Hmm, no. Actually checking Snopes (who are at least somewhat biased on political questions) it looks more like some are false, some are true, and others aren't addressed at all. Though the press has historically been quite eager to get at every little detail of Obama's political opponent's background, including sealed divorce records.
Mark could have actually presented an argument where he said, for example -
This link ____ says this ____ and shows Kevin is wrong because of this ____ reason.
Instead he gave a list of hundreds of possibly related and hundreds of unreleated links. ( No, I didn't read through the hundreds of links - ain't my job to do Marks work.)
Using that same style of arguing then I should be able to post thus:
1st four are true. #5 iffy. #6 mostly true, I think. 7 and 8 unknown, 9 I don't know about nor did snopes. 10-11 pretty much true, though I sure would like to have seen the original. #12: really? 13-14: eh. #15 Snopes can't say anything one way or another because no one knows. 16 is the same -- no one knows. They say he could've used a US passport, but that doesn't mean that he did. [That's some of that there logic yaw'll be hearin' about in these parts lately. Learn some. It might save your life someday.)
Thank you, Dr. F. for the correction. The president has gone way beyond where he should have had to go with his birth certificate. The list in the image is very dishonest and another sad attempt to paint President Obama as "The Other."
Guard Duck, I had no problem whatsoever with Mark's link. The links are all right there that refute some of the items on the image.
markadelphia why dont you tell us why Obamas college records are all sealed. You always know what everyone is thinking when they do things - turn that vision onto the current president.
His school records are sealed by law...Do you think I can go get your school records? It is not public information. ; the only ones to me that Joe Q. Public should have to see are the Harvard Law School articles and the University of Chicago articles.
IL state senator records that are public information can be garnered via an FOIA request.
The rest is protected by privacy laws for good reason, and any reasonable employer will only want to know proof of conferral of a degree.
If your claim is that you need to see these records as an employer, since when are school records other than conferral of degree and articles written for public publications relevant information?
As for the thesis at Columbia University, it likely doesn't exist because undergraduate programs do not require thesis papers to be written. Only post-baccalaureate programs (except for usually law and medical programs) require a thesis.
Guard Duck, I had no problem whatsoever with Mark's link. The links are all right there that refute some of the items on the image.
Eric,
May I quote you from another post?
"why can't you just say something like, "Mark's wrong and here's why." ? Follow this by evidence."
I ask you, why can't Mark do the same? Mark essentially did the 'Kevin's wrong.....evidence.' But he left out the 'here's why' part.
Then I ask you, what items did Mark refute? Gosh, if he'd actually presented an argument I wouldn't even have to ask you that. But instead he posts a link to a search result that provided over 200 snopes stories. Some may have refuted Kevin, most did not.
As I said, it's not my job to do Mark's work for him. If he wants to make an argument the very least he can do is say 'this point is wrong, this link specifically disproves it.' or 'this point is wrong, here is why and these links provide the evidence.'
I'm starting to get a sense of why Mark gets frustrated. Maybe it's just something personal with him that bugs you. Kevin didn't provide any evidence. Just a list. Why should Mark be any different? His link is just a list of all of the BS about Obama. It doesn't take long to match it up with Kevin's list. There was no work to it at all. It seems that he always has a greater degree of scrutiny and I don't think that's very fair.
We ain't at Kevin's site. We're at Mark's. And Mark opened a 'discussion' of something by presenting it as a fait acompli that he had 'proved' it wrong. Did he? Did Mark actually do anything to prove something? He provided a link to snopes - which apparently doesn't actually disprove more than two of the sixteen things on Kevin's list. That's not 'many'.
There was no work to it at all
No? You think you should have been the one doing it? Did you visit the link I provided that 'proved' Mark wrong? What did you think about the work needed to do that?
The list in the image is very dishonest
Really? Two of the sixteen not true (and there is debate about those as well), and you think the list is dishonest?
Maybe it's just something personal with him that bugs you.
Oh no, GD, don't tell me you have gone birther as well.
I put up the one link with a hyperlinked list rather than cutting and pasting each individual one because I actually thought it would be easier to have all the lies about the president in one list for future reference. For whatever reason (well, I know why, actually, and so do you:)), you thought that was more work.
As Eric aptly points out (thanks Eric and...I'm sorry), it takes a few second and barely a scroll to cross reference the image's list with the falsehoods. Now, my question is why doesn't this image (and Kevin) get the same sort of scrutiny? Where's the call to back up the evidence now, eh?
15 comments:
Do you still think your Indian ideological friend is going to win in Massachusetts? All hail affirmative action!
Hmm, no. Actually checking Snopes (who are at least somewhat biased on political questions) it looks more like some are false, some are true, and others aren't addressed at all. Though the press has historically been quite eager to get at every little detail of Obama's political opponent's background, including sealed divorce records.
