Obama 'Most Powerful Writer Since Julius Caesar,' Says NEA Chief

[Earthling]

...Stunning...Dumfoundedness

YOU'RE THE ONE WHO SAID THE ARTICLE WAS RIGHT TO CALL OBAMA "THE BEST AT WRITING"!

You called me wrong for saying that wasn't true. You can't even keep your ridiculous logic straight.

 

[Patroklos]

Are you saying there are 5 to 0 positive vs negative comments about Obama on this forum? If you make the positive = fanboy connection, it would be intellectually dishonest not to make the negative comment = crybaby connection

That of course is what is being measured, what is being measured is people accepting completely unfounded praise for Obama or denouncing Fox for not reporting the comment accurently on the quote despite them having been totally accurate to avoid having to repudiate a praise of Obama they know is absurd.

Anyone pointing out how stupid the quote is are just people who know history.

So again, we are currently at 5:0.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

That of course is what is being measured, what is being measured is people accepting completely unfounded praise for Obama or denouncing Fox for not reporting the comment accurently on the quote despite them having been totally accurate to avoid having to repudiate a praise of Obama they know is absurd.

Anyone pointing out how stupid the quote is are just people who know history.

So again, we are currently at 5:0.

Denouncing this Fox article is not the same as praising Obama. This thread is not this forum.

Well 0 out of 2 aint ... well, yes ... it is bad

By the way, am I one of those 5?

 

[RedRalph]

Patroklos can you please respond to my last post Re: churchill, Stalin, etc

 

[Mise]

@Patroklos: They don't want people to only read the headlines -- but they know that a great number of people will do exactly that. They know that a large number of people will read their headlines and jump to conclusions -- which is why they put headlines that denigrate Obama as much as possible. Surely you don't believe that Fox has no political bias against Obama? It's obvious to any impartial observer that this is exactly what Fox are doing by making headlines such as this -- preying on people who are too lazy to read the entire article and naive enough to believe their deliberately misleading headlines. You're absolutely right that it's wrong to just read the headlines and jump to conclusions, and I absolutely agree with you. But you know as well as I do that a large number of people do exactly that, and it's these people who Fox are attempting to sway with their headlines. The actual content of the article is more substantial, as you point out -- and it appeals to the sensibilities people who aren't lazy and who are erudite enough to read the entire thing.

The headlines is quite clearly misleading, and deliberately taken out of context, knowing that a large number of readers will believe that people are foolishly lavishing praise on Obama's writing skills, and comparing him to a brutal Roman dictator. Surely you can see these basic journalistic tactics?

 

[Patroklos]

...Stunning...Dumfoundedness

YOU'RE THE ONE WHO SAID THE ARTICLE WAS RIGHT TO CALL OBAMA "THE BEST AT WRITING"!

You called me wrong for saying that wasn't true. You can't even keep your ridiculous logic straight.

I did no such thing, I immediatley recognized that they were talking about powerful PEOPLE, and then said that regardless of the way you interpret it the quote is STILL stupid. But hey, go ahead and quote me saying that the article specifically says that Obama is a better writter than anyone since Julius Caesar. I dare you.

I then combined the two to prove that point by asking people to list people who were similarly powerful (as the author intended) and who were better writers than Obama (as FCF commented). There are many who meet both criteria.

Furthermore, I also took issue with people who claimed Fox was reporting as FCF concluded when any read of the article clearly shows that FCF was in error. This lead to a host of people ridiclously attacking the article and Fox while unwittingly admitting they never read the article in the OP.

 

[Patroklos]

Patroklos can you please respond to my last post Re: churchill, Stalin, etc

Sorry, I didn't think you wanted one. Just because you have immense power does not mean things always go your way. Fortune is a staight on wench in that regard. To use one of Landsmann's own references, I doubt Caesar considered his outcome of bleeding to death on the Senate floor from a hundred stab wounds to be the circumstances he was looking for despite his power, and I am sure Churchill considered his outcome a slight bit better than that.

