As Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited with saying

[DancingBear]

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Just today I have responded, with links to valid sources, to the following incorrect statements made by posters on these boards:

--Obama changed and said those over $200,000 will have a tax increase (instead of $250,000).

--The entity to which the International Republican Institute, chaired by McCain, gave $400,000+, was not the one founded by Rashid Khalidi.

--A parent can renounce the United States citizenship of a minor.

--Obama's birth records in Hawaii were sealed by the Governor.

--Obama has spent $600 million in this election but McCain has only spent $84 million.

These are not matters of interpretation, they are just not true. And this doesn't include assertions which have no evidence to support them, like that Obama used an Indonesian passport to visit Pakistan. I'm just talking about the out-and-out mistakes of fact. As near as I can tell in each case the poster who put this up got it from WorldNetDaily or some other clearly partisan source.

And in no case when they are proven wrong do they ever acknowledge it. They ignore it and move on, or they respond with a non sequitur, or they just disappear. Why can't anyone admit they're wrong?

 

[SteveInBrooklyn]

It is difficult to admit it when you're wrong, but I think the real explanation here is that conspiracy theories are comforting to people. They give you a sense that there is some kind of order in the universe, and they make complicated problems seem simple.

 

[ChrizJen]

I think that at this point, it's not really a matter of right or wrong for some. It's more a matter of slinging as much nonsense as possible at the last minute, hoping that at least some of it will stick.

Kinda like an eating contest. At first you try to pace yourself, but then at the last minute you realize you're behind, and you just start shoving it all in as fast as you can, hoping that none of it comes back up...

 

[DancingBear]

But, Steve, a lot of these folks are getting themselves very upset by the conspiracy theories, when the truth (to me at least) is actually simpler and less upsetting.

 

[ntsammy5]

well put

 

[SteveInBrooklyn]

But, Steve, a lot of these folks are getting themselves very upset by the conspiracy theories, when the truth (to me at least) is actually simpler and less upsetting.

To some people, the prospect of a black man with an exotic name becoming President is very upsetting. For some people, the only plausible explanation for it is that Obama is some sort of one-man marxist muslim sleeper cell. It must be hard to accept,for some, that he made it through hard work and intelligence, just like those who became president before him.

 

[bsnyder]

To some people, the prospect of a black man with an exotic name becoming President is very upsetting. For some people, the only plausible explanation for it is that Obama is some sort of one-man marxist muslim sleeper cell. It must be hard to accept,for some, that he made it through hard work and intelligence, just like those who became president before him.

Talk about conspiracy theories!

For most, the plausible explaination is that we don't believe the "Obama as a moderate" routine that the MSM has been carefully helping him sell, and that the reality is a far left of center politician who does not have the experience (yet) to be POTUS, and who's major political experiences are from the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago politics.

 

[okeydokey]

I feel your frustration. There are some people who just can't admit they are ever wrong. AS Paul Riser once said, "This isn't the most right I've ever been", but even that is too hard for some. Keep the faith. It's almost over,

 

[SteveInBrooklyn]

Talk about conspiracy theories!

For most, the plausible explaination is that we don't believe the "Obama as a moderate" routine that the MSM has been carefully helping him sell, and that the reality is a far left of center politician who does not have the experience (yet) to be POTUS, and who's major political experiences are from the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago politics.

I was referring to the people who believe that Obama is not a citizen, that he is a marxist, that he's a fanatical muslim, that he's a one-man sleeper cell. I wasn't talking about you. Don't be so defensive.

 

[yeartolate]

Talk about conspiracy theories!

For most, the plausible explaination is that we don't believe the "Obama as a moderate" routine that the MSM has been carefully helping him sell, and that the reality is a far left of center politician who does not have the experience (yet) to be POTUS, and who's major political experiences are from the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago politics.

What are your views about the 5 points bulleted in the OP?

 

[freckles and boo]

Talk about conspiracy theories!

For most, the plausible explaination is that we don't believe the "Obama as a moderate" routine that the MSM has been carefully helping him sell, and that the reality is a far left of center politician who does not have the experience (yet) to be POTUS, and who's major political experiences are from the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago politics.

I disagree with you, but I find you "plausible explanation" considerably more rational than the lies we see every day on the boards. If this is the reason you aren't voting for Obama, why perpetuate or fail to repudiate the ridiculous crap that is out there?

 

[ChrisFL]

Talk about conspiracy theories!

For most, the plausible explaination is that we don't believe the "Obama as a moderate" routine that the MSM has been carefully helping him sell, and that the reality is a far left of center politician who does not have the experience (yet) to be POTUS, and who's major political experiences are from the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago politics.