Which ones are true? I think Mark also said that many (not all) are false.
Mark could have actually presented an argument where he said, for example -
This link ____ says this ____ and shows Kevin is wrong because of this ____ reason.
Instead he gave a list of hundreds of possibly related and hundreds of unreleated links. ( No, I didn't read through the hundreds of links - ain't my job to do Marks work.)
Using that same style of arguing then I should be able to post thus:
Here is a link that shows that many of Mark's claims are completely false. I expect retractions, Mark.
Not much of an argument is it?
Intellectually lazy and a liar - try for a trifecta Mark.
1st four are true. #5 iffy. #6 mostly true, I think. 7 and 8 unknown, 9 I don't know about nor did snopes. 10-11 pretty much true, though I sure would like to have seen the original. #12: really? 13-14: eh. #15 Snopes can't say anything one way or another because no one knows. 16 is the same -- no one knows. They say he could've used a US passport, but that doesn't mean that he did. [That's some of that there logic yaw'll be hearin' about in these parts lately. Learn some. It might save your life someday.)
Sorry, 10,11 pretty much false, not true.
Thank you, Dr. F. for the correction. The president has gone way beyond where he should have had to go with his birth certificate. The list in the image is very dishonest and another sad attempt to paint President Obama as "The Other."
Guard Duck, I had no problem whatsoever with Mark's link. The links are all right there that refute some of the items on the image.
Even if the president was born in Kenya and he obviously wasn't, he'd still be qualified to run for president because his mother was a US citizen.
markadelphia why dont you tell us why Obamas college records are all sealed. You always know what everyone is thinking when they do things - turn that vision onto the current president.
His school records are sealed by law...Do you think I can go get your school records? It is not public information. ; the only ones to me that Joe Q. Public should have to see are the Harvard Law School articles and the University of Chicago articles.
IL state senator records that are public information can be garnered via an FOIA request.
The rest is protected by privacy laws for good reason, and any reasonable employer will only want to know proof of conferral of a degree.
If your claim is that you need to see these records as an employer, since when are school records other than conferral of degree and articles written for public publications relevant information?
As for the thesis at Columbia University, it likely doesn't exist because undergraduate programs do not require thesis papers to be written. Only post-baccalaureate programs (except for usually law and medical programs) require a thesis.
Guard Duck, I had no problem whatsoever with Mark's link. The links are all right there that refute some of the items on the image.
Eric,
May I quote you from another post?
"why can't you just say something like, "Mark's wrong and here's why." ? Follow this by evidence."
I ask you, why can't Mark do the same? Mark essentially did the 'Kevin's wrong.....evidence.' But he left out the 'here's why' part.
Then I ask you, what items did Mark refute? Gosh, if he'd actually presented an argument I wouldn't even have to ask you that. But instead he posts a link to a search result that provided over 200 snopes stories. Some may have refuted Kevin, most did not.
As I said, it's not my job to do Mark's work for him. If he wants to make an argument the very least he can do is say 'this point is wrong, this link specifically disproves it.' or 'this point is wrong, here is why and these links provide the evidence.'
I'm starting to get a sense of why Mark gets frustrated. Maybe it's just something personal with him that bugs you. Kevin didn't provide any evidence. Just a list. Why should Mark be any different? His link is just a list of all of the BS about Obama. It doesn't take long to match it up with Kevin's list. There was no work to it at all. It seems that he always has a greater degree of scrutiny and I don't think that's very fair.
Kevin didn't provide any evidence.
We ain't at Kevin's site. We're at Mark's. And Mark opened a 'discussion' of something by presenting it as a fait acompli that he had 'proved' it wrong. Did he? Did Mark actually do anything to prove something? He provided a link to snopes - which apparently doesn't actually disprove more than two of the sixteen things on Kevin's list. That's not 'many'.
There was no work to it at all
No? You think you should have been the one doing it? Did you visit the link I provided that 'proved' Mark wrong? What did you think about the work needed to do that?
The list in the image is very dishonest
Really? Two of the sixteen not true (and there is debate about those as well), and you think the list is dishonest?
Maybe it's just something personal with him that bugs you.
Years of his BS antics......
and there is debate about those as well
Oh no, GD, don't tell me you have gone birther as well.
I put up the one link with a hyperlinked list rather than cutting and pasting each individual one because I actually thought it would be easier to have all the lies about the president in one list for future reference. For whatever reason (well, I know why, actually, and so do you:)), you thought that was more work.
As Eric aptly points out (thanks Eric and...I'm sorry), it takes a few second and barely a scroll to cross reference the image's list with the falsehoods. Now, my question is why doesn't this image (and Kevin) get the same sort of scrutiny? Where's the call to back up the evidence now, eh?
Here's another link that demonstrates that several of these items are false.
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/clueless-columbo/
Post a Comment