Cheney Caught in Lie!

---

Posted by PrincessRose

---

Posted by eogara


No need to be general here - you are directing this at me. I'd much rather have you say 'eogara said'.

See my post back to Heidla, it explains my reasoning.

---

Actually, no. You're not the 'Only' one that such things could be said about. In fact, Often times I am more apt to respect your arguments, because they are actual arguments as opposed to 'Well I'm right and you're wrong because my Mommy said so.'

Edited for spelling.

---

Well thank you Princess Rose

But in this case, marymoon was using the exact things I said in her post, that's why I wrote that. Entirely possible it's because she didn't remember who it was but I'd just rather have directive then general debates.

True, she may have been using things you said in a post, but honestly, those are sentiments that get echoed over and over and over again by a LOT of people who share your beliefs. And I Do feel that every time these sentiments are expressed, never is there a mention of 'Here are my incredibly reliable, unbiased sources.' All I see are 'Well your sources are biased because I said so.' I agree, a nice, directive debate would be a lovely thing, but it's very rare on LIW.

Last week I got into it over the debates because I would present facts and no one would try to actually present arguments to counter them, only say 'Well you've been paying attention to Michael Moore and he's wrong because I think he is.' That's not a debate, as I'm quite sure you would agree.

So I have a question for you: Who ARE your sources? That is a genuine request for information, not a judgement. You know who/where we get our arguments from, we have the right to hear who you get your info from as well.

I would like to interject here and point out that even if we all have the same sources, it is possible to 'read into things' differently because of our beliefs, not unlike the old game of 'telephone,' you can hear wht you want to.

I also think that drawing from just once source is probably not the best way to gather info to make an informed decision. It is important to hear both (or all three, four, or five) sides & then try to decipher the truth from those.

---

Posted by HearzBellz

I would like to interject here and point out that even if we all have the same sources, it is possible to 'read into things' differently because of our beliefs, not unlike the old game of 'telephone,' you can hear wht you want to.

I also think that drawing from just once source is probably not the best way to gather info to make an informed decision. It is important to hear both (or all three, four, or five) sides & then try to decipher the truth from those.

---

Agreed, Melani. But I just can't stomach Fox News. I mean REALLY.

---

Posted by PrincessRose

---

Posted by HearzBellz

I would like to interject here and point out that even if we all have the same sources, it is possible to 'read into things' differently because of our beliefs, not unlike the old game of 'telephone,' you can hear wht you want to.

I also think that drawing from just once source is probably not the best way to gather info to make an informed decision. It is important to hear both (or all three, four, or five) sides & then try to decipher the truth from those.

---

Agreed, Melani. But I just can't stomach Fox News. I mean REALLY.

---

I am not implying that you have to look at all the news (I do not like them either, or CBS, and many people swear by them)

just mix it up a bit

To much going on here my head hurts

glad to see we're still talking about this

---

Posted by HearzBellz


I am not implying that you have to look at all the news (I do not like them either, or CBS, and many people swear by them)

just mix it up a bit

---

More for humor than anything else - trying to lighten the mood a LITTLE.

Trust me, I even read reports about things that truly sicken me in regards to issues I feel very strongly about (ahem, Israel, let's not get into an argument because I'll cry and I really don't want to).

(I don't know anyone's opinion on Israel, but I don't really want to because, like I said, I will cry if I get into an argument over that)

---

Posted by don424

glad to see we're still talking about this

---

I was wondering where you were

Princess: I gotcha. I just wanted to make sure we understood each other

there is nothing worse than having a debate with someone who is not debateing the same thing as you

---

Posted by don424

busy as all hell

---

Good busy, I hope

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

Posted by don424

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

LMAO

---

Posted by PrincessRose

True, she may have been using things you said in a post, but honestly, those are sentiments that get echoed over and over and over again by a LOT of people who share your beliefs. And I Do feel that every time these sentiments are expressed, never is there a mention of 'Here are my incredibly reliable, unbiased sources.' All I see are 'Well your sources are biased because I said so.' I agree, a nice, directive debate would be a lovely thing, but it's very rare on LIW.

Last week I got into it over the debates because I would present facts and no one would try to actually present arguments to counter them, only say 'Well you've been paying attention to Michael Moore and he's wrong because I think he is.' That's not a debate, as I'm quite sure you would agree.

So I have a question for you: Who ARE your sources? That is a genuine request for information, not a judgement. You know who/where we get our arguments from, we have the right to hear who you get your info from as well.

---

Assuming we're still on the 53% vacation thing, my sources are basically your sources. As Hearzbellz said, different people have different interpretations of the same information. Well, those sources and that my (liberal) cousin worked as a White House correspondent for Reuters. He knew exactly where the President was, and who was with him, 99% of the time. I spoke to him about this claim in the movie because, as I said, I like to have all the info before making judgments. Simply put, his info confimred what I already believed - because the President is not at the White House does not mean he's on vacation. I think the job is one that can have the perk of telecommuting.

---

Posted by don424

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

What do you mean?

---

Posted by don424

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

She's a tough one!

---

Posted by eogara

---

Posted by don424

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

She's a tough one!

---

Thank you, Darlings. I do my best.

---

Posted by PrincessRose

---

Posted by eogara

---

Posted by don424

yes it is

besides i can't debate with princessrose, she shuts me down every time

---

She's a tough one!

---

Thank you, Darlings. I do my best.

---

Yes, we know