Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

These dumb bastards have a whole lotta correcting to do.
1 posted on 09/16/2008 6:10:46 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: pissant

They know that “corrections” don’t mean a whole lot after the damage is done.


2 posted on 09/16/2008 6:14:00 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer ("Troopergate" - The Revenge of the Alaskan Good Old Boys Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant
Katie Paul at Newsweek alerted me that Newsweek printed a correction to their story claiming that Palin cut funding for teen mothers and the state WIC program. I blogged about it here and had extensive conversations with Alaska officials about the claims. Ms. Paul was also diligent to work with Alaska officials to correct the story once I made her aware of the facts.

Once the damage is done, the corrections are practically meaningless. Newsweek is part of the liberal biased MSM, and practically worthless IMO. I have not read it for years; even when I on occasion take a look at Newsweek, I soon return it to the coffee table because I find it repulsive.

3 posted on 09/16/2008 6:18:25 PM PDT by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

We’re sorry that Sarah Palin is a b*tch…...


5 posted on 09/16/2008 6:22:39 PM PDT by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Obama for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

I think I saw it posted under the Classified Ad section of yesterday’s paper.

Look for an ad that starts:For sale, 1999 Ford Tuarus, 4 door. Newer brakes, CORRECTION:Palin Cuts to Social Program
Not as Drastic as Reported, 147,667 miles. Great car for
short distances.”


6 posted on 09/16/2008 6:24:26 PM PDT by justkate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

Newsweek shouldn’t bother correcting previous errors. They’re not the publication of record in any measure and will likely be out of business within 20 months.


7 posted on 09/16/2008 6:28:37 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

They could release a Special Issue of nothing but corrections.


10 posted on 09/16/2008 6:40:32 PM PDT by VanDeKoik (Stand Up For Chuck 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant
I thumb through one at the doctor's office and it reminded me of why I canceled my subscription back in the 80’s.
13 posted on 09/16/2008 6:47:45 PM PDT by kempo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

Will those scumbags from Newsweak be on Olbermann’s show with this retraction? He spent 20 mins on this story one night bashing her.


18 posted on 09/16/2008 7:08:15 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache (No Obama, No Way, No How)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant; All

If Newsspeak was staffed by actual “journalists” and was managed by people who cared enough to be true and objective “journalists”, the “error” would never have happened and no apology would have been needed.

Newsspeak is not in the business of journalism.


19 posted on 09/16/2008 7:08:43 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

Newsweek and Katie Whats-Her-Face just pretending to unring the bell.


21 posted on 09/16/2008 7:19:37 PM PDT by RoadKingSE (How do you know that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a muzzle flash?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

“Ms. Paul was also diligent to work with Alaska officials to correct the story once I made her aware of the facts.”

If Ms. Paul was so darn diligent in the first place this would not have happened.

It’s like a lawyer saying something in court and then retracting it. It doesn’t matter, the damage was done. Intentionaly

What a piece of solid human waste this person is.


22 posted on 09/16/2008 7:22:20 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Drill Baby, Drill - Drill Thrawl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant; All

So Governor Palin must need a huge staff to point out errors, smears, discrepencies, etc. While Obama / Biden dont even have to worry about being vetted. Pathetic.


24 posted on 09/16/2008 7:29:11 PM PDT by wingsof liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

We’re back to this agaiu, are we? I thought Rush Limbaugh had finally put to bed in the 80s the idea that cuts in budget projections were real cuts.
Newsweek is back at it again. Palin “cuts” WIC because she increases the amounts it gets but not as much as liberals hoped for.


25 posted on 09/16/2008 7:57:52 PM PDT by jwalburg (I live in the 57th state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: pissant

I hate WIC. I would like to know how my Mom and Dad were able to “make our formula” and pay for it themselves back in the 1960’s without WIC. Seeing as they had 4 children and my Dad raised cattle and chickens. Now almost every child is on WIC and most births are payed for by the STATE and most are on Medicaid. A multi-millionaire children are on Medicaid. I do not know how they pull that off by I saw their children in the office and they had Medicaid.


26 posted on 09/16/2008 8:36:37 PM PDT by therut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: None

Mark for later read


27 posted on 09/17/2008 2:51:48 AM PDT by MathDoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson