This just in: Tommy Christopher doesn’t know what a transcript is.

Defund PBS. Do it Now. Not later, Now. This needs to happen Now.

Tommy Christopher wants so badly to project this image of Mediaite as some great non-partisan fair minded website. The fact is that founder Dan Abrams is a liberal and most of the columnists and people associated with Mediaite are left leaning. . I will say again they do try hard and want to be seen as fair but they really don’t have it in them. Media in general needs to be honest. MSNBC, NBC,CBS,ABC, CNN, PBS,NPR, New York Times, Time, Newsweek etc are all to the left. While Fox, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, talk radio etc tilt right. So Mediaite .. you know you tilt left .. Time to admit it.

I sent the Ed piece in. Obama did an epic fail on the Lincoln line (sorry, I live in the state that is the birth of the Republican Party and I’ve been to the actual facility) and the media isn’t correcting the records at the same pace in which they would if Palin made a gaffe.

Stop shilling Tommy. You are allowed to call out Obama on all of his flubs. He’s made a ton of them.

Tommy, I should have known you would cover for the president.  Please get a dictionary and look up the word “transcript”.  I am getting tired of this left wing site.  I wish you provided equal treatment to all politicians and news organizations.  You would be much better if you would.

Why does the media continue to cover for BO?  What is in it for them?  What and who are they afraid of?

You know what? I for one am sick and tired of thin skinned dumbass conservatives getting their soiled panties in a twist over EVERYTHING.

What an idiot Jim Treacher continually is. What PBS first posted is most often called a transcript. Is that a totally accurate way to describe it? No. So what?

That’s OK. ” Affirmative Action Jackson ” aka Barack Hussein Obama ll needs all the help he can get.

That’s OK. ” Affirmative Action Jackson ” aka Barack Hussein Obama ll needs all the help he can get.

No, it’s called “prepared remarks”. A for effort, F for failure.

A mistake by a Dem covered up the the media is turned into an allout assault on all conservatives .

This simple straightforward incident has been  Tommy Christophered .

Obama is a gaffe…..an immature incompetent gaffe!!

No matter how much conservatives wish for it, gaffes will just never be Obama’s “thing,” so if they want to get a thrill up their legs every time he pulls a minor Ron Burgundy and reads “corpseman” off a teleprompter, or uses the shorthand “57 states” instead of saying “57 states, territories, commonwealths, and other types of votey-places,” or even makes a genuinely funny one like saying he sees fallen heroes in the audience, that’s their business, but it’s just not going to catch on with the no-ax-to-grind crowd. President Obama just isn’t all that good at gaffes.

Yeah, that’s a real knee slapper, Tommy, just like the time he told the 10th Mountain Division that he’s hung a Medal of Honor around the neck of one of their fallen brothers.

Just frigging hilarious. He’s so funny, that Obama.

Sounds like you have your panties in a twist. Soiled too, huh?

It appears that Obama intended to say “father” of the Republican Party and he can fairly be described as that, just as George Washington can be fairly described as the “father” of our nation. GW was not the first person to suggest that we become an independent nation, but he led us to that path. Lincoln was the guiding force that made the Republican Party a viable third party. He was the first Republican president. It was the actions of his debate opponent, Stephen Douglas, in creating the Kansas-Nebraska Act that fueled the creation of the Republican Party. Lincoln was the co-founder of the Illinois Republican Party, and the first national leader of the Republican Party.

The rightwing freaking out over Obama’s ad lib is ridiculous, and their misunderstanding of how powerful people send out transcripts of their prepared remarks ahead of time is immature.

This is an awfully long post for something really minor.  But a couple of things I would like to point out:

1)  PBS does STILL have on their website “transcript” not “prepared remarks”.  And they are deleting comments from people who are making mention of the error.  This is what makes people suspicious.

2)  Bachmann’s comment about some of the Founding Father spending their lives working to abolish slavery is factually correct.  Just to name a few:

Ben Franklin – in 1790, he petitioned Congress to abolish slavery.  http://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/franklin/
He was a member of the PA Abolition Society and in 1785 was the President of the Society.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Abolition_Society
There are also extensive writings from Franklin on his views of slavery that clearly condemn the practice.

Thomas Paine – He was the first to propose the emancepation of slaves in his article, “African Slavery in America”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine#Political_views
In 1775, founded the PA Abolition Society.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Abolition_Society.
He also wrote numerous papers on the evils of slavery.

John Jay – In 1785, he founded the New York Manumission Society, which fought against slavery.  The society organized boycotts against newspapers that advertised slaves for sale and provided free legal counsel for free blacks claimed as slaves.
In 1799, as Governor of NY, he signed into law emancipating slaves in NY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jay#As_an_abolitionist

I would site more, but you get the jist.  If you are interested, the following founders also opposed slavery:

Thomas FitzSimons
Robert Morris
Richard bassett
James Madison
James Monroe
William Few
John Marshall
Charles Carroll
Rufus King
 
You can find most of the info here:  http://www.constitutionday.com/constitution-founding-fathers.html

A transcript is a transcript. Not a script.

And you wouldn’t have noted the error if, say, Palin had made it.

So you don’t know what a transcript is either. But at least you know what Obama MEANT to say…

Lincoln didn’t join the Republican Party until a couple of years after Alan Bovay started it. How could Lincoln be the father of a party that he joined after its formation?

When Republicans make a gaffe, it’s reported in Mediaite.  When Obama makes a gaffe, only the DNC vetted response is reported in Mediate.  An honest journalist wouldn’t handle things this way, but the author this article is Tommy Christopher.  

It’s the coverup that gets you .

Solyndragate
Walpingate
Fast and Furious Gate
New Black Panthers Helpful Voter Persuasion Gate
Air Force One sent to New York for a Photo Op Gate
Weinergate , too many more .

Actually, the public is most always gracious about gaffes.  The press, though…they’re only gracious if it’s a Dem so take your self-righteous attitude and shove it up your gaffe….

Such pointless, dog-whistle outrage. 
I’m borrowing this collection of quotes from a poster at LGF: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/16/9257401

I am a Lincoln/Kemp Republican. It’s 150 years ago in Chicago this year that Abraham Lincoln, the founder of the Republican Party, accepted the Republican nomination for President of the United States. – Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN)Immigration was a core belief of a founder of the Republican party, Abraham Lincoln.– Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R)Though Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party, to liberals and advocates of civil rights Lincoln was in that pantheon along with FDR as one of the heroes of liberalism and American democracy. – James Pierson on National ReviewGeorge W. Bush is not a Goldwater Republican — he’s a Lincoln Republican. Like the founder of the Republican party, Bush doesn’t mind spending money on his priorities, and he doesn’t mind doing some of this spending with borrowed money. – Jerry Bowyer, National ReviewIt is a pleasure for me to address you upon the day when this club and our countrymen of all faiths throughout the land are paying tribute to the memory of Abraham Lincoln. We tonight also pay tribute to him as founder of the Republican Party and the inspirer of its ideals. – President Herbert Hoover (R)It was — it was, in fact, the founder of our party, Abraham Lincoln, who reminded us that a government that can do everything for us is the government that can take everything from us. – Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) 2008 RNC Speech

Without a teleprompter, Obama gaffes so much that there’s a good chance Biden was brought onto the ticket to set a low bar.

Yikes. Hey Disqus: what’d you do to my formatting? 

Yeah, and he got called on it. By, among others, a Time Magazine reporter named… Jay Carney.

No matter how much conservatives wish for it, gaffes will just never be Obama’s “thing,” 

Not with the dual protection he receives from his media whores and his teleprompters, that’s for sure.

No matter how much conservatives wish for it, gaffes will just never be Obama’s “thing,” 

Not with the dual protection he receives from his media whores and his teleprompters, that’s for sure.

Those teabaggers in all 57 states have been talking about it so much, they’re out of breath. They need a breathalyzer.

Nope, you’re wrong again, Jim, just like you were wrong when you claimed that you didn’t deserve a jaywalking ticket for jaywalking since you got hit by a car (because you were jaywalking!). This kind of thing is often called a transcript. Your word parsing is insincere and partisan and crazy – all typical of your work. A transcript can be a literal transcription of the spoken word, or it can be a delivered copy of prepared remarks. The way people use words matters. PBS wasn’t intending to deceive anyone with their usage of the word “transcript”. You and your ghouls, however, did intend to mislead people with your assertions that PBS scrubbed a sentence from Obama’s speech because they were trying to protect him. It never happened. Top that off with the fact that Lincoln was a co-founder of the Illinois Republican Party, according to the GOP website. Add to that the fact that there’s no equivalent hair on fire hysteria over on the FoxBusiness website where it still includes that omission, and your side has hit into a triple play.

No, it’s most often called a transcript when the media publishes them like PBS did. You’re wrong.

Oh, it’s you.

A transcript is a transcript. Babble all you want.

Live by the sword, die by the sword. If liberals had taken the high road during the Bush administration and then met the standards they set for conservatives, maybe your criticism might be warranted.

In the meantime, we’ll keep tossing all the fruit at Obama we want, regardless of how low-hanging it may be.

Okay, so why does the GOP website state that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party then? There were state Republican Parties, but there wasn’t a national Republican Party until they elected Abraham Lincoln.

“Abraham Lincoln helped establish the Republican Party with a speech denouncing an 1854 law, written by a Democrat Senator, that allowed slavery to expand into the western territories. Two years later, he co-founded the Illinois GOP.”
Read more: http://www.gop.com/index.php/issues/heroes/abraham_lincoln-1/#ixzz1Xa7ywwL8

Since when does someone who helps establish something not get credited with being one of the founders?

You guys are so desperate to go after Obama that you failed to think about what it meant to deny that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party!

Sa†an’s Anus’ interpretation of Stoneyjack’s comment: “WHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!”

Sa†an’s Anus pokes your hollow ego with an excrement laden stick and enjoys it. 

There was no error! There wasn’t an error by PBS, and there wasn’t an error by Obama either. The GOP website claims Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party. So have many current Republicans! Do I need to link to all the comments by Republicans who’ve claimed that Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party?

I am a Lincoln/Kemp Republican. It’s 150 years ago in Chicago this year that Abraham Lincoln, the founder of the Republican Party, accepted the Republican nomination for President of the United States. — Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN)
Immigration was a core belief of a founder of the Republican party, Abraham Lincoln. — Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R)
Though Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party, to liberals and advocates of civil rights Lincoln was in that pantheon along with FDR as one of the heroes of liberalism and American democracy. — James Pierson on National Review
George W. Bush is not a Goldwater Republican — he’s a Lincoln Republican. Like the founder of the Republican party, Bush doesn’t mind spending money on his priorities, and he doesn’t mind doing some of this spending with borrowed money. — Jerry Bowyer, National Review
It is a pleasure for me to address you upon the day when this club and our countrymen of all faiths throughout the land are paying tribute to the memory of Abraham Lincoln. We tonight also pay tribute to him as founder of the Republican Party and the inspirer of its ideals. — President Herbert Hoover (R)
It was — it was, in fact, the founder of our party, Abraham Lincoln, who reminded us that a government that can do everything for us is the government that can take everything from us. — Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) 2008 RNC Speech

You should have read my article before commenting. PBS site says “Transcript” because they replaced the prepared remarks with the remarks as delivered.

Wait, I call out conservative blogs for lying about PBS, while also REPORTING the all-important gaffe, and I’M dishonest? 

Why don’t you ask the GOP, since they said he was a founder too? Or Herbert Hoover, or Rudy Guiliani or Mike Pence? What was created first was the Michigan Republican Party. Lincoln co-founded the Illinois Republican Party and then was the first Republican president. There’s not just one founder, just like there’s not just one moment when one can say that there was a founder of the USA! It’s word parsing simply in your effort to attack Obama.

And this was a transcript, Mr Treacher. That’s what it’s called – a transcript of prepared remarks.

A lot of news stories get “christophered” here on this site.

Christophering:  (Pron; Krist’ tuh fur’ ing)  Def:  The practice of twisting a news story into an attack on those who report it, based solely on ideological rather than journalistic standards.  Example:  The President made a gaffe in his speech, but the story was christophered by the time it got reported on Mediaite.

No, a transcript is a transcription (see how that works?) of remarks that have been made. Dope.

Sa†an’s Anus is unimpressed with the Right’s insistence that Obama’s use of a teleprompter somehow mitigates his intelligence.

Sa†an’s Anus once bought a desk calendar that had a Bush Jr. gaffe for every day of the year. Man, oh man, was there some doozies on that 2006 calender.

Sa†an’s Anus wants you to try harder, for Sa†an’s Anus wants you to succeed, Tristan.

“When you fail, do not fret, Sa†an’s Anus will be there to pick you up, dust you off, and give you a swift kick in the rear for good measure.” — Billy Graham (1972)

One of your best pieces, Tommy.    

The President’s gaffe certainly deserves a story here.  Your attack on conservative blogs could very well be a second story.  But to run the latter without running the former was clearly driven by ideology, not journalism.

Tommy, I have no problem with stories reflecting liberal / progressive views.  But to run the liberal response without ever running the original story is straight out of the Pravda playbook.  Come on, you know that.  

“Air Force One sent to New York for a Photo Op Gate”

Sa†an’s Anus would recommend that BigEddie not bring up military vehicles and photo-op.

A one “mission accomplished” gaffe seems to creep to the crease of Sa†an’s Anus and excretes yellowish substance all over the content of your post – marinating like bacteria laden fecal droppings from an infected wild boar’s rectum.

God Damned Right.

I gots somethin low hangin for ya! Reach up and gives me a squeeze!

BING BANG BOO-YA MOFEAUX

Sa†an’s Anus is unimpressed with Pablo’s attempt at undermining Ellie’s comment regarding Lincoln. Starting a party and making a name for that party can be considered semantics concerning the term “father”.  

Sa†an’s Anus pokes your hollow ego with an excrement laden stick and enjoys it.

“Do not underestimate Sa†an’s Anus, for he – like Christ – is quite forgiving.” — Billy Graham (1983)

It’s not the the teleprompter mitigates Obama’s intelligence, it’s that he can’t speak intelligently without it.

It’s like in The Crow, where Eric Draven has superhuman powers, as long as he has the Crow nearby.  Take out the Crow and all of a sudden, he’s mortal, just like everyone else.  Take away Obama’s teleprompter and he starts talking like he’s having that nightmare where he’s in front of everyone in his underwear.

“Obama Calls Lincoln ‘Founder of Republican Party’?”

jake tapper of the A(lways)B(iased-socialist)C(lowns) network says that the only reason OBOZO said that is because huckabee once said it!!!!!  (NO JOKE, FOLKS)

So the “Corrupt B-tards” of the lamestream socialist media now BLAME HUCKABEE (in addition to Bush) for OBOZO’s screw-ups.

Sa†an’s Anus declares:

Sounds like Pablo has in depth knowledge regarding soiled panties – and the joys of wearing excreta laden panties on ones head. It’s the smell, right? Sa†an’s Anus would know – considering Sa†an’s Anus current position. Hold on, something is coming down the Exit tunnel.
 *blop*                                              *blop*                                                     *blop*

Ooof, that one was quite large and dubious. Sa†an’s Anus apologizes for the interruption. Please, Sa†an’s Anus implores Pablooo to continue his soiled-panty sniffing fantasies. Sa†an’s Anus takes much pleasure IN Pablooo!

How would Tommy have Christophered the Sandy Burglar story ?

Conservatives outraged when innocent patriot former NSA director takes Clinton secret documents out for fresh air . Has no brief case , forced to stuff docs down pants .

“but is it because the media is “covering for” Barack Obama, or because it’s just not that big a deal?”

If a Republican says it, its proof of their idiocy. If a Democrat says it (especially the one), its no big deal. 

Tell it to Jay Carney:
 

He gives a good speech, but he’s loose with the facts. He called Abraham Lincoln the “founder” of the Republican Party. Nope. Lincoln was not the founder of the party; he wasn’t even the first Republican nominee (John Fremont was, in 1856). Lincoln was, of course, the first Republican to be elected president.

 
Hey, Tommy, was Carney “up in arms” back then?

Who the hell cares?

Sounds like you get scant little funny out of lots of typing. Any idiot can do poop jokes, but it takes a talented idiot to drag them out like that.

http://tinyurl.com/ybyb3p2

A transcript can be a transcription, or it can be exactly what the White House provided to PBS and all kinds of other media – a transcript of prepared remarks. The dopes here are you and Jim, insisting that “transcript” always literally means something that was transcribed!

It’s especially annoying since there are 17 territories plus District of Columbia.    How does that add up to 57?   Did you miss all the math classes Tommy?

Yeah, it’s me, the person who repeatedly caught you in lies and dishonest comments about your jaywalking episode.

A transcript is not always a transcription from spoken words. It is also what the White House provided PBS in this case.

It said transcript before there was a transcript posted, that is, describing the previously released text.

They’re not lying, Tommy. That’s just the conclusion you jumped to like you were a little piece of dirt in a Swiffer commercial. So, yes.

No, Tommy can actually get it right sometimes. This isn’t one of them.

