Thread: Obama lost, and so did Brady bunch

So since you have absolutely NO evidence to support your belief, you expect others to jump through hoops to satisfy your own fabricated rules.

It also clearly shows that you have an inherent bias (especially looking at your other posts) against accepting evidence you don't care for.

It's funny that you claim to have never heard of my site but w/ your first post on it states that it's purpose is to put out fabricated information. Fabrications you are incapable of showing.

Is that clear enough for you?

Originally Posted by JGRuby

So your the only place that got this detail and you want me to beleive you that it is true - guess again - it needs to be verified by more than one site having the information than one, yours. I dont care whose website it is - there must be more than one source provided for the information otherwise you cant prove that it is real only that your website has a picture or image of something that we must take according to you as the "truth". Prove it is real - afterall you said it was. Where else is this detail posted and please dont make it a gunsite that is a direct enemy of the Brady Bunch. You want me to trust - I dont even know of you and have never heard of your website before - so guess what - I dont. Is that clear enough for you.

P.S I dont have to play by your rules so the honest answer is that I have no proof of wether it is true or not.

James Ruby

I'm not missing it. He dismisses the site based off of his own biases by declaring it 'not credible' and inventing some sort of nefarious 'purpose'. Then he refuses to support his allegations w/ anything resembling evidence.

Originally Posted by JGRuby

I wasnt thinking necesarily of a talking mouth piece I was thinking more like the evening news, or CNN or some other news source versus a gun related site. Nope instead we get the right wingers pointing at a gun sight on the web accepting at face value anything that is posted. So far after listening to the news - no one else has come across this story. I am hoping the Brady Bunch screwed up but one web site in insufficent for me to accept it at face value. I am not a fan of the Brady bunch but I am also not going to accept it just because its posted on a website either.

It i sreally not my claim I am trying to determine it is the position that the Brady bunch screwed up that needs verification from at least more that one website.

James Ruby

James you don't know the first thing about me. I would describe myself as a lot of things but being right wing isn't one of them. I didn't post this as fact but ran across it and found it extremely funny. If it is false I look forward to the Brady Campaign holding a big press conference to denouce the post and for the subsequent lawsuit against the site for libel. If that is truly the case then I wish Brady the best but I am not going to hold my breath on this one.

Originally Posted by beavertonbuck

James you don't know the first thing about me. I would describe myself as a lot of things but being right wing isn't one of them. I didn't post this as fact but ran across it and found it extremely funny. If it is false I look forward to the Brady Campaign holding a big press conference to denouce the post and for the subsequent lawsuit against the site for libel. If that is truly the case then I wish Brady the best but I am not going to hold my breath on this one.

Their press conference would likely look like this one they had: Now we done piss them off. | Gun Free Zone

But that's just another picture from 'right wing, non-credible' sources. It must be photoshopped too.

You don't hold press conferences to denounce a picture that a gun website posted.

Here is an example of what James is trying to avoid. Fox supported Zimmerman and gathered pictures off a white supremacist website that wasn't trayvon but passed them off like it was

Originally Posted by Akathepriest

You don't hold press conferences to denounce a picture that a gun website posted.

Here is an example of what James is trying to avoid. Fox supported Zimmerman and gathered pictures off a white supremacist website that wasn't trayvon but passed them off like it was

So it should be simple then to show that the screencap was -shopped/faked in some way.

Otherwise it's just denial for denials sake as per his preconceived claim of what the 'purpose' of the site is.

I meant business insider not fox.

And it isn't easy to disprove it but it lacks credibility because your the only website to have posted it.

Oh here is another one. A lone man in the desert sees aliens but nobody believes him. Meh that skips the motive part but yeah.... Still waking up.

Websites can post almost anything today and according to some on here it is up to the person doubting teh data to prove wether it is truthful or not. I simply choose not to beleive until there is further evidence that this is what the Brady bunch did or planned to do. One source is rarely sufficent to prove anything one way or another. In this case I choose not to believe without more information. It surely would not be the first time a website tried to pull something over on its readers / visitors.

I choose not believe that one guy got something the rest of the world mised especially on such an important subject.

I am done with this conversation - beleive what you will or wont. I do.

James Ruby

Brady Campaign Presses Jim Lehrer To Ask About Gun Violence In Presidential Debate

Brady Campaign Caught Red-Handed - New Jersey Gun Forums

Denial - The first stage of grief... - The Minuteman

Brady Campaign Caught Red-Handed - Their Desperation & Deceit is Clear

Brady Campaign wants gun discussion at debate - POLITICO.com

Just a quick simple search shows this is all over the place including some fairly main stream news outlets.. Seems legit.

