The President Speaks Of Hope For The Future

[rightwinger]

Nice try at backpedaling but you failed early on Gomer

why is there so much fact-averse rw hate .

Because RWs hate a country destroying bastard.

We already know you hate Ike

Buddy, when I joined the army, Ike was my CIC and a damn good one. I was too young to vote for him but in the case of Obamahdi I didn't have hope and I didn't want change. I could visualize Shariah law from this pretender.

Its a shame how you turned on the guy in this thread

Where at, RW?

You wanted to name a public toilet after President Eisenhower....very disrespectful

Gaza City names their streets and schools after suicide bombers. That's more profound.

What, more profound than naming things after this president??

I don't know.....maybe putting him on a coin or something
I'm thinking the dollar

Maybe some roads...

An airport or two.

Public toilets.

 

[Hossfly]

Sad, sad, day in America that Righties attack their own when they think a non-Repub said something

You're very good at Turnspeak DC. Ever think of getting a job with Hamas?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

I've invited you at least three times to illustrate where this "dishonesty" is. Now what am I gonna do with all these crickets?

And again --- how is your assumption the fault of somebody else?

And what reaction did I judge? The assumption you just admitted to?

These are the questions of our time...

Quote a single instance when someone argued against the text of the message and not the person who they thought made the message for being a hypocrite if that is what he actually said, which he didn't.

Nu-uuh. KK made the claim this thread was "dishonest" and "lying" --- it's on HIM to make that case, not on me to make the opposite.

Note how Pogo keeps insisting that I show where there was dishonesty in this thread, and then dishonestly ignores the fact that I've done so on several occasions.

 

[Hossfly]

Because RWs hate a country destroying bastard.

We already know you hate Ike

Buddy, when I joined the army, Ike was my CIC and a damn good one. I was too young to vote for him but in the case of Obamahdi I didn't have hope and I didn't want change. I could visualize Shariah law from this pretender.

Its a shame how you turned on the guy in this thread

Where at, RW?

You wanted to name a public toilet after President Eisenhower....very disrespectful

What, more profound than naming things after this president??

I don't know.....maybe putting him on a coin or something
I'm thinking the dollar

Maybe some roads...

An airport or two.

Public toilets.

I wasn't in on the plot, SFB.

 

[Slyhunter]

Sad, sad, day in America that Righties attack their own when they think a non-Repub said something

Show where anyone did that.
Show where they attacked the content of the message and not the hypocrisy of the alleged messenger, Obama.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually Kevin, I agree with your last sentence.
There were plenty of posters who assumed the quotes were that of Obama and then let their hate take over. Stat never implied it was Obama, people assumed the quotes were by Obama.
The act of assuming. Looking back, the behavior of those who were punked, reminds me of all those who come here everyday armed with nothing but hyper-partisan talking points and run with it over and over again. It happens often and by both sides of the aisle. I can't tell you how many times hyper-partisan talking points end up getting debunked because certain qualifiers are intentionally left out.
That's where Google (or some other search tool) comes into play. When I am here on USMB, Google comes into play constantly. Doing some research using non-partisan resources involves not much work and it sure helps avoiding punking oneself. I know I have burned myself by being lazy and assumptive. I hate it when I humiliate myself.

Stat proved once again that it is not Obamas statements or policies that the right objects to

It is Obama who they object to

Except that I pointed out several of Obama's policies that I disagree with and that blatantly go against the quote I falsely assumed came from him. Nobody bothered to address those posts at all.

Unfortunately, Obama isn't unique at all, he's just another politicians. There aren't many politicians who walk the walk. When I moved to Minnesota there was Paul Wellstone who was pretty damn consistent as far as doing what he said he'd do. I didn't agree with him very often, but I respected him. Other than that, there probably isn't any modern politician I have respected in the last few decades..

So you retract your claim that the people who were duped in this thread, myself included, only objected to Obama personally, rather than his policies and the perceived, though obviously wrongheaded, hypocrisy of the quote.