Fox News and other Republicans. They absolutely can’t stand that Obama is probably one of the best orators in presidential history. It is stark contrast to the previous president who would receive criticism at times when he struggled with his command of English. Expect whining about teleprompters and other criticism over Obama’s speech giving prowess to only increase as we enter the election.

Palin’s, Bachman’s, and other conservatives gaffes are reported here as proof of intellectual inadequacy.  Obama’s gaffes are reported here on how conservatives are making political hay out of them.  The difference is thus:
Example #1:  “Hey look at how intellectually deficient those republicanes are!”
Example #2:  “Hey look at how the republicans will spin this innocent mistake by Obama!”

Yes, Jay Carney was also wrong back then! In fact, it appears that Jay Carney was the only member of the media to go after Mike Huckabee.

Lincoln was a co-founder of the Illinois Republican Party.

Lincoln didn’t join the Michigan Republican Party. He co-founded and joined the Illinois Republican Party.

There was no “gaffe”. It’s a fantasy from the rightwingers. Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party.

And no, he doesn’t have to cover both stories in order to have credibility.

Yes, and Jay Carney was wrong. And can you provide any member of the media besides Keith Olbermann who also called him on it, since you said “among others”?

See, some of us are consistent, and others, like you, are highly partisan and blindered by that partisanship.

Yes, and Jay Carney was wrong. And can you provide any member of the media besides Keith Olbermann who also called him on it, since you said “among others”?

See, some of us are consistent, and others, like you, are highly partisan and blindered by that partisanship.

Gee I come to Mediaite and the only two peices by Tommy are an article on some GOP nutjob and a defense of Obama’s gaffes.

All the real work is done by Francis Martel it seems.She must actually keep her bias at home like everybody here should.

Pablo is correct.  And PBS was deleting comments made regarding their error.  I know because my comment was deleted.  Why delete people’s comments?  Just make the corrections and move on.

Obama’s screw up is not the issue.  “rightwingers”, as you call them, are not making an issue of Obama making a gaffe.  The issue is with the MSM and the double standard.  Huckabee made the same gaffe a few years ago and Obama’s WH Press Secretary wrote about it when he worked for Time Magazine.

That is what Tommy’s long, excruciatingly painful post is about.  He is trying to defend the MSM not making an issue of Obama’s gaffe, but it is relevant when a GOP makes a gaffe…because it is evidence of their stupidity.  

Obama making a gaffe is irrelevant.  Politicians make gaffes all the time.  It’s just that democrats are given a pass on their gaffes.  Republicans?  not so much.  That is what the issue it.

Interesting analogy, but Sa†an’s Anus maintains disapproval of your original point.

Sa†an’s Anus enjoyed your analogy though.  

Um, I referenced that in detail in the article. What’s your point?

I reported you again.  Hopefully you will be gone.  Your name makes me cringe and doesn’t belong in a supposed mainstream blog.  Grow up and take your foul verbiage elsewhere.  

What’s unfair or unequal about what I wrote? 

Specifically what did I “twist?” What was inaccurate or unfair? I have yet to see anyone point that out. There was no “altering,” and the complaint was that we were ignoring the gaffe. Now, we report it, accurately and fairly, and you’re still mad? Not very logical.

I referenced that one in the article, as well. You really ought to read more carefully.

So, to be clear, you’re backtracking on the “honesty” thing? A gentleman would apologize.

As I’ve said before, we’re perfectly capable of covering two angles of the same story at once. If oon;y you were capable of digesting them.

Sa†an’s Anus appreciates the compliments, but it’s second nature. No effort at all, really.  An idiot with talent – a la Obama? Bush? Perry? Bachmann?

Sa†an’s Anus is raw and red with irritation at your deplorable attempt at sarcasm.

*Bloop* D a m n! Now look what you have done! Pablooooo! A hemorrhoid…you happy now? A God-d amned hemorrhoid just popped out of Sa†an’s Anus. See what your bloviating has caused no…sheesh. Does any one have Preparation H?

That’s not accurate. The hook for this story was not the haymaking about the gaffe, it was the inaccuracy of the accusation against PBS. They “altered” nothing. My article is pretty clear: make all the hay you want.

You still haven’t pointed out what it was I got wrong, other than the fact that two topics are more than you’re prepared to read in a single article. That’s your problem.

How often does someone “found” something two years after it was founded?

By the way, DelDolly nutters, attacking JT for his car-accident incident is a new low.

It was a gaffe. I knew it when I heard the speech live. It.was.a.gaffe.

Was he “up in arms” then like “Conservative blogs” are now, is my question.

It.was.a.gaffe …

There was no compliment. You’re not talented, is what I’m saying.

“Fox News and other Republicans. They absolutely can’t stand that Obama is probably one of the best orators in presidential history.”

As long as the teleprompter is nearby. P.S. I don’t care if he is Cicero reborn. He does not know what he is doing. 9 percent unemployment is probably the BEST he can do.

Yea…gaffes just aren’t his http://youtu.be/SVn59TC2QqM. Or, maybe they are, the media just doesn’t cover them. Yea, that sounds more like it.

I missed another genuinely funny joke? I’d better review. Who doesn’t love a good belly laugh?

That would be transparent, and that’s not really on their agenda.

LuLZ!

What idiots!

Yea, he’s such a great orator…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp0hU1THjuchttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEAO0lt4Dw&feature=related

I think you mean he’s a pretty good teleprompter reader.

sounds like another definition of is is.

media is 90% liberal.  It all their agenda. 

From the update:

While you’re at it, ask why conservatives are now trying so hard to distance themselves from Abraham Lincoln.

Nope, no spin here. That’s either dishonest or extermely stupid, Tommy. Which is it?

Sure I have, Tommy.

http://tinyurl.com/3fhcghr

No- when the MSM prints a transcript, it is an actual verbatim transcript of what a person says. Prepared remarks are what a person plans to say.

Obama’s Lincoln comment was not in the speech as written.  This means he was planning on saying anything about Lincoln.  That would be called “prepared remarks”.  When Obama gave the speech, he added the comment about Lincoln as he was giving the speech.  A transcript would be the actual words he spoke. 

There is a difference.  Do you understand now?

Except, this is not the issue with Republicans.  Again, the issue is Obama made an incorrect statement (which really is no big deal), the same incorrect statement Mike Huckabee made.  The MSM treated Mike Huckabee’s Lincoln comment as evidence of his stupidity.  They ignore when Obama makes the same incorrect comment.  THAT IS THE ISSUE.  How the MSM treats two different people making the same error.

Gaffes? What gaffes?

http://tinyurl.com/3fhcghr

Other gaffes, like Michele Bachmann’s frequent mangling of history (placing Lexington and Concord in New Hampshire, or calling slavery-codifiers abolitionists
are not “tomato/tomahto” nitpicks) get attention because of their
innate humor, and because they illustrate a chasm between waving the
flag and knowing something about it.

How about we start there, shall we?  

“ If there appears to be a gaffe deficit, it’s not a media creation, it’s a reflection of either perception, or reality. People either like conservative gaffes more, or they just make more of them. ”

The media created the perception that Obama is *brilliant* and the smartest president, evah! And they also created the perception that Palin (and Bush, Quale, Reagan) is an idiot. 

Yes, it is a media creation. Obama is gaffetastic. They ignore or barely touch his extremely long list of gaffe and blunders, yet pound away at Palin/Bachmann/Bush 24/7. 

Need I remind you of the Palin emails? Did the media even vet Obama? Yet they scoured Palin’s emails, a private citizen, hoping to dig up any dirt they could. And TC writes how many paragraphs covering for Obama’s Lincoln gaffe? Where are Obama’s grades? They have been busy calling Perry an idiot, because of his grades, and attacked Bush, even though his grades were better than Kerrys…but where are Obama’s? 

Conservatives do not make more gaffes than liberals. They are just ignored in the media. Just ask Rachel Maddow about Boy King. Can you imagine had a Con even uttered the word boy in a 100 mile radius of Obama? Oh, wait, we don’t have to. Those stories get covered, and stick to Cons like a tar baby. 

What, that they lied? How am I wrong about that? 

It’s a joke. Ask someone who has a sense of humor to explain it to you.

No. It can’t.

I GOT YOU, JAYWALKER!!!!!

Right, you are disputing the interpretation of what PBS did – whether it was a transcript or recitation of the supplied script.  There’s nary a criticism of Obama’s gaffe itself, unlike the contempt Palin et al receive.

“What, that they lied? How am I wrong about that?”

“They probably should have labeled their transcript “as prepared,”

And had they, they wouldn’t have been accused of altering the transcript. No one lied when they said PBS altered the transcript. PBS *lied* when they posted the prepared speech, and labeled it as a transcript. 

Had they labeled the speech, as you noted, “Prepared Remarks” versus “Remarks As Delivered”  they would not have been accused of altering the speech. 

“If PBS wanted to “cover up” the gaffe, they did a lousy job when they posted the full video of the speech”

That’s funny, because people ALL the time accuse FOX of intentionally editing out content, even though they post the entire video. (example, Jon Stewart interviews.)

In the realm of Obama gaffes, this one is pretty minor. But, considering every single thing uttered by a Conservative is jumped on, ripped apart, analyzed and repeated ad nauseum, I’d say the Left kind of created this environment.

Just one more to go!

It’s like a virgin birth. But Obama’s got the chops to make it happen, being The One and all.

 ”Jim, just like you were wrong when you claimed that you didn’t deserve a jaywalking ticket for jaywalking since you got hit by a car (because you were jaywalking!).”
How do you know where he was walking? Are you the one who ran him over? 

He wasn’t jaywalking, he was in the crosswalk. Hence the outrage over the jaywalking ticket. 

Good thing he has you to tell him what he did that night. 

Tommy, to devote a story here to your rebuttal, but not to report on the President’s original gaffe makes no sense.  If the gaffe wasn’t newsworthy, your appropriation of it in an attack piece is far, far less newsworthy.

But I am happy to invite others decide which is the real news story:  the President’s gaffe or Tommy Christopher’s attempt to use it to attack his ideological opponents.  If a real journalist was going to cover only one of those stories, which one does the real journalist select?  It’s a pretty easy call, isn’t it?

They see what’s labeled as a transcript posted, but it is not an accurate transcript, as the gaffe is not there. Further, they point out that comments mentioning that the gaffe is missing are actively being deleted. Then, as the story caught fire, PBS updates with the actual transcript.

What the hell do you expect people to make of that? And you still don’t really know that they’re even wrong, let alone lying. All you know is what PBS is telling you their “mistake” was. And yet, you can declare that the bloggers who noticed this were lying.

At the very worst, they were wrong. In your case, that’s the best case scenario and it’s unlikely.

Treacher, do you get this one?

Tommy, I read it perfectly and carefully.  You are regurgitating the phony defense of “57 states” that Obama was actually speaking about how many territories and states there are.  If he was referencing that, then he was wrong on that number also.   He is a great reader of a teleprompter, and nothing beyond that.

Tommy, nothing would give me greater pleasure now than to say I was wrong, and that you aim to practice honest journalism — and not just political advocacy under the disguise of journalism.  Give me even some slight reason in the future to do so, and I will be quick to rush to your defense and admit I was wrong. 

I admire many things about this website.  But it’s clear that Mediaite has a split personality.  The readers can see that the editors and writers wrestle with two incompatible goals.  On the one hand, they want to report honestly and thoroughly on each day’s events.  But they also want to help Obama get re-elected, and this non-journalistic goal tends to undermine what is otherwise and outstanding and impressive website.

I understand that political reporting is difficult, and to maintain even-handedness is challenging, even for the most fair-minded reporter.  But Mediaite has shown, on many occasions, that it is capable of operating at this high level.  I would be the first to sing its praises if it rose that level more consistently.  But I fear that, with an election year looming, the political advocacy here will squeeze out the journalism.  Please prove me wrong, and I will graciously and happily say so.

I’ve been banned, apparently. Or at least my replies aren’t showing up.

Update: Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has a roundup of Republicans (I added links) referring to Lincoln as the “founder” of the GOP that I’ve never even heard of! Does this mean the mainstream media has a right-wing bias? Why did they cover all of these up?

First, they’re not covered up which you can tell by the links to them. Duh.

Second, you know what none of those quotes are? From an address by the President of the United States to a Joint Session of Congress.

The answers you seek, Dolly, may be found here:

http://bit.ly/qK87wc

Unless Delldolly was driving the car, she has yet to explain how she knows “what really happened.”

Obama was still wrong, even though other people were wrong. You have some severe psychological problems.

BO should just stick to his teleprompter. See what happens when he decides to ad lib?

Really, where’s the punch line there, Tommy? I don’t even see an attempt at humor. All I see is a lame attempt at spin in your trying to blow it off as a joke.

j/k might work for texting, but I’m not buying it.

TIME is now covering the gaffe as well.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/10/surprise-media-covers-lincoln-gaffe/

He gives a good speech, but he’s loose with the facts. He called Abraham Lincoln the “founder” of the Republican Party. Nope. Lincoln was not the founder of the party; he wasn’t even the first Republican nominee (John Fremont was, in 1856). Lincoln was, of course, the first Republican to be elected president.

Oops, no, that’s their response to Mike Huckabee (who was not President, or making a major address to the nation) when he erred. 

He said “57 states with one left to go” and then mentioned he would not be able to go to Hawaii and Alaska.  Tommy C, what a partisan hack you are.

It’s especially ironic that this site — which rushes to cover any Republican gaffe, no matter how insignificant — gets angry when others report on the a gaffe by the most important politician in the world.  

In general, I think journalists waste too much time on these gotcha stories.  I prefer substantive discussion of real issues.  But once the liberal journalists have decided that gaffes deserve to be lead stories for the evening news, they can’t exempt the President.   And to avoid covering the President’s gaffe, yet use it as an excuse to attack obscure conservative bloggers is impossible to justify from any reasonable standards of journalistic ethics. 

Banned? Really? Why? Is Mediaite sensitive about their honey Tommy?

Ah, yeah, it can, and it often is, Pablo – your word parsing doesn’t change the way that people use that word, and the media often uses the word “transcript” to describe their publishing of prepared remarks. I understand that the facts here destroy your argument. Too bad, so sad.

I pointed out countless lies, omissions of relevant info, and deceptive comments when you first were claiming that there was no reason for you to have gotten the jaywalking ticket. You leapt to all kinds of unsustainable conclusions, repeatedly, even when it was explained to you how your scenario couldn’t be right. This is indisputable, Jim. You have no credibility except among deluded rightwingers. Your strawman argument that it’s me who doesn’t know what happened is just that – bogus. It was you who didn’t know what was going on, and it’s you who’s making the bogus strawman argument about the word “transcript” here. It was used to describe what they provided – and what many in the print and online media regularly provide – a preview copy of someone’s remarks.

Great work here, Tommy. Since Rick Perry seems to be running for election to the CSA presidency, the entire Party needs distance from Lincoln. I learned that at Robert Stacy McCain’s place*

*not really, that’s snark

sniff that jock !! tommy christopher

No, he wasn’t – that’s why he was given a jaywalking ticket! He’s not been honest about it. First he whined about being given the ticket while he was in the hospital – then he whined that he hadn’t been handed it personally, as though THAT would have been necessary for it to be a justified ticket. There were witnesses. When he was challenged to provide us with the police report, he refused. The driver of the car was not found to be at fault for the incident, because Jim was at fault for not crossing the street in a legal way, according to the witnesses. Jim asserted, without ANY evidence, for a long time, that it was a hit and run, because he thought that the driver HAD TO TALK to him (Jim) and give him his (the driver’s) ID and insurance info before he left the scene of the accident in order for it NOT to be a hit and run. First off, the driver never has to talk to the person they hit – what if that person is unconscious? Secondly, the driver doesn’t have to give that info to Jim – he only has to ensure that the proper people get it – which they did!

His story crumbled with the slightest examination, and then he blew off all further inquiries when it was clear that he couldn’t pretend any more that it wasn’t his fault that he got hit. He and Tucker Carlson went off the deep end on his story, and Jim is doing the same thing on this story. There’s no “there” there. There’s no evidence that PBS did anything, in any way, to try to protect President Obama. They didn’t scrub anything from their site, they didn’t use the word “transcript” in any effort to mislead a soul, and on top of that, it’s inaccurate to say that Obama shouldn’t have said that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party!

you banned? Oh, noes, Treacher, if you only had your own wing nut bl;og to broadcast your inanity from? Oh, hold it…..

As for the “substance” of your comments, for god’s sake your reading ability is minuscule. The words on the PBS website are the word as released to the press prior to the speech (pretty SOP). Way to confuse remarks as released by the White House with the actual transcript of what was said.

Oh, and way to ignore the fact this isn’t a gaffe and, of course, ignoring that this wasn’t a speech on antebellum history, but on jobs. You remember don’t ya, “jimmy”,” how your Party doesn’t care about jobs or governing and instead starts to whine over “gaffes.”

Pablo, what’s your angle here? That Carney was right then? How many times do you say Carney is right now?

