1
   

Update: Murtha "quote" was FALSE. Newspaper corrects story

 
 
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 10:07 pm
I know this is gonna kill some of you guys, but you should stop creaming your pants over the whole "Murtha quote."

The newspaper screwed up. He was citing a poll. They officially corrected the story. Not like that the truth is going to make any difference to some of you...

Quote:
Correction: An article in Sunday's editions misinterpreted a comment from U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., at a town hall meeting in North Miami on Saturday. In his speech, Murtha said U.S. credibility was suffering because of continued U.S. military presence in Iraq ,and the perception that the U.S. is an occupying force. Murtha was citing a recent poll, by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, that indicates a greater percentage of people in 10 of 14 foreign countries consider the U.S. in Iraq a greater danger to world peace than any threats posed by Iran or North Korea.


Link to article
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 736 • Replies: 18
No top replies

 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 11:55 pm
Re: Update: Murtha "quote" was FALSE. Newspaper c
JustanObserver wrote:
I know this is gonna kill some of you guys, but you should stop creaming your pants over the whole "Murtha quote."

The newspaper screwed up. He was citing a poll. They officially corrected the story. Not like that the truth is going to make any difference to some of you...


you got that right. why was he citing the poll if he didn't agree with it, huh? that would be like a toothpaste commercial that says, 9 out of 10 dentists don't recommend our toothpaste.

yit-just playing devil's advocate (with apologies to joe nation)-wail
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jun, 2006 04:50 am
Actually, yitwail, I don't think that analogy is really accurate. The purpose of Murtha's speech was to stress the fact that the US being in Iraq is harmful to our image in other countries. To back up that belief he cited the Pew Global Attitudes Project poll.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jun, 2006 07:08 am
Why cite some poll when they poll only people in only 10 of 14 countries?

Which 14 countries and which are the 10?

Think N. Korea was one on the 10? Syria? Iran?

Murtha is an embarrasement to this country!
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jun, 2006 07:11 am
They polled 14 countried. In 10 of them, a greater percentage of people thought the US was the biggest threat to peace in the world. Murtha's point was that US credibility was suffering. He illustrated this point by citing the poll. Nothing to see here.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jun, 2006 07:14 am
FreeDuck wrote:
They polled 14 countried. In 10 of them, a greater percentage of people thought the US was the biggest threat to peace in the world. Murtha's point was that US credibility was suffering. He illustrated this point by citing the poll. Nothing to see here.


Which 14 countries?

That's like saying the majority of people hate the Yankees. Then you find out the poll was taken in Boston.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jun, 2006 07:23 am
Quote:
The survey interviewed people in China, Egypt, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Spain, Turkey and the US.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5077984.stm
0 Replies
 
paull
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 10:36 am
Fight about it all you want, but the fact remains this would be, if true, one of the least stupid Murtha quotes. He has consistantly (since December 7th), advocated fighting the Iraq war from Okinawa and convicted US troops of murder, in the press, while simultaneously opining that they were stressed.

The biggest waste of time for anyone concerned about Bush, the Republican attack machine, the Nazification of America, Corporate abuse, Global warming, or any other of the liberal concerns would be to try to buff up Murtha's image. He seems to fancy himself a presidential prospect, but with him in the race Howard Dean will look like a responsible statesman, and how much more wacked out could that be?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 10:43 am
I doubt he has presidential aspirations. I have no intention of propping up his image. He used to by my congressman and he has a virtual lifetime appointment to congress as he is never opposed. His biggest accomplishment is consistently winning pork for his home town, a town which would be better left to die in its own right.
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 12:48 pm
paull wrote:
Fight about it all you want, but the fact remains this would be, if true, one of the least stupid Murtha quotes.



See, this is a huge reason why political discourse in this country is in the crapper.

A paper falsely misquoted Murtha, attributing a (fairly damning) statement to him. It turns out they screwed up, THEY ADMITTED THEIR MISTAKE, and yet you STILL have the gall to say "this would be, if true, one of the least stupid Murtha quotes."

For Chrissakes, IT'S NOT TRUE. Get that through your head. HE DID NOT SAY THAT. He was quoting a f*cking poll.

If you want to make harsh statements about Murtha, FINE. If you want to call him names and what have you, FINE. But at the VERY LEAST, have the integrity to base your arguments on factual information.

Something tells me that idiots will continue to hold this "comment" from Murtha against him regardless of the fact that it is not attributable to him. Unbelieveable.

