tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post6081849851573272210..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Surveying the Poll Resultskcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-46613943570803212182006-11-01T23:18:00.000-05:002006-11-01T23:18:00.000-05:00Did anyone see Duff Wilson's begrudgingly tepid ar...Did anyone see Duff Wilson's begrudgingly tepid article (see last paragraph) in today's NY Times?<br /><br />The article was on A20 (as buried way in the back), I believe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-15302064195410210562006-10-29T23:42:00.000-05:002006-10-29T23:42:00.000-05:00(continued from above,as due to a site malfunction...<i>(continued from above,as due to a site malfunction, the following paragraph was being truncated when I attempted to post it above)</i><br /><br />As to <i>LieStarters'</i> lie that Steve Monks and I have engaged in the "stalking of Duke Lacrosse Players"—which in North Carolina would be a crime had it occurred—well, <i>that</i> appears to be a good deal more than <i>just</i> the <i><b>lie</i></b> that it is, and somehow <i><b>libel</i></b> comes to mind. But, gosh, it's Sunday, so I suppose that we'll just have to leave <i>that</i> for another day...Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-29470492528262940742006-10-29T23:32:00.000-05:002006-10-29T23:32:00.000-05:004:54 AM
Yes, it is exactly the lie I'm referring...4:54 AM <br /><br />Yes, it is exactly the lie I'm referring to. <br /><br />The phrase "has come to be known as" is employed universally to indicate that <i><b>others</i></b> (<i><b>not</i></b> the user of the phrase) have used a specified term—in this case, "Duke Lacrosse Rape Case" (which is something <i><b>very</i></b> different from "'Lacrosse Rape'", as you can see) frequently enough to describe a given set of circumstances that the term—properly placed within quotations, as I do—has entered the common language of discourse on those circumstances as an abbreviated way to describe them. Here the circumstances are, of course, the <i><b>allegations</i></b> that three persons who were members of the Duke University Men's Lacrosse Team at the time the <i><b>allegations</i></b> arose participated in an <i><b>alleged</i></b> rape of the complaining witness in this case. <br /><br />Contrary to <i>LieStarters</i> claim, I never refer to the set of circumstances just described, or any other set of circumstances, as the "'Lacrosse Rape'" in my editorial <a href="http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/19/Columns/Defeating.Nifong.Where.Does.Our.Real.Victory.Lie-2377077.shtml?norewrite200610242054&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com">“Defeating Nifong - Where Does Our Real Victory Lie?”</a>, nor have I ever used or thought about using this term to refer to the circumstances of the case in question. The claim that I refer to anything in my editorial as the "'Lacrosse Rape'" is a <i><b>lie</i></b>. While <i>LieStarters</i> is certainly entitled to disagree with my editorial, it is not entitled to lie about it. That it has chosen to do so in order to discredit my editorial is highly instructive. <br /><br />The fact that whoever's running that site thinks that lying is acceptable conduct ought to speak volumes, to <i><b>anyone</i></b> paying attention, on the issue of the legitimacy of any claim they may make and on their general credibility in the world of ideas. Might some of their reporting be legitimate? Yes. Can it be assumed to be legitimate? Absolutely not. <br /><br />In consequence, their credibility shot, <i>LieStarters</i> cannot be trusted as a reliable reporter of the world they cover unless and until they implement whatever changes are necessary to ensure that their reporting is accurate and truthful. When any organization disseminating "information" is prepared to lie about that "information", it loses it's legitimacy entirely, as any person—academic, journalist, or otherwise—worth his or her salt will know.<br /><br />Given the conduct in which they have engaged here and as referenced below, it seems to me that they can just as well be called <i>LieStarters</i> as LieStoppers and I've chosen the former as more appropriate to the facts of my experience with them. <br /><br />Wrapping this part up, your claim on the use of "alleged," which admittedly I do not use, is simply mistaken. There is absolutely nothing "alleged" about what has come to be known as the "Duke Lacrosse Rape Case"; this case is, in fact, <i>very real</i>. And, if you're attempting to assert that I should have said "what has come to be known as the 'Duke Lacrosse Alleged Rape Case'", that is NOT what it "has come to be known as" for what I would have hoped would have been the obvious reason that <i><b>of course</i></b> it's <i><b>alleged</i></b>—it is, as we all know, an active case, pending disposition, that consists only of what's been <i><b>alleged</i></b>.