Yes, you got yourself banned because of your dishonest and disingenuous commentary. That is your schtick, and it doesn’t fly on sites that you don’t control, Sean. You aren’t some innocent victim here, Sean, poor baby.

Oh, and I’m sure that in the message that told you that you were banned, there was also an implicit (if not explicit) warning that you weren’t to return under a new screen name/email address.

But since when has behaving honestly been any impediment to you, huh? Oh, and thanks for the sexist (and baseless) insult above. When someone of your ilk gets freaked out over my refuting your every word, I love it. Please, keep it up.

You were wrong about the usage of the word “transcript”. There’s no evidence of any nefarious motives by PBS in their usage of that term And it’s an extraordinary claim to make, and so you’d need extraordinary evidence to document it – yet you have nothing. PBS didn’t leave anything off on purpose, and the evidence of that is that when they were informed that a sentence was in his actual remarks that wasn’t in his prepared remarks, they put out a revised transcript and noted that it had changed from the first time they’d published it. And lastly, there’s no true issue with Obama saying that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party. Yeah, I’m sure it stings a little when Obama can throw up your side’s disreputable behavior by citing Lincoln, but, too bad, so sad. Even the GOP’s own website says that Lincoln was a founder, for cripes sake.

steph can leave, Tommy. We won’t miss one more wingnut who thinks that these sorts of things are important and who can’t understand the difference between publishing a released speech and noting it’s the copy as released and not as given.

As I already explained to you, Pablo, Jay Carney was wrong back then!

he would know. Every morning he sees something disappointing and untalented in the mirror. If it’s a full length mirror, he can see two disappointing things

thin-skinned whiner

Well said.

Yup – that’s me.

Thanks 

Dolly’s insane.

Well, I make no secret that I’m a liberal, but as a regular reader, you also know that I have never shied away from defending a conservative, or criticizing a liberal, when the situation calls for it. I’m sure you can think of a number of examples off the top of your head. You don’t have to agree with me, but the facts don’t back up your assertion that I “practice political advocacy under the guise of journalism.”

You are out of your mind.

Don’t you just love the left’s response?  Well Huckabee made the same mistake….So what?  it’s still a mistake and I would bet that Huckabee didn’t have a team of writers and fact checkers working on his “speech” to 10 people.  Could be wrong…..

Is it worth mentioning that these comment threads are gutters of dogma-zombied, hyper-partisan ballsheet? Probably not. nevermind..

There’s your problem Tommy.  When a “joke” has to be explained – it’s not a joke.  It was an attempt to be cute and coy which failed.

Seriously Tommy, so you are a democrat.  Does that pre-empt your ability to write a news item, or interpret a news item without slanting it so badly that it sinks?  An even keel would be admirable and appreciated.  

finally, we agree on something

you could try trenchant political analysis at the Daily Caller too. You might lose the wing nut welfare gig, but you’ll always have the clever body of “so there” “well saids” “Iknow you are, but what ami I” comments you’ve left here. I smell a book deal

You quoted him in the paragraph he wrote. Does he seem “up in arms”?

Semantics, tenantry, and gotchas. You should work for the next Republican campaign, pabby, ’cause all you knwo of politics is Lee Atwater

well, I think it probably describes most of the people here (myself included on occasion )

There was no gaffe, first off.

And secondly, what this site reports upon is the media and things about the media an criticism of the media.

What Tommy covered was the rightwing freak-out over a non-issue. PBS didn’t try to hide that comment from President Obama. They simply published the prepared remarks that they were sent, as did many media sites (including Fox Business Network – which as of a couple of hours ago, still had those prepared remarks only on their site). And when it was pointed out to PBS that their posted remarks deviated from the actual speech as given, they updated their copy to reflect that. The idea that they had any intention, ever, of covering up for or protecting Obama was disproven once Byron York and others told us that the original prepared remarks were different from Obama’s adlib, and that everyone gets those prepared remarks.

What happened is that some ill-informed people weren’t aware that the media gets those prepared remarks and then publishes them all the time, and that explained the discrepency between the two things! They leapt to unsustainable conclusions. ***The story is their belief in a conspiracy theory, a theory that falls apart upon the merest of examinations!***

There IS NO STORY about Obama saying that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party. The GOP website says that he was a founder – that his speech in 1854 helped establish the party. After all, the reason it was created was because of something that Stephen Douglas, Dem-Illinois pushed through Congress.- do you really think that Lincoln wasn’ intimately involved in the opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act?

So it’s no big deal when a Democrat makes a gaffe, but a gaffe by a Republican makes him dumb. Gaffes either matter, or they don’t

If gaffes matter, the dumbest person in the history of the world is our current #2.

I don’t care about the alleged “cover up,” just that it’s reported fairly. Tommy, I assume by your insinuation that this isn’t a big deal that you will not be covering stories of Republican candidates misspeaking. I’ll be right here holding my breath.

What part of reading eludes you? These are quotes from Republicans doing the same thing you are decrying the President do and she is explaining to you, patiently I might add, that what you call a gaffe is a matter of interpretation.

could someone flag this bit of racist hyperbole?

Hey, you made a valid point! Hurray for you. President Obama, when campaigning, didn’t say 57 because he was referencing territories too. He said it because he’d been to 47 states, and he was thinking about how we have 50 states total, and so he said “57″ instead of “47″. He had been to 47, he was going to go to one more, and there were 2 states that he had no chance of affecting the vote to his advantage that he wasn’t going to campaign in.

It’s simple. It was a simple slip of the tongue by someone who was very tired. He had “just one more to go” in order to get to the 48 states his campaign advisors and he had decided he would go to. He’d been to 47, and he had one more to go to. He wasn’t going to hit all 50, and so, when he commented about it, he accidentally said “47″.

you forgot college transcripts and teleprompters. Keep all of your inanity together, pablo

You’re letting this libelous shrew get away with accusing me of a crime. Okay.

As I wrote above, you’re right, it had nothing to do with how many territories we have, nor did it have anything to do with the number of Islamic Republics that exist.

There’s a perfectly good defense of Obama saying “57″ though, as I also explained above. It’s a non-issue. There’s no “there” there, just like there’s nothing here with the bogus attack on PBS!

There is no proof Pablo can read anything but Beck propaganda and Bircher manifestos

How is George washignton the father of America? It was here long before he was born!

Semantics, semantics, semantics, in the service of inane diversion and silliness. It is ALL you are good for

Jim Treacher said “Well said.”  I wonder how long before that comment is flagged for review?

I fully understand what a transcript can be. It’s you who doesn’t get it. The media and many others call what they first published a “transcript”. That’s the point. There was no evidence that PBS, or anyone else who uses that word to describe the copy of prepared remarks that they publish for that matter, was trying to deceive anyone into thinking that Obama didn’t say what he actually said in the speech.

And the evidence that they didn’t intend to deceive anyone is that they updated the remarks to show the actual words Obama used when they were informed that Obama adlibbed something!

Obama didn’t make an incorrect statement, and the issue is the freak-out by rightwingers over a non-issue. They were alleging that PBS scrubbed that remark from Obama’s speech, and it’s 100% clear and indisputable that they didn’t – other media sources have documented that what PBS published was the prepared remarks.

And the MSM didn’t go after Huckabee. 2 lefties did – Jay Carney and Keith Olbermann, and they were both wrong for doing so! It’s not us who doesn’t understand anything here.

So, Keith Olbermann and Jay Carney unfairly went after Governor Mike Huckabee in the past, so that somehow justifies rightwingers going after PBS when PBS did nothing wrong? How does that work in your worldview, because on the planet I grew up on, two wrongs don’t make a right.

You making an assertion that’s easily disproven ruins your whole argument – you DO know that, right? The gaffe isn’t what Tommy was highlighting in his piece above. I understand you want to make it into a discussion of that since you can’t defend the hysterical comments that unfairly defamed PBS when PBS actually did nothing wrong! But it’s the unjustified defamation of PBS that’s the whole point of Tommy’s piece. Note his headline and then the first sentence in his article!

Conservatives Accuse PBS Of ‘Altering’ Jobs Speech Transcript To Cover Up President Obama Gaffe

So, Keith Olbermann and Jay Carney unfairly went after Governor Mike Huckabee in the past, so that somehow justifies rightwingers going after PBS when PBS did nothing wrong? How does that work in your worldview, because on the planet I grew up on, two wrongs don’t make a right.

You making an assertion that’s easily disproven ruins your whole argument – you DO know that, right? The gaffe isn’t what Tommy was highlighting in his piece above. I understand you want to make it into a discussion of that since you can’t defend the hysterical comments that unfairly defamed PBS when PBS actually did nothing wrong! But it’s the unjustified defamation of PBS that’s the whole point of Tommy’s piece. Note his headline and then the first sentence in his article!

Conservatives Accuse PBS Of ‘Altering’ Jobs Speech Transcript To Cover Up President Obama Gaffe

Why delete off topic and unfair comments that distract from the actual topic and unfairly smear PBS when they didn’t do anything wrong? Hmmm, let me think about that one for a while.

No, wait a minute – you’re the one who’s confused here, and it’s you who needs to rethink your conclusion.

The Michigan Republican Party was founded 2 years before the Illinois Republican Party, which Lincoln co-founded.

And has been explained elsewhere, there wasn’t an instant when the party was created, and not only those present at that exact instant can be credited. There was behavior that led up to the creation of the party, and it wasn’t an instantaneous thing that created it anyway – it was a process. A large part of that full process was a speech that Lincoln gave BEFORE some people in Michigan actually formed a party.

Heck, if you word parsers had your way, we couldn’t associate Christianity’s founding with Jesus, since he didn’t actually start a new religion. He was trying to educate Jews, after all. I mean, really, if you fools only thought through your arguments, you’d make much more sense. The GOP’s own site says that Lincoln was crucial in establishing the Republican party. He co-founded the Illinois Republican Party.

If we used your logic, we’d have one founder of our nation. But, luckily for us, we don’t use your logic. We understand that the founding of our nation wasn’t an instantaneous event, that it was a process, and that many people had a hand in the founding of America.

The word parsing your side is doing about the usage of the word “transcript” is bereft of any good intent.

There’s no evidence that PBS had any malicious intent to mislead anyone by their usage of the word “transcript”. It’s regularly used by the media when they publish prepared remarks!

As so often was the case in everything you’ve written, you provide no value, Sean.

Some of us, as I said, are consistent, reliable, and truthful. Others, like you, are so blinded by your partisanship that you can’t seem to even force yourself to be truthful and logical.

You couldn’t refute a thing I said, and so you post nonsense, as though that’s a mature rebuttal. Your parents must be so ashamed.

Where has the left’s response been that?

PBS did a piss poor job of editing their piece.  They never updated the story they ran.  Incidentally, why run a story – even the “prepared remarks” – as fact before the speech was even given?  Again, at best its poor reporting.  

But they didn’t update their report until they were called to task for it by commenters on their own site.  Is this evidence of inherent bias?  Perhaps not.  But it is evidence of a media outlet who simply ‘cut and pastes’ White House material without proper follow up or vetting.

If PBS and others did a better job of, well, doing their job, when things like this happen – to anyone – there wouldn’t be such an ‘outcry’.

Do your job well and do it right.  The rest will take care of itself.

You don’t spit into the wind

You don’t tug on Superman’s cape

And you don’t mess around with Jim (Treacher)

So, he really meant 47 when he said 57?   Then how do you explain his next comment that he has “one more to go” til he has seen them all? So now you are making up what he was thinking at the time? How many contortions do you leftists have to twist into to cover for this fraud?

As too the “on purpose” – the fact of the matter is, they didn’t have the remark up their in their original story/transcript.  And PBS didn’t update their original report until AFTER it was brought to their attention – by commenters.  Go through and read the comment thread.  PBS didn’t voluntarily update their post nor did they publish the Editor’s not until they had been called on it by commenters.  Again, you can go back through the comment thread and read it and read PBS’s responses.  The fact their original story didn’t get updated until almost a day and a half after Obama’s speech isn’t evidence either, really.  But what it is evidence of is piss poor journalism.

Apparently not. My comments seem to be held for moderation. DementedDolly and “Satan’s Anus” have the run of the place, though.

1. Obama didn’t misspeak. I’ve explained this thoroughly above. There was no gaffe.

2. Tommy is covering the rightwing freak-out over the non-issue of PBS publishing the prepared remarks.

3. What clearly happened originally was that someone didn’t know that there was a difference between the prepared remarks which are sent out to the media immediately before a speech (and maybe didn’t know that this is done routinely) and what a politician might actually say in a speech. They leapt to the erroneous conclusion, therefore, that PBS had removed that “offensive” sentence from Obama’s remarks in an effort to protect him!

They didn’t. It never happened.

And ever since that initial mistaken impression happened, the rightwing has been trying to justify their inaccurate and unjustifiable criticism of PBS. They’re still over there, posting on PBS’ site, accusing them of covering up for the president, threatening to never write a check to PBS ever again. They’re here, asserting that there’s something nefarious about PBS’ usage of the term “transcript”, even though there’s no evidence whatsoever that PBS did anything with that usage that many other media sources don’t do every week.

4. Mike Huckabee shouldn’t have been attacked by Jay Carney or Keith Olbermann for his comment 3 years ago! The MSM didn’t go after Huckabee – two commentators did. They don’t make up the entirety of the MSM.

Tommy was wrong about the “57″ thing. Obama had been to forty-seven states, with plans for one more. He accidentally said he’d been to “fifty… seven states. One more to go.” It doesn’t take a genius to see what happened there. I’m not enamored with Obama, but it’s impossible to be in the US Senate (or the rest of the country) and not know we have fifty states. Especially if you’re from the 50th state.

The homo libs are all in San Francisco.

All these references to Lincoln as the founder of the Republican party might offend The Pathfinder John C. Frémont, the Republican nominee for President in 1856. Frémont kind of reminds me of Obama actually, but with some real accomplishments (mostly due to Kit Carson).

“We need to work more on the message. We have to re-energize people and
get them back to the party,” said Mannie Rodriguez, a member of the
Democratic National Committee from Colorado.

Yeah, Mannie…you go right ahead and do that.

LOL.

If  right wing blogs are trying to make hay over the use of “father” versus “founder”, then they have way too much time on their hands.

“breathalyzer”. LOL. I wonder how many here got that.

Case in point, Obama’s toast to the Queen last spring.

lol – you’re kidding right?

Tommy, you did a great job!  The Republicans have a hard time walking and chewing gum at the same time. Your article made perfect sense to me.  

Sounds to me that your side, which makes headlines about every Repub gaffe, can dish it out, but can’t take it.   As is usual with the left, the standards conservatives are held to, is quite different than liberal progressives are held to.  Kinda like civility and violent rhetoric, huh?

Perhaps he could actually write about it at his blog?

As we so often see, when someone can’t actually refute what someone else has said, they make baseless personal attacks. As though personal attacks of any kind have any place in a discussion, Sean. Here’s a clue – they don’t belong in one. But that’s all you can do, and it’s sad, Sean. You really need to get a clue and understand this – but you won’t. I don’t think you’re capable of that, given the evidence we’ve seen. As I explained above, your version of your story about your jaywalking fell apart under minimal examination, and you hated that – you wanted to simply be able to say “oh, poor me”. And it was terrible what you had to go through, but you weren’t innocent in the events, nor were you accurately or fairly depicting what happened. I’ve never, in fact, seen you honestly portray the event that went through, and that’s why I doubt it’s possible for you to get a clue and change.

But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s inappropriate for you to have made a baseless personal attack as though it was appropriate. The fact that you can’t seem to argue any other way doesn’t legitimize your inappropriate behavior, you know!

I love this comment, dolly. You are awesome.

Hey Tommy, it’s pretty cowardly of you and Mediaite to ban Jim Treacher from commenting here.

But frankly, this kind of cowardice is exactly what I’ve come to expect from you.  Journalists as a group tend to be the most thin-skinned people in the world.  We all remember your hysterical, profane Twitter rant against Lee Stranahan when he dared to question your “Betty and Veronica” story a few months ago, a story that we now know turned out to be largely false.

http://patterico.com/2011/06/17/about-mediaites-explanation-of-their-fiasco/

The cops accused you of a crime – jaywalking. They did that after interviewing all the witnesses.

So, what you’re doing is disrespecting the local cops and disrespecting the guy who was driving the car legally, a guy who wasn’t cited by the cops for any illegal behavior and who has to live with the fact that you were seriously injured after he hit you, even if it wasn’t his fault.

The problem isn’t that I’m repeating accurate info that calls your credibility into question. The problem is that your credibility fell apart during that incident 2 years ago, and you are again showing that you should be given no credibility.

The only libelous behavior here is yours. Everything I’ve said was documented on The Daily Caller. With links. It could be verified in court with the police report – their interviews of witnesses, for example, who document that you weren’t crossing the street legally as you claimed. You were given a jaywalking ticket for a good reason. You thought it was insensitive for them to have shown up at the hospital to give the ticket to you – it felt like adding insult to injury to you, but what really happened was that you were being held to account for your behavior.

