Is Newsmax a reliable source that should be used on DU?

[Seen the light]

Poll question: Is Newsmax a reliable source that should be used on DU?

[rinsd]

1. Big fat NO!!!

[jlake]

2. If it's about Bill raping Hillary, Hillary being a lesbian, Hillary murdering Vince

Foster, The Clinton Body Count, Lewinsky, Flowers, Bill shooting down TWA-800, Bill's raping rampages, Hillary hanging crack pipes and condoms on christmas trees,
Chelsea being ugly, or any other of their glorious anti-Clinton screeds - absolutely.

If it is about Obama it shouldn't be allowed.

[americanstranger]

4. Show me where anyone used those links here.

Provide a link. I'll bet you can't.

And the fact that those stories you list even exist on Newsmax should give everyone here - Obama and Clinton supporters alike - enough of a reason to disregard everything from that site. People should fucking know better.

So come on, big boy. show me where any of what you cite was linked here.

- as

[rinsd]

26. Here's a link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4929528&mesg_id=4930002

[americanstranger]

29. Sorry.

That link includes nothing - not a single item - that jlake was referring to.

Perhaps you misunderstood my post. I wanted proof that Obama supporters were linking to Vince Foster, Clinton Body Count or any of that other trash from Newsmax in order to slime Senator Clinton.

Clearer? Your link doesn't prove that.

- as

[rinsd]

30. So other Newsmax links sliming Hillary are ok? I thought the point was Newsmax was trash

I certainly think so which is why I was shocked when a purported Obama supporter told me (in that link) that NewsMax was no longer the conservative site we love to hate.

[americanstranger]

35. Wow. you could not have read my post any more wrong than you did.

Congratulations.

One more time, slowly....

Jlake posted upthread (you can actually scroll up and read it if you'd like) that using Newsmax links like Clinton Body Count, Vince Foster and all that other trash was okay, but using Newsmax to slam Obama was not.

It was sarcasm, but nonetheless, that's exactly what he said.

I called him on it (as did a couple of other posters), because I had never seen any of that seriously posted here to try and discredit Clinton.

So far, jlake has run far away from his assertion. He has been unable to back up his assertion with a single link.

Nor have you. The link you gave me - although it does have a link to Newmax - is not a post that uses any of the crap jlake implied was being used against Clinton by Obama supporters.


I never said - and will not say, ever - that using Newsmax crap to slime Clinton is okay, and I challenge you to show me where I did say that. In fact, I used the fact the Newsmax still hosts that anti-Clinton crap as prime evidence that no Newsmax stuff should be posted here to slime any Denocrat.

It's amazing to me that I'm sitting here typing this. It's amazing that I have to explain something again and again, that on its face is so simple.

Got it now?

- as

[anonymous171]

5. Provide some links then we can talk.

[Breeze54]

49. Winner of the 'The Dumbass Award' !!

[TheWraith]

7. You do know it's YOUR side that's citing NewsMax, right?

Their recent anti-Obama smears have been all the rage among Clinton supporters.

[Blue-Jay]

8. I know you're trying to make a point, but you're doing it poorly.

[onenote]

10. another brilliant post by the great predictor...

[Forkboy]

36. You're crazier than a box of frogs.

[jlake]

39. Why do you say that?

Do you know how many times I've seen bizarre Newsmax stories about the Clintons posted here as fact?

[Forkboy]

40. Because you are.

:shrug:

You're a donating member. Why don't you do a search for us and find some of those threads? I saw ONE last summer, and I railed on that one for being shit too. And how can you complain about the ones about Hillary when you cheer on the ones about Obama? You're crazy AND a hypocrite.

[stevenleser]

41. That is why I have that person on my ignore list (n/t)

[Forkboy]

44. The trouble with ignoring is it allows them to spew their shit without us calling them on it.

And I'll be calling out this sadsack any chance I get. :)

[jlake]

42. They're on here all the time -- they get locked or deleted fast.

There was a truckload of Vince Foster threads about a week ago.

[Forkboy]

43. So you should have no trouble finding them.

I'll wait.

[americanstranger]

51. Yeah, me too.

Anyone that makes accusations like that should be able to back them up, or risk looking like a liar who talks out his ass.

- as

[americanstranger]

56. Search function must be really slow on this site.

It's been a half hour, and still no link.

Of course, I gave the guy 10 hours to post a source that told him the Wright story would flare up again on Wednesday, with no luck.

If I was a less trusting person, I'd begin to think that this one was just full of crap.

- as

[Forkboy]

63. That's ok...I'll keep asking him when I see him.

;)

[jlake]

66. bwahahaha I just got back - I'll look some up.

[Forkboy]

67. How's that search going for ya?

[jlake]

68. II haven't started yet. I will later and start an OP with the links...... will

keep you updated.
Just drove for 5 hours to pick up an f-ing ups package. need a moment to rest.

[Forkboy]

69. Well, there's so many examples it should only take a couple minutes.

[Forkboy]

73. Hows that search workin'?

[donheld]

60. Admit it, you lied plain and simple

[tammywammy]

45. Good, since you've seen it so many times

Please post some links to it.

[guruoo]

59. I've seen plenty of these RW talking points used here to attack Hill

even by some DU members that once defended her from them.

[NJmaverick]

3. It should be used only to show the likes

The repukes and the rightwing nuts are spreading.

[The Night Owl]

6. As a Clinton supporter, I am embarrassed that some on my side...

As a Clinton supporter, I am embarrassed that some on my side are posting material from Newsmax, a right wing website which is known mainly for being untrustworthy.