<br /><br /><i>(continued below)</i>Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-48313248763842015112006-10-27T22:38:00.000-04:002006-10-27T22:38:00.000-04:00Cliff's reward for helping Monks hand the election...Cliff's reward for helping Monks hand the election to Nifong will be a job as Nifong's gofer. "Can I get you another soft drink, Mr. Nifong?" "Yes sir!" "Here's your Wendys triple burger-- extra mayo just the way you like it." "Can I rub your feet for you Mr. Nifong, or do anything at all to make you more comfortable?" If you need anything else, just buzz my electric collar-- I'll be curled up on the dog bed waiting for you, sir."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-4369972130737741342006-10-27T11:28:00.000-04:002006-10-27T11:28:00.000-04:00I think I heard somewhere that before he became a ...I think I heard somewhere that before he became a DA, Mike Nifong had published some works of fiction under the pseudonym "Cliff Brandt"!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-24783655213941342142006-10-27T08:44:00.000-04:002006-10-27T08:44:00.000-04:00http://mysite.verizon.net/luker33/http://mysite.verizon.net/luker33/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-60297208650226945972006-10-27T07:23:00.000-04:002006-10-27T07:23:00.000-04:00Thanks to Mr. Monks, Nifong personally didn't have...Thanks to Mr. Monks, Nifong personally didn't have to say one bad word about Cheek's campaign.<br />And for what?<br />2%?<br />Sad.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-4324946493829549902006-10-27T06:08:00.000-04:002006-10-27T06:08:00.000-04:00Brandt, Does Monks know you've gotten out of your ...Brandt, Does Monks know you've gotten out of your cage? NBC-17 just reported Steve will announce his withdrawl from the race at the BOE today. I can't wait for the johnsville or lie stoppers headline:<br /><br />"Monks Withdraws, Brandt Fights On For Fong"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-34080767505541412282006-10-27T04:54:00.000-04:002006-10-27T04:54:00.000-04:00Cliff...this is the "lie" you've been refering to?...Cliff...this is the "lie" you've been refering to?<br /><br />"of the Duke Hoax (which Brandt prefers to refer to as the “Lacrosse Rape”)."<br /><br />You say:"what has come to be known as the 'Duke Lacrosse Rape Case'", <br /><br />Even the mainstream media has the courtesy to insert alleged into the phrase, yet you call it a rape and when someone points that out it is an absolute lie? Obviously calling it a rape is your preference. You used the damn word with no qualifier as nearly all of the msm has come to do. Given your activities to ensure Nifong's election, one might think it is also your belief. It's a hoax Cliff not a rape. It's a false accusation and a false prosecution, calling it a rape lends credence to the charge.<br /><br />Some might have thought the "lie" you spoke of was:<br /><br />"Mr. Monks appears intent on manipulation designed to simply split the anti-Nifong vote to the benefit of the candidate, DA Nifong, that he pretends to campaign against."<br /><br />or <br /><br />"manipulative overtures made by both Monks and Brandt in late night stalking of Duke Lacrosse players at campus bars and manipulative emails that followed."<br /><br />or<br /><br />"The introduction to Brandt’s editorial gives away the apparent true nature of the Monks’ Campaign."<br /><br />or<br /><br />"Despite the fact that Monks and Brandt know full well that attaching oneself to the prosecution of the Hoax is political suicide, they prey on the fears and emotions of the Duke students at large, just as they had done directly with the lacrosse teammates of the accused."<br /><br />or<br /><br />"Mr. Monks must realize that his withdrawal from the District Attorney’s race provides the best opportunity for the removal of Nifong from office, yet he pretends that voting for him affords the only possibility to save the Duke Three."<br /><br />or<br /><br />"By invoking the names of the wrongfully persecuted Duke Three in this manipulative effort, Nifong's allies attempt to turn the sympathy of those concerned for the fate of the three innocent young men into votes than would ultimately serve their persecutor. Stooping to this political low reveals the moral deficiency of the Monks campaign which can only serve to help Nifong's retain his office."<br /><br />Thanks for letting us know that the rest is true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-64641797107482818182006-10-27T04:51:00.000-04:002006-10-27T04:51:00.000-04:004:34 AM
