| akuma587 said: Exactly. Sqrl is treating a common journalism practice like it is something reprehensible. And the people speaking out against Palin have a lot more to lose than the people who would support her (like her own aides, who would probably benefit from supporting her). They could potentially be alienated from the Republican Party and might never work again in politics. But obviously they are just out to get Sarah Palin. I mean what other explanation is there? They've obviously got the pettiest intentions in mind and don't care at all about the Republican Party itself. They just want to hurt Sarah Palin. That's the only explanation. Its a vast liberal conspiracy with Michael Moore at the bottom of it fabricating lies to slander the good name of Sarah Palin.
|
Re-read my posts and you will see that my issue was with the lack of corroboration and that the only substantiation provided by the reports were the words of the anonymous sources themselves. While I do dislike anonymous sourcing I did not, and have not said that it should be abolished. This is a bit of a strawman argument actually, although I would not go so far as to say it was intentional, thats what it is.
In fact, and this alone should be cause for you to admit your mistake, the person who broke the story (Carl Cameron) has stated that the way he presented the story came across far different than he had intended and that he regrets how things have played out. Cameron has said the story was meant merely to show that there was fighting within the campaign in the aftermath of the election using these examples to show the childish lengths some staffers were going to in order to place blame.
In short, the journalist is now saying he has not put his weight behind the comments either, leaving us with a purely anonymous without even the most rudimentary journalistic support for the source that you would expect. This one isn't even on life support anymore folks.
Now on your second paragraph here I'm not going to dignify it with a direct response. I merely would ask when I've treated you with such disrespectful mockery to deserve such a response? I presented my case with facts and remained civil and yet both of you chose to respond to me by attacking my character and integrity. Rather than a subsantitive point-by-point response I get two character attacks trying to paint me as a Palin stooge despite my record as someone who has stood for none of this unsubstantiated crap regardless of who it effects. I expected this from Madskillz, but I'm dissapointed that you would go here as well.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