It’s all Pablo has, dolly. He spends weeks holed up in his trailer, listening to Glen Beck, hating the New Deal, and wondering why the Republican Party is too liberal for him and waiting for stupid diversions like this to come out and parse statements, play equivalencies, and resort to semantics.

It’s his MO

Well, if they had time for actual policy it would occur to them that their policy ideas haven’t worked for 30 years.

Right – until they were informed about the disparity between the prepared remarks and the given remarks, they didn’t know about the discrepency. How were they supposed to know about it until they knew about it? Do you not see the disconnect and lack of common sense and logic in your comments? Until they were made aware that Obama veered from his prepared remarks, they weren’t aware of it, and as soon as they were made aware of it, they updated the transcript to show that! Fox Business News, among others, still has the original transcript posted. This is very common that they publish the prepared remarks, rather than making their viewers wait for an actual transcription to happen! They do it in order to get the news to their viewers as soon as possible.

The rightwing spin that Tommy is highlighting here is that accusation that PBS was trying to protect Obama – and they weren’t. That’s obvious to any casual observer – yet it baffles you? Well, that’s your shortcoming, not mine! PBS did, in fact, voluntarily update their post, and they did it because they cared about being accurate. When they found out that what was on their website wasn’t accurate, they corrected that!

Oh yeah, poor Sean, getting attacked – oops, no, he isn’t getting attacked. He’s getting called to account for his posts and the content of those posts. He’s not some victim here who’s getting unfairly called out!

He’s a clown. The only thing Treacher does well is make silly observations and decline to understand what he reads

Uh, Mediaite posted the same thing. Most news organizations did.

What you missed the three years we’ve been freaking out about this! Did you forget the Congressional investigations? The movie “The Gaffe” about Mike Huckabee? Bob Woodward’s best seller: “The Destruction of a President: Huckabee, Lincoln, and the Great Unraveling of an American Leader”?

How could you forget, Dolly

What you missed the three years we’ve been freaking out about this! Did you forget the Congressional investigations? The movie “The Gaffe” about Mike Huckabee? Bob Woodward’s best seller: “The Destruction of a President: Huckabee, Lincoln, and the Great Unraveling of an American Leader”?

How could you forget, Dolly

Pablo, could you remind us how the 16 words about Uranium yellowcake were true?

I understood and chortled

But, you’re a partisan asshole with absolutely no sense of humor. Why would take your word for what funny is?

Plus, they need to make sure he can’t actually accomplish anything, if they plan on beating him with Rick Perry who likes secession and hates SS

Wow, just a week ago, Tapper was the toast of Mediaite wingnuts. Now….poor Jake gets yelled at

There was NOT one founder of the Republican Party, just like there wasn’t one founder of the auto industry here in the USA, nor one founder of the USA itself.

Abraham Lincoln wrote 3 speeches in opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act and it was a direct result of that speech that people in Michigan formed the Michigan Republican Party. Lincoln co-founded the Illinois Republican Party and ran for the VP slot in 1856!

Really, the next time you try to educate others, you might want to be better educated yourself. I mean, really, you could have even used Wikipedia and been better informed.

Sen. Stephen A Douglas and former Illinois Congressman Abraham Lincoln aired their disagreement over the Kansas–Nebraska Act in three public speeches during September and October 1854.

In late 1854, Lincoln ran as a Whig for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois. At that time, senators were elected by the state legislature. After leading in the first six rounds of voting in the Illinois assembly, his support began to dwindle, and Lincoln instructed his backers to vote for Lyman Trumball, who defeated opponent Joel Matteson. The Whigs had been irreparably split by the Kansas–Nebraska Act. Lincoln wrote, “I think I am a Whig, but others say there are no Whigs, and that I am an abolitionist, even though I do no more than oppose the extension of slavery.” Drawing on remnants of the old Whig party, and on disenchanted Free Soil, Liberty, and Democratic party members, he was instrumental in forging the shape of the new Republican Party. At the Republican convention in 1856, Lincoln placed second in the contest to become the party’s candidate for vice president.

Clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about. Here’s the entire comment, you fool.

“It is wonderful to be back in Oregon,” Obama said. “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it.”

So, replace the “57″ with “47″, and it makes perfect sense. He’s going to visit one more, which will bring him up to 48 – remember, 47 + 1 = 48. And then he adds that he’s not going to go to two more states. Remember your 1st grade math? 48 + 2 = 50.

So yes, he really meant 47 when he said 57. He meant that in order to get to the 48 out of 50 states he was eventually going to visit during his campaign, he had one more to go.

Really, this ain’t rocket science! There’s no twisting going on from my side. He meant 47 and he said 57 because we have 50 states and he was thinking about how he’d eventually visit 48 out of those 50 states!

Okay, now, I’ve explained this to you twice – has it penetrated yet?

Oh, that totally nails it, Timmah!

For the record, Timmah! figured that out while fucking a chicken. We just know each other.

Yes, that’s another good point – the reason the TV show is called “Hawaii 5-0″ is because Hawaii is the 50th state.

The idea that somehow Obama didn’t know how many states we have here in the USA is laughable. I think even the idiots we see on Jaywalking would know that there are 50 states – now, if you ask them if D.C. is a state, they’d likely get THAT wrong, but they’d know that there’re 50 states!

So you’ve been the one! HAHAHA!

Report all you like. Sa†an’s Anus has more ability in it’s inner ring than you do in your entire being – which includes an ability to get around the moderators on ANY site.

“Do not fear Sa†an’s Anus, for he can be quite forgiving.” — Billy Graham (1992)

DOWN WITH CENSORSHIP!!!!!!!!!! 

When there’s a gaffe that shows ignorance, dishonesty or lack or education, then it should be pointed out. When someone misspeaks, it’s unfair to highlight it.

It’s your side that behaves disrespectfully in this way, over and over again. I could give you hundreds of examples! Obama’s comment wasn’t a gaffe – it’s not inaccurate to call Lincoln a founder of the Republican Party.

STFU!!!

You are so grotesque! You make me want to vomit tampons! J E S U S, I think I’m going to be sick just reading your stupid post. You don’t know anything and suffer from a psychological condition.

Get a f u c k i n g life, lame-o. 

Why does the media publish prepared remarks on their websites as soon as the embargo is lifted?

Because it’s what their audiences want – they want the transcripts, and so it’s beneficial to simply take the electronic copies of speeches they get from the politicians and post them on their websites for the benefit of their readers.

This ain’t rocket science. It’s done all the time. The media gets these statements ahead of time – it’s why they can often give us an idea of what will be said, even though they can’t provide the actual comments until they are said. It takes a while to get a transcriber to copy, fully accurately, a whole speech.

You’re poop smells just like everyone else!

Satan’s Anus has more ability in its inner ring than Pablo has in his whole body – which includes an ability to maneuver around the moderators, Jim.

Keep trying though – censorship is as evil as Sa†an’s Right Hand – believe me, he uses it to wipe after dropping a phat deuce and is quite aggressive with Sa†an’s Anus. Ooof…

(That’s right, phat with a PH! Sa†an’s Anus just went there. Boo yah!)

If you want to make your own head spin sometime, just try to imagine a world in which a major TV news anchor ran with a story about Barack Obama not being born in the U.S. on the basis of crudely forged documents that were clearly produced in Microsoft Word rather than with some technology that actually existed at the time, such as a typewriter, and then realize this is pretty much what happened to George W Bush in 2004.

If your head is still attached to your shoulders, try to imagine Bush being elected President after it was discovered he’d spent decades in a church featuring racist rants by the preacher– who was also his spiritual adviser.  Oh, and Bush had worked with (and launched his political career from the living room of) a guy who famously bombed abortion clinics — Eric Rudolph, let’s say.

If anyone ever needs lessons in blaming the victim, Dolly’s your gal.

Ya think?

Sa†an’s Anus disagrees. Republicans have a very difficult time chewing panda excreta and patting their heads simultaneously, it’s not difficult to believe they have a hard time chewing gum and walking as well. The deep, inner ring of Sa†an’s Anus solutes you!

“Sa†an’s Anus wants you to succeed in life – that’s why it has invested to much time in planning your future for you.” — Billy Graham (1972)

No, actually, he’s getting called out on your unhinged version of the time a guy from the State Department ran him down. Which, you’re nuts, so… 

“But, you’re a partisan asshole with absolutely no sense of humor. Why would take your word for what funny is?”

You sound like a little girl in a whining liberal suit.

Didn’t realize Tommy had kids old enough to gain access to this site.  Hmmm 

timb116, 
Why not try this again, and get it even close to what a responsible person would call English? 

Timmah! sees into your bathroom! Fear him!

You aren’t joking right?  You truly believe what you wrote.  That is truly sad.  Not joking.

You – responsible? For a dipstick you are a real comedian. You’ve got no right to criticize his English.

“Why would take your word for what funny is?”

Like that made a ton of sense.

So yes, he really meant 47 when he said 57.

And you know this because you were in his brain, yes? Perhaps you tripped on something in there and made him screw this up in the first place.

This is all your fault.

now which of the above posts is the real sergeant rock? lol

You know I can read that site Jeff tossed your mendacious ass out of, don’t you, Timmah!?

In fact, Obama had himself concieved a couple of years after he was born, at Selma, so this really isn’t unprecedented.

Look it up, nitwit.

In other words it wasn’t the speech writers who are morons but just Obama?

So can I and I don’t even have to give him the rhetorical equivalent of the handie you provide on a regular baisi.

See, here’s where you might begin to grasp this. A speech is the product of a speechwriter. A transcript is the work of a transcriber. (Actually, a transcriptionist, but who’s counting.)

See how they’re different?

You know the profanity gives it away that you’re hurt, right? When you let the freak flag show, pabby, you show the ugliness onside you. It’s why it’s best for you to keep the ugly hidden away.

If anyone needs lessons in sucking up to a wingnut blogger, Pablo’s your gal.

Yeah, Jim Treacher is the finest troll this site ever had

To be fair, she’s also calling him out on being a fool and being completely wrong on this story.

Can’t you go to the Daily Caller and kiss his ass there, Pablo? Why is your cause so precious here?

Oh, I will stand corrected. I assumed you bathed in the mornings, Pablo.

So instead of “father”, Obama said “founder”.  Oh my God.  Impeach him.  You silly right wing trolls are truly pathetic.  If you held yourself and your leaders to the same standards you hold for Obama, you would be very disappointed.  But of course, you do not.  It’s all a partisan horse race to you trolls.  That kind of metality is destorying our country. 

Seriously? You have the balls to write that after just whining about Obama’s mis-statements and then saying “he can’t nuthin’ ‘cept read off one them there teleprompter.” HOW did hear about those, Mac? Were you listening to every speech or did you hear them on the freaking news?

Hypocrisy much?

It’s amazing that it took this long for someone to figure out what Obama meant to say.  lol

Pretty funny.  Had to do a search through a book of homonyms. lol

And there clever plan was?????

Give it to us, Pablo. BPS was gonna seal the 2012 election for Obama by changing a 5 words of a speech that will be forgotten in two months? What was PBS’s grand plan? Ferreted out by the geniuses of the Right and foiled. What is the plan for Democratic dominance?

In fact, let’s open to the wingnut floor. Wingnuts, please tell us what the “altering” (which did not happen) of this gaffe (which is not even, arguably a gaffe) was supposed to gain the evil libruls? Make Fox forget it had a transcript? Make Limbaugh forget he had a tape he could talk over? Maybe the WSJ editorial page writers source their transcripts to PBS and bnow they would go along with the recommendations in the speech, since the TRUTH was just white-washed.

Tell us, oh wingnut sages, what is the plan you foiled?

Well, if you say so, anonymous commenter on the internet, then we must take your word over the GOP and various other conservative pundits and historians who say you’re wrong.

And, there’s nothing low about Treacher, except treater

look up what? That you’re a partisan hack who defended a lie in the Stateof the Union and is now attacking a nothingness in a joint session to Congress?

I don’t need to look it up. You are predictably wrong on everything.

I didn’t go after PBS. I left a comment stating that what they had listed as “transcript” appeared to be the prepared remarks. I don’t consider that an attack. I was pointing out an error, which most news organizations will correct. PBS, however, did not correct it (they may have by now but I’m not interested enough to check because that is not really my issue) and they deleted comments that highlighted their error. Why delete the comments. Especially comments like mine, which were in no way attacking, no name calling, no whatever. Just pointing out the error.

And my point has nothing really to do with PBS. My point is the double standard the MSM has for Democrats and Republicans. Even Tommy’s posting highlights my point. It’s ok for the media to point out gaffes made by Republicans, but it is not ok for Republicans to point out the same gaffe made by the President.

No. Again, a transcript is the actual verbatim of what someone says. Not “what is first published”. The media usually makes a distinction between prepared remarks and a transcript. Other media sources may have documented that what PBS published was the prepared remarks, but PBS did not.

But AGAIN, that is not my issue. My issue is the double standard. I don’t care what PBS put on their website – prepared remarks, transcript, whatever. I think PBS was being lazy, not trying to scrub anything. AGAIN, my issue is the double standard – NOT PBS.

The simple explanation: PBS got a little lazy in trying to get a transcript up right away and didn’t check to see if Obama went off script at any point.

The conspiracy theory: PBS, guessing that not a single conservative actually visits their website, decided to hide Obama’s minor historical misstatement from its liberal followers. I guess they figured that if their readers knew the shocking truth that Obama’s speechwriters are a little fuzzy on the difference between the words “father” and “founder,” they’d turn into Rick Perry fanatics or something. Plus, it’s the perfect crime! How could they ever get caught? It’s not like anyone else was covering the speech and might point out the discrepancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripon,_Wisconsin#Birthplace_of_the_Republican_Party

Wow, you think that “hicksville” vernacular makes you sound intelligent?  You just come across as another elitist shallow know-nothing, like your god Obama.   I, quite honestly, don’t speak the way you assume, nor am I uneducated, having earned higher degrees, in all likelihood, than you have.  Your response is utterly nonsensical if you are trying to rebut me, but what else could I expect from one who worships as the alter of govt?

Resist we Much!

You should whine about all over Twitter! the injustice of it all! Sean, DC might just be too hard for you. Come back home and revanchist Republicans maintain control of Marion County. The local cons need as much help you can provide!

Well, doc, let me put in a way your higher book learning can process. In two separate comments you whine that conservative gaffes get reported and liberal ones do not. You preceded that delicious whine by cataloging all the President’s gaffes, which leaves the reader confused: if they go unreported, then how did you hear about them for your list.

P.S. If you want to sound smart as all those degrees make you think you are, then avoid teleprompter-ism, because people whining about teleprompter don’t sound smart.

P.P.S. Since we are friends now, I thought you’d like to know that a GED is not nearly as impressive as your Kinkos manager said it was

Did Obama say Illinois Republican party?  Pretty sure he just said Republican party.

And, no, Lincoln was not a founder of the Republican party. 

As we so often see, mostly from rightwingers, when they can’t refute a thing that their debate opponent has written, they throw out a baseless personal attack. So of course that’s what Pablo did. It’s sad that they must really think that it’s a legit way to behave. How deluded they are.

Obama didnt say Lincoln was “a founder”.  Obama called Lincoln “Founder of the Republican Party”.  Funny you keep making that mistake. 

Even then that is historically inaccurate.  Sort of like saying John Quincy Adams was a Founding Father.  Imagine if a politician did that? 

No, actually, it isn’t “cowardly” at all! It’s the responsible thing to do. When someone won’t be honest, they should be denied the right to be dishonest. When someone thinks that an appropriate response to a post they can’t refute is a personal attack, they should be denied the right to make ongoing personal attacks, as though doing so is a legit way to behave! It’s not!

What’s sickening is that Sean sent over his minions to this site after he got his butt handed to him, repeatedly, and he was outgunned in the debate. PBS did nothing wrong, Sean was wrong about the usage of the word “transcript”, and there was no cover-up here. On top of that, it’s reasonable to say that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party – it wasn’t created in an instant, after all, it was a process, and Lincoln, with his speeches on the Kansas-Nebraska Act, was a major part of that process! It was a minor third party, and Lincoln was almost their first VP candidate, and he was the first Republican president! To deny Lincoln’s impact on the formation and establishment of the Republican Party is to deny reality.

And when Sean realized that not a single one of the potential arguments here held any water, he pitched a fit, and he then got held to account for his behavior! He’s not a victim, despite your and his efforts to portray him as one. This crap about people being held to account for their behavior later whining about being persecuted is childish and stupid, yet you’re here defending it. I swear, get a clue.

I have no “unhinged version” of the time he jaywalked and was hit by a car as a result. Sean lied about the events as they happened. At first he was simply misinformed, and he was spouting falsehoods, like that it was a hit and run, and that it was the Secret Service that hit him. Later on, after he knew that those things were falsehoods, he continued to push them. A lie is a falsehood told with the intent to deceive. Sean lied. Repeatedly. He got the ticket after witnesses testified - including Sean himself! He entered an intersection after the walk light had begun to flash. You are not supposed to enter the intersection after it begins to flash. Other witnesses stated that he was not, in fact, in the crosswalk. He was close to it, but not in it.

