"The Secret Service is investigating a Maryland man who held a sign reading 'Death to Obama' and 'Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids' outside a town hall meeting this week."

Lovely.

And the right keeps trying to tell us these are all just little old blue hairs concerned about being cut loose on an iceberg when the time comes?

Rawdog is so dishonest! They took an ABC news story and removed all context.

Rawstory says "White House officials are "privately admitting concern" for President Barack Obama's safety as incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket in the midst of the country's heated health care debate.

That's the word from an ABC News report"

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

ONe again-

Rawstory- ABC reports "incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket"

Actual ABC report- "President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats"

Nobody minded when Bush was on the receiving end of all of this. It's par for the course.

Here's what it says at your ABC link...

"Fear for Obama's Safety Grows as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash

Violent Signs, Gun, Standoff Latest in Emerging Anger Towards the President"

So really, the only difference is the sentence about the daily threat matrix.

Nobody minded when Bush was on the receiving end of all of this. It's par for the course.

#4 | Posted by mysterytoy

What an unexpected response.

It isn't my link Sana, it is the story Rawstory claims to be reporting on.

Rawstory- ABC reports "incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket"

Actual ABC report- "President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats"

Either threats are skyrocketing or there is not increase. I would personally say a "skyrocket" would be a "sharp increase," wouldn't you?

"ABC reports 'incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket'"

I don't think that's what it says.

Sana,

It is exactly what it says:

White House officials are "privately admitting concern" for President Barack Obama's safety as incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket in the midst of the country's heated health care debate.

That's the word from an ABC News report that says racist groups are thriving on the backlash in some corners of the United States to a black president who is working overtime to overhaul the country's social safety system.

What's word from an ABC News report? People are worried because incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket in the midst of the country's heated health care debate.

The ABC Report, as the link shows, clearly says there as been no increase.

So you're choosing to ignore that the headline at the ABC link is:

"Fear for Obama's Safety Grows as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash

Violent Signs, Gun, Standoff Latest in Emerging Anger Towards the President"

You are being surprisingly disingenuous over this one, Kan.

The wording of the lead is not as precise as it should be... but the content is consistent.

Look, I am not saying the White House doesn't feel threats, I am saying Rawstory has taken one part of the ABC story and blown it out of proportion to jump on the bandwagon of reporting right wing violence.

Read the ABC headline, Kan.

The ABC report quotes memebers of the White House staff as having concern, however Obama has not increased securtiy, and the daily threat index has not increased. Rawstory is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Read the ABC headline, Kan.

I did read it, but I also read the STORY with it. If the headline had all the needed information, then there wouldn't be all those words after it.

OK.

It's all just shit that I'm making up, really. . .

"I think the president has, in effect, triggered fears amongst fairly large numbers of white people in this country that they are somehow losing their country, that the battle is lost,"

This is the card they are trying to play with this story.

So somebody close to Obama is more fearful for him now than they were prior to now...OK, who fucking cares? If the SS says there is no sharp increase, then why is this a story?

No knock on you for posting it, San, because that's what the retort is about, but why the heck is ABC pretending there's something more to be fearful of if the SS says there isn't?

Nogov,

according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service

A guy with a book to sell? That is whose word you are taking?

This is the card they are trying to play with this story.

#17 | Posted by kanrei at

Well now why would they do that???

"including an alleged plot by white supremacists in Tennessee late last year to rob a gun store, shoot 88 black people, decapitate another 14 and then assassinate the first black president in American history."

This is the card they are trying to play with this story.

#17 | Posted by kanrei

Sure thing.

That's why the ABC headline is considerably more graphic than Rawstory's.

You want to quibble over some wording while ignoring the fact that the content and thrust of the stories are identical.

I don't really have anything else to say to you about it.

If the SS says there is no sharp increase, then why is this a story?

Thank you. Obama also does not feel there is a risk.

While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats, White House officials privately admit deep concern and have told the Secret Service to keep security tight, even if Obama objects.

So, basically, a White House staff memeber is worried, told the Secret Service they were worried, then called ABC news and that is news? Rawstory sees this line, removes context, then runs a story to make it seem like Obama is under the gun 24/7.

This is the card they are trying to play with this story.

#17 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-08-14 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag

Which is exactly the card that people on the right side of the aisle claimed would be played prior to the Obama election. All jokes, criticisms, and complaints will be viewed from a racial context...Nobody thought it would be any different.

The media, and Obama supporters are attempting (succesfully I might add) to make every single thing about race, as usual.

I don't really have anything else to say to you about it.

You really haven't had much to say this thread. You keep harping on a headline while I give you the story which does not support the headline.

Kanrei v Rogue?

:*(

Stop it, you two.

...while I give you the story which does not support the headline.

#24 | Posted by kanrei

The stories are identical. Quibble away.

Hag,
Headlines are NEVER written by the person who writes the story. The headline's only purpose is to attract readers to keep reading. It seems most people here seem to think the headline contains all the information needed to understand a story.

This is probably BS.. most of these stories originate from the same source, the Southern Poverty Law Center, that essentially thinks most white people are racist lunatics, and if they oppose an OBama policy, it could only be because of race.

They keep handing out these statements that simply aren't supported by any factual evidence.

Sana,
They are far from the same as Rawstory omits the part about no rise in daily threats which is the key to the story. They claim threats are "skyrocketing" while the SS says there has been "no sharp increase." How do you define "skyrocketing" if not as "a sharp increase?"

Will you answer or just say "but the headline" again?

"Stop it, you two."

Flame away guys and pass the popcorn.

It seems most people here seem to think the headline contains all the information needed to understand a story.

#27 | Posted by kanrei

#26

Will you answer or just say "but the headline" again?

#29 | Posted by kanrei

Forget the headline. Rawstory didn't say ABC said "skyrocketing", they said ABC said "WH officials worry". So if you want to claim Rawstory sexed up their headline, fine.

The fact remains, the content of both stories are identical in citing examples of what has been going on.

#26

#31 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-08-14 03:04 PM |

#29

Rawstory didn't say "skyrocketing?"

White House officials are "privately admitting concern" for President Barack Obama's safety as incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket in the midst of the country's heated health care debate

That's the word from an ABC News report

Then what, pray tell, is "the word from an ABC news report" when they say "that's the word?"

"While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats, White House officials privately admit deep concern and have told the Secret Service to keep security tight, even if Obama objects."

What whitehouse official has the authority to order the secret service to do anything, and even over the objections of the President?

What whitehouse official has the authority to order the secret service to do anything, and even over the objections of the President?

#35 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

The Chief of Staff.

Is this the "Shut up, Little Man" thread of the day?

Then what, pray tell, is "the word from an ABC news report" when they say "that's the word?"

#34 | Posted by kanrei

Uhm, the part they put in quotation marks?

What whitehouse official has the authority to order the secret service to do anything, and even over the objections of the President?

#35 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-08-14 03:08 PM | Reply

The new SoS, Bill Clinton?

The Chief of Staff.
#36 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Who else? The article says "officials".

I guess the deputy chief of staff, right?

The new SoS, Bill Clinton?
#39 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Ouch.

Look at it this way... given the premise that the threat matrix has not increased, one story leads with:

Report: Obama's life at risk in health care battle

the other one:

Fear for Obama's Safety Grows as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash

From that point on, the stories are identical.

Sana,
We have actually already agreed on my main point and have gotten into a "last word wins" competition. Rawstory is sensationalizing the ABC report. Can we end it there?

Rawstory is sensationalizing the ABC report. Can we end it there?
#43 | Posted by kanrei

So if you want to claim Rawstory sexed up their headline, fine.
#32 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Not another word from either of you.

#44 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-08-14 03:16 PM |

Fine =(

Party pooper

I feel like the five year old getting upset watching his parents argue about how well the dishes were done and who's turn it was to do them.

I can't help it when I see a headline that doesn't match. I called a "Sleep journal" the other day and got on them because a headline said a study proved something that the article said it didn't. I called the author of the story and raised Hell. She admitted it wasn't the headline she sent in, but the Editor changed it to a more eye catching one.

I feel like chewing bubble gum and kicking some serious ass. Guess what bitches, I'm all out of bubble gum...

Sometimes I feel like a nut...
Sometimes I don't

"While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats ..."

"Since Mr Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service."

Which ones are the liars? The "Officials" or the "Secret Service"?

Whichever one it is, if not both, they are liars at the Whitehouse

Sheesh, these idiots are so easy!

I'm all out of bubble gum...

#48 | Posted by 101Chairborne

*Hands 101 some chicle in the name of world peace.

I can't help it when I see a headline that doesn't match.

#47 | Posted by kanrei

And for some reason, that discrepancy was more important than the actual content of the article, the incidents it discussed, and the reasons behind them. Disturbing stuff that got completely shit on because you wanted to throw a hissy over the way Rawstory wrote its lead.

Should we make this thread all about Tad before he does or should we let him have some fun?

My G-d Sana, you can't let shit lie! You have to get that last fighting word in. You couldn't read "Sana, We have actually already agreed on my main point and have gotten into a "last word wins" competition. Rawstory is sensationalizing the ABC report. Can we end it there?" and just say OK. YOu had to jab again and again. You are pathetic sometimes and this is one of those time.

You are pathetic sometimes and this is one of those time.

#54 | Posted by kanrei

Ditto.

You are pathetic sometimes and this is one of those time.

#54 | Posted by kanrei

Ditto.

#55 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-08-14 03:25 PM | Reply

You're both being a couple of Monroes for fucks sake.

For the record, the story is sensationalized bullshit, according to the only line in the ABC article that matters..."President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats".

101 lies down with dogs, "Ditto."

Well, which one is the 'truth'? That the Secret Service has the 'threat assessment up 400%, or Whitehouse 'Officials' saying that it hasn't increased significantly?

Why not address that point, rather than join in to make me the 'subject', like some Yellow-Dog is impelled to do?

Say! You're not some stalking horse for Leftists, are you?

RIF.org Tad. 101 didn't say "Ditto," Sana did and 101 quoted him.

"Say! You're not some stalking horse for Leftists, are you?"

Well I've always thought that Chair was a stalking horse for leftists. That's clear from his post history.

#57 | Posted by tadowe

SOMEone's a little confused again today.

Well, then very sorry, 101. My mistake entirely in this instance. Just being heuristic about all the other times, and acting like a reflexive, Yellow-dog jerk ...

Mea culpa.

Null plays dumb, "Well I've always thought that Chair was a stalking horse for leftists. That's clear from his post history."

"For," dogbreath, not against ...

Well, then very sorry, 101. My mistake entirely in this instance. Just being heuristic about all the other times, and acting like a reflexive, Yellow-dog jerk ...

Mea culpa.

#61 | Posted by tadowe at 2009-08-14 03:46 PM | Reply |

Apology accepted you cunt.

Well, then very sorry, 101. My mistake entirely in this instance. Just being heuristic about all the other times, and acting like a reflexive, Yellow-dog jerk ...

Mea culpa.

#61 | Posted by tadowe at 2009-08-14 03:46 PM | Reply |

Apology accepted you cunt.

#63 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-08-14 03:47 PM |

Fucking Hillarious!

Go take a nap Tadly.

101 demonstrates how to save face, "Apology accepted you cunt."

While I dote on the 'results' such mistakes provide me in experiencing chagrin. Thanks, 101.

While I dote on the 'results' such mistakes provide me in experiencing chagrin. Thanks, 101.

#66 | Posted by tadowe

Boy, ya'll sure must have a whole lotta that there chagrin stuff.

Sanan asserts, "Boy, ya'll sure must have a whole lotta that there chagrin stuff."

All through my life, Sanan. It reminds me that ego is nothing more than a 'fight-flight' monitor suffering from hubris.

However, I doubt that you understand what I just said ...

However, I doubt that you understand what I just said ...

#68 | Posted by tadowe

Unnerstan whut? Noboddies so smart as ewe Unkle Tadly. Thas why we'uns jes werships at yer feets cuz ewe nowes it all!

I noticed, though, that 101 avoided answering this contretemps:

"While officials told ABC News that the President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats ..."

Which seems to be in contradiction to:

"Since Mr Obama took office, the rate of threats against the president has increased 400 per cent from the 3,000 a year or so under President George W. Bush, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service."

Which ones are the liars? The "Officials" or the "Secret Service"?

Whichever one it is, if not both, there are liars at the Whitehouse ...

I'd expect the Leftists to misdirect the subject into being the messenger, as they have. I would also expect a stalking horse to avoid answering, if they were actually leftist activists, playing at being a rightwinger ...

All of which is On Point ...

All of which is On Point ...

#70 | Posted by tadowe

Well, not really "on point" since most everyone accepted that the "no increase in threat matrix" statement was accurate. And since 101 never made any argument to the contrary, I guess that begs the questions...

What the hell are you talking about?

Stupid,
Are you under the mistaken impression that I believe Obama is in some kind of added danger? Did #18 confuse you?

What are you going on and on about, dickbag? Keep it short and to the point. The first mention of this being all about you and I'll slap your vagina off of you.

Sanan in the forest, "What the hell are you talking about?"

Well, then you are agreeing that the Secret Service agent was the liar when he said that the threat status had increased 400%.

Unless you think a 400% increase is not a 'significant' increase? Is that the 'forest' you can't see through? You think that percentage is ignorable, a trifle?

#73 | Posted by tadowe

Up the dosage on the Aricept.

One person interjected the report on the 400% increase. Go find him if you want to discuss that.

It is not the topic of discussion, nor the point of the article referenced at the top of the thread.

This thread is a classic example of how Tad injects himself into a thread and makes it about him by attacking any and everyone until someone reponds and then blames them for responding. Notice in #70 where, after apologizing to 101 for being wrong, continues his assult as if he never was wrong.

There are some amazing similarities between Tadly and Eddie.

Sanan admits, "It is not the topic of discussion, nor the point of the article referenced at the top of the thread."

The topic leads the inference that the Whitehouse is chock full of liars attempting to direct attention onto the rightwing as a threat to America by conflating them with terrorism.

The goal is to discredit any rightwing, conservative or Republican disagreement by defaming that as coming from 'terrorists.'

It is an active effort of the Whitehouse, the yellow-dogs of this site, and Democrats in general to lie for votes and to advance their utopian ideal of communism via the perfection of socialism ...

their utopian ideal of communism via the perfection of socialism ...

ROFLMAO! I love people who seem to think Communism and Socialism are interchangeable.

101 has a personal grudge against me, and I enjoy that display of obsession, and take the opportunity to notice that effort when I can. After all, 101 takes whatever opportunity he sees to give me some 'orders' or call me some 'name.'

Tit-for-tat, is quite enjoyable for me (as I am sure it is for 1010.) And, when it spurs defense of 101 by the Yellow-dogs of the Democrat party?

I'm platz with natches over the whole situation!

The Democrats are liars and being more than just obvious about it! It provides thrills for me to see all the obsessed who try to misdirect that into being all-about-me ...

Kanrei with me as the subject, "ROFLMAO! I love people who seem to think Communism and Socialism are interchangeable."

Well, you are correct: socialism can't become communism, because socialism will become tyranny before the 'perfect communist democracy' can ever be achieved.

I should say, in that regard, that Democrats are stupid to believe that their socialistic efforts will EVER result in some utopian ideal of that ideology!

Stupid, as well as liars ...

being all-about-me ...

#79 | Posted by tadowe at 2009-08-14 04:47 PM |

Exactly.

Jerry says, "Exactly."

Dam! I expected 101 to come in his pants, as he says, "... first mention of this being all about you and I'll slap your vagina off of you."

Instead, a pussy replies ...

101 must need some Viagra to get it up, what?

All this worrying and nary a word or a peep when Bush was the target.

------

ROFLMAO! I love people who seem to think Communism and Socialism are interchangeable.

#78 | Posted by kanrei

Maybe it's a pick 'em!

Rawstory- ABC reports "incidents of attempted or threatened violence against the president skyrocket"

Actual ABC report- "President's daily threat matrix has yet to reflect a sharp increase in threats"

#3 | Posted by kanrei

Enough with the facts already :o) !!

But I thought swine flu, global warming and carbon footprints were going to kill us all! Why should anyone be more concerned about the elected?

Even the people that hate Obama, because he is a non-American, fascist, corporate puppet, don't want him dead. Because then we would have Biden, and Hillary. Fuck that noise!

dont have to read this thread either as I know what liberal fucks will say

EVERY president has had kooks and idiots and assasins to deal with..

andrew jackson had a guy just walk up to him and put a bullit in him and truman walked out side while living across the street from the white house as it was being renovated and two men tried to shoot him
to say that there is a spike in that threat now because americans are calling the president what he is...A FUCKIN LIAR....is more democrat bullshit nonsense..

God bless the secret service.........keep him and his family safe...

Even the people that hate Obama, because he is a non-American, fascist, corporate puppet, don't want him dead. Because then we would have Biden, and Hillary. Fuck that noise!

#86 | Posted by JeffnDenmark at 2009-08-15 04:57 AM

"non-American"?

"we"?

You fled like a pussy.

You've got nothing to say, Queef.

Main Entry: socialism
Pronunciation: ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Main Entry: communism
Pronunciation: ˈkm-yə-ˌni-zəm, -y-
Function: noun
Etymology: French communisme, from commun common
Date: 1840
1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

their utopian ideal of communism via the perfection of socialism ...

ROFLMAO! I love people who seem to think Communism and Socialism are interchangeable.

#78 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-08-14 04:43 PM | Reply

It's apparent you need the above definitions.

Communism is where they kick your door down and take your property out right.

Socialism, is where, they put their foot in the door, then slowly, like turning up the heat in the proverbial frog in the frying pan, create laws, that take away your rights and property.

"The goal of socialism is communism."
Vladimir Lenin