[gristy]

9. They are not a reliable source - period

Whether they should be used on DU or not is a separate question, though the answer to that one is also no.

[theredpen]

11. NewsMax should only be used to attack the candidate I don't support!

[City Lights]

12. No. And they shouldn't be used as a source in the NYTimes either.

Even in an opinion piece. Just shows how low the NYTimes has sunk. :thumbsdown:

:puke:

[sazemisery]

13. About as often as we quote FOX news. n/t

[11 Bravo]

14. Might I politely suggest a "FUCK NO!" option?

[Tarc]

15. Where's the "only if it is cited to attack Clinton" option?

[invictus]

16. Newsmax is racist, extremist, right-wing garbage. n/t

[Tippy]

17. Never has been...never will be...n/t

[NastyRiffraff]

18. Absolutely not.

I don't care which side uses it...it's wrong. People on both sides have been guilty of using various RW sources, including Drudge, the Moonie Times, etc. It's wrong no matter who does it, but now that a Clinton supporter has used one of these sites, suddenly there's outrage that wasn't seen when Drudge was used for the bogus "insider email."

[endarkenment]

19. In fact its use in GDP ought to be reason enough to lock the thread.

[Scurrilous]

20. No. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

21. NO!

[Not the Only One]

22. The Onion is a more reliable news source.

No.

[burythehatchet]

23. But if DUers have been reading Newsmax for all their news, isn't it unfair to them

to restrict citing Newsmax?

[NorthernSpy]

24. if you have to cite newsmax, you might as well make up the shit yourself...

NO credibility -- none. The "journalist" whose story formed the basis for the Kessler-Kristol lie insists that he saw Obama in the church listening to Rev Wright's sermon. But after his claimed date (22 July) was disproved, he now says that he has no idea what day it was, or even whether it was a morning or evening service. Didn't he take any notes at all?



:eyes:

[scoobiedavis]

25. No, Here's why not

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5122670

[yardwork]

27. No, and I hope that the admins take this under consideration.

I'm surprised that DU allows it.

[RichardRay]

28. It should be tracked and the content commented upon...

in order to counter lies, illuminate half-truths and expose fraud. I suppose it's possible that they'll get a story right every now and then, but mostly as a result of random walk.

[rucky]

31. Does a chicken have lips? n/t

[Enrique]

32. only if it suits my agenda

:sarcasm:

[Tresalisa]

33. ...

NO!!1!1!!

[jillan]

34. The ONLY good thing about Newsmax is you can find out what the

right-wing wackos are up to.

Other than that - no - it's not a reliable source.

[Forkboy]

37. Kick

[kerry-is-my-prez]

38. It might be ok if people use a disclaimer - it might be good to know what they're up to.

n/t

[Breeze54]

48. It is NEVER OK to use it.

Only dumbfucks and idiotic morons would consider NewsMess a reliable source.

[tammywammy]

46. It's really just pathetic when anyone on DU links to Newsmax

Just pathetic.

[backscatter712]

47. Newsmax should be in the same category as Prison Planet

In other words, unreliable and slanted at best, utter bigoted garbage at worst.

In short, threads that link to Newsmax should be deleted.

[tammywammy]

50. And a good look at posters that keep linking to it too

[Khaotic]

52. NewsMax is ...

... equal to getting your information from the bottom of a Scotty Potty!

[DeepModem Mom]

53. No. nt

[slackmaster]

54. No it isn't reliable, yes it should be used when appropriate

It's not always wrong.

[Texas Hill Country]

55. i voted no, but they did have one acurrate story... could have used a diff source tho.

[DerekJ]

57. I am dying to know who those 4 people are who said yes.

[Forkboy]

64. Not hard to guess.

Just look for the idiots defending them in the other threads.

[cbayer]

58. Unsure here.

When a story is swallowed whole despite the source, it spotlights the lack of critical thinking on the part of many DU posters.

This happens all day long here. People rec on the headlines alone.

So, when someone posts bogus information from hostile sources, I find it very interesting to watch the response.

It gives me some insight into the credibility of the people posting.

So, I would say, let people post whatever they want from whatever source they want. Then watch who critically evaluates it and who doesn't.

It teaches me a lot about the general electorate.

[eallen]

61. I enjoy Newsmax. It brings me a chuckle most every day.

Oh, wait. You mean people take it seriously? Really?

:hippie:

[here_is_to_hope]

62. What? Are you series!!11!1!? n/t

[yasmina27]

65. Ya' know I hate to admit this

but after 9/11, somehow I stumbled onto FReakrepublik in my obsessive research. The constant bashing of DU, and occasional links to here, lead me to you all. For which I am forever grateful.

Newsmax was often linked from there as sources of the bullshit and crap put out by the *Bush Misadministration. In my incessant research, (my dh has threatened divorece over my boxes of books and printed research articles), I came to the realization that NM is nothing more than a repuke noise-maker spouting the latest talking points.

I wasn't politcally savvy back then, and it took me a while, but I finally found a home here among those with similar beliefs. Although I don't have the highest post count (but I'm getting there!), unfortunately real life often interferes with my ability to respond.

Ultimately, I believe that above all, we are DEMOCRATS, and we MUST come together and support WHOEVER is our party's nominee.

[BringBigDogBack]

70. No.

[Johnny__Motown]

71. O attacked Newsmax in tonight's "Worst Persons" should answer this question

and expose everyone who voted Yes as delusional

[Scurrilous]

72. Kick

:kick:

[New Dawn]

74. "Newsmax" = Neocon propaganda