You wouldn't know what support of an argu...4:34 AM<br /><br />You wouldn't know what support of an argument looked like if it walked into your house naked and wearing a name tag.Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-44495986272670600162006-10-27T04:34:00.000-04:002006-10-27T04:34:00.000-04:00Ignore the troll folks. Cliff is no different tha...Ignore the troll folks. Cliff is no different than the haters who come on here. Notice he answers no questions, supports none of his arguments and tries only to annoy and confuse. His goal is close folks. All he needs to do to ensure Nifong's victory is up that 2% to 5% and Mike will pat him on the back for a job well done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-1885591009900905622006-10-27T02:21:00.000-04:002006-10-27T02:21:00.000-04:002:00 AM
If you were down here in Durham, it would...2:00 AM<br /><br />If you were down here in Durham, it would make a lot more sense, but read the first link, think about it, and I'm pretty sure you'll be able to figure it out...<br /><br />Clue: There are plenty of people in Durham County who won't vote for Cheek and will vote for Nifong unless they accept the viability of Monks' campaign, which the backing of Cheek's arsenal of supporters guarantees...Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-81036750146058665072006-10-27T02:00:00.000-04:002006-10-27T02:00:00.000-04:00Yep, that makes sense. Candidate with 28% of the v...Yep, that makes sense. Candidate with 28% of the vote can't tell anyone to withdraw, but candidate with 2 % of the votes can? There has got to be something in the water in Durham.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-84107586586209314032006-10-27T01:43:00.000-04:002006-10-27T01:43:00.000-04:007:25 PM
While I respect KC, I do not regard him a...7:25 PM<br /><br />While I respect KC, I do not regard him as an Oracle. As Justice Louis D. Brandeis observed...<br /><br />"Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done".<br /><br />And getting Mike Nifong out of office is surely worth doing, don't you think?<br /><br />If anyone here is interested in examining the overarching realities of this race, take a look at my post at <a href="https://beta.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=32542246&postID=6867045971125239007">If You Really Don't Want Nifong, Tell Cheek to Withdraw</a> at 6:31 AM. You may not like the name of the link, but it's time to wake up: a candidate with 28% of the vote is hardly in a position to ask <i>anyone</i> to withdraw, particularly when the only hope for the mess he's led his followers into (look at the polls: <a href="http://www.wral.com/politics/10149893/detail.html">Nifong Polls With 64% More Votes Than Cheek!</a>) is for him to get out of the race and support the only anti-Nifong candidate, Steve Monks, who actually wants to serve.<br /><br />Well, now fancy <i>that</i>, a candidate who actually wants to serve—gosh, what a novel idea, why didn't we think of that? You know, I'm really not sure, but, don't worry about it, it's never too late to start...<br /><br />And now would be a real good time, because you know what, not enough people in Durham County are going to surrender a centuries-old right to choose their own representatives so that a candidate who has <i>no interest in serving</i> can say he saved the day.<br /><br />If Steve Monks had one vote for every person who's told just <i>me</i>, "I'd vote for him, but he <i>can't</i> win," this election would be over right now but for the counting and 'ol Mike Nifong, he'd be headed out the door. So what I'd suggest: turn your "he can't wins" into votes and watch the fun begin...<br /><br />And, if you're <i>still</i> having trouble with the whole concept of a write-in candidacy (and the only reason you think they can't work is that someone who didn't know what the heck they were talking about told you so), check out <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write-in_candidate">Write-In Candidates Can and Do Win!</a><br /><br />It's really simple, fill in an oval on the ballot (you're going to have to do <i>this</i> no matter who you vote for) and write down two words: "Steve Monks". Think you can handle it? That's what I thought...<br /><br />And, if Lewis <i>really</i> wants to save the day, tell him to send that link to everyone of his supporters with a real simple set of intructions:<br /><br />1) Fill in the oval next to the Write-in line, and<br /><br />2) Write the following two words: "Steve Monks"<br /><br />To see what the ballot looks like after you've done this, go to <a href="http://www.stevemonksfordurhamda.com/sampleballot.jpg">This Is What Victory Looks Like</a>.<br /><br />Looks pretty sweet to me.Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-69801955985739041762006-10-26T21:15:00.000-04:002006-10-26T21:15:00.000-04:00I think they'll accept the actual spelling for Mon...I think they'll accept the actual spelling for Monks: Nifong Bootlick. Sic Semper TyrannusAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-20857587257862459622006-10-26T20:09:00.000-04:002006-10-26T20:09:00.000-04:00I don't know what Cliff is trying to accomplish, b...I don't know what Cliff is trying to accomplish, but clearly the things he is accomplishing can only help Nifong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-47484443459984159342006-10-26T19:53:00.000-04:002006-10-26T19:53:00.000-04:00Cliff,
