• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Generic Fiorina Thread

sunmaster14 said:
You'd have to point me to exactly what her defense is. All I've seen her do is make the same argument I have. Sure, she's not forthcoming in conceding that the video is misleading, or may be, but her literal words at the debate had to do with the video itself, and the video itself does in fact show a fetus that is moving around while somebody recounts in gory detail her experience with procuring a brain from an intact, moving fetus.
Click to expand...

Although I should keep looking for a better link (probably the fox news direct link):
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-parenthood-claims-but-shes-not-backing-down/

“Do you acknowledge what every fact-checker has found that as horrific as that scene is, it was only described on the video by someone who claimed to have seen it?” he said. “There is no actual footage of the incident that you just mentioned.”

“No, I don’t accept that at all. I’ve seen the footage,” she responded. “I find it amazing, actually, that all these supposed fact-checkers in the mainstream media claim this doesn’t exist. They’re trying to attack the authenticity of the video tape.”

So her 'literal words ' say she doesn't accept that "There is no actual footage' ... because she has seen it ?

Explain that :confused:
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
Why do you think she's evil? That's a sincere question. I'm completely open to believing she's a sociopath. Personally, I was rather turned off by her little display of anger about the Planned Parenthood videos, but I figured it was just a bit of pre-planned political theater to grab some attention.
Click to expand...

She rose up through the ranks of a large business. Only evil people do that.
 
Dr. Keith said:
I couldn't help but think that a lot of what was said in that article could apply to Trump.
Click to expand...

Sure, but Trump's antics have been closely observed and reported for 30+ years. Fiorina's only qualification is her business experience, which by most accounts wasn't very successful and which she describes dishonestly.
 
Bob001 said:
Well, her rags-to-riches story isn't quite accurate either. She's the daughter of a federal judge who was on the panel that appointed Kenneth Starr to investigate Bill Clinton.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ceo-career-trajectory-fact-checker-biography/
Click to expand...

That fact-checking article is a beautiful example of liberal bias. For her claims about her biography to earn any Pinocchios, let alone three is absurd. A similar analysis applied to Joe Biden's or Hillary Clinton's biographies would set a record for Pinocchios.
 
sunmaster14 said:
That fact-checking article is a beautiful example of liberal bias. For her claims about her biography to earn any Pinocchios, let alone three is absurd. A similar analysis applied to Joe Biden's or Hillary Clinton's biographies would set a record for Pinocchios.
Click to expand...

Actually, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton have been roundly criticized for exaggerating or distorting their pasts in a variety of ways. But they've both been national public figures for decades (in Biden's case, 40+ years). Fiorina is new on the national scene, without any record in public office. Her biography, from "working girl clawing her way out of the steno pool" to "brilliant executive building tech giant" is the only qualification she can offer for the presidency. And she provably lies about almost everything.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Although I should keep looking for a better link (probably the fox news direct link):
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-parenthood-claims-but-shes-not-backing-down/

“Do you acknowledge what every fact-checker has found that as horrific as that scene is, it was only described on the video by someone who claimed to have seen it?” he said. “There is no actual footage of the incident that you just mentioned.”

“No, I don’t accept that at all. I’ve seen the footage,” she responded. “I find it amazing, actually, that all these supposed fact-checkers in the mainstream media claim this doesn’t exist. They’re trying to attack the authenticity of the video tape.”

So her 'literal words ' say she doesn't accept that "There is no actual footage' ... because she has seen it ?

Explain that :confused:
Click to expand...


Glad to see you back in this thread, sunmaster14.

Is this also an example of liberal bias, or an example of fiorina lying ?
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Glad to see you back in this thread, sunmaster14.

Is this also an example of liberal bias, or an example of fiorina lying ?
Click to expand...
What? I can't hear you. The sound of crickets is deafening. Paging sunmaster to the red courtesy phone.
 
sunmaster14 said:
That fact-checking article is a beautiful example of liberal bias. For her claims about her biography to earn any Pinocchios, let alone three is absurd. A similar analysis applied to Joe Biden's or Hillary Clinton's biographies would set a record for Pinocchios.
Click to expand...

I find it to be quite telling that you do not dispute the facts of article, but instead you dispute the number of Pinocchios that she was awarded as a result of the facts in the article.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Glad to see you back in this thread, sunmaster14.

Is this also an example of liberal bias, or an example of fiorina lying ?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would be an example of Fiorina lying, assuming that she understood precisely what she was responding to. It was presumably a back and forth interview where they were sometimes talking over each other, so that assumption is certainly questionable.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Yes, it would be an example of Fiorina lying, assuming that she understood precisely what she was responding to. It was presumably a back and forth interview where they were sometimes talking over each other, so that assumption is certainly questionable.
Click to expand...

No presumptions necessary, and it wasn't questionable. It was very clear.

Thanks for answering.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
No presumptions necessary, and it wasn't questionable. It was very clear.

Thanks for answering.
Click to expand...

Yes, I just watched that part of Chris Wallace's interview. It was indeed clear. It might have been a more precise question than she had anticipated though, and she might not have realized on the fly that her stock response to it was false.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Yes, it would be an example of Fiorina lying, assuming that she understood precisely what she was responding to. It was presumably a back and forth interview where they were sometimes talking over each other, so that assumption is certainly questionable.
Click to expand...

"Presumably?" "Questionable?" Have a look. They were certainly not "talking over each other." The Planned Parenthood discussion starts at about 2:40. And she says anyone who disagrees with her has to prove that they saw the tape she [claims she] saw.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoZAJjXPHAM

A commentary:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_facto...about_abortion_and_planned_parenthood_at.html

But everybody's lying except her, right?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom