No, that's the point, you wouldn't. Look, do you hear me about the EESC guy, I still think his comments were bad because of the soundbite, I really have no idea if I would have read that in context and complete and just waived it outside or been more outraged then I am now, and it doesn't matter, because my view it tainted by the soundbite.
Actually I think the comment by the EESC guy wasn't great - he used what is a major, major ongoing disaster to point score. It is just that in his case stripping it of the context makes it look not just crass, which it is, but also dishonest. Limbaugh's comment is unchanged by context - in fact adding the context just reinforces it, making it worse and not better.
So no matter how you try to draw a parallel I don't see it at all. It is just misleading for you to go on about it.
You seem to be of the opinion that I was trying for a hit piece on the EESC president, and that for some strange reason I went ahead and posted the whole thing and talked about how it wasn't so bad in context, then suggested people dig up Rush's and see if it was similar.
nah, I think you just tried to confused the whole issue by banging on about something that carries no bearing on the original post.
MWAHAHAHA!!! You've seen through my sinister plan, er, or something! My whole goal was to prove that hyper-partisan blogs and sites and pundits are totally objective sources of information who never take things out of context, by pointing out one from my side of the aisle that took something rather out of context. Drat! Foiled again!
You should take some deep breaths and maybe lie down in a cool dark room. Or try to misrepresent me as well, if that is the kick you are on *shrugs* whatever floats your boat I guess.
Seriously, it does not behoove us to do these endless "X said this!" posts, all you get is people singing with the choir and even if what X said is shown to be wrong, or even right, nobody wants to change their mind. The point is that posters need to have those context with the original post, and if they can't find them, they shouldn't post it, because they don't even know if it is or isn't in context. At best they'll end up right for all the wrong reasons.
Perhaps you should have picked on a post where removing the context changed the thrust of the quote? Because this one seems bang to rights and all you did is misdirect in whatever your point proving was.
*MySmiley*
Robert Graves "There is no money in poetry, but then there is no poetry in money, either."
Henning Mankell "We must defend the open society, because if we start locking our doors, if we let fear decide, the person who committed the act of terror will win"
Robert Graves "There is no money in poetry, but then there is no poetry in money, either."
Henning Mankell "We must defend the open society, because if we start locking our doors, if we let fear decide, the person who committed the act of terror will win"
So, how many drugs is Rush Limbaugh actually on?
- 16/03/2011 08:30:25 AM
838 Views
Possibly different ones then the EESC president
- 16/03/2011 03:58:41 PM
732 Views
No one's blaming the earthquake or tsunami on global warming.
- 16/03/2011 04:22:52 PM
533 Views
Tsunami and climate change
- 17/03/2011 11:59:36 PM
681 Views
"Speakers were careful to point out that many findings still amounted only to hypotheses"
- 18/03/2011 01:31:44 PM
671 Views
Re: No one's blaming the earthquake or tsunami on global warming.
- 18/03/2011 12:25:01 PM
700 Views
Republican spin doctor Frank Luntz popularized "climate change" to make global warming appealing.
- 18/03/2011 01:56:01 PM
581 Views
A slightly misleading post
- 16/03/2011 07:41:46 PM
616 Views
Kind of missed the point there
- 16/03/2011 09:54:35 PM
619 Views
If you link the transcript I'll look at it.
- 16/03/2011 10:16:21 PM
491 Views
Re: If you link the transcript I'll look at it.
- 16/03/2011 10:44:56 PM
631 Views
" I can't help attaching, you know, political reaction to this". Yeah, we noticed....
- 16/03/2011 11:10:11 PM
653 Views
Re: " I can't help attaching, you know, political reaction to this". Yeah, we noticed....
- 16/03/2011 11:42:29 PM
482 Views
I've read the transcript
- 16/03/2011 10:34:41 PM
642 Views
Re: I've read the transcript
- 16/03/2011 10:46:42 PM
557 Views
You need to reread what I said
- 16/03/2011 10:49:45 PM
520 Views
No, I think you're still missing my point
- 16/03/2011 11:09:04 PM
598 Views
No. You don't get to say, "what he said doesn't matter because of how we learned of it".
- 16/03/2011 11:54:46 PM
547 Views
I think Republicans should stop using "legitimate". I do not think it means what they think it means
- 16/03/2011 04:11:14 PM
639 Views
there are enough carzies on the left to make things like this easy for Rush
- 16/03/2011 04:20:47 PM
584 Views
So it doesn't matter that no one said it as long as he can plausibly claim they did.
- 16/03/2011 06:58:17 PM
513 Views
well since it is taken out of context it is hard to say where Rush was going with it
- 16/03/2011 07:19:46 PM
618 Views
Um... he stated where he was going with it.
- 16/03/2011 07:30:02 PM
579 Views
At least you are not ashamed to use a double standard
- 16/03/2011 08:17:39 PM
525 Views
It's the same standard, whatever you choose to believe.
- 16/03/2011 09:08:01 PM
645 Views
I don't thinkit is as clear as you make it out to be
- 16/03/2011 09:31:53 PM
538 Views
It is not just "possible" he's talking about islands affected by global warming; he says it outright
- 16/03/2011 10:09:16 PM
696 Views
Sorry but I still fail to see how the islands he mention are a sign of what needs to be done
- 16/03/2011 10:27:20 PM
583 Views
Then you don't understand context and this whole discussion is pointless.
- 16/03/2011 11:28:47 PM
661 Views
lets throw a little context at asnd see if it matters
- 17/03/2011 12:12:03 AM
544 Views
Yes: It makes it worse.
- 17/03/2011 12:45:12 AM
552 Views
no it shows that the one statements was not meant to be taken literally
- 17/03/2011 02:47:55 AM
576 Views
At best, it shows he was joking about something he believes to be fact despite lacking evidence.
- 18/03/2011 02:24:45 PM
653 Views
so you finally agre that the context changes the meaning, took you long enough
- 18/03/2011 02:33:41 PM
531 Views