It is difficult to believe if you sincer...Cliff,<br /> It is difficult to believe if you sincerely want to remove Nifong, why you only attack Cheek. I happen to be Republican, but it is obvious that a Rep. will not win this election in such a predominantly Democratic county. I am sure Monks is also viewed as an "outsider" by Durhamites. My family lived in the area for several years and were always considered "yankees" by the natives. (Funny, because we were from the Midwest, but nonetheless called Yankees on numerous occasions. Some seem to think the civil war is still going on down there.) While much of the Triangle area is extremely progressive and well educated, Durham is a corrupt, backward, dangerous city. Durham's corrupt, evil, and/or incompetent DA has been on display to the entire nation for months - yet you attack Cheek, not Nifong. Why do you bother to post on sites intended to support the lax players only to attack those who post? I sincerely don't understand what it is you are attempting to accomplish.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-41394734934570853012006-10-26T19:35:00.000-04:002006-10-26T19:35:00.000-04:00Oh please, Cliff. Who are you kidding?
Mr. Monks ...Oh please, Cliff. Who are you kidding? <br />Mr. Monks supporters spelling his name either Monk or Monks is fine with you, it's only Lewis Cheek supporters you have a problem with? <br />Again, I must ask, what gives? What are your intentions?<br />Don't tell me you are still trying to hold on to an illusion that Mr. Monks can somehow win this election? Like KC says, name one instance in American history when a write-in candidate polling 2% two weeks before the election went on and won that election? It just can't happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-7691702584122692172006-10-26T19:10:00.000-04:002006-10-26T19:10:00.000-04:006:21
An amusing rejoinder, I'll concede, but one ...6:21<br /><br />An amusing rejoinder, I'll concede, but one that reflects an ignorance of at least one very important aspect of North Carolina election law. Steve Monks' supporters don't have to worry about spelling his name exactly right either, because the Board of Elections will, in accordance with North Carolina law, accept as a vote for Monks any writing that reasonably resembles his name.<br /><br />Another problem for the "Cheeks" supporters is, of course, that some of them may get in the voting booth, not see the name "Lewis Cheeks" anywhere, think that their candidate is no longer running, and then decide to write-in, let's say, "Steve Monk" (which will certainly do the trick, even if it isn't his real name), because he <i>too</i> is not Nifong. I say this with some facetiousness, of course, but with the level of thought reflected in the support that <i>some</i> folks are offering Cheek, one really can't help but wonder.Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-82885948008092490412006-10-26T18:49:00.000-04:002006-10-26T18:49:00.000-04:00Learnedhand (at 2:19 PM):
As I matter of principl...Learnedhand (at 2:19 PM):<br /><br />As I matter of principle I refuse to visit LieStarters any longer. However, to provide you with the information you've requested, take a look at <a href="http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/19/Columns/Defeating.Nifong.Where.Does.Our.Real.Victory.Lie-2377077.shtml?norewrite200610250248&sourcedomain">"Defeating Mike Nifong - Where Does Our Real Victory Lie"</a> and then take a look at the second paragraph at item 1).<br /><br />What I wrote was "what has come to be known as the 'Duke Lacrosse Rape Case'", writing which, of course, accurately reflects how the mainstream media frequently describes the matter with which we are all concerned here.<br /><br />Now pay a visit to Liestarters and see what they reported I'd said in this regard. It is, as I said, an absolute lie.<br /><br />So that there's is no confusion as to the close of my post to KC at 1:32 PM, which I now see was somewhat ambiguous, the last sentence, in order to be entirely unambiguous as to my meaning, would much better have been:<br /><br />While they may be <i>a</i> voice, I do not see how, given the astonishing lack of integrity they've displayed here, they can be considered an "important" one, unless one has absolutely no concern for the truth, a category which I know does not include you.