You are so full of it.

I WANT PEOPLE TO READ MY POST!

If they read it they will see it is a quote from my text.

You attack the poster because you can't refute his comments.

You attack the author because you can't refute his comments.

The impotency of your position is made clear by your wild off-base attack.

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

Quoting your own text comes AFTER the act was done.
Not before...

And I challenged you to show ANYWHERE where you have used that "technique" before.
Predictably, no response...

And like I said, you dishonestly claimed you were answering MY question.
That was YOUR claim.
But what you really did was turn around and answer YOUR OWN question, when you were claiming to answer mine?


You're ignoring the REAL point.
You CLAIM an "attack on the poster" when it's you or Corsi, IGNORING the fact that people are JUST SPEAKING FACTUALLY about the situation.
But when Corsi attacks the president, it is NOT FACTUAL. It's a lie. A claim without substantiation.

The "Boy Who Cried Wolf" could come on here and insist that Bush did wrong in the Plame affair, and you'd use his history to refute him.
But when it's an attack on Obama, the legitimacy of the claim is ASSUMED...

One standard for Scott McClellan's criticism of the president.
Another for any criticism of Obama, which must be presumed accurate regardless of the source.
Amazing how that works...


As has been previously been pointed out, BOTH his comments AND his character have been refuted.
YOU CANNOT substantiate his claims, so you IGNORE that aspect and instead make inaccurate assessments of what has really gone on.

If I admitted I did everything you've said, as you allege and for the reasons you have stated, then what?

Could we then get to the matter of Corsi's findings or will you continue to twist and shout?

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

His claims have already been brought up, but you don't want to talk about what's already been said.
To label them as "findings" presumes their accuracy, when he's obviously not a trustworthy source.

Let's get a snapshot of the situation, shall we?

Corsi Wrote a Book Saying Bush's "Globalist Agenda" Is Leading to a North American Union. "The real reason behind President Bush's push for immigration reform, says author Jerome R. Corsi, is to unite the United States, Mexico and Canada by erasing borders and creating a "North American Union."
Expected response: Bush Bashing... Where's your proof!

Corsi Wrote a Book Disagreeing With Most Scientists That There is a Limit to Oil. "All his life, Jerome Corsi's been told that we're running out of oil. "I remember driving with my dad in a 1952 Plymouth and listening to him talk about the end of oil," says the 59-year-old New Jersey author. "Hasn't happened yet, and it's not going to happen." What makes him so sure? He doesn't buy the fossil fuel theory--that oil comes from dead plants and dinosaurs. He believes it comes out of the ground naturally, and that there's more coming up all the time...
Expected response: Where's your scientific basis?

This is curious in that the volume has a second author, but Jerome Corsi has dropped from the marketing because he has been revealed as the author of religiously bigoted remarks published on a Web site. Corsi not only considers Muslims to be pederasts, but he took the trouble to slam Catholic priests and refers to the pope as senile.
Expected response: Religion bashing. Where's the proof?

Attacks on Kerry or Obama?
Response: It's all part of the process and questioning the author's credibility is "bashing" him, which should not happen. His claims must be disproven, instead of proven.

In an exhaustive 41-page PDF document entitled Unfit for Publication -- a riff on Corsi's 2004 Unfit for Command, which targeted John Kerry -- the campaign documents every false claim they have been able to find in Corsi's current tome. No matter how small the error, including the year the Obamas married, the campaign has taken time to correct the record.

Clearly, the cumulative effect is meant as a kind of rhetorical "shock and awe" campaign against Corsi, who is described in the prelude of Unfit for Publication as "a discredited, fringe bigot" who "believes that President Bush is trying to merge the United states with Mexico and Canada," in addition to holding other conspiracy theories.

"Corsi has penned a litany of bigoted, hateful comments-- crossing the line so thoroughly that even the right-wing operatives behind Swift Boat Veterans for Truth disavowed him. This is a man who smears the Catholic Church, calls the Pope 'senile,' and regularly demeans public servants in vile sexual and racial terms," the document reads. "In short, his record of attacks is disgusting and false, and so is this book."

And then comes the table of contents.

Overall, the response memo was produced in a comprehensively media-savvy style meant to inspire more critical coverage of Corsi's book, and perhaps a few giggles at the author's expense, as well. The document's satirical cover carries a seal next to Corsi' picture that reads: "Brought To You By Bush/Cheney Attack Machine," and a quote from Joe Klein's Time.com blog post calling The Obama Nation "poisonous crap."

As for the content of the Obama camp's rebuttals, they also appear comprehensive. After a short section excerpting Corsi's bad reviews thus far, the bulk of the document is a section dedicated to the book's falsehoods. And the inaccuracies in Corsi's book appear vast indeed, from the small and quotidian to the large and substantive.

Obama Campaign Punches Back Hard Against Corsi Smears


http://obama.3cdn.net/a74586f9067028c40a_5km6vrqwa.pdf
The document includes about 30 pages of factual inaccuracies of Corsi's deception.
One of the really repugnant things about this whole thing is how people will "defend" Corsi's work WITHOUT actually defending him.
Trying to pretend the rebuttal is somehow "invalid" just because the "witnesses" character is exposed as an extremist nut-bag is ridiculous when the opposition REFUSES TO ADDRESS the question of whether the author actually is an "extremist nut-bag"...

Anybody who wants to test the "objectivity" of the back-handed Corsi "defense" squad can compare and contrast their statements made here against the statements on the "McClellan" thread.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/new...ite-house.html

If all you can talk about are Corsi's previous books doesn't that mean you can't find any inaccuracies in this one?

And are you one of Obama's "paid bloggers?"

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

I'll take this to mean you aren't even reading what's already been posted.
In the VERY FIRST FEW POSTS, there were listed items which Corsi just plain lied about.
The links include other items.
Since then, I've posted this which I expect to go primarily ignored...
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/pol...html#post37497

You're obviously not interested in the truth...

You don't get it?

An 18 year old can understand the difference!

One is trying to become POTUS. The other wrote a book that you can take or leave if you don't like it.

If you can't see the difference then maybe Corsi should be the Democratic nominee.

Hell, I don't believe a grown man can't tell the difference!

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

When Babe Ruth retired his home run record stood for 39 years. But few realize he also set the record for numbers of times he struck out.

With a career average of .342 he got a hit about three times out of every ten at bats.

If Corsi got 3 things right out of every ten of his findings he'd be on a better average than the legendary Ruth.

But because you haven't read the book you can't really criticize it.

So I strongly suggest that you STFU.

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

Talk about COMPLETELY ignoring the context of what TristanRobin was ACTUALLY talking about, and then running full tilt with your own strawman argument...


"IF"????
You don't have any clue, do you...

A minute ago you were insisting people prove him wrong.
And when it FINALLY sunk in that you already were given that proof, suddenly you're switching from "You can't disprove him" to "there's a possibility he was right about something"...

Unbe-freakin-lievable!


Have you read it?


I think it has been you who has been silenced in this discussion.
Others have pointed out what the book HAS said, and where it was LYING.

You have no counter. You just went from PRESUMING it was truth, to this pathetic "maybe it's got a couple things right" approach...

And now you're doing what you've been seen to do dozens of times you got owned. You switch to arrogant posturing while ignoring the issue...

You don't even have the courage or honesty to respond to the post where Corsi's lies were pointed out!
No matter.
I can simply repost the link of the post that you couldn't handle... http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/pol...html#post37497