Somebody pleas explain the difference between "creating" something and "taking the initiative" in creating something? Which is exactly what he did. Far cry from "inventing". Probably means something different in Japan

Should i report you for personal attacks? Hmm.

Anyway I never said he invented it. You guys really need to learn to read. I actually already said I didn't say he invented it as well. Yes to do anything you have to initiate it. Whats your point? I took the initiative to write this post. I took the initiative to eat breakfast. To do anything you have to make the first step.

invent [ɪnˈvɛnt]
vb
1. to create or devise (new ideas, machines, etc.)

Now if we want to quote dictionaries here you go. invent is to create.

I am not saying he invented it. I am saying people saying he invented it isnt a lie. It can be perceived that he said that.

If every act must be initiated and he claims to have initiated the creation and if by definition inventing is creating then yes you could claim he said he invented the internet.

Snopes agrees with me, not you

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

Really? are you sure about that?

Lets look at some of the things he claims are republican lies and see if we can possibly debunk them.

Global warming is not a proven thing. Many scientists know that the Earths temperature does change and has a cycle.

Al Gore did say he "created" the internet. The claim he invented it would be more of an exaggeration but not a lie. If I asked you who created peanut butter wouldn't most people think of the person who invented it?

I am not saying Obama was born in Kenya but unless you can produce proof he wasn't then it is not a lie. There has yet to be any proof produced he was born in this country. (to my knowledge)

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi' lied about Saddam having WMDs not the GOP. He was an Irqi defector.

Thats just what I have off the top of my head.

Yes. I'm sure about that.

Lets get back on topic. For those that got lost here was what I originally posted.

Thank you for that. I guess that one ma's propaganda is another man's truth. I would sometimes like to hear some details as to what makes my truths propaganda. Did you find the items listed in the original post to be fraudulent?

I cant put one lie on any specific party. There are what seem to be strong 'deceptive' statements within the political and media world which get repeated often enough for the gullible to believe them as fact.

one is that al gore said he invented the internet, when he actually said he took initiative in the creation of the internet,

another is that OBAMA was born in kenya, when there is an official , US DOCUMENT, stating his place of birth in Hawaii,,,

Yes deception within the media and political world. That is a big difference from saying the GOP is lying.

As for Obama's document I though many people had an issue because he wasn't producing said document. Do you know something I don't? Not that my opinion of him would change either way.

You know,

I get really tired of this whole he said / she said crap in politics.

I am a conservative and I don't believe half of the OP statements. Not in that I am saying he is wrong about the statement. I mean that I personally don't hold that viewpoint.

For some reason in politics it is politically correct to condemn a whole group for the perceived beliefs of the group in general.

The worst part about this whole thing is that no one that says statements like that in OP can see the flaws in their own party. Happens on both sides. I know, I used to do that myself.

Condemn the opposition and defend all your party's view points.

"If you don't agree with me you are an idiot/moron/liar/etc etc etc."

The worst part about the whole deal is that most people could agree on most points on most topics. But, when you lump it into a whole group, all of a sudden these same people that can agree on most points say the other is completely wrong on everything.

The worst part was, during the gulf war, I was opposed to the torturing. Vehemently opposed to it. That is not American. But, I couldn't say I was opposed to it and still support the war. If I said I was opposed to it, then I would be ignored on the points I believed were valid for fighting the war. Not debated on it. Just ignored. Almost like what I said was contradictory therefore everything was irrelevant.

Why don't we stop to listen to each other rather than ranting at each other? And please stop generalizing on whole groups of topics. Each point made in the OP could be a thread in itself. It would take way too long to address each and every point. Maybe that is the reason for lumping so many statements into one post...

Oh, just thought of this. My experience has been when someone makes a statement like the OP, even if you can disprove 90% of it (not saying I can btw) because they can hold onto the 10% they believe they are correct on all. Also more often than not, one point will be argued to the teeth and the rest will be ignored. Usually the one point they feel most strongly about.

If I made 10 statements here and 9 of them had some validity to them, those would be ignored and the 1 would be proven wrong, therefore, all the statements are wrong.

Find it fascinating. Half my family is liberal the other half conservative. I had a debate with one of my brothers and one of my sister on peek oil over Christmas. I misstated one fact in the three days we talked about this. Therefore all the facts I had were in question and could be ignored until I could prove them correct. The funny thing was, I agreed with everything they said. I agreed with all their facts. I disagreed with their conclusion. I guess there is only one possible answer to a very complex issue involving thousands of facts.

I had to point out to my brother quite a few times that I did agree with him about his statements on peek oil. He kept thinking I disagreed with everything he said because I didn't agree with his conclusion.

My sister decided since I had a personal experience in something the government did that everything I said was based on my emotional response to that and had no bearing on anything she said. We can go to great lengths to discard what we don't want to hear.

Neither my brother or sister ever once acknowledged that anything I said had any validity to it. I felt like I was talking to a couple Jehovah Witnesses who wouldn't leave until I converted.

I challenge everyone to take a look at themselves and truly ask if you are really listening or have you chosen to stop listening until someone agrees with you.

But that doesn't specifically address the thesis of this article. The substantive points of the article make specific allegations about facts. Just saying, "everybody spins" doesn't constitute much of an analytic discussion. If "everybody spins" is all we have, then we might as well just hide in our caves and wait cowaring for our own personal boogie men to come and get us.