Sidney Blumenthal and Salon Magazine

[DKW 86 7,726]

Blumenthal hired by Salon

I said they were related but could not show an actual link. Now, the two are together as employer and employee.

Does this give me a chance as the New MS. Cleo?

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i remember that thread from a way back, david.

you're a man before his time.

ct

[DKW 86 7,726]

i remember that thread from a way back, david.

you're a man before his time.

ct

NO, actually, just very lucky in this case.

[Tiger Al 0]

Blumenthal hired by Salon

I said they were related but could not show an actual link. Now, the two are together as employer and employee.

Does this give me a chance as the New MS. Cleo? 

Oh yeah, you said they were related:

2) He started that balanced and fair reporting rag, Salon.com so the wealthy limousine liberals could feel better about themselves.

Too bad he lied about keeping Salon going and kept his staff working for NOTHING while he was supposed to be selling the mag. It was sssooo indebt, no one would even look at it. Of course Mr. Blumenthal doesnt seem to have lost a cent in all this. Just his backers, his friends, his employees, Sounds a lot like the Clintons doesnt it?

The reason you couldn't find a link is because none existed and you were lying about its' existence.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

The reason you couldn't find a link is because none existed and you were lying about its' existence.

this is a very telling statement.

[Tiger Al 0]

The reason you couldn't find a link is because none existed and you were lying about its' existence.

this is a very telling statement.

Elaboration, please.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

The reason you couldn't find a link is because none existed and you were lying about its' existence.

this is a very telling statement.

Elaboration, please.

well, maybe i misunderstand your statement, but it appears to me you were accusing david of lying.

i usually reserve the term 'liar' for those people who intentionally seek to deceive; for people stating an untruth they know to be untrue, with the intent of having others believe their untruth.

i typically separate 'lying' from 'being mistaken' by this "intentional deception" criterion.

so, in reading your statement, i presume you think david was intentionally trying to deceive us into believing there was a link between these two entities (i really don't know much about either) when he knew there wasn't a link.

as opposed to his merely being mistaken in his belief about the link between the two.

naturally, i cannot speak as to david's motives or intentions, but in general, i tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise.

NOW, TO DRAW A CORRELATION HERE (and this is the reason i said this was a telling statement):

if being mistaken about a link between X and Y (without the intent to deceive, meaning the speaker genuinely believed the relationship between X and Y existed) constitutes "lying", then i can easily see why you believe bush "lied" in some of his various pre-war statements.

i certainly do not intend to move this thread into a discussion of 'bush lied', 'no he didn't!' stuff; your comment just struck me as being a bit harsh in its indictment of david.

ct

[DKW 86 7,726]

OOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT Care!

I was mistaken and said so. Blumenthal was rumored or at least linked to Salon in several radio (Rush I believe) commentaries. If I was wrong, I have already admitted to it in the old thread and admit I was wrong about SB and Salon back then.

The point here is that LUCKILY for me, there is now a very open link between the two. The owners of Salon still robbed their emplyees of salaries, that has been stated over and over again. Salon was supposedly sold probably 2-3 times already.

Anyway, I just thought it was funny that it all ended with a link between the two.

Thank you for playing....

I can defend myself ably I think. Besides, does anyone think that a Conservative could go on a Liberal board and post like Al and Donut do here without being openly name called and eventually banned? I think not.

[Tiger Al 0]

I was mistaken and said so. Blumenthal was rumored or at least linked to Salon in several radio (Rush I believe) commentaries. If I was wrong, I have already admitted to it in the old thread and admit I was wrong about SB and Salon back then.

No, David, you never admitted you were wrong but, rather, claimed the link was harder to prove than you first thought and asked for more time to find it. Here's the link to the original thread. Check, re-check and triple-check for yourself.

The point here is that LUCKILY for me, there is now a very open link between the two. The owners of Salon still robbed their emplyees of salaries, that has been stated over and over again. Salon was supposedly sold probably 2-3 times already.

How is this lucky? Does this prove that what you said over a month ago was fact? You claimed that Blumenthal was the owner of Salon and cheated his employees out of money.

I can defend myself ably I think. Besides, does anyone think that a Conservative could go on a Liberal board and post like Al and Donut do here without being openly name called and eventually banned? I think not.

Yes, they can. On other boards I post on, Democratic Underground for one, conservatives post all the time without name-calling or banning. But, I think you're not paying attention if you think that name-calling doesn't happen here. It doesn't bother me but it does happen frequently.

well, maybe i misunderstand your statement, but it appears to me you were accusing david of lying.

No misunderstanding.

so, in reading your statement, i presume you think david was intentionally trying to deceive us into believing there was a link between these two entities (i really don't know much about either) when he knew there wasn't a link.

I don't know what David's intent was. I do know that he was asserting things as 'fact' that, according to his own links, were known to be untrue. In other words, LIES.

i certainly do not intend to move this thread into a discussion of 'bush lied', 'no he didn't!' stuff; your comment just struck me as being a bit harsh in its indictment of david.

Then re-read the original thread from December.