Lets just switch the people involved here for a second. Here's an example:

Quote:
A paper quotes Bush as saying "I love to suck donkey d*cks." People who are against Bush JUMP at this statement. "Look at that! I told you the guy was nuts! He loves to suck donkey d*cks!" Then, a few days later, the newspaper publicly admits they were wrong. Bush was reading a line from an article he had. He was quoting what it said during a speech. That comment was not his own.


How would you feel if, after the newspaper PUBLICLY ADMITTED it was THEIR FAULT that such a quote was attributable to Bush, people on the left continued to say "Well, that comment, if true, would be one of the least stupid things Bush has said."? You would be pissed. As you should be. So don't pull that same sh*t here.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 05:44 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
They polled 14 countried. In 10 of them, a greater percentage of people thought the US was the biggest threat to peace in the world. Murtha's point was that US credibility was suffering. He illustrated this point by citing the poll. Nothing to see here.


So,they polled 14 out of 300+ countries on the planet???

Somehow,that doesnt seem to me to be representative of the whole planet.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 05:53 pm
touché MM! Laughing but i imagine the congressman was speaking to a receptive audience.
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 07:53 pm
mysteryman wrote:

So,they polled 14 out of 300+ countries on the planet???

Somehow,that doesnt seem to me to be representative of the whole planet.



Yeah... like anyone cares what people from Kiribati have to say about the matter. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 08:57 pm
don't know about Kiribati, but Indonesia is the only country in the southern hemisphere that was surveyed. still, not a bad selection of countries, in terms of population and/or economic clout, but odd that european countries include Spain but left out Italy and Holland, and muslim countries left out Saudi Arabia. by the way, i count 6 mainly muslim countries, so i presume they all regard the US as a bigger threat to world peace than Korea or Iran, but who knows?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Jul, 2006 02:45 am
JustanObserver wrote:
mysteryman wrote:

So,they polled 14 out of 300+ countries on the planet???

Somehow,that doesnt seem to me to be representative of the whole planet.



Yeah... like anyone cares what people from Kiribati have to say about the matter. Rolling Eyes


Are you now saying that they dont matter?
Are you now showing how bigoted you are by deciding only the opinions of a few select countries carry any weight at all?

I thought the left believed that everyone was equal,and that everyone was important.
Are you saying that isnt the case?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Jul, 2006 07:11 am
The point, MM, is that in those countries which were surveyed support has dropped than what the support was previously due to the Iraq war proving Murtha's point that the Iraq war is having an effect in other parts of the country.
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Jul, 2006 08:36 am
mysteryman wrote:
Are you now saying that they dont matter?
Are you now showing how bigoted you are by deciding only the opinions of a few select countries carry any weight at all?

I thought the left believed that everyone was equal,and that everyone was important.
Are you saying that isnt the case?



Is it possible that you're really that dense?

You're implying that the poll somehow wasn't valid unless it represented "the entire planet"? That you could even imply something like that speaks volumes of your (lack of) intellect. No one was saying they took a poll representative of "Earth," you dolt.

Anyway, I'm not representative of "the left." I speak for myself. And yes, I feel that "everyone is equal and important," but that has no bearing on relevancy. I'm the citizens of Kiribati are fine individuals, but their nation doesn't really have anything do with this war. I was making a point, which obviously flew high and fast above your head. No surprise there.

I'll repeat what revel said:

Quote:
The point, MM, is that in those countries which were surveyed support has dropped than what the support was previously due to the Iraq war proving Murtha's point that the Iraq war is having an effect in other parts of the country.


There's more I'd like to add to that, but you fill me with such disgust that it would be hard to read due to all the expletives I would pepper it with. It's like you go out of your way to be a f*cking idiot.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Jul, 2006 12:16 pm
Quote:
You're implying that the poll somehow wasn't valid unless it represented "the entire planet"? That you could even imply something like that speaks volumes of your (lack of) intellect. No one was saying they took a poll representative of "Earth," you dolt.


Actually,there was a post here on A2K that claimed that 90% of humans hated Bush.

So,I just wondered who surveyed every human on earth to find out.

And,I bet you that I could cherry pick 10 out of 14 countries and find that they do support Bush,and like him more now.

The point is that surveys like the one quoted are absolutely meaningless.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Jul, 2006 01:27 pm
woiyo wrote:
Why cite some poll when they poll only people in only 10 of 14 countries?

Which 14 countries and which are the 10?

Think N. Korea was one on the 10? Syria? Iran?

Murtha is an embarrasement to this country!


George Bush doesn't embarrass you, and Murtha does. It really is a parallel universe.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Update: Murtha "quote" was FALSE. Newspaper corrects story
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 05/21/2024 at 06:19:04