Also, do you realize how “I’ve been on FR longer than you have” (#46) comes across to most people as sounding?
The use of newbie to silence those one disagrees with is one of the aspects of FR that is childish. It makes no argument. It has the same persuasive value as calling those one disagrees with DUmmies or trolls. It’s the mentality of children on the playground.
Whether Obama’s first words were a flub or a response to a pause by Roberts is arguable. The “faithfully” problem was initiated by Roberts. If it helps you to believe that Obama’s to blame for Roberts skipping “faithfully,” fine.
I despise Obama as much as anyone on FR. I just think there’s no need to lambaste him over this. It discredits us all in any other criticism of Obama. And I’m not alone among Freepers in that conclusion. So accuse all of them of being Obamabots, why don’t you?
To conclude from my disagreement over whether Obama should be attacked for the way the oath was flubbed that I am simply defending Obama is a like using a nuclear bomb to kill a fly. If you want to disagree with me on this point, fine.
Where have I said that?
The real question here is, When are YOU going to realize that FR Posters are individuals and that when you are carrying on arguments with multiple people on one thread, you can't just take something said by one person you disagree with and falsely attribute it to every other person who is disagreeing with you?
whether Obama should be attacked for the way the oath was flubbed
Attack? Once again: in that post of mine you first flamed, I was merely defending Roberts from people who seemed to put the blame squarely on him. My defense of Roberts was that there were flubs by BOTH men, and I pointed out how Obama's early interruption seemed to fluster Roberts. If that equates in your mind to my "attacking Obama," well, then ...... how your mind processes data and draws conclusions is not my responsibility.