No one “ran him down”. He jaywalked, and he was hit as a result.

This is the same crappy argument that lefty Justice Bradley tried to make out in Wisconsin! She tried to pretend that Justice Prosser tried to choke here, but he didn’t. She confronted him, and he justifiably tried to push her away, and since she was a woman, he placed his hands above her breasts and they impacted her neck. Her snide take on it was that she ran her neck into his hands, and based upon the evidence we have, that’s exactly what happened! Prosser did nothing wrong, besides being a jerk who wouldn’t let Bradley bully him into leaving her office doorway! He should have just left, but when he didn’t, she didn’t have the right to charge him with a raised fist so that he felt obligated to defend himself by pushing her away!

No State Dept guy ran Sean down, and Justice Prosser didn’t come close to putting Bradley into a chokehold. And Sean isn’t being abused here. But thanks for demonstrating, once again, that when you can’t actually refute a thing I’ve written, you’ll make a baseless personal attack.

Yes, he was! What part of you being clueless do you not understand? Even the GOP’s own website says that Lincoln helped establish the Republican Party! That makes him a founder. Obama did not say that Lincoln was THE founder. There wasn’t ONE founder, and the founding wasn’t instantaneous. I swear, I’ve explained this countless times here – read for a change, and stop making a fool of yourself. What first was established was state parties, then there was a national party. That national party came about as a direct result of 3 speeches that Lincoln made about the Kansas-Nebraska Act, a piece of legislation created by Lincoln’s debate opponent in Illinois, Stephen A Douglas.

Lincoln co-founded the Illinois Republican Party and was a founder of THE Republican Party. THE Republican Party wasn’t founded when the first state party was founded. That was the beginnings of it.

Just like the USA wasn’t founded by the first people that floated that idea.

And the Republican Party wasn’t created in one moment, just like the USA didn’t become a nation in one moment. It was a process.

The only reasonable way to read his comment, in context ( the thing that rightwingers hate – the dreaded context), is to hear him saying that Lincoln was a founder.

John Quincy Adams wasn’t a founder. He wasn’t one of many founders.

But Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party. It’s undeniable. Autobiographies of Lincoln say he was. The Republican Party says that he was on their own website. Multiple righty politicians have made the claim over multiple decades.

But you fools are so determined to create a gaffe where none exists that you invented this whole conspiracy theory – that PBS cropped Obama’s comment to make him look better, that there was some collusion between them and Obama, and it was because that comment was embarassing – linking Lincoln with the Republican Party.

Well, see, in reality, it IS embarassing, but not in the way you’ve been making it out to be! See, you guys on the right should be embarassed that you’ve allowed your political party to stray so far from your roots and your political ideals. Lincoln, despite being a highly partisan Republican in a country that was really divisively split, worked with the opposition as much as he possibly could. And although he was terribly bogged down with immediate crises, he still looked to the future.

Obama was saying to the Republicans in Congress, why don’t you act more like Lincoln? The fact that they aren’t doing that should make them hide their faces in shame, but as is so often the case when they are confronted with factual, reasonable, logical arguments they can’t refute, they resort to baseless personal attacks!

Denying that the Republican Party has long referenced Lincoln as a founder of the party is ridiculous.

It’s the only possibility that makes sense. He’d been to 47 states at that time. That’s a fact. He knew that there were 2 states he was not going to visit. That’s a fact. He knew that he had one more state he was going to visit. That’s a fact.

And it’s beyond belief that he could not have known, when he was running for office, that there are 50 states in the USA. It’s beyond belief that he not have known, since he was a relatively small child, that there were 50 states.

And so the only conclusion any person can come to is that he meant 47 and said 57 and said 57 because he was thinking about there being 50 states in the USA at the same time he was trying to say that he had only been in 47 of those 50.

But thanks, once again, Pablo, for showing us all that when you can’t refute a thing I said, you’ll resort to a stupid, ludicrous personal attack.

No, a transcript is NOT always that. It often is an online copy of prepared remarks. That’s a fact. The media does not “usually” make that distinction. They rarely do, actually.

And what “double standard” are you talking about?

Someone is stalking you? Why? What would be the point? There’s too many of you to follow.

Everything you raise has been debunked, repeatedly, already.

You did, in fact, go after PBS, and you do it again in this post! It is common practice to call what they published a transcript. That’s a fact. So, despite your feeble attempt to claim it’s not an attack because you don’t consider it an attack, it is, undeniably, an attack. Pointing out an error, especially one that’s not really an error, is an attack.

And as soon as PBS was made aware of their error, they did correct it. You’re LYING when you say that they didn’t – or else you’re stupid beyond words – because your statement makes no sense. If they deleted your comments about the topic, then you knew about the topic! I swear, do you just string words together, hoping they end up in sentences?

There was no error to point out. They didn’t crop any offensive comment out of the transcript. Obama adlibbed.

It IS okay to point out true gaffes by either party. This isn’t a gaffe by Obama. It wasn’t okay for 2 lefties (not the entire MSM, or even a majority of them) to harass Mike Huckabee for his comment – they were as ill-informed on the topic as many, many rightwingers are on the topic today, thinking that it’s unfair to call Lincoln a founder of the Repubican Party. But it’s not.

It’s the Republican Party, the party of the new majority, founded 130 years ago and lifted to greatness by the candidacy of an awkward and obscure lawyer who had some new ideas himself. And when he had won the Presidency, he said some words that reflect what all of us think when we look at the policies of the other party. He said: We must disenthrall ourselves with the past, and then we will save our country.

Well, Abe Lincoln was one great dreamer, one great risk-taker, one great soul, and one great hero. And I think he would be proud of his party today.

Is the bolded sentence poorly constructed, or was Ronald Reagan implying the same thing that President Obama just did, in his August 23, 1984 remarks to a Republican National Committee fundraising luncheon in Dallas, Texas?

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/search/speeches/speech_srch.html

To seek123: which one of the village idiots above is your alter ego? Do all your personalities have names?

And no, Obama did not say that he was old enough to have been conceived in Selma during marches. That’s simply evidence of poor reading comprehension on your part. He explained that he was talking about the entire civil rights movement.

And all I was “attacking” Sean about was his dishoenesty – dishonesty he demonstrated, on multiple occasions, almost 2 years ago when he jaywalked and, as a result, was unlucky enough to get hit by a car! I wasn’t attacking him for a car accident at all.

What’s a “new low”? Your dishonest accusations, that’s what.

No, in fact,, Dave, that’s not at all an accurate portrait of what happened to Bush.

He was AWOL from the service for close to a year, and those in power in the TANG allowed him to get away with it. The documents weren’t as you describe, they documented events as they happened, as verified by the TANG secretary, and he was lucky that they were able to distract us from the real issues with the wild goose chase that likely was a trap planted by Karl Rove!

Your side pored over hours of tape to pull a few comments by Rev Wright out of context, and even after Obama said that he didn’t agree with those comments by another person, you tarred him with them – yet you wouldn’t blame Bush for his own behavior when he went AWOL for a whole year during the Vietnam war!

And Obama didn’t launch his political career in any terrorist’s home. I swear, do you think this is a rightwing echo chamber where you can push lies without being challenged on them? In our nation, after one gets convicted and serves whatever sentence one is given, one is given a second chance to become a productive citizen, and fair-minded people don’t believe that people are forever tainted by the mistakes they might have made earlier in their lives.

Yet again, you’re wrong. What they provided to us is typically also called a transcript. It doesn’t fit the literal translation of that word, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s still called a transcript.

And the important thing (that I’ve already explained to you at least 3 times) is that PBS was NOT trying to mislead anyone by calling it a transcript. It’s what the media does. They call them transcripts.

Delldolly,
Actually it is often called the Speech that is written (thus prepared remarks, it is an exact copy of what appears on the teleprompters. That does not mean that is an exact copy of what was said. That would require a transcriptionist to make an exact copy of the words that the President spoke. Thus why a trial court has a transcriptionist (also called a court reporter) present during the proceedings, so that the jury has a copy of exactly what was said. 
Transcription is synonymous with Dictation, they are both of only the spoken word.

DellDolly,
Got a link to where the GOP website says that Lincoln was a founder?
http://www.gop.com/Search/search_page.php?cx=012184668256731348851%3A29dduexeusi&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=Abraham+Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln

…snores

Well…apparently PBS recognizes it was pretty foolish and they have now changed the transcript to reflect the truth and factual gaffe that he made.

Jay Carney himself slammed Huckabee for making a similar statement iin 08 as a member of the jounalism community, and now, as the spokesperson for the gaffe maker, he defends it.

Like most liberals here, both commenters and the author of this piece, when Obama makes a mistake it is nothing to speak about, but when a conservative makes a mistake they are STUPID, or dumb, or something.

Geeze….can you get a little balance around this board?

Water carrying is getting ridiculous.

That point would be on top of his head – keeps the dunce cap from falling off.

Talk about whiners – you make my ears bleed with that nasal, sissified horn you keep blowin’.

What a priss. My sister is tougher than you.

You are no one to talk about revenge – that is 90 per cent of your posts. Revenge is what you are all about, Timmy.

That’s the cake your momma made on your last birthday when you were all sitting around the dinner table wearing pretty little dresses and sippin’ tea.

What an idiot Jim Treacher continually is.

Leading off with a personal attack. How about that.

Damn! All those words from a mental midget like you? Who would have believed it!

Fact is, liberals are liars, and that’s the way it is.

Just in case you didn’t get that, read it twice real slow.

I don’t think Republicans could ask for a better caricature of a White House reporter than one who argues that Republicans shouldn’t be wringing their hands over the lack of media appetite for Obama gaffs because:

!.  He doesn’t truly make any…

2. Republican gaffs are funnier–

3. Don’t shoot the media messenger about this, folks…    (!!)

3. And ….(wait for it)… who cares anyway, look who got OBL..    bada bing…

If this dude were NOT real…Jim Treacher would have had to make him up…

“Hypocrisy much?” Why Tiffany, I didn’t know you cared. What kind of an ass says stuff like that, especially when the truth is staring them in the face. Liars like you, that’s what kind of an ass does that.

You seem upset.

Why don’t you just put up razor wire and plant mines here? You think this place belongs to you, but you get all prissy when someone tells you you’re wrong. Why is it you liberals only tolerate speech from your side? Not a very liberal attitude.

You should try dragging that chain instead of pushing it.

You guys spent a week on Paul Revere.

And then it would be “flagged for review.”

Looks like you are making an attempt to capture that title for yourself, Tiff.

It’s me – as if you couldn’t guess… Timber brain needs to hear more of his/her nonsense repeated to him/her/it.

Any doubt now?

https://www.facebook.com/people/Sue-Runyon/100000521323583

And then what happened?

What do you do for a living, Sue? You must be a detective.

This article is Total BS.  If W said corpsman, or 57 states or Abraham Lincoln was the founder of the Republican party, the MSM would have called him an idiot (they already called him one).  If W had to use a teleprompter for every speech, he would have been called an idiot!  The Barack administration can’t even do the simple things like scheduling a speech without it being on the front page.  I still remember the first promise Barack made (after getting elected).  He was closing Gitmo and moving the trials to NYC.  His staff is a bunch of idiots when they agreed to close Gitmo down.  They are so arrogant that they didn’t talk to anyone before making that announcement.

Yeah, there’s some symbolism there, for sure.

It baffles me that read contempt as anger. For god’s sake, Sean/jim, you are met with contempt like, you know, everywhere. Have you been misinterpreting all this time?

Umm, dood, I never mentioned the word revenge

http://tinyurl.com/ku7dgp

You got you some axe to grind there, Doll. Maybe you should think about disengaging before you get that party dress soiled. Is that issue important on a day like this? Really?

Lots of folks lost loved ones ten years ago in a cowardly attack on the American way of life, and all you and Timber here can do is bitch about someone’s traffic violation? Man you live in a plastic bubble. Where the hell is your sense of perspective? I’ll bet you don’t give too much thought to the brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who have been risking their butts everyday for the past ten years keeping Al Queda and his band of renown from kicking in your front door and giving you a slice and dice, now do you?

Maybe that is what you deserve, but there are people out on the front lines dying every day to protect your fool asses. You should think about that, every day. Then all this crap about someone having a jaywalking ticket pales in comparison. For that matter so do your petty fits and crying jags about being important, because you ain’t all that important.

Remember the losses of this day, and be proud that someone out there is taking it to the bastards that brought it here.  

Sorry, Sarge. Timmah! is a subpar troll, at best. He tries really hard, but being an idiot weighs him right down. Creepy is the best he can muster.

You got it wrong on both counts, Timber head. What the hell do you thing revanchist means? Do you always ramble on in ignorance using ten dollar words to make you appear smart, and then say something like this that leaves a question of your smarts behind?

I’ve run into dummies before, but you are on the short list.

So, you acknowledge that your preceding comment is a lie, then? Thanks, Timmah!

Really, Timmah!? When did the United States of America come into being?

You truly are an idiot, Timmah!

I addressed that in my article. No, he wrote a 3 paragraph blog post, one of which was about an entirely different passage from Huckabee’s speech. 

What was inaccurate or unfair about that?

None of those links are from an MSM news source.

Like fish a in a barrel.

“I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.”

Obama and Palmer “were both there,” he said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html

No wonder bin Laden was surprised by the response to bombing the Pentagon; the last guy who did it was given a teaching job and introduced our next President to politics. 

Wait, it gets better… now, try to imagine the whole racist preacher thing blowing over as press swoons over Bush’s speech about race relations, in which he claims he slept through approx. 2000 sermons, and talks about “typical black people” with racist views.

Right. There’s the GOP website, the New York City website, and the National Review.

It’s a wingnut coverup conspiracy, I tells ya! And if it had a punch line, it could be a genuinely funny joke! Pity, that it doesn’t.

No, they don’t, for the millionth time.

Is that English? I read the site almost daily. Helps to know what’s going on in the MMA right. And to see the debasement of a former intellectual

I Engrish velly good!

An unrepentant terrorist, mind you, who to this day will not even apologize for the murders he committed.

But if Sarah Palin puts crosshairs on a map…

Was he President of the Articles of Confederation? Cause, I think the US existed before Washington became President….

Oops, Pablo, you can’t even play your own sematics game very well

Two weeks, actually. But the difference is that she’s an irrelevant chillbilly non-candidate. If she were the President of the United States, and she had said that in an address to a Joint Session of Congress, no one would even have noticed it. Priorities, you know.

There’s a little bridge between the two scenarios that you seem to have missed, which is that PBS was just deleting comments pointing the error out while not fixing it.

It only takes one Obamoron to screw up like this. At PBS, that’s not farfetched.

BTW, who else pointed out the discrepancy?

There are two seperate facts in that sentence. “lifted to greatness by the candidacy of an awkward and obscure lawyer who had some new ideas himself.” is one of them. Lincoln did that. Consider a similar sentence: “The Republican Party, founded in Wisconsin and lifted to greatness by the candidacy of an awkward lawyer…” That makes perfect sense and it doesn’t mean that the lawyer founded the party. The same is true with Reagan’s, as all I did was change out the date of the founding with the place.

The sentence could be misconstrued, but it isn’t incorrect.

Right, Dolly. I just tossed out a baseless personal attack because I have no argument for these “facts”:

It’s all Pablo has, dolly. He spends weeks holed up in his trailer, listening to Glen Beck, hating the New Deal, and wondering why the Republican Party is too liberal for him and waiting for stupid diversions like this to come out and parse statements, play equivalencies, and resort to semantics.

It’s weird how I just head directly to the personal attacks when I’m confronted with “facts”, isn’t it? Probably, Fox News told me to do that, right?

Hmmmmm,,,,,

As we so often see, mostly from rightwingers, when they can’t refute a thing that their debate opponent has written, they throw out a baseless personal attack. So of course that’s what Pablo did. It’s sad that they must really think that it’s a legit way to behave. How deluded they are.

yea, you’re right dolly. he didn’t even get hit by a car. you know, cuz you were there!

(why such a hater? the dude was run over. you seriously attack him for the accident because you hate his politics? you’re sick, lady.)

Do you always ramble on in ignorance using ten dollar words to make you appear smart, and then say something like this that leaves a question of your smarts behind?

Yep, that’s Timmah!

Tommy’s censorship of comments on this article is even worse than the article itself.  And that is saying something. 

Can’t you go to the Daily Caller and kiss his ass there, Pablo? Why is your cause so precious here?

Psssst! Timmah!

http://tinyurl.com/42jzu2w

Care to answer the questions you gaffe claim raises. Pablo, or is this all about your hurt little feelings?

The sentence could be misconstrued, but it isn’t incorrect.

Which, is exacltly why I prefaced my conclusion with… “Is the bolded sentence poorly constructed, or was Ronald Reagan…”

Evidently, the transcriber of that speech, didn’t hear a comma delimited pause between “130 years ago” and “lifted to greatness”.

