Thread: GOP affiliated publication headlines full court press to force Gingrich out

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

So what and no they can't turn a race, that doesn't make NR the GOP as the OP claimed.

Whoa! I read the OP and nowhere did he say that the NR was the GOP. Maybe you need to go back and read it again - slowly!

GOP affiliated publication headlines full court press to force Gingrich out

Is the NYT the DNC? If they called for a Democrat to drop out of a primary would it influence DNCers, yes? Now if you can prove the RNC called National Review and told them to call for Gingrich to drop out then you might have a point.

Again, go back and read the OP, why do I have to prove that the RNC called NR and told them to call Gingrich to drop out when neither I nor the OP ever said such a thing. I think your reading abilities are in need of repair.

Got such evidence? No. Who looks foolish..........go look in the mirror.

And your previous statement

I don't need such evidence, because the OP never said such a thing. You're the one that claimed that the NR wasn't the GOP, and you lose, because nobody has said, to my recollection that it is. The OP just said it was GOP affiliated, and I said it had some influence on the GOP. Prove that anybody has said that the NR was the GOP, and maybe you won't look foolish.

Is foolish, the national parties do not select primary candidates nor endorse one over the other, it leaves it up to the voters of each state.

Ha,ha - since it looks like each state has picked a different one, and it looks like there won't be enough electoral votes for any one to be declared the winner, it looks like that won't be the case! LOL!

Originally Posted by Ronin Tetsuro

Thanks for the link! Just a question: Why do you think this court case got less attention than the O'Keefe scandal?

Probably because none of the people in this story dressed like a pimp.

I've already stated that I think nominating the most "electable" candidate is a flawed idea. But that doesn't mean the party should nominate the most unelectable either. Gingrich is a smart guy who could be an invaluble resource to the next president. But he will never be elected president. His three marriages and the scandals he dealt with in the 90's will be too much to overcome. Personally, I think the ethics charges filed against him were a partisan witch hunt. All but one were dropped and the one that stuck was because of badly prepared written testimony that was given truthfully in oral testimony. File enough charges against anyone and no matter how innocent they are you can get them to trip up somewhere along the line. But the media isn't going to make that distinction.

Originally Posted by Mertex

Whoa! I read the OP and nowhere did he say that the NR was the GOP. Maybe you need to go back and read it again - slowly!

Yes he edited it to another specious statement. Do keep up.

Originally Posted by Macduff

Probably because none of the people in this story dressed like a pimp.

Hmmm. I'll allow it.

Originally Posted by Singularity

Because this minor detail is of such critical importance to you, I've changed the thread title.

Now, please get on topic or get out.

A totally fallacious statement is no minor detail and editing it to another fallacious statement doesn't correct it.

Prove NR is affiliated with the Republican party.

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

A totally fallacious statement is no minor detail and editing it to another fallacious statement doesn't correct it.

Prove NR is affiliated with the Republican party.

Sure. And after that, will you prove how Media Matters, MSNBC, and Hollywood are affiliated with the Democratic party?

Originally Posted by Ronin Tetsuro

Sure. And after that, will you prove how Media Matters, MSNBC, and Hollywood are affiliated with the Democratic party?

Why should I prove something I have not claimed?

Now Media Matters and the White House do operate in cooperation, are you denying that?

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/in...organizations/

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

Why should I prove something I have not claimed?

Now Media Matters and the White House do operate in cooperation, are you denying that?

Media Matters | Sources | David Brock | The Daily Caller

Your article asserts that because MSNBC and other outlets were using MM's material in their broadcasts that it was in collusion with the White House. Spurious, at best. At worst, nothing more than FOX Luls or NATIONAL REVIEW does for the right.

So my original question stands.

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

A totally fallacious statement is no minor detail and editing it to another fallacious statement doesn't correct it.

Prove NR is affiliated with the Republican party.

I met you half way. "Affiliation" implies a variety of possible connections or relationships. As a conservative publication National Review consistently supports the overall Republican cause. Republican politicians, including Gingrich, Romney, and Santorum, have all written op ed pieces for them. Buckley was known to be a GOP kingmaker and when he was not his vote of confidence or of no confidence still carried a great deal of weight in internal Republican politics. Either way, I have made it clear that it was NR, not the RNC, that was doing this from my first post.

But explaining all of this to you is demonstrably rather pointless. By continuing to do what you're doing here you've just demonstrated your intent to complain really to the point of trolling. Until you get on topic I am not going to acknowledge any more of your posts here.