Not exactly, I can't include you with my next statement because I would be too inclusive, but a majority of those "duped" sucked themselves in because they were driven by partisan hate. They jumped all over this thing and expounded their hate for the man.
I can't say I think you're a partisan "hater" based on the posts of yours that I have read over time. You seem to me like a person dedicated to libertarian principles which of course clash with Obama World.

Can you cite any post that relied on "hate"? No, you cant.
Everyone saw the quotation was completely at odds with the actions and words of the Obama Administration. Obama has belittled religion. Obama has quashed dissent. Obama's supporters have accused his opponents of racism and every other bad dirty ugly thing in the world, simply because they opposed his policies.
There is no hate. There is disgust. And there is wonder that anyone would be stupid enough to try passing off Eisenhower's words as Obama's.

 

[Statistikhengst]

This thread all goes to show exactly how blind hate is.

No, this thread shows very little, actually. It is one of the most intellectually dishonest and bankrupt threads in recent memory. We have an OP, and others, pretending that people were protesting the words of a quote, rather than the person that the OP was pretending said the quote, as if context is unimportant. We have an OP who was completely unwilling to engage in any discussion with any meaningful or well thought out critique of the person he was pretending said the quote, and rather simply sat around mocking the low-hanging fruit.

The most that can be said for this thread is that those of us who were duped, and we were, should have known better and Googled the quotes.

Actually Kevin, I agree with your last sentence.
There were plenty of posters who assumed the quotes were that of Obama and then let their hate take over. Stat never implied it was Obama, people assumed the quotes were by Obama.
The act of assuming. Looking back, the behavior of those who were punked, reminds me of all those who come here everyday armed with nothing but hyper-partisan talking points and run with it over and over again. It happens often and by both sides of the aisle. I can't tell you how many times hyper-partisan talking points end up getting debunked because certain qualifiers are intentionally left out.
That's where Google (or some other search tool) comes into play. When I am here on USMB, Google comes into play constantly. Doing some research using non-partisan resources involves not much work and it sure helps avoiding punking oneself. I know I have burned myself by being lazy and assumptive. I hate it when I humiliate myself.

Except that mistakenly assuming that Obama said those things, and then pointing out that Obama doesn't actually believe them, has nothing to do with being a blind partisan. Obama's actions don't fall in line with the principles espoused in those quotes, I would say neither does Eisenhower's, but that's irrelevant, and pointing that out is simply pointing out facts. Now we pointed out those facts based on a false assumption, but they're still facts regardless.

No. Its merely your opinion that Pres. Obama does not believe the content of the quotes which you now know are actually from Pres. Eisenhower. That very sentence of yours proved the point of this experiment, namely that the hatred of Obama from the Right and their blank assumptions about him cloud their judgement even over the most innocuous of quotes. So, thanks for supporting my argument.

PS. No USMB rules were broken with the creation of the OP. I provided 2 historically correct quotes and attributed them to a POTUS. My oh my, when Righties get upset, they literally beg for the nanny state to intercede. Why, Rightwinger made a similar thread using a Reagan quote about eliminating nuclear weapons and the Right went totally apoplectic. He too broke no USMB rules. ..

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I am impressed that you are impressed by the words of a great Republican President. For both of us know that Obamahdi damn sure doesn't live up to those sentiments. He's not very bright.

Eisenhower is imo one of the four greatest presidents in our Union's history.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[rightwinger]

We already know you hate Ike

Buddy, when I joined the army, Ike was my CIC and a damn good one. I was too young to vote for him but in the case of Obamahdi I didn't have hope and I didn't want change. I could visualize Shariah law from this pretender.

Its a shame how you turned on the guy in this thread

Where at, RW?

You wanted to name a public toilet after President Eisenhower....very disrespectful

I don't know.....maybe putting him on a coin or something
I'm thinking the dollar

Maybe some roads...

An airport or two.

Public toilets.

I wasn't in on the plot, SFB.

Ignorance is no excuse

 

[rightwinger]

No, this thread shows very little, actually. It is one of the most intellectually dishonest and bankrupt threads in recent memory. We have an OP, and others, pretending that people were protesting the words of a quote, rather than the person that the OP was pretending said the quote, as if context is unimportant. We have an OP who was completely unwilling to engage in any discussion with any meaningful or well thought out critique of the person he was pretending said the quote, and rather simply sat around mocking the low-hanging fruit.

The most that can be said for this thread is that those of us who were duped, and we were, should have known better and Googled the quotes.

Actually Kevin, I agree with your last sentence.
There were plenty of posters who assumed the quotes were that of Obama and then let their hate take over. Stat never implied it was Obama, people assumed the quotes were by Obama.
The act of assuming. Looking back, the behavior of those who were punked, reminds me of all those who come here everyday armed with nothing but hyper-partisan talking points and run with it over and over again. It happens often and by both sides of the aisle. I can't tell you how many times hyper-partisan talking points end up getting debunked because certain qualifiers are intentionally left out.
That's where Google (or some other search tool) comes into play. When I am here on USMB, Google comes into play constantly. Doing some research using non-partisan resources involves not much work and it sure helps avoiding punking oneself. I know I have burned myself by being lazy and assumptive. I hate it when I humiliate myself.

Except that mistakenly assuming that Obama said those things, and then pointing out that Obama doesn't actually believe them, has nothing to do with being a blind partisan. Obama's actions don't fall in line with the principles espoused in those quotes, I would say neither does Eisenhower's, but that's irrelevant, and pointing that out is simply pointing out facts. Now we pointed out those facts based on a false assumption, but they're still facts regardless.

No. Its merely your opinion that Pres. Obama does not believe the content of the quotes which you now know are actually from Pres. Eisenhower. That very sentence of yours proved the point of this experiment, namely that the hatred of Obama from the Right and their blank assumptions about him cloud their judgement even over the most innocuous of quotes. So, thanks for supporting my argument.

PS. No USMB rules were broken with the creation of the OP. I provided 2 historically correct quotes and attributed them to a POTUS. My oh my, when Righties get upset, they literally beg for the nanny state to intercede. Why, Rightwinger made a similar thread using a Reagan quote about eliminating nuclear weapons and the Right went totally apoplectic. He too broke no USMB rules. ..

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I am impressed that you are impressed by the words of a great Republican President. For both of us know that Obamahdi damn sure doesn't live up to those sentiments. He's not very bright.

Eisenhower is imo one of the four greatest presidents in our Union's history.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

That is why Hoss wanted to name a toilet after him

 

[The Rabbi]

No, this thread shows very little, actually. It is one of the most intellectually dishonest and bankrupt threads in recent memory. We have an OP, and others, pretending that people were protesting the words of a quote, rather than the person that the OP was pretending said the quote, as if context is unimportant. We have an OP who was completely unwilling to engage in any discussion with any meaningful or well thought out critique of the person he was pretending said the quote, and rather simply sat around mocking the low-hanging fruit.

The most that can be said for this thread is that those of us who were duped, and we were, should have known better and Googled the quotes.

Actually Kevin, I agree with your last sentence.
There were plenty of posters who assumed the quotes were that of Obama and then let their hate take over. Stat never implied it was Obama, people assumed the quotes were by Obama.
The act of assuming. Looking back, the behavior of those who were punked, reminds me of all those who come here everyday armed with nothing but hyper-partisan talking points and run with it over and over again. It happens often and by both sides of the aisle. I can't tell you how many times hyper-partisan talking points end up getting debunked because certain qualifiers are intentionally left out.
That's where Google (or some other search tool) comes into play. When I am here on USMB, Google comes into play constantly. Doing some research using non-partisan resources involves not much work and it sure helps avoiding punking oneself. I know I have burned myself by being lazy and assumptive. I hate it when I humiliate myself.

Except that mistakenly assuming that Obama said those things, and then pointing out that Obama doesn't actually believe them, has nothing to do with being a blind partisan. Obama's actions don't fall in line with the principles espoused in those quotes, I would say neither does Eisenhower's, but that's irrelevant, and pointing that out is simply pointing out facts. Now we pointed out those facts based on a false assumption, but they're still facts regardless.

No. Its merely your opinion that Pres. Obama does not believe the content of the quotes which you now know are actually from Pres. Eisenhower. That very sentence of yours proved the point of this experiment, namely that the hatred of Obama from the Right and their blank assumptions about him cloud their judgement even over the most innocuous of quotes. So, thanks for supporting my argument.

PS. No USMB rules were broken with the creation of the OP. I provided 2 historically correct quotes and attributed them to a POTUS. My oh my, when Righties get upset, they literally beg for the nanny state to intercede. Why, Rightwinger made a similar thread using a Reagan quote about eliminating nuclear weapons and the Right went totally apoplectic. He too broke no USMB rules. ..

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I am impressed that you are impressed by the words of a great Republican President. For both of us know that Obamahdi damn sure doesn't live up to those sentiments. He's not very bright.

Eisenhower is imo one of the four greatest presidents in our Union's history.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

That's because he was known mainly for playing golf.

 

[Statistikhengst]

So ---- your lack of cynicism is our fault?

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

Only, the OP was anything but duplicitous. I am not responsible for your lack of concentration or discernment. Personal responsibility and all that jazz. Lovely display of butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[The Rabbi]

So ---- your lack of cynicism is our fault?

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

Only, the OP was anything but duplicitous. I am not responsible for your lack of concentration or discernment. Personal responsibility and all that jazz. Lovely display of butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

The OP was a cheap gotcha that tried to make you look like a genius.
Unfortunately only mass delusion could make you look any better than the retard you are.

 

[Dot Com]

So ---- your lack of cynicism is our fault?

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

Only, the OP was anything but duplicitous. I am not responsible for your lack of concentration or discernment. Personal responsibility and all that jazz. Lovely display of butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

The OP was a cheap gotcha that tried to make you look like a genius.
Unfortunately only mass delusion could make you look any better than the retard you are.

it didn't make OP look like a genius, on the contrary, it made you people look exactly like the President described Republicans- low-info, reactionary haters.

He said that anything that had his name attached to it would immediately receive negative reaction from Rightards and he was right.

you led the parade starting on the 1st page of the thread too

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So ---- your lack of cynicism is our fault?

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

Only, the OP was anything but duplicitous. I am not responsible for your lack of concentration or discernment. Personal responsibility and all that jazz. Lovely display of butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I've said on many occasions that I'm responsible for not googling the quote myself. It was, however, your intent for people to make the assumption that I made, and the fact that you did not bother correcting anybody when they made that assumption proves your intention was to trick people. This is a textbook example of duplicity on your part. Furthermore, you then dishonestly made the claim that people, for mistakenly criticizing Obama for the hypocritical statement, were in fact criticizing the person who actually made the statement, President Eisenhower. For some reason you think quotes in and of themselves should be taken completely in a vacuum without context of the character or actions of the person giving the quote.

 

[The Rabbi]

Not at all. You simply have no leg to stand on in judging those of us who were fooled, because if you had not been informed beforehand you likely would have made the same assumptions.

This place absolutely screams for cynicism and checking what's being said. That's how we busted bogus fake-news stories on "Isis beheading Christians" and "Girl suspended from school for saying 'bless you'". It's the whole reason I created this thread a while back. It's full of 'em.

The moral of the story: "do your homework". Know what you're talking about. If that lesson has impressed any of the dupees here this thread has served a productive purpose.

Again, there's no question that I, among others, should have googled the quotes. Fully and freely admitted. My bad. That you were in on the con, however, hardly qualifies you to judge the reaction of those who were not. That you also deny that there was any dishonesty from the OP or from those who perpetuated the duplicity is laughable, however.

Only, the OP was anything but duplicitous. I am not responsible for your lack of concentration or discernment. Personal responsibility and all that jazz. Lovely display of butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

The OP was a cheap gotcha that tried to make you look like a genius.
Unfortunately only mass delusion could make you look any better than the retard you are.

it didn't make OP look like a genius, on the contrary, it made you people look exactly like the President described Republicans- low-info, reactionary haters.