“Gaffe”, or not, Reagan wanted to leave the audience with the impression that Abraham Lincoln was the “founder” of the Republican Party. Obama’s off the hook on this one, by anyone that isn’t a hypocrite.

A number of us put up comments here, but they were soon christophered by an angry editor.

I see. So when Carney points it out, he’s just doing his job. But when conservatives point it out, they’re all locked, loaded and ready to roll. Because.

Are you gonna ask Carney whether he or Obama is right on this? 

Timmah! who was the General that led the American Revolution?

Think real hard.

But that is not my concern. I’m showing how Tommy is avoiding using his normal standard of ridiculing a gaffe from the right by distracting away from one of Obama’s gaffe’s with this contextual argument.

I think she is secretly in love with you. She sure is invested in your story.

Why is using a teleprompter the sign of an idiot?  My church uses them during sermons.  I just cannot understand why all you Boomers love note cards so much….

I still remember the first promise Barack made (after getting
elected).  He was closing Gitmo and moving the trials to NYC.  His staff
is a bunch of idiots when they agreed to close Gitmo down.  They are so
arrogant that they didn’t talk to anyone before making that
announcement.

Which isn’t, Mike, arrogant or idiots?  Or, did they just defer to Congress when Congress said they didn’t want the prisoners transferred?  Was that deference to cowards in Congress part of the idiocy or the arrogance.  And, what person was unaware that was part of the plan, since he campaigned for 2 years on closing Gitmo?

I think she is secretly in love with you. She sure is invested in your story.

Douchebag, he wasn’t called father of the country for leading a army.  Hell, he wasn’t even officially part of the Continental Congress (ironically, not named the United States Congress).  He’s called the father of the country for his Presidency.

I can’t imagine for all your faults and errors and Gilded Age, social darwinism politics, that even you do not know this.  Just stop digging the hole.  Sean/Jim ran away, Tommy left.   This morning you are just embarrassing yourself.

I mean, when you lose your piddly, little semantic arguments, then just stop. 

Are you going to be okay?

I love how you ran away from this version of the question to the who led the army question. Never admit it, eh, just move the goalposts and runaway

She’s a 2/3 Truther.

That it could be misconstrued does not make it poorly constructed. People misconstrue all sorts of things, often on purpose.

You seem to become baffled quite easily, Tim.

Be careful, be very careful.  They will ban you for criticizing them too much; thin skinned columnists live on this board.  Especially if you are a conservative, they will boot you in a heart beat, but if you are a liberal you can call someone a “dumb fu–” and the post goes unnoticed.

Go figure.

Oy.

Says the guy who cannot cross the street without getting hit by a car

If W had to use a teleprompter for every speech, he would have been called an idiot.

- Iron Mike

You’re a little off the mark in your analysis of what this proves. Using a teleprompter is a great political advantage. Using one, effectively, requires a proficiency in reading skills. Obama has that “proficiency”, so he uses one. Reagan had that “proficiency”, so he used one. The truth is, it is “W’s” inabilty to use a teleprompter that makes a statement about his lack of intelligence.

Hello, Dolly.

Precisely the point. President Obama misread the scripted speech. It appears that President Reagan read what was “prepared”. Big difference. This criticism of an Obama “gaffe”, is a wash. I suggest that the wingnutters give it up.

The levels to which the left will prostitute themselves for Obama is really remarkable, as is evidenced in this article by Tommy.  My goodness, the weight of water Tommy is carrying is enormous…so funny, so typical, so biased.

Imagine had Palin said it, the headlines would be screaming stupidity…but alas, it is the one and only cult leader of the liberal left.

So you’re admitting PBS was lazy in correcting their mistake?

Delldolly says…And lastly, there’s no true issue with Obama saying that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party.
Then why was it when an issue when a Republican says it???? DOUBLE STANDARD…..

Sounds as tho PBS has no Obama supporters either since most of the Democrats didn’t show up for his  Wash, Rinse, Repeat speech.. One would think someone at PBS would’ve been paying atttention..

No one tell Tommy about the front page of the NYT today . Those lying conservatives !

“Democrats are expressing growing alarm about President Obama’s re-election prospects and, in interviews, are openly acknowledging anxiety about the White House’s ability to strengthen the president’s standing over the next 14 months. ”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/us/politics/11obama.html

The evil Maureen Dowd is picking on Barry again !

The last line :

 
“It’s still impossible to sum up what Obama’s presidency is about right now, except saving his own job. ”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/opinion/sunday/dowd-sleeping-barry-awakes.html?_r=1

The media got 0bama elected, now they have to protect them from looking like the fools they are. But, are they fools or traitors?

Ahhhhh, Pablo, yes, facts. The facts that you rely upon word parsing, false equivalencies, and semantic diversions. The fact that you’ve only been wrong here – you haven’t gotten one thing right. The fact that you’re continually wrong on the issues and that you’re deluded by your rightwing beliefs.

Perspective and context….

Well said, Sarge!

I would like to thank Delldolly for clarifying that when when a pedestrian ”enters an intersection after the walk light begins to flash” it is OK to run them over.  I bet a lot of people don’t know that.

He gives a good speech, but he’s loose with the facts. He called Abraham
Lincoln the “founder” of the Republican Party. Nope. Lincoln was not
the founder of the party; he wasn’t even the first Republican nominee
(John Fremont was, in 1856). Lincoln was, of course, the first
Republican to be elected president. -Jay Carney, 2008

Wow, in 2008 when Mike Huckabee said it he was loose with the facts, and it was splashed all over the news. And now 0bama just makes a simple mistake…once again.

Palin was more accurate on the Paul Revere ride ( I know lefties, you never will admit it) on an off-the-cuff remark than 0bama is in his prepared statements. Maybe Jake Tapper will ask Mr. Carney if 0bama is “loose with the facts”? Tommy, why don’t you?

I flagged this post by Pablo, because, as is typical, it’s a baseless personal attack and provides no value to any discussion. And that’s typical when one is involved in a discussion with a rightwinger on a board like this – they reach a point where they can’t refute a thing that the lefty has written, and so they resort to baseless personal attacks. It’s got to be terribly frustrating to be a rightwinger and only have decrepit arguments to rely upon – too bad, so sad. We progressives don’t hold the patent on the truth and facts and reasonable arguments – you righties can choose to use these tools to argue any time you want – but see, what happens is that your arguments fall apart when you try to do that, and so all you’re left with is personal attacks, word parsing, dishonesty, disingenuous cropping, etc, etc.

Using a teleprompter and relying on one for every delivered message are not the same. 0bama is stuck on his teleprompter for fear he may go off script and say something even stupider than the last time he ventured off script.

No, Sara, he did get hit by a vehicle, and hurt pretty seriously with multiple complications – but that doesn’t mean that his portrayal of the event was accurate, which is what I’m going after him about! He lied that he was crossing the street legally. There’s a reason he got a jaywalking ticket and the driver didn’t get cited, and it’s not that he’s a despised rightwing liar and the driver indirectly works for Hillary Clinton! It’s because he was jaywalking and the driver did nothing illegal.

I “seriously” attack his credibility because he has none.

You, on the other hand, make strawman arguments since you can’t actually defend him for what he did in describing the event in the days and weeks after the event.

And why do I hate dishonest people? Hmmm, let me think about that for a while – oh, that’s right, I don’t need to think about why it’s a good think to dislike dishonesty in a discussion. I’m baffled as to why YOU don’t understand that – oops, that’s right, I fully understand why you don’t understand it, Sara – because you’re a rightwinger, and you have learned that you can’t support your arguments with facts, and the only way to ‘support’ them is with dishonesty and eventually personal attacks.

What are you replying to, and what do you think I said? I swear, get a clue Todd. What is often published by online media is called a transcript, but is actually a soft copy of the prepared remarks for a speech, given to the media before an event by the representative of the speech-giver.

I know that prepared remarks and the eventual speech as given often vary. That doesn’t change the fact that both are called “transcripts” by the media.

I know, and have always known, that PBS didn’t scrub anything, but they did “alter” what they had on their website. First it was the prepared remarks, and later it was the actual transcript of the remarks. PBS did, in fact, add the transcript of the actual remarks when they were informed that the prepared remarks differed from the prepared remarks. You’re crazy if you think that PBS didn’t, in fact, do that very thing!

The initial accusation was totally without merit. That accusation said that PBS had scrubbbed a sentence from Obama’s remarks, but they didn’t do that. Nothing in any story on this topic ”proves me wrong”. Get a clue.

Why do you hate women, Sean

Yeah, DC, excellent point, except that it out-drew the football game.  If it wasn’t us watching, it must have “independents” and you

All we’re trying to point our, sweetpea, is that if Sarah Palin, or Michelle Bachmann, or ANY republican would have said it, it would have been sensationalized in every paper and newsroom across the country. Now, do your part as Tommy instructed, and send e-mail this to all your friends. He’s too busy, digging up dirt and gaffes said by any republican he can find, to concern himself with something so trivial about your beloved B-HO.

No, actually, it’s not a personal attack if it’s true, Jim. It’s not a personal attack to say that Scott Peterson is a murderer. Now, it would be a personal attack to call an abortion provider who performs a legal medical procedure as part of his occupation a “murderer”. Oh, that’s right, that’s the kind of thing your side does, and so you should be well aware of this – not sure why it baffles you. As I’ve repeatedly documented, you push idiotic arguments that don’t stand up under minimal scrutiny – that makes you an idiot. Now, I understand that you’d have preferred to not have your idiocy pointed out so effectively. Too bad, so sad. I actually called you to account for your behavior. I realize that you would have survived so long by getting by without actually being held to account for your behavior, and so it’s like light to a vampire to have your dishonesty pointed out for all to see. Again, too bad, so sad for you.

Oh, and thanks for showing that you’re not ashamed of cropping a comment, ripping it out of context. It’s irrelevant what the literal translation of the word “transcript” is – what’s relevant about the usage of that word in this instance is two-fold – was there any deception intended by PBS in their usage? Of course not – they simply published the prepared remarks, as given to them, to provide those remarks, as soon as possible, to their listeners. This happens all the time in the media. Secondly, the media calls these things “transcripts” all the time. The fact that you ignored these two things makes you an idiot – the fact that you insisted that “transcript” could only be used to describe what is delivered after a transcriptionist transcribes the spoken word, when there’s plenty of evidence that it’s not the case, makes you an idiot.

I went and re-read some of those latest entries at the DC too, Dolly, and treacher can sure bring the funny.  Funniest joke is him linking to Human Events for a news story.  What’s the matter, sean, couldn’t “hot link” to Free Republic?

There isn’t, in case you haven’t noticed.  Republicans have been claiming it for years and the only person who complained was Jay Carney.  Go ask him

You might want to look up the definition of revanchist again, dood, because in a political context it means taking back disputed control. 

I get that the first definition you ran into probably used the revenge part, but move onto the second one and remember to log in under the appropriate handle next time

Yes, we guys.  William jacobson just brought up yesterday.  Palin kept talking it about for two weeks.  Nutbags like Pablo changed Wikipedia accounts to match her mangling.

Yes, it was the dastardly liberal media, apparently personified by this Re-elect guy/gal above, who, acting upon orders from the White House, spent a week on Palin.

Do you ever get tired of pretending to be a victim?

Huh? So, I can’t be concerned about what happened on 9/11 AND talk about this issue too? Really, SargeantRock - that’s the best strawman argument you could come up with? Man, we need better trolls.

I didn’t “bitch” about anyone’s traffic violation. I accurately called someone to account for serial dishonesty, and that does have value when that person is pretending that their current argument should be given credibility! I swear, this ain’t rocket science. And then you say that I can’t possibly give much thought to servicemen? Tell that to the multiple career servicemen in my life, all of whom know that they and all their comrades have all my support? That’s a baseless personal attack for you to have made, but, of course, that’s common coming from your side when you can’t actually refute what I’ve said.

Explains why Pablo is still banging the drum….

“Waaaaaaaah!”, cry the GOPsters, “President Obama is as good on the teleprompter, as Ronald Reagan was, and he’s kicking our butt everytime that he gets behind one. Heh, let’s make a big f__n’ deal about how often he uses it, and maybe it’ll reduce the number of times he hands us our ass, by using one.”

Huh, DC – what are you talking about, that most Democrats didn’t show up for his speech?

And what relevance does that untrue personal attack have to do with this discussion? Oh, that’s right, it’s got nothing to do with it – it’s simply you wildly lashing out in frustration when you can’t refute a thing I’ve written!

And no, one would NOT think that someone at PBS was watching intently, verifying that every word that Obama said was exactly the same as every word in the prepared remarks transcript. There’s no conspiracy theory here, with PBS trying to protect Obama.

you mean like the time he handed Republicans their lunch on healthcare at that retreat.

The Republican was for note cards continues!

Danielson, remember to mention college transcripts next time too!  It is unseemly for a wingnut to whine about teleprompters and then forget to mention LSAT scores

stay classy, sean.  Wonder why you’d get banned.

It’s just odd that every news organization published this before the speech and somehow the fact that the President deviated slightly from this release has the “who cares about jobs when we might win the White House” crowd in a tizzy.

And, not one of them can explain how this devious plan by PBS helps either PBS, the President, of anyone to the left of Evan Bayh

Hold on a second here. How is Tommy Christopher twisting the narrative to “right wing blogs freaking out” on this story? The story never was about the gaffe itself…no one cares about what was said…its about the apparent coverup.

The story is that right wing blogs point out that PBS edited their transcript, leaving out what happened to be a slip up on Obama’s part. Coincidence? Tommy insists it is, but how can he be sure? PBS subsequently fixed it, but is that because they we talking heat for it? If so, maybe a small bit of thanks are in order to right wing blogs, not ridicule. (that is, if Tommy actually cared about accuracy in journalism.)

LOL…leave it to Tommy Christopher to defend sloppy journalism by PBS with some of his own.

That being said, I think Tommy C is the right man to comment on this…!

After all, who else is more of an expert on journalistic gaffes than him…?

As I’ve already explained about 4 times, DC, it should NOT have been an issue when a Republican said it. Had I read Jay Carney’s comment in “Time’” Swampland blog, I would have called it out. Had I heard Keith Olbermann making an issue of it, I would have objected, JUST AS I am objecting here.

And those were the only two people in the media that I’ve been able to find after considerable searching who brought up Huckabee’s comments. It wasn’t the MSM, in general. It wasn’t, in general, an issue, and it shouldn’t have been.

And so your “argument” above is entirely impotent. It wasn’t okay 3 years ago, and it’s not okay this weekend either!

You liked this, Pablo, but couldn’t respond to me.

Jesus, i used to think you were good at this stuff when we were at PW.  You had a blithe answer for everything. had done your homework at various kook sites, and like to mix in a clever retort now and again.  You have lost something

We tried, but Pablo ACTUALLY does think Lincoln is a war criminal like Stacy McCain claims.  It’s not a joke to him, Tommy, kicking Lincoln our means he could finally vote for the Republican instead of voting for the Constitution Party candidate

Dammit, quit forgetting to throw in college transcripts!!!

Now, Oxy, you are a legit wingnut.  You believe that the President was not properly vetted and probably received all these honors and degrees because of Affirmative Action.  How could you forget to throw in transcripts? 

You can’t complain about teleprompters without throwing in Grader nonsense.  You’ll lose your right wing decoder ring

Jim likes the other comments, OS, but he can’t get behind this one

12 hours to show us what dastardly plot was stopped by the Human Events crowd (writing at American Thinker of all places*) and no winger can say>

PS Treacher links to Hayward all the time….is Haywward the only journalist the Human Events/AT crowd has or are you his bobo, Sean?

There were many founding fathers of our nation, and that’s because founding our nation was a process, not an instantaneous event.

George Washington is called the father of our country due to multiple qualities and qualifications he had – but arguably the best reason to call him the father of our country is his Presidency – but he was elected to that post without a challenger because of all the other leadership qualities he’s shown.

And, in a similar way, Lincoln is considered to be a founder of the national Republican Party because of his leadership role in the establishment of the party! It was his speeches and his efforts and his charisma, along with the efforts of others. He began a 25 year dominance by the Republican Party in holding the presidency. It wasn’t an illegitimate reference by Obama.

See, us lucid progressives recognize this for what it is – flailing to find anything with which to attack Obama! It’s bogus here, but it goes on all the time.

You got to understand the logic behind these sorts of things.

It’s the same reason you won’t find pictures distributed in the media that look as though Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden are deep-throating a corn dog.

They ain’t funny…

Republicans ARE dumb in the media’s thinking and when they reveal the truth of this assumption by screwing up ..well…now, THAT’S entertainment…

He’s a conservative, Tommy.  It doesn’t have to be inaccurate or unfair.  You can’t quote conservatives words back to them. 

And yet again, we see evidence in SargeantRock’s posts that he doesn’t understand that making baseless personal attacks is not a legitimate way to argue. Discussing how feminine you think a man might be, and asserting that it’s a bad thing for a man to hold feminine tendencies, is extremely offensive, SR!

Wonder how Austin, Tx got to be such a haven for creeps.