<br /><br />It is my hope that my actual meaning, as just addressed, was understood by all readers, especially in view of my beginning my post with "With all due respect...", but if it was not, I do apologize for my somewhat inattentive and inexact choice of words in my original post.Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-27374863722046495022006-10-26T18:37:00.000-04:002006-10-26T18:37:00.000-04:00I hope the 2% doesn't confuse people and they star...I hope the 2% doesn't confuse people and they start spelling it Milk or Milks.<br /><br />Here's a few more liestoppers references for Cliff:<br /><br />LieStoppers has also been cookin' with gas. Its piece entitled Occam's Razor and the publishing of defense counsels' new omnibus discovery motion are exemplars of the enormous worth of this very talented team of researchers and writers. ...<br />http://crystalmess.blogspot.com/2006/09/words-yo.html<br /><br />In keeping with my policy of sharing all points<br />of view fairly on this site, I wanted to link this article from the Liestoppers blog (http://liestoppers.blogspot.com). I think it is insightful, sincere, and very well written. <br />http://justice4twosisters.blogspot.com/2006/10/liestoppers-highly-unacceptable.html<br /><br />Comments on the LieStoppers blog and KC Johnson/Wonderland blog have become a fascinating way to understand some of the issues surrounding the case.<br />http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/10/duke-case-commenting-on-case.html<br /><br />A (very) thorough rundown of reactions to the 60 Minutes profile<br />Provided by a website called “Liestoppers.”<br />http://soundandthefury.wordpress.com/2006/10/18/a-very-thorough-rundown-of-reactions-to-the-60-minutes-profile/<br /><br />Liestoppers presents an interesting challenge: if you believe that a rape occurred at the lacrosse party, explain these 91 contradictions.<br />http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/main/7921.html<br /><br />Finally, I close with a piece that is not to be missed from the Liestoppers blog, "A Conspiracy of Truth." Read the whole thing: it lays the case out and makes a persuasive case for what this whole event is premised upon.<br />http://rattlergator.typepad.com/rattlergator/2006/10/african_america.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-70637579729589958102006-10-26T18:21:00.000-04:002006-10-26T18:21:00.000-04:00Well, that's the beauty of being on the ballot, Cl...Well, that's the beauty of being on the ballot, Cliff. Lewis Cheek supporters don't have to worry about spelling his name exactly right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-38623947506225348522006-10-26T18:16:00.000-04:002006-10-26T18:16:00.000-04:005:31 PM
It's "Cheek", not "Cheeks". Always helpfu...5:31 PM<br /><br />It's "Cheek", not "Cheeks". Always helpful to know the real name of the candidate you're supporting. BTW, if I thought that "Cheeks" was just a typo, I wouldn't have said a word, but if Monks had a vote for every time I've heard the name "Cheeks" used as the last name of Lewis Cheek by his own supporters, Monks would be leading by a landslide.Cliffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807244058439606546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-15281241315674019702006-10-26T18:05:00.000-04:002006-10-26T18:05:00.000-04:00Cliff you seem pretty alone in your disdain for li...Cliff you seem pretty alone in your disdain for liestoppers. Have you ever even read their blog? All we've gotten from you is whiney drivel about how we're all stupid and even that didn't start until last week. Here's what some other's have said about liestoppers.<br /><br />But its flaws are so glaring that it was shredded by bloggers within hours after it hit my doorstep. They were led by a Durham group called Liestoppers and by KC Johnson, an obscure but brilliant New York City history professor of centrist political views. <br />- Stuart Taylor http://www.slate.com/id/2148546/<br /><br />Hi. My name is Robin Sanders, and I work at CBS News. I wanted to let you know about the piece on the Duke lacrosse rape case that will be airing this Sunday, Oct. 15, 7PM ET on CBS. Below is a note from our CBSNews.com editorial director, who has been following your blog coverage: <br />First, I apologize for this slightly impersonal note. I'm Dick Meyer, the editorial director at CBSNews.com. I'm writing because you've written about the Duke lacrosse case in the past so I think you'll be very interested in the stories that will be running on 60 Minutes this weekend and the extra material that will be posted on them on CBSNews.com. Whatever your take on the story, whatever your take on us here at CBS News, this story is the first time you'll be able to hear some the principals speak for themselves. The section for 60 Minutes is: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml. <br />If we can help, let us know. Thanks much. <br />http://z9.invisionfree.com/LieStoppers_Board/index.php?showtopic=344&view=getnewpost<br /><br />That said, those who mock justice expose themselves to mockery in turn; and no website has demonstrated a more piercing wit than Liestoppers. Some of the site's best parodies:<br />Nifonging your way to success! <br />The Adventures of Baldo <br />Coalition of Durham Animals United against Nifong<br />My personal favorite came when Liestoppers "Nifonged" the Group of 88.