• 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.

Bill O'Reilly

For what it's worth. There are two homeless guys I pass every day on my way to work; one of them holds a sign reading: " USMC vet with dog, please help", and at night they sleep under the bridge.
Sorry, I know thats a red herring.
 
Upchurch said:
You've been shown that there are approximately 195,000 homeless vets sleeping in the street. You can either accept this or point to reliable evidence that contradicts the evidence you've been shown.

So far, you've only stuck your fingers in your ears and sang, "La La La I can't hear you!"
Click to expand...
Well, he's also called John Edwards names, in order to distract from the fact that Bill-O made up a number, and he's being gullible in the extreme by accepting Bill-O's nonsense as fact.
 
Upchurch said:
Well, the DVA is an appeal to authority, but I wouldn't consider it an unreasonable one. Given that there are no evidence contradicting the DVA's numbers (other than O'Reilly and pomeroo's evidenceless complaint*), there is no reason to think they might be wrong.



* fantastic phrase, Lurker!
Click to expand...

True, and, as has been pointed out, it is in their interest to have high numbers. It just seems funny to have critics of Democrats calling the DVA a suspect source for homeless vet numbers.

What source should have Edwards quoted?
 
pomeroo said:
No, I am not a leftist. A serious study is one that doesn't assume its conclusion. I realize that you don't understand what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

18 pages into this thread, are you going to present anything but empty rhetoric or can we just write this off as a waste of time?
 
pomeroo said:
No, it isn't. Edwards tossed around an empty number,
Click to expand...

The "empty number" is the one used by the Veterans' Administration. What number should he have used?

You've said you don't accept the number. Repeatedly.

What you haven't done is give any substantial reason for why beyond the fact that you don't believe it, and the usual "leftists liberals blah blah blah."

Can you offer any substantiation for your comments, or are you just going to keep filling up the forum with condescension?

Sneering at others might make you feel better about yourself, but it's not a substitute for evidence.
 
LukeB said:
18 pages into this thread, are you going to present anything but empty rhetoric or can we just write this off as a waste of time?
Click to expand...



You can certainly write this thread off as a waste of time. Hypocritical lefties getting their panties in a bunch over a bloviating commentator. Wake me up when they start opposing all forms of dishonesty in our nation's political discourse.
 
Cleon said:
The "empty number" is the one used by the Veterans' Administration. What number should he have used?

You've said you don't accept the number. Repeatedly.

What you haven't done is give any substantial reason for why beyond the fact that you don't believe it, and the usual "leftists liberals blah blah blah."

Can you offer any substantiation for your comments, or are you just going to keep filling up the forum with condescension?

Sneering at others might make you feel better about yourself, but it's not a substitute for evidence.
Click to expand...


What do you make of the sudden disappearance of stories about the homeless upon Bill Clinton's victory in 1992? Were you troubled by the reappearance in 2001 of the same tendentious stuff after an eight-year hiatus? Do you truly believe that the problem of homelessness in America vanishes when a Democrat occupies the White House?

After shamelessly peddling for years Mitch Snyder's absurd fabrication of 3 million homeless, the major networks never quite got around to admitting that the number was wildly inaccurate and they were behaving irresponsibly when they ran with it. Were you outraged? Why not?
 
Cleon said:
Can you offer any substantiation for your comments, or are you just going to keep filling up the forum with condescension?
Click to expand...

Apprently he can't and has elected to take the time wasting option. Pomeroo, you mentioned you knew plenty of intelligent conservatives earlier. Please introduce one of them here so there can be an actual intresting discussion.
 
pomeroo said:
What do you make of the sudden disappearance of stories about the homeless upon Bill Clinton's victory in 1992?
Click to expand...
Evidence?


pomeroo said:
Were you troubled by the reappearance in 2001 of the same tendentious stuff after an eight-year hiatus?
Click to expand...
Evidence?


pomeroo said:
After shamelessly peddling for years Mitch Snyder's absurd fabrication of 3 million homeless, the major networks never quite got around to admitting that the number was wildly inaccurate and they were behaving irresponsibly when they ran with it.
Click to expand...
Evidence?
 
Cleon said:
The "empty number" is the one used by the Veterans' Administration. What number should he have used?

You've said you don't accept the number. Repeatedly.

What you haven't done is give any substantial reason for why beyond the fact that you don't believe it, and the usual "leftists liberals blah blah blah."

Can you offer any substantiation for your comments, or are you just going to keep filling up the forum with condescension?

Sneering at others might make you feel better about yourself, but it's not a substitute for evidence.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for the number that matches his "gut"... or, less probably, an admission of what has been clear to everyone else from the start: Bill O'Reilly and pomeroo are both lying about John Edwards, and making a bunch of noise to cover up their dishonesty and ignorance.
 
pomeroo said:
What do you make of the sudden disappearance of stories about the homeless upon Bill Clinton's victory in 1992? Were you troubled by the reappearance in 2001 of the same tendentious stuff after an eight-year hiatus? Do you truly believe that the problem of homelessness in America vanishes when a Democrat occupies the White House?
Click to expand...

Oh, come off it.

A 1997 review of research conducted over the past decade (1987-1997) in 11 communities and 4 states found that shelter capacity more than doubled in nine communities and three states during that time period (National Coalition for the Homeless, 1997). In two communities and two states, shelter capacity tripled over the decade.
Click to expand...
Recent studies suggest that the United States generates homelessness at a much higher rate than previously thought
Click to expand...

Source
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Evidence?



Evidence?



Evidence?
Click to expand...

Of course, even if he has the evidence, it doesn't in any way change the fact that both he and Bill-O are wrong to attack Edwards on this. Notice how he changes the subject from his lies and "gut feeling", to conspiracy theories about things from last millennium, also with zero evidence.

I don't know about you, but I've little reason to doubt that his distraction is also a lie, which makes him consistent if nothing else.
 
Pomeroo's postings are of little surprise, seeing as he uses two of Billo's more famous methodologies:

1) Shout down the opponents when they are making their points, which is what, in effect, he has been doing in this thread, and
2) Make stuff up that probably won't be challenged.

Although someone else is no doubt better equipped to undertake this, I will address #2, and the made up claim that no one paid attention to the homeless during the Clinton years. I have neither the tools nor time to thoroughly investigate (nor the care...it is only pomeroo, after all), but here's something I found right away:

Cincinnati Enquirer, September 15, 2000
... Mr. Mack spoke about his conversion Thursday at the kickoff for StandDown, a two-day outreach effort in which volunteers try to connect Greater Cincinnati's estimated 4,000 homeless veterans with services, such as the Joseph House program, that could improve their lives...
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that it does not paint a Clinton-friendly picture (4,000 homeless vets in one metro), especially at a time when Gore was hoping to win on the results of the previous eight years.

I highly doubt this example is isolated...maybe someone with the tools (e.g., Lexis-Nexis) could confirm...
 
Last edited:
JoeEllison said:
Of course, even if he has the evidence, it doesn't in any way change the fact that both he and Bill-O are wrong to attack Edwards on this. Notice how he changes the subject from his lies and "gut feeling", to conspiracy theories about things from last millennium, also with zero evidence.

I don't know about you, but I've little reason to doubt that his distraction is also a lie, which makes him consistent if nothing else.
Click to expand...
I liked the "panties in a bunch" bit. Obviously just a metaphor, but while the "lefties" are coming up with evidence, he behaves like a schoolyard brat, for 18 pages no less. The pot-kettle thing in action...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom