yep, being gullible idiots is a rightwinger strong suit

[Mytzlplk]

and one of the few things they do well, unlike with their lying. That requires intelligence, and that they do get away with -- you guessed it -- goes right back to the gullibility of rightwingners.

Earlier this week and after much hype, Big Government’s Editor at Large Ben Shapiro unveiled a video of a young Barack Obama praising and hugging late Harvard Law Professor Derrick Bell. Shapiro claimed the video was purposefully hidden by supporters of Obama in 2008, citing a few seconds of video they released from a lecture given by Harvard Law Professor Charles Ogletree, in which he joked, “we hid this during the 2008 election.”

Shapiro and other conservative media figures like Fox News’ Sean Hannity took Ogletree’s obfuscation claims seriously, even though Ogletree laughed as he said it, as did the rest of the audience. This can be seen in the video posted on Breitbart TV, and even more so in the full lecture.

Indeed, today, Ogletree told the Boston Herald that the line was clearly meant as a joke:

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/09/441611/breitbart-olgetree-joke/

 

[justoffal]

Think about this for a minute

How do you train circus animals?

Why you feed them when they do what they are told.

Now think about this for a minute

The EBT crowd votes for Obama and ...he feeds them!

 

[Mytzlplk]

why would I care to think about your transparent and pathetic dodge of the material facts you won't address that I posted about?

Were you one that bought into the garbage rebutted, leaving you little but the deflection and projection that is dripping off that garbage, given you couldn't overcome the compulsion to post something, anything, regardless of the cost?

I know, that assumes that successfully prosecuted indictments of your motives and product result in any meaningful costs, which is a "MY BAD!", given my awareness that things like embarrassment, shame, etc are no impediment for the modern gullible rightwinger that must have an equal amount of denial on hand at all times...

I've likely been one of BHO worst, or best, depending on how you look at it, critics, for a long time now, but this post has nothing to do with BHO, but rather the specifics of a very narrow case that impacts him tangentially because of lying rightwing hacks.

Given you couldn't figure that out and went off on that tangent, or in the equally unflattering alternative already explored, I don't see how you can think you're in possession of enough intelligence, wisdom, or integrity, to be trying to turn this all aound on me.

you've failed quite miserably at the effort, as I'm sure the readers can see

 

[justoffal]

Because everyone enjoys the circus!

 

[TomFitz]

I don't know what that meant. (what's EBT anyway?).


How does that change the fact that Fox Noise spent two days hyping and "expose" (and many loyal wingers hyped it here too), only to discover that the big scandal they were "unveiling" was a joke?

Plus, this isn't the first time they've done this, either?

Is the Fox audience that stupid and that gullible?????

We already know that Limbaugh thinks HIS audience is. That's why he attacked the President for sending troops to Uganda to fight the Lord's Liberation Army. He either assumed that this brutal warlord was a righteous christian, or he knew what Kona really was and counted on the stupidity of his audience to sell his dishonest attack.

Either way, it's a reflection on both Limbaugh and his followers, just as Fox peddling a joke as serious evidence in an "expose" reflects on how they believe that they can sucker their audience.

 

[Mytzlplk]

well said tom

 

[worldlymrb]

It's obvious Breitbart was the first victim of the NDAA in a three pronged attack that include, termination with a heart attack gun, bribing his close associates at Breitbart.com, and threatening his children in front of his wife.

That was not the video Brietbart was going to show. Also, in a video at CPAC where this video first came to light, Breitbart said he was going to release this video around election time.

 

[Norkalein]

and one of the few things they do well, unlike with their lying. That requires intelligence, and that they do get away with -- you guessed it -- goes right back to the gullibility of rightwingners.

Earlier this week and after much hype, Big Government’s Editor at Large Ben Shapiro unveiled a video of a young Barack Obama praising and hugging late Harvard Law Professor Derrick Bell. Shapiro claimed the video was purposefully hidden by supporters of Obama in 2008, citing a few seconds of video they released from a lecture given by Harvard Law Professor Charles Ogletree, in which he joked, “we hid this during the 2008 election.”

Shapiro and other conservative media figures like Fox News’ Sean Hannity took Ogletree’s obfuscation claims seriously, even though Ogletree laughed as he said it, as did the rest of the audience. This can be seen in the video posted on Breitbart TV, and even more so in the full lecture.

Indeed, today, Ogletree told the Boston Herald that the line was clearly meant as a joke:

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/09/441611/breitbart-olgetree-joke/

It's very easy to say something in all seriousness ... and then say it was a joke ... no harm, no foul, right? I highly doubt Obama's performance at Harvard was a joke. But, calling it a joke and laughing about the reaction is a very easy way to excuse inappropriate behavior.

 

[Mytzlplk]

who said anything about his performance at harvard being a joke?

nobody, which makes that a pretty transparent dodge, and nothing more, unless of course it's indicative of reading comp problems

here, let me help -- the "joke" was the claim that the tape was hidden

apparently there are some similarities between their problem and yours

 

[Norkalein]

who said anything about his performance at harvard being a joke?

nobody, which makes that a pretty transparent dodge, and nothing more, unless of course it's indicative of reading comp problems

here, let me help -- the "joke" was the claim that the tape was hidden

apparently there are some similarities between their problem and yours

Okay ... so the "joke" was with the tape. Was it also a joke that Obama demonstrating at Harvard? Regardless, since the tape just now surfaced, I don't believe it was a joke. I suspect it actually was hidden.

Out of curiousity, why do all your responses have to be a personal attack? Is it too difficult to attack the post instead of the poster?

 

[Mytzlplk]

it didn't just now surface, unless you wanna call the scum Brightfart reintroducing it "just now surfacing"

why do you always have your facts wrong while holding an unreasonable expectation that your abilities to read and understand plain and simple english and woefully lacking knowledge base likely due directly to your reading comp problems, while thinking that my pointing those things out is a "personal attack". And why did you change the subject to BHO allegedly "joking about hugging Bell" when that was neither the issue nor was it seen in the material I provided? Are you dishonest, or merely incompetent?

they're obvious -- much like your silly claim here that the tapes "just now surfaced" when it has been in the public record as I recall, since 2007 or so..

you apparently don't know much of anything about the topic, and think I have nothing better to do than to educate you while I have a debate or conversation I have no interest in having with you

and will avoid in the future, if this is the best you can do

 

[Norkalein]

it didn't just now surface, unless you wanna call the scum Brightfart reintroducing it "just now surfacing"

why do you always have your facts wrong while holding an unreasonable expectation that your abilities to read and understand plain and simple english and woefully lacking knowledge base likely due directly to your reading comp problems, while thinking that my pointing those things out is a "personal attack". And why did you change the subject to BHO allegedly "joking about hugging Bell" when that was neither the issue nor was it seen in the material I provided? Are you dishonest, or merely incompetent?

they're obvious -- much like your silly claim here that the tapes "just now surfaced" when it has been in the public record as I recall, since 2007 or so..

you apparently don't know much of anything about the topic, and think I have nothing better to do than to educate you while I have a debate or conversation I have no interest in having with you

and will avoid in the future, if this is the best you can do

It's obvious you drank the kool-aid. Please do ignore me.

 

[Mytzlplk]

yet, after being shown to be factually in error, attempting to inject BS into that was neither explicit or even implied in an effort to change the subject -- meaning you dodged the one posed -- all you have left is more baseless claims you can provide no material support for, like one described thus has any credibility on which to even build such a case, much less evidence to sustain it.

Hollow declarations aren't indicative of anything but the dishonesty and/or hollowness of the head that makes them

thanks for making my case for me