<br /><br />This case is so depressing that it's good to occasionally view events in Durham through a light-hearted lens. - KC Johnson <br /><br />http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/08/liestoppers.html<br /><br />http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2006/08/more-truth-about-liestopperscom.html<br /><br />Earlier today LieStoppers may have written their finest column to date. That column is titled “A Conspiracy of Truth.” It goes directly to the heart of events leading up to and following your Mar 27 column.<br /><br />http://blogs.newsobserver.com/ruth/index.php?title=more_national_press_on_nifong&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1<br /><br />http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2006/10/conspiracy-of-truth.html<br /><br />LieStoppers published a very good article today reflecting the feelings and ... <br />LieStoppers published a very good article today reflecting the feelings and ... <br />http://friendsofdukeuniversity.blogspot.com/2006/05/from-moderator.html<br /><br />Liestoppers offered a fair and balanced review of Mr. Michaels' article on the "60 Minutes" expose and explanation of it:<br />http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/061023<br /><br />Thank God for the creation of Liestoppers who will…<br />http://blog.washingtonpost.com/benchconference/2006/07/a_gag_order_in_teh_duke_caseho.html<br /><br />If you doubt that , go to the website of Professor Robert K.C. Johnson (durhamwonderland.blogspot.com), or Liestoppers (liestoppers.blogspot.com), <br />http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/060917<br /><br />The National Review:<br />The following blogs are excellent and have been following the case in great detail for months:<br /><br />http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com<br />http://liestoppers.blogspot.com<br />http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/ <br /><br />http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjMwMWIxYmM4MWQwNTEzYjM1OGRkNmY0MzZmOGYzNTY=<br /><br /><br />Wilson and Glater's errors of comission and omission were savaged by Stuart Taylor in Slate.com, K.C. Johnson, and blogs such as Liestoppers<br />http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/009052.php<br /><br />You can also see the in-depth reporting of Liestoppers here, and a post that provides a rather detailed and exhaustive look at the contradictions <br />http://dukenewsense.com/blog/dcu.html<br /><br />It has been a while since I updated the Duke rape hoax. But Liestoppers is too good to miss. Cartoons, poetry, links, discussion and some impressive prose. <br />http://www.debunkers.org/ubb/Forum18/HTML/000505.html<br /><br />You'll find several hundred more here:<br /><br />http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-37,GGLR:en&q=liestoppers<br /><br />Other than your own, I've yet to read a complimentary word about you. Other than your own, I've yet to read an unkund word written about them. Seems your just sore at them cuz they didn't agree with you. It's the same way you've acted towards everyone else who has not agreed with you too. liestoppers has been tireless warriors against Nifong and the Hoax. What have you done besides work to help Nifong get elected by trying to take votes from Cheek and create confusion?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-5336527483842125582006-10-26T17:31:00.000-04:002006-10-26T17:31:00.000-04:001. Monks must get OUT!
2. Undecideds will vote fo...1. Monks must get OUT!<br /><br />2. Undecideds will vote for Cheeks, as they have enough information about Nifong, and they are still undecided.<br /><br />3. The November "surprise" that will undoubtedly trash Nifong even further (if possible).<br /><br />That is the road to victory. VOTE CHEEKS!<br /><br />P.S. It seems pretty pathetic for an incumbant to have less than a majority poll result against:<br /><br />A. A guy who doesn't want the job, and<br /><br />B. A write-in candidate. <br /><br />Chin and CHEEKS up! There is still a lot of time before the polls close. Vote CHEEK! Recall Nifong!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com