You know what? That's one of the most sensible posts here for not voting for him. I disagree of course, but at least that's using some common sense and not resorting to the extremes of the "non-citizen, his middle name is hussein,he's a muslim but goes to a racist christian church, etc. etc."

I mean, that's almost ground that could be discussed rationally!

 

[corndog]

Just today I have responded, with links to valid sources, to the following incorrect statements made by posters on these boards:

Could it be because you're wrong? I've only looked at the first 2, but you appear incorrect in both cases. Should I read on?

--Obama changed and said those over $200,000 will have a tax increase (instead of $250,000).

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf
See Page 5. On Obama's own website it says individuals over $200,000 will see their taxes go up.

--The entity to which the International Republican Institute, chaired by McCain, gave $400,000+, was not the one founded by Rashid Khalidi.

I'll give almost (but not quite ) a half truth for this one.
http://disboards.com/showpost.php?p=28452700&postcount=40

And in no case when they are proven wrong do they ever acknowledge it. They ignore it and move on, or they respond with a non sequitur, or they just disappear. Why can't anyone admit they're wrong?

I'll be awaiting your admission with baited breath!

 

[tinkryansmom]

Ah Corn don't wait too long.

I am honored you called me out personally there Dancing Bear. I went back and see Bicker even used my name. I am blushing.

See I don't get up at 4:00 in the morning and get on the DIS so by the time that thread was buried by all the other above the fold fodder - I did not go looking for it. Sorry to have offended you by not responding to your criticism of me.

Not going to argue semantics of the definition of sealed. If you can call my source into question for being partisan I can call your source into question. Where does it end?

I posted on a totally different thread originally and basically my point was Obama is above the scrutiny others have had to deal with. Pretty straight forward and simple opinion.

I apologize if you did not like my opinion. But it is mine. Try not to let it get to you.

 

[bicker]

I think that at this point, it's not really a matter of right or wrong for some. It's more a matter of slinging as much nonsense as possible at the last minute, hoping that at least some of it will stick.

That's pretty much all they have left, as far as I can tell. I don't even see any undecided posters getting into the discussions, anymore, since it is clear that all that's going on is nonsense to try to distract from the fact that Obama is the preferred candidate of most Americans. There is no chance left for real discussions, due to the rabid nature of the tactics, used by those who's candidate is losing, to try to do something that could reverse the trend.

 

[DancingBear]

Could it be because you're wrong? I've only looked at the first 2, but you appear incorrect in both cases. Should I read on?

Don't want to deal with the last 3?

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf
See Page 5. On Obama's own website it says individuals over $200,000 will see their taxes go up.[/quote]Yes, and I've set that forth from time to time. However, that figure has not changed, and the latest round of allegations has been that Obama has changed the figure (and that is the specific falsity I cited above). Also, I'm not aware of any advertisement where Obama mentions this $200,000 figure for individuals, but there are many where he mentions that those below $200,000 get a cut. And yet there have been posters saying they saw an ad where Obama said tax increases start at $200,000. Specifically one said it was in the 30-minute infomercial, which it verifiably isn't. Another suggested that Obama had slipped up in saying it in an ad, which is really a silly idea. Perhaps they've used different figures for illustration in a speech or an interview, as Biden did the other day, but there has been no change in the threshholds in the plan.

I'll give almost (but not quite ) a half truth for this one.
http://disboards.com/showpost.php?p=28452700&postcount=40
I'll be awaiting your admission with baited breath!

Sorry, you're still wrong about this. You are confusing two different, very similarly-named organizations. This is the CPRS that Rashad Khalidi founded and the IRI gave money to:

http://web.archive.org/web/20001209082600/www.cprs-palestine.org/about/board.html

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.ph...5.07UNIQ2fff852d18d359cd-nowiki-00000011-QINU

http://www.iri.org/newsreleases/2008-10-29-IRI.asp

The IRI news release makes clear that this is the organization that is at issue, and says it apparently no longer exists (so nobody is currently associated with it).

In your post you talked about a different organization (PCPSR, similar):

http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=28437676&postcount=12

Of course, it would have been easier to get to the truth if you had bothered to include a source when you first made the claim.

I'll be awaiting your admission with bated breath. http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-bai1.htm

 

[DancingBear]

I posted on a totally different thread originally and basically my point was Obama is above the scrutiny others have had to deal with. Pretty straight forward and simple opinion.

I apologize if you did not like my opinion. But it is mine. Try not to let it get to you.

You're completely ignoring the quote in the OP.