Originally Posted by Akathepriest

I meant business insider not fox.

And it isn't easy to disprove it but it lacks credibility because your the only website to have posted it.

Oh here is another one. A lone man in the desert sees aliens but nobody believes him. Meh that skips the motive part but yeah.... Still waking up.

The only one huh????? wow, a simple search showed many websites showing this..... maybe your internet is broken...

Originally Posted by JGRuby

Websites can post almost anything today and according to some on here it is up to the person doubting teh data to prove wether it is truthful or not. I simply choose not to beleive until there is further evidence that this is what the Brady bunch did or planned to do. One source is rarely sufficent to prove anything one way or another. In this case I choose not to believe without more information. It surely would not be the first time a website tried to pull something over on its readers / visitors.

I choose not believe that one guy got something the rest of the world mised especially on such an important subject.

I am done with this conversation - beleive what you will or wont. I do.

James Ruby

That pretty much says it all. You have no evidence that it's faked nor any evidence the site publishes fabricated information like you claimed so you 'believe what you will'. Just cuz.

Originally Posted by gehrheart

The only one huh????? wow, a simple search showed many websites showing this..... maybe your internet is broken...

... Those websites reposted the picture directly taken from the page we bring into question. This is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Just because one person can start a rumor and 5 other people tell the same rumor doesn't make it anymore true.

You don't believe everything the govt spoon feeds you, so why start now? Because it is in your best interest?

Originally Posted by Akathepriest

... Those websites reposted the picture directly taken from the page we bring into question. This is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Just because one person can start a rumor and 5 other people tell the same rumor doesn't make it anymore true.

So again the choice is that w/i an hour an image was so perfectly -shopped that there is not a single color, font or pixel discrepancy in order to 'fool' people on a site that has NO history of doing so...

OR...

An organization that has a documented history of decreased competence w. their staff screwed up and hit the 'post' button and someone happened to catch it at the right moment before they scrubbed it (unprecedented on the internet, right?).

Which do you think is more likely?

It's a simple question.

Originally Posted by Akathepriest

... Those websites reposted the picture directly taken from the page we bring into question. This is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Just because one person can start a rumor and 5 other people tell the same rumor doesn't make it anymore true.

Didn't you say something about video games being your thing?

And you don't understand the first thing about screen shots or cached web pages?

WTF kind of computer nerd are you?

Originally Posted by Thirdpower

So again the choice is that w/i an hour an image was so perfectly -shopped that there is not a single color, font or pixel discrepancy in order to 'fool' people on a site that has NO history of doing so...

OR...

An organization that has a documented history of decreased competence w. their staff screwed up and hit the 'post' button and someone happened to catch it at the right moment before they scrubbed it (unprecedented on the internet, right?).

Which do you think is more likely?

It's a simple question.

Nah, you don't even need PS, I could use MS paint and make a "perfect" image. Simply by making the post on my own wall of what I want it to say and them copy pasting the brady logo at the top and Voila! The hardest part would be coming up with some bs that they said.

Originally Posted by Thirdpower

So again the choice is that w/i an hour an image was so perfectly -shopped that there is not a single color, font or pixel discrepancy in order to 'fool' people on a site that has NO history of doing so...

OR...

An organization that has a documented history of decreased competence w. their staff screwed up and hit the 'post' button and someone happened to catch it at the right moment before they scrubbed it (unprecedented on the internet, right?).

Which do you think is more likely?

It's a simple question.

Somebody screwed up and hit the *Post* button.

That said, I'm not seeing the big deal with it.

Originally Posted by Jamie6.5

Didn't you say something about video games being your thing?

And you don't understand the first thing about screen shots or cached web pages?

WTF kind of computer nerd are you?

Fill me in, what don't I understand about a screenshot? That it can be saved as any file format and reposted in an image program be edited and then saved again and link added to my website and suddenly its fact?

I am not saying it is faked, I AM saying that there is a possibility that the picture could have been faked and was waiting for other sources to post their own findings.

Originally Posted by Akathepriest

Nah, you don't even need PS, I could use MS paint and make a "perfect" image. Simply by making the post on my own wall of what I want it to say and them copy pasting the brady logo at the top and Voila! The hardest part would be coming up with some bs that they said.

So you consider that that's what happened more likely, w/ no precedence or evidence whatsoever, than them screwing up and hitting send which has evidence? Yes or No?