NY times lies about George Bush. Repeating long debunked story

[hislegacy]

I don’t think they can help themselves. Once the lie is spoken it just gets repeated. Even 20 plus years later.

 

[Arcangl86]

Where is the lie here? I'm not seeing it.

 

[Tanj]

Where is the lie here? I'm not seeing it.

Beats me too. A composite screen shot from somewhere without any links to make sense of it.

 

[USincognito]

And out of context screen cap from Snopes is supposed to show that the NYT is lying about President Bush?

I'm not seeing the connection here.

 

[hislegacy]

Google is your friend. It is still on the nytimes site.

 

[tulc]

Google is your friend. It is still on the nytimes site.

So...you want other people to prove something you said? I don't think that's how it works.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

 

[hislegacy]

So...you want other people to prove something you said? I don't think that's how it works.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

They can readi t for themselves

That is the easiest way, them people know word for word what it says.

 

[USincognito]

Since the OPer is unwilling to support the assertions in the OP we can safely conclude the OP is false.

 

[Tanj]

They can readi t for themselves

That is the easiest way, them people know word for word what it says.

No, the easiest way would be a link to click on, so that we could know word for word what it says. Otherwise googling Bush+Nytimes comes up with a dozen recent articles.

Seriously, who could honestly think providing a link is the less easy path???

 

[tulc]

They can readi t for themselves

Not if you don't post a link to it they can't.

That is the easiest way, them people know word for word what it says.

You've now posted 4 times in a thread you started, in any one of those posts you could have put a link to the story you want people to see, if you can't support something you said there's no reason anyone else has to do so. It's actually that simple.
tulc(guesses that just needed to be pointed out)

 

[USincognito]

Seriously? He spent all that time typing that post instead of simply posting a link?

 

[tulc]

---Staff Edit---
Gosh, I guess i was wrong, there was something about it.
tulc(wonders why there wasn't a link about it in any of the OP's posts in the thread?)

 

[hislegacy]

.

 

[wing2000]

Here's the link. Boy, that was hard to cut and paste.

George Bush, 41st President, Dies at 94

H.W's assessment of Rumsfeld was spot on...:

Mr. Bush was quoted as saying that his son’s administration had been harmed by a “hard line” atmosphere that pushed an aggressive and ultimately self-destructive use of force around the world, and he placed the blame for that on men who had long been part of his own life and who became key figures in his son’s orbit — Dick Cheney, his son’s vice president, and Donald H. Rumsfeld, his son’s secretary of defense, with whom the elder Mr. Bush had feuded.

“I do worry about some of the rhetoric that was out there — some of it his, maybe, and some of it the people around him,” Mr. Bush said in the Meacham book, “Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush.”

He was particularly critical of Mr. Rumsfeld. “I don’t like what he did, and I think it hurt the president, having his iron-a** view of everything,” he said, adding, “Rumsfeld was an arrogant fellow and self-assured, swagger.”

 

[tulc]

Off topic. You just cost me 10.00. I bet my wife 10.00 that not one person would take the time to check.

Back on topic

Sounds like you should listen to your wife more often.
tulc(knows Mrs.tulc is much smarter then he is so he always listens to her)

 

[USincognito]

I'm still wondering where the lie is.

His critics saw him as out of touch with ordinary Americans, pointing to what they portrayed as his amazed reaction during a demonstration of a supermarket scanner when he visited a grocers’ convention while president. (He later insisted that he had not been surprised.)

His critics saw him as out of touch with ordinary Americans. That was true.
His critics portrayed his experience with the scanner as amazement. This is true.
The article notes that President Bush later said he wasn't amazed. This is true.

So where's the lie?​

 

[Sparagmos]

Google is your friend. It is still on the nytimes site.

Why didn’t you just post a link? What you posted says his critics said something and he denied it later. Is that not accurate?

 

[DaisyDay]

---Staff Edit---
You're mistaken but you seem unable to admit that. It's already been pointed out, more than once, that the NYT stated what Bush's critics felt about the scanner incident, while also giving Bush's own explanation. If anything, the NYT and Snopes agree.

Is Snopes now reliable, btw?

 

[USincognito]

Edit.

 

[KCfromNC]

Some feel that admitting one was wrong is a sign of weakness.

Dunning-Kruger Effect is also a thing.