If by some real twisted, half-baked thought that you think they do, keep reading the above until it sinks in or get your parent to explain it.
Oh, and one last thing: in addition to what is listed above, add the RNC, Rush Limbaugh, the author's wife, or their dogs and/or cats.
Just so ya know.
VW
Thank You!!
« Bumvertising! | Main | A Disgrace To The Service »
An abortion-rights group is running an attack ad accusing Supreme Court nominee John Roberts of filing legal papers “supporting . . . a convicted clinic bomber” and of having an ideology that “leads him to excuse violence against other Americans” It shows images of a bombed clinic in Birmingham, Alabama.
The ad is false.
Again, I say that Roberts should sue for libel!
Hat Tip: Blogs for Bush
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c17569e200d83426471953ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference You Mean NARAL Really Wasn't Telling The Truth?:
» CNN to run NARAL slime ad from Danny Carlton: codenamed "Jack Lewis"
From the Drudge Report... CNN has reviewed and agreed to run a controversial ad produced by a pro-abortion group that... [Read More]
The comments to this entry are closed.
2. I reserve the right to banish you and I will do so if you can't be nice.
3. I reserve the right to edit, delete, post, mangle, fold, spindle, and/or mutilate any comment. I probably won't do it if you play nice.
4. I may post any email sent to me if I want to. Privacy will only be honored if requested and I think it needs to be kept private.
5. This is a hobby, but feel free to help defray the costs via the tip jar. :) If you don't, Obama will tax you out of it, so you may as well give it to me. I pay for the bandwidth and this blog. It ain't blogspot. Seriously, if you don't donate, don't feel obligated. I'll still like you.
6. Enjoy. Constructive criticism is alway welcome.
7. If you'd like to participate as an author here, Email me and we'll discuss it.
VW
NARAL has now issued a rebuttal to the FactCheck.org analysis and they do a pretty good job of exposing it as just a crappy research job:
FACTCHECK.ORG COULD USE A GOOD FACTCHECKER
Factcheck.org’s analysis of the television advertisement released by NARAL Pro-Choice America on August 8, 2005 is deeply flawed, and its conclusion that the “ad is false” is unsubstantiated and should be retracted. The analysis, written by Matthew Barge, identified as a recent college graduate, is riddled with legal and factual errors and in many instances virtually mirrors the White House’s talking points. One might disagree with the opinions stated in the ad or even have a different view of how John Roberts’ role in a particular case should be characterized; however, every factual statement made in NARAL Pro-Choice America’s ad is completely accurate and supported by objective documents. The ad is not “false.” John Roberts did indeed file briefs supporting violent fringe groups, with the effect of excusing their actions by helping to remove a crucial legal remedy that had been the most effective tool against them.
VW's Note:
Please leave a link and a summation rather than leave a comment that is pages long.
Posted by: kaybear | Wednesday, August 10, 2005 at 14:33
Some unkown college student writes the rebuttal? Yeah Right.
It is STUPID BEYOND BELIEF to think that Judge Roberts supports violence against women or the bombing of abortion clinics. Period!
And yes, I'm calling you stupid if you believe that John Roberts indeed supports violence.
Posted by: Mike | Wednesday, August 10, 2005 at 14:51