And, yet again, SergeantRock, unable to refute a thing that someone said, is shown to be the “mental midget” here by his usage of unfair and untrue personal attacks as though they can be legitimately used as a substitute to actual facts and debate.

“Fact is”, there’s no “there” here – liberals aren’t liars and it’s the rightwingers who were caught with their pants down, misinterpreting PBS’ posting of the transcript of the prepared remarks as evidence of PBS scubbing Obama’s speech to remove a potentially damaging sentence!

Tommy, they did, Stop pretending for you Messiah.

There’s no gaffe!

Again, the fact that Obama was at one meeting at Ayer’s house is not equivalent to him launching his political career there. I understand that you are apparently wedded to that false meme – that’s your failing, not mine. Secondly, as I explained to you, in our nation, once one has been released from custody after being convicted of a crime, one is not then scorned for life for the crime. I understand that authoritarian rightwingers don’t like that, but it’s really a good thing that you should embrace. If you did so, you wouldn’t associate Obama with the criminal that Ayers was but instead you’d associate Obama with the good man that Ayers is now. But you’re infected with the binary thinking that affects so many on the right.

Oh, and Ayers wasn’t a murderer, either. He committed no murders. Ever. How do you sleep at night when you can’t even be honest or stay on topic in a simple discussion like this?

He’s kicking the economy’s butt.

What’s the problem, Tim?

Tim’s upset.

Tim’s upset.

Tim’s not having a good day.

Timmah! do not pretend to know what I think. You’re ACTUALLY an idiot and it’s just not going to work.

Tim is concerned.

Do you think every inanity that makes it through your keyboard merits a response from me? You overestimate your significance, Timmah!

Please tell me more, Sue.

You mad, bro?

That’s an interesting point, Tim.

Yes, they do! It happens all the time that these things are called “transcripts”.

I understand that some people were misled by it being called a transcript, and then wrongly assumed that PBS had scrubbed the transcript.

But that doesn’t make it incorrect to describe the transcript of the prepared remarks as a transcript of prepared remarks!

No, he ad libbed. He went off script, and he screwed up. It’s not a huge deal, really. The refusal to acnowledge it is what’s really interesting.

Poor Sue.

Why do you love libel, Tim?

Sue’s nervous breakdown is kind of boring.

Actually, Sue, you don’t know what “actually” means either. Let’s have another few hundred words on that, when you get a minute.

Oh, so now outing someone (not me) is okay, Sean? Are you really that corrupt? That dishonest? That scared and idiotic?

It is incredible that you somehow thought that was okay.

What’s the problem with you outing someone? Of course you understand what the problem is, Sean.

“Outing”? Who did I “out”?

Tim’s concern is concerned.

And yet again, another poster who apparently is so consumed with their frustration over being overwhelmed in the comments and so dedicated to supporting a guy who doesn’t deserve any support that she thinks it’s appropriate to out someone!

It’s hard to believe how slimy some people will allow themselves to be in order to defend their political ideology.

Thanks for, yet again, showing that when you can’t refute a thing that’s said, you’ll make a baseless personal attack AND try to derail the subject being discussed.

Sue’s a bit confused.

PBS didn’t edit anything to leave anything out though! How ill-informed can you possibly be that you still think that’s what happened?

PBS, along with countless other media sources, provided the prepared remarks. They didn’t edit anything. Obama added to his prepared remarks.

You’re welcome, Sue.

No, it wasn’t “splashed all over the news”. It was covered by Jay Carney as a small mention in his Swampland blog, and Keith Olbermann mentioned it. That’s it.

And they were wrong to highlight it – it wasn’t an error when Huckabee did it, and it wasn’t a gaffe when Obama did it!

And yeah, we know what PBS called it – they called it a transcript of prepared remarks. That’s what it was. Rightwingers are wrong about what the online media call a transcript.

Why do you keep saying that?

Are you projecting that because you are?

I’m here just making my opinions known.  Same thing you are doing, except one of us gets paid to do it (and from the more recent posts, bash the living hell out of anyone in a union) at a different website

a week for the media to laugh at her and a week for her to claim vindication and send the flying monkeys to Wikipedia, primary source documents, etc.  Sean apparently said “we” spent a week.

Are you kidding about the mad thing? Have you seen the quality of wingnuts here when you are not?  it’s a pathetic collection.  I think 90+% of them don’t read the news and the vast majority don’t even read the article they choose to comment on.

We may not like each other’s politics or, well, each other, but I would rather trade insults and links with you ANY day than read their regurgitated Limbaugh-isms. 

So, no, I’m not mad.

Arguing with the guys who stalk me is like going to CPAC and missing Breitbart.  You can’t miss the most vile, most accomplished opponent or you miss all the fun.  So, I’m glad you’re back, even though, as always, you’re wrong.

I do often wonder why you always need to be the wingman, though.  You always have to have a big brother to encourage you and egg you on, whether it’s Jeff or Treacher/medlock or the Good Lt.  You should try it all alone some time.  It’s more fun that way

Well, now that you outed here, I look forward to your suit.  On the plus side, you certainly don’t qualify as a public figure, so you won’t have to leap over the “actual malice” hurdle.  On the other hand, you can clear your good pseudonym.

Make sure to keep us up on the details.  Should be fascinatin’

Yet again, immature Sean thinks it’s okay to try to “out” someone in retaliation for Sean having been taken to the woodshed on this topic!

Here’s a hint, Sean. It’s not. It’s childish and stupid and petty and inappropriate, and I hope Tucker Carlson fires you for such disgraceful behavior.

This is the comedy you promised Carlson?  This is why he swooped you up from fair Naptown?

I don’t EVER recall indicating that you think

But he’s not angry.

Tim’s going to start making sense any old time now.

Yet again, keep digging that hole, Sean – any sane, reasonable person knows that outing someone else is inappropriate, yet you keep pushing it.

How immature can you get?

Who did I “out”?

Got a solution to that problem, Jim.  Maybe you should let Boehner know, since he does not.  I mean besides obstructing the governance of the country, so that Cantor can’t take his job

Bringing people’s personal lives into a discussion is wrong, except when it’s not.

Impeccably expressed, Tim.

Ahhhh, the parsing we so respect.  Next, Pablo gets out his red ink pen and starts explaining the nominative case and subjective clauses and gerunds.

@868ac6b9a2d59edca3f8646519c333a2:disqus I was replying to a comment of your that had not reply button on it on the first page. 
You still refuse to admit that Tommy included the fact that PBS did not include the actual “transcript” that the White House released after the speech. If you watch the video of the speech you will see a transcptionist below and to the right of the President recording what was actually said on the House floor so that the Transcript of the speech could be released. How does this work? “PBS did, in fact, add the transcript of the actual remarks when they were informed that the prepared remarks differed from the prepared remarks.” Emphasis added.
@bd213c73a0ea30b83bc15d4a41cae29c:disqus 
No I am not admitting that PBS was lazy, in the quote from Tommy in my post above you will see where Tommy addressed this in parentheses. 

Says the guy who will defend Palin’s Revere comment, Bachman’s Founding Father one, and Bush’s SOTU lie about yellowcake uranium.

He’s just bemused. Why won’t people just let him win?

Yet again, you can’t refute a thing I wrote, and so you retreat to a baseless personal attack.

I understand you’d prefer to not have your dishonesty and your pathetic arguments pointed out for all to see. Too bad, so sad.

Making an incontrovertible argument, and having to write quite a few words in order to do so, isn’t a bad thing or something to be ashamed or embarassed about. But behaving here as you have – now there’s something that should embarass and shame anyone with a modicum of humanity. Apparently that excludes you. I realize you’d like it better if that lack of humanity on your part hadn’t been pointed out, but that doesn’t give you legitimate license to behave as you have. Any parents who care about their parenting skills would be incredibly ashamed to call you their son after what you’ve displayed here.

Wind ‘er up and watch ‘er go, folks.

So, you use the word libel, but don’t understand it?

I thought so

Okay.

Why do you ask?

It’s hard to believe how slimy some people will allow themselves to be in order to defend their political ideology. – Exactly. You should be ashamed. 

It really is something to watch a schizophrenic in action.

Ok, so you either work for the popo or you were there – one or the other, or give it up. You dedicated about 50 comments insanely claiming you know more about his accident than he does. Like I said, you are attacking him just because you disagree with him politically. You are one sick cookie.

‘ I fully understand why you don’t understand it, Sara – because you’re a rightwinger” – I was a Hillary Clinton supporter, but don’t let facts get in your way.

Ok, so you either work for the popo or you were there – one or the other, or give it up. You dedicated about 50 comments insanely claiming you know more about his accident than he does. Like I said, you are attacking him just because you disagree with him politically. You are one sick cookie.

‘ I fully understand why you don’t understand it, Sara – because you’re a rightwinger” – I was a Hillary Clinton supporter, but don’t let facts get in your way.

DellDolly 2 hours ago in reply to PabIo” it’s a baseless personal attack and provides no value to any discussion. ”

Then I flag ALL of your comments in this thread. You filled the thread with unhinged comments personally attacking Treacher, and added absolutely nooooooooooo value to the discussion, at all. 

I just worry about you, jim/sean.  Last night, you seemed so upset, running around Twitter and whining about her and Tommy and proclaiming she accused you of a crime.  Just trying to ease your agitated mind. 

yea, ya did.

“We tried, but Pablo ACTUALLY does think…” 

“Her”? “She”? Maybe it would help if you explained who you’re talking about, Tim.

It’s not a case of bringing someone’s personal life into the discussion inappropriately though, when it was YOU who made YOUR being hit by a car something you posted about on your public blog on The Daily Caller, Sean. It’s not that at all when it’s done to point out your serial dishonesty.

That is vastly different from outing someone, and you know it. You can’t defend, not in any way, what you did here – you were desperate to go after me since I thoroughly trashed every argument you raised and cratered your credibility, and that’s immature, dishonest behavior, Sean. I understand you’d have preferred that it not happen, but you don’t get to act that way and then retaliate by outing someone as you did here today. What a whiny baby, unable to admit that you were bested here, and unable to restrain yourself from acting immature, and then unable to admit that you acted very badly when it’s again highlighted! What a desperate, immature person you are.

Yeah, you’re right – oops, that’s right, you’re not at all right. I’m not defending any political ideology here. PBS did nothing wrong – I’m defending them from unfair attacks. And there’s nothing wrong with saying that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican Party – I’ve defended Obama and Huckabee from that accusation.

The evidence shows that I’m not behaving in a partisan manner here at all. And the evidence also shows that when you can’t refute a thing I’ve said, you’ll make a baseless personal attack!

On the other hand, outing someone is slimy. There’s universal agreement about that, and it’s what your “hero”, Sean, did. He should be ashamed, and you should be too, for failing to call him out on that behavior, much less for attacking me unfairly.

You’re clueless.

Just the latest example of what happens when Barry goes off-prompter.  He’s not such a genius when he’s using his own words. 

delldolly

When Dumbo makes a mistake they always cover it up once you are libtarded you protect your fellow Libtard at all costs no matter how stupid it makes you look .It all comes with being mentally libtarded.

Oh.

Who’s been “outed”?

Sounds like things aren’t going the way you planned.

Huh? More nonsense and distraction from Sean after he’s fairly being called out for dishonest and immature behavior. This isn’t about me, Sean, it’s about you, when confronted with an argument you couldn’t refute, behaving really badly!

Sounds pretty bad.

LOL By that logic, bin Laden wasn’t a murderer either.

Guess it’s too bad he’s already dead, the Chicago Machine could have found a cushy professorship for him. He and Wright and Ayers could have lunch together on Tuesdays and issued joint statements.

Thanks for the laughs!

Truth reminder…

It’s the Republican Party, the party of the new majority, founded 130 years ago and lifted to greatness by the candidacy of an awkward and obscure lawyer who had some new ideas himself. And when he had won the Presidency, he said some words that reflect what all of us think when we look at the policies of the other party. He said: We must disenthrall ourselves with the past, and then we will save our country.

Well, Abe Lincoln was one great dreamer, one great risk-taker, one great soul, and one great hero. And I think he would be proud of his party today.

Is the bolded sentence poorly constructed, or was Ronald Reagan implying the same thing that President Obama just did, in his August 23, 1984 remarks to a Republican National Committee fundraising luncheon in Dallas, Texas?

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1984/82384e.htm

Truth reminder…

It’s the Republican Party, the party of the new majority, founded 130 years ago and lifted to greatness by the candidacy of an awkward and obscure lawyer who had some new ideas himself. And when he had won the Presidency, he said some words that reflect what all of us think when we look at the policies of the other party. He said: We must disenthrall ourselves with the past, and then we will save our country.

Well, Abe Lincoln was one great dreamer, one great risk-taker, one great soul, and one great hero. And I think he would be proud of his party today.

Is the bolded sentence poorly constructed, or was Ronald Reagan implying the same thing that President Obama just did, in his August 23, 1984 remarks to a Republican National Committee fundraising luncheon in Dallas, Texas?

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1984/82384e.htm

If Reagan was wrong, that means Obama wasn’t wrong.

He’s kicking the economy’s butt. – Jim Treacher

That’s a well thought out argument. I’m very impressed with the trouble you went to, to gather your evidence, and present it in such a cogent, exciting, and instructional way. God job. 

Anything else I can help you with?

Why does it matter PBS is known and always will be liberal and lean far left with anything political it needs its public funding taken away!

Confucius say… Righty,who say if Reagan wrong, then Obama not wrong, need vacation.

No, of couse not. We wouldn’t want the public funding “public” radio, now would we?. That wouldn’t make any sense, would it?

I hope that you recognized my sarcasm. It’s well earned.

America is dealing with a Conservative Rght that is “rooted” in the ignorance of science and education.

Which one of these 911 Truthers is you:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/classy-truthers-chant-9-11-was-an-inside-job-outside-ground-zero-memorial/

Wll, y knw hw the Rght s. 

Why are you a racist?

You’re welcome.

By the way, if you have any evidence that the economy is doing well, feel free to gather it and present it.

So, no, I’m not mad. 

Of course not, dear.

Why do you keep saying that?

Why does it bother you?

12 hours to show us what dastardly plot was stopped by the Human Events crowd (writing at American Thinker of all places*) and no winger can say>PS Treacher links to Hayward all the time….is Haywward the only journalist the Human Events/AT crowd has or are you his bobo, Sean?

Don’t do drugs, kids.

“A transcript of prepared remarks” is a contradiction in terms. You’re welcome.

You think that honoring/mimicking Confucius philosophy is an insult to the Chinese people, JT? Really? Well, good luck with that argument. My guess is, that they, the Chinese people, dig the s__t out of Americans quoting Confucius. It’s a sign that we admire their Chinese philosophy.

You’re out of your league JT.

It’s okay if you don’t want to explain why you’re a racist.

The leftists like JT are so eager to throw out the “Your a racist” crap when they have nothing else.
They’re done and the people don’t buy it anymore.  Pelosi called Grandma and Grandpa Nazi’s and the NAACP called them all racists.  That will really help people decide who to vote for next year.

“TMP”

End of the line for this nest. Are you the proud “Dittohead” that I’ve been searching for, JT?

Wow, that is super insulting, oxy! I will see if I can find a picture of a Klan rally and ask you tp pick yourself out?

timb116,
How about learning to spell two letter words like “to”?

Like anyone including Republicans would know honest Abe was the ‘Father’  please – non story

You do know that the KKK was started by the Democrats and they had the longest sitting member of the KKK in the Senate “Timmah”.

The racist crap isn’t working for you leftists anymore little man.

Stay stupid.

LMAO

“TMP”

You do know that the KKK was started by the Democrats and they had the longest sitting member of the KKK in the Senate “Timmah”.

The racist crap isn’t working for you leftists anymore little man.

Stay stupid.

LMAO

“TMP”

Obama also said “a economic” instead of “an economic” and that was cleaned up in the transcript, too. Wouldn’t have been for Bush. It would have become his hot “potatoe.”

Obama also said “a economic” instead of “an economic” and that was cleaned up in the transcript, too. Wouldn’t have been for Bush. It would have become his hot “potatoe.”

You see, Myself and many others out there think the opposite then you do. its the liberal far left that now is the growing problem in America. 
With the Dependency on the government instead of themselves and the feeling of entitlement and lack of values and morals.
 The feeling that the left are owed something and the over and over use of hatefully names and calling everyone they dont agree with racist… that is what’s hurting this country.

No where near the same as the transcript of a speech.

“…24…25.”  Twenty five links, many to verbal gaffes (or questionable contextual interpretations that liberals prefer to portray as such) of republicans.  Over a nothing story.  The deflections, they do mount.

The bigger revelation, however, lies in here.

No matter how much conservatives wish for it, gaffes will just never be Obana’s “thing,” so if they want to get a thrill up their legs every time he pulls a minor Ron Burgundy and reads “corpseman” off a teleprompter, or uses the shorthand “57 states” instead of saying “57 states, territories, commonwealths, and other types of votey-places,” or even makes a genuinely funny one like saying he sees fallen heroes in the audience, that’s their business, but it’s just not going to catch on with the no-ax-to-grind crowd. President Obama just isn’t all that good at gaffes.

