. Neither of has any real interest in the truth.

You defend a claim when your only source admits that it isn't true, and you call me stupid?

The is odd to begin with, as IM correctly and sanely points out. Your problem with the whole concept is part of your pathology. Everyone knows that you would be falling all over yourself to defend it if Bush had done this.

The very fact that you're oblivious to the obviousness of your rank partisanship is evidence of your stupidity, as if we really needed more evidence of it.

And as for examining evidence, you never ever support any of your rank partisan extremist claims. You regularly barfback FoxPAC and Limbaugh talking points and then deny your source. Your in no position to criticise anyone.

[IM2]

badnews,

It is a FACT that apologizing to Irabians is viewed as a total exercise in capitulation and weakness.

Says who?

We owe those people a huge apology for fucking up their region. If wer had left them alone in the 50's we would not be facing what we face now.

[Observer]

badnews,

Says who?

Anyone who has ever lived in the Middle East.