He said that anything that had his name attached to it would immediately receive negative reaction from Rightards and he was right.

you led the parade starting on the 1st page of the thread too

So he posted something that did not have Obama's name attached to it and that somehow makes us look like idiots?

 

[Dot Com]

nice attempt at backpedaling the Rabbi

 

[NLT]

I am unaware of any secrets. His life is an open book and he is respected around the world as a great American

Now I know you're trolling...

There are schools in France and England that are named after him

Gaza City names their streets and schools after suicide bombers. That's more profound.

What, more profound than naming things after this president??

I don't know.....maybe putting him on a coin or something
I'm thinking the dollar

only the dollar? racist

 

[NLT]

the result of this thread is? Liberals are dishonest and on this board if Scat and RW post anything, better google it to see if they are not lying. Good Job Scat. I all ways figured you for a sorry POS and you proved it today. BTW you did not fool me faggot.

 

[rightwinger]

Now I know you're trolling...

There are schools in France and England that are named after him

Gaza City names their streets and schools after suicide bombers. That's more profound.

What, more profound than naming things after this president??

I don't know.....maybe putting him on a coin or something
I'm thinking the dollar

only the dollar? racist

Eisenhower is on the dollar.......idiot

 

[NLT]

This thread all goes to show exactly how blind hate is.

No, this thread shows very little, actually. It is one of the most intellectually dishonest and bankrupt threads in recent memory. We have an OP, and others, pretending that people were protesting the words of a quote, rather than the person that the OP was pretending said the quote, as if context is unimportant. We have an OP who was completely unwilling to engage in any discussion with any meaningful or well thought out critique of the person he was pretending said the quote, and rather simply sat around mocking the low-hanging fruit.

The most that can be said for this thread is that those of us who were duped, and we were, should have known better and Googled the quotes.

Actually Kevin, I agree with your last sentence.
There were plenty of posters who assumed the quotes were that of Obama and then let their hate take over. Stat never implied it was Obama, people assumed the quotes were by Obama.
The act of assuming. Looking back, the behavior of those who were punked, reminds me of all those who come here everyday armed with nothing but hyper-partisan talking points and run with it over and over again. It happens often and by both sides of the aisle. I can't tell you how many times hyper-partisan talking points end up getting debunked because certain qualifiers are intentionally left out.
That's where Google (or some other search tool) comes into play. When I am here on USMB, Google comes into play constantly. Doing some research using non-partisan resources involves not much work and it sure helps avoiding punking oneself. I know I have burned myself by being lazy and assumptive. I hate it when I humiliate myself.

Except that mistakenly assuming that Obama said those things, and then pointing out that Obama doesn't actually believe them, has nothing to do with being a blind partisan. Obama's actions don't fall in line with the principles espoused in those quotes, I would say neither does Eisenhower's, but that's irrelevant, and pointing that out is simply pointing out facts. Now we pointed out those facts based on a false assumption, but they're still facts regardless.

No. Its merely your opinion that Pres. Obama does not believe the content of the quotes which you now know are actually from Pres. Eisenhower. That very sentence of yours proved the point of this experiment, namely that the hatred of Obama from the Right and their blank assumptions about him cloud their judgement even over the most innocuous of quotes. So, thanks for supporting my argument.

PS. No USMB rules were broken with the creation of the OP. I provided 2 historically correct quotes and attributed them to a POTUS. My oh my, when Righties get upset, they literally beg for the nanny state to intercede. Why, Rightwinger made a similar thread using a Reagan quote about eliminating nuclear weapons and the Right went totally apoplectic. He too broke no USMB rules. ..

What kills me is Rabbi tried the same thing with a Hitler quote, early in this thread ------ and still didn't figure out that he was doing the same thing the OP did.

Post 21:

Tell me you agree with this statement, dullard:

As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.

]

So close and yet so far...

Are you patting yourself on the back for knowing little known Hitler quotes? That's fucked up