I interpret this paragraph to mean Tommy Christopher will ever be ready, willing and able with bucket in hand to bail water from Obama’s boat and carry it wherever it needs to be taken.  For there’s a narrative in the minds of liberals that their spokesmen must be seen to speak with a greater eloquence, to match the notion that their ideas hold a greater value.  Working off the idea that perceptions can be made into a reality, Tommy, as with many a liberal, will never admit to gaffes or the seriousness of those gaffes that can’t be denied for to do so would put a chink in the armor of that narrative.  The truth, though, is that without a teleprompter Obama is not nearly the president he wishes for us all to envision.

An intelligent individual, to be sure, but, regardless this of little account Lincoln misnomer, results reveal Obama to be no great intellect.

Whose college transcripts? Timbo’s? Barry’s?

There are no college transcripts… for either one!

There was NOTHING WRONG with what Obama said, and so your assertion that a problem occurred when he ad libbed is without foundation. Your Obama Derangement Syndrome is showing. Presidents and other powerful people have been using teleprompters for decades. Any rational person who has to give a speech uses one if they have on available. It keeps them from having to either memorize the speech or read from a paper copy by looking down all the time – neither is the optimum way to behave if you have a teleprompter available!

And the idea that Obama can’t manage without one is ludicrous too – again, your ODS has disabled your thinking processes. He’s a terrific extemporaneous speaker. Just ask the Republicans who got a tongue-lashing last spring!

timb116,
You do realize that Palin has been proven correct about Revere right? 
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/06/06/sarah-palin-was-right-about-paul-revere
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/06/news/la-pn-palin-revere-20110606
Yet Bush did not lie in his 2003 STOU, he used the best information available at the time. It was not until months after the speech that the documents the British had were forgeries. For to lie Bush would have had to have known that what he said was false at the time he said it. You should know this counselor.
FYI: There is no credible evidence that Washington ever chopped down his fathers cherry tree. What Palin said about Revere is confirmed by his own letters.

Conservatives do not listen to PBS.  It’s always been deeply over their heads and culturally mystifies them.

Nice rebuttal

He is brother bush a second big lair!!!

LED sign

Someone’s cranky.

Indeed.

Funny, your very first post in this thread is calling someone an idiot, and yet further down the thread you have the nerve to write this, repeatedly (after calling numerous people idiots, wingers, etc.):

Delldolly 1 day ago in reply to PabIo
As we so often see, mostly from rightwingers, when they can’t refute a thing that their debate opponent has written, they throw out a baseless personal attack.

“When someone thinks that an appropriate response to a post they can’t refute is a personal attack, they should be denied the right to make ongoing personal attacks, as though doing so is a legit way to behave! It’s not! ”

That’s rich coming from someone who’s very first post on this thread was a personal attack, and who continued the personal attacks. Wonder why you weren’t denied the right to continue…

Thanks very much for clarifying things.  When anyone thinks of PBS, they should certainly think of this summation.

It’s wholly indicative of the spirit behind the company and certainly begs the question as to why the govt is helping to fund a select news agency for you oh-so- well-heeled-intellectuals.

Surely, you cultural elites can do that for yourselves…..

Quite

are you perhaps a “paid supporter”?  You seem to have a lot of skin in this game.  Hmmmm

Period.

Good job, Professor.

Over 500 comments now on Tommy’s relentless , impassioned and wrongheaded defense of Obama and the media .

Tommy just won one of Gibbs’ leftover Twinkies from the press office .

What a long winded defense of Obama. LOL. As usual Tommy missed the point. If Bachmann or Palin made that mistake Tommy would be saying how dumb they are.

What about these Obama gaffes. He met his wife in college when he met her at his job? Hirohito was on the Missouri to sign the treaty that ended World War II.

As usual Tommy has no idea what he is talking about. Obama is a lie and gaffe machine.

Who is Tommy Christopher and why is he a moron?

we do, but there aren’t enough of us to fund those stations in the middle of nowhere.  You know, where an-against-the-odds child of evangelical Perry supporters might secretly be reading books and need to glowing beacon of culture to cut through the chatter of Limbaugh and classic rock.  You know like when Kevin Bacon visited that town with no dancing?

Those people needs us and America needs to nurture possible intellectuals to be great someday.  That’s why PBS/NPR have to have govt support, so some kid in Brazil, Indiana can pick up a PBS station from Terre Haute and learn something.

IMPEACH HIM.

Oh,. and impeach Victoria to since she doesn’t know the difference between Dan Quayle and George Bush.  Oh, and Fast Eddie too, since in his hurry to express his Obama hatred he missed her gaffe as well.

then move from NorCal to some begotten red state. 

I love that So there thinks Treacher, a wingnut’s wingnut, is a Leftist just because he objected to TD’s line.

Oh, and TD, don’t bother with Sean/jim.  if you question his “witticisms,” he will accuse of “being cranky”.  Getting him to answer a question, after making an allegation, no less, is harder than crossing a street in DC

You are attacking Treacher because of your hostile political ideology. You have personally attacked many people on this thread, calling them names. Your very first post on this thread called someone an idiot. 

“ And the evidence also shows that when you can’t refute a thing I’ve said, you’ll make a baseless personal attack! “ 

Oh, reeeeeally? I don’t think so, lady. I *attack* people when they attack ME with baseless personal attacks. Like you did. Repeatedly. 

I didn’t out you, I didn’t know who you were. People sign in with FB all the time, and it links to their FB page. How were you outed? Who attacked YOU unfairly? As we all see here, you have spent a lot of time attacking people you disagree with – even going so far as to attack a poor kid that was run over by a car. 

“You’re clueless” – Oh lookie! Another personal attack!

People here have supported their claims about PBS, and their misuse of the term transcript. Only after they (PBS) were called on it, did they replace the prepared speech with the actual transcript. 

You and TC assume that they did not intend to deceive, yet offer no proof, other than that they switched out the speeches AFTER the matter was called out.

You keep arguing that there was nothing wrong with how they represented the speech, yet they changed it, so obviously, they knew it was inaccurate. 

If you would stop calling people idiot and *wingers* and actually READ what people are saying, you would see that they are supporting their statements.

So PBS is a vehicle for converting the great unwashed to that most pompous and illusory of gods: Liberal Self Esteem.

Yet another reason for govt not to fund it; separation of church and state.

Oh, and TD, don’t bother with Sean/jim.

It’s a bit late for that, Tim.

Let me reinforce your disdain for all things PBS, elite and intellectual when I tell you that your use of the phrase “begs the question” is incorrect. You mean to say “raises the question.”

“Begging the question” describes a logical fallacy (often unconsciously employed by feral conservatives) where one argues for a conclusion already assumed in the premise.

I recommend you watch more PBS :)

Well, first, I was being snarky. 

Secondly, the “case” I made up was not about “self-esteem,” but actual people who want culture in the hinterlands (like where I grew up) where, because of economics, the only thing on the TV was Oprah and Soap Operas (network TV, which always aims for least complicated, cheapest alternative which will attract the most viewers).  Sesame Street and Clifford are better than Maury Povich.

Thirdly, like most government programs, the government funding for PBS stations is not necessary for WAMU, WBUR, or KCRW to operate, but is vital if a station in the Dakotas is going to air.  Once again, blue subsidizes red, so red can whine about “big government.”

Thirdly, maybe you have read these boards very long, but I have it on good authority that “separation of church and state” is not found in the Constitution. 

Seriously, Ceclia, for a conservative, you’re better at this than most of these people (you’re a lot, a lot, less angry than the rest), so I hope you keep your snark around.  Threads are a lot more fun when people aren’t calling each other names.

Hey, Jim, can you explain to so there “why leftists like you are so eager to throw out the ‘Your [sic]a racist’ crap when they have nothing else.”

I mean, I’ll concur with the “you have nothing else” line (well, except union-bashing and Solyndra), but, we wouldn’t take on the Left since you’re so nihilistic.

You’re like Hannity without the money or talent. 

So, explain why PBS committed this terrible transgression, Barney.  What was their angle?

dammit, Michelle, you know not to mention teleprompter without mentioning transcripts!  Get it right or Limbaugh won’t love you anymore

Remember, this is Tim when he’s NOT angry.

Thank you very much for that correction.  It was well needed and appreciated.

It also lends credence to my point that tax-payers needn’t pay for PBS. Lectures from our elites are ubiquitous and accordingly free.

No, he doesn’t think you’re a racist – he’s a rightwing troll is all. He posts inflammatory things, hoping to get a response because he can’t actually refute a thing you wrote – for that matter, anything anyone writes. His political philosophy is inept and unsupportable, and so all he has is derision and deflection and derailment.

Well, I enjoy snark, but the sincerity and palpable concern of your first paragraph is most persuasive.

What an ignorant comment, Victoria. What happened is that there was a transcript of the prepared remarks. There were no grammatical errors in those prepared remarks, but in the actual speech, as given, he did say “a economic”. It wasn’t “cleaned up” in the transcript! I swear, how do people STILL NOT understand what happened here?

And, in spoken language, people make goofs at times. People make mistakes and misspell words accidentally. And then other words get misspelled by other people because they don’t know how to spell that word.

That’s the difference here, Victoria, and the distinction you’re missing. Obama knows that the word “economic” should be proceeded by an “an”, not by an “a”. Dan Quayle didn’t know how to correctly spell “potato”. Michelle Bachmann really thought that that day in August was Elvis’ birthday. Obama really knew how many states are in the USA – he simply misspoke.

Hello, Dolly.

As I already explained, dummy, accurately describing someone isn’t a personal attack. You’re a dummy, for example, for not having absorbed that info the first time I explained it.

This ain’t rocket science, dummy. Figure it out. I didn’t begin any comment with a personal attack. You’re lying now, since it’s been explained to you already, and so you’re pushing a falsehood with the intent to deceive – all because you want to protect your buddy Sean.

I didn’t do anything wrong here. You, on the other hand, did do something wrong, and had you a soul, you’d have known not to do it.

No one “ran over” Sean. He was hit after he jaywalked, and yes, there were no charges against the driver – that means that what he did was okay.

Just like if you shoot someone in self-defense, it’s okay. It’s okay to shoot someone, under some circumstances. It’s okay to hit another car if they’re at fault in an accident too! It’s okay to demolish a home if you’ve got a permit from the city and the home has been condemned.

This logic isn’t that difficult, Alisonbard. You might want to try harder next time to think through your objections, because you failed miserably this time.

The driver of the car, although I’m sure he was traumatized by the event and he’s sorry he hit Sean, was not at fault. The guy who tears down a condemned home was not at fault for doing so. The guy who shoots someone in self-defense is not culpable – he didn’t murder anyone. And the guy who hit Sean isn’t to blame for the accident happening – Sean is, for jaywalking.

This ain’t rocket science.

Well, hello, Dolly.

It’s so nice to have you back where you belong.

Pablo, when you dealing with idiots, don’t bother trying to make them understand the common meaning of a word in English.  It’s beyond them.  Any fool can look it up in the dictionary, but it’s too much for Delldolly and timb116.  So they make it up as they go along, in order to fit their argument.

A speech is a message delivered orally.  A transcript is an exact copy. A transcript of a speech is an exact copy of words that were spoken, not a copy of words that were written down beforehand. This is very, very simple.

Jim Treacher suffered a terrible accident because he was hit by a government vehicle while inside a crosswalk in D.C. There is no reason to dementedly attack an accident victim just because you really like Obama and don’t like it pointed out that he made a mistake and that PBS covered for him. It is a very strange thing for you to do and does not indicate a high level of sanity.

You sure CAN flag all my comments if you like, Sara, but as I’ve already explained to you multiple times, it’s not a personal attack if it’s true. I was 100% accurate with my depiction of the other comments. You’re lost in the sauce, busy defending the indefensible. My previous comment was entirely correct, and, once again, because you couldn’t refute a single word of it, you made a baseless personal attack, alleging that my posts are equivalent to the posts I’m referencing. Massive fail, Sara.

You’re lookin’ swell, Dolly.

I know almost as much about the incident as Sean does – that doesn’t mean that Sean’s been honest about it. I documented multiple lies and distortions he made about the event here and on The Daily Caller when it first happened. It’s isn’t that I know more about it – it’s that I’m honest about it and he’s not been honest about it. For example, he himself told his readers that he began crossing the street when the light was flashing. That, just by itself, tells us that he was crossing illegally – you can NOT legally begin crossing the street after the walk light has begun flashing. For example, Sean himself told us that witnesses said that he was crossing outside the crosswalk. Who do I trust – someone who has a personal bias in protecting himself, or non-partisan witnesses? Hmmm, let me think about that for a moment! I swear, get a freakin’ clue.

I dedicated multiple replies to multiple posts after calling Sean’s credibility into question because, based upon his comments here and his failure to have credibility in the past, his credibility should ALWAYS be called into question! I didn’t “insanely” do anything! The insane person here is the one whom I’m replying to! It’s you who’s defending the indefensible.

I haven’t once attacked him because I disagree with him politically. You’re lying. I attacked him because he’s not being honest, just like I attacked Justice Bradley in Wisconsin, because she wasn’t being honest. She didn’t accurately portray what happened between her and Justice Prosser, a man whose politics I disagree with in virtually every matter! You’re the sick cookie.
And you expect me to believe that you were a supporter of Hillary Clinton? I don’t.

Your post is still unintelligible.

We can tell, Dolly.

A transcript CAN BE an exact copy of a message delivered orally, or it CAN BE exactly what PBS and countless other media outlets provided on 9/8 right before the speech.

This IS very, very simple. PBS used the term that many others use – they called it a “transcript of prepared remarks”.  That’s what it was. The argument about it not literally being a transcribed copy of what was said is a strawman argument, being used as an excuse to explain away the mistake of the original people who misunderstood what happened here. You know, those people who falsely alleged that PBS scrubbed the transcript of a comment they thought embarassed Obama? The only way for them to pretend that they weren’t wrong is to say that they were misled by the fact that it was called a transcript!

But they were wrong. That’s been documented. PBS didn’t scrub anything from the prepared remarks – they posted a transcript of the prepared remarks that they received in an email from the White House, and then they replaced it with an updated email, again from the White House, that had the transcript as delivered.

Sean did suffer a terrible accident. He was not inside the crosswalk, and he was jaywalking, as demonstrated by the fact that he got a ticket and the driver didn’t. I’m attacking the credibility of someone who deserves to have their credibility attacked due to his lack of credibility!

Obama didn’t make a gaffe. I’ve explained that repeatedly – read my other posts. And PBS didn’t cover for him – I swear, if you don’t KNOW YET that PBS didn’t cover for him, simply read any of the major rightwing sites where they admit that PBS didn’t cover for Obama – that it was solely their misunderstanding about the “transcript of prepared remarks” that PBS posted was!

Repeating already debunked talking points as you did is the very definition of insanity.

Good lord, Sue, you lunatic. I stood at the corner and waited until the Walk light flashed. Then I crossed. Legally. You are out of your mind, and also an idiot.

Did Sean REALLY run around Twitter complaining? I wondered what he did to inspire his troll girlfriends to show up here!

You’re still glowin’.

You’re still crowin’.

And, crickets!

But enough about the contents of your skull.

If you have the stomach to visit the DC trawler, his twitter feed is right there.  He whined about being banned, he whined about you, he was acstatic when he found the facebook page. 

It was quite the show

That’s the way, Tim. Vent your frustrations.

By the way, what does “acstatic” mean?

Again, you’re babbling like a nincompoop, Sue.

Someone please get Sue Runyon her meds.

last word

Aw.

“but as I’ve already explained to you multiple times, it’s not a personal attack if it’s true.” Delldolly

Then how the hell are the *attacks* on you personal attacks – since they are all true…?

“because you couldn’t refute a single word of it,” 

You have been refuted from here to Sunday. You just refuse to accept it, and resort to childish name calling. 

DellDolly – “I know almost as much about the incident as Sean does – that doesn’t mean that Sean’s been honest about it. I documented multiple lies and distortions he made about the event here and on The Daily Caller when it first happened. ”

LMAO! Yea, sure ya do. You are insane. Why the f*ck did you feel it necessary to “document” his accident at all? Because you disagree with his politics, plain and simple. You dislike him, so you attacked him for getting run over by a car. You are sick, sick, sick. And quite sad, actually. 

WRT supporting Hillary – yea, you know for a fact I wasn’t, just like you know the facts about Treachers accident. LOL! FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL

Give it up hon. You don’t know diddly. 

“As I already explained, dummy, accurately describing someone isn’t a personal attack. You’re a dummy, for example, for not having absorbed that info the first time I explained it….This ain’t rocket science, dummy. Figure it out. I didn’t begin any comment with a personal attack.” 

OK, so, calling me an idiot, dummy, soulless, etc. aren’t personal attacks, according to you, because you are accurately describing me.  

So, if I were to say mean things about your looks, weight, mom jeans, personality, and hair, those wouldn’t be a personal attacks…or would they?

Is “aw” a word?

Yes.