 

[Earthling]

Ah, so you're claiming your problem wasn't that you didn't read the OP or the speech, but that you didn't read what other posters posted and in fact tried to contradict them saying the same things you "thought" you were saying the whole time.

I said this:

In short - the quote should be interpreted as "Obama is the most powerful person, who writes or is a writer, since Julius Caesar" - still an odd comparison, but it's not saying "Obama is the best at writing."

You said that my summary of the quote was "stupid" and a bad paraphrase. I, in fact, was directly discussing with frenchcivfan why the one interpretation of the quote was wrong. The only possible way your statement makes any sense, and wasn't some horrible attempt at trolling, is by saying that I was wrong, and the quote did mean "Obama was best at writing." So, whatever you thought you were saying, you clearly did imply that calling Obama "best at writing" was correct. Furthermore, you never called out any posters who seemed to be making that claim as well - for instance, appearing to agree with holycannoli saying this:

This article does imply that Obama is the best at writing. You guys are just interpreting it differently because Fox said it.

 

[RedRalph]

Sorry, I didn't think you wanted one. Just because you have immense power does not mean things always go your way. Fortune is a staight on wench in that regard. To use one of Landsmann's own references, I doubt Caesar considered his outcome of bleeding to death on the Senate floor from a hundred stab wounds to be the circumstances he was looking for despite his power, and I am sure Churchill considered his outcome a slight bit better than that.

But surely a good measure of power is how effectively you can move events in to your will. by that measurement Stalin was the most powerful of the big three, no one improved their position as much as he did. Plus he fairly effectively drove a wedge between the other two. I realise this isnt the thread for this sicussion, if you want we can take it to history.

 

[Patroklos]

By the way, am I one of those 5?

No, you have not rised to the challenge to refute the quote but have also not commented on the validity of the Fox critisism. I am not really sure what you have contributed to this thread.

I expected you to recognize the stupidty of the quote and I am sure you do, you just won't give me the satisfaction of seeing you say so.

"And Obama didn't create as many "hoplessly love sick internet fanboys" as "hoplessly election sick internet crybabies". Just look at threads in this very forum to see the ratio."

Yes, I didn't catch that. However, I am in no way interested in following you to arguements outside the scope of this thread.

 

[Patroklos]

Ah, so you're claiming your problem wasn't that you didn't read the OP, but that you didn't read what other posters posted and in fact tried to contradict them saying the same things you "thought" you were saying the whole time.

Seriously, SERIOUSLY, what the hell are you talking about. All I said was that no matter what position you are going to use, that of FCFs wrong paraphase (his OP post) or the actual sentiment of Landsmann (the article's quote and your link), THEY ARE BOTH WRONG AND RIDICLOUS ON THEIR FACE.

You said that my summary of the quote was "stupid" and a bad paraphrase.

No, I didn't.

1.) You didn't paraphrase, you linked to a direct quote, hense I did not acuse you of a paraphrase at all let alone a bad one. The paraphrasing was done my FCF in his OP comment.

2.) The stupidity of your quote [of Landsmann] has nothing to do with FCF's erronous comment, it is stupid in its own right.

I, in fact, was directly discussing with frenchcivfan why the one interpretation of the quote was wrong. The only possible way your statement makes any sense, and wasn't some horrible attempt at trolling, is by saying that I was wrong, and the quote did mean "Obama was best at writing."

The amount of mental gymnasitcs you just did above to arrive at the jumbled pile of bloddy twisted limbs on the mats that constitutes your position above is truely mind boggling.

I asked you to quote me doing any of the above things you accuse me of and you yet again fail to deliver. Quote me, or it didn't happen.

So, whatever you thought you were saying, you clearly did imply that calling Obama "best at writing" was correct. Furthermore, you never called out any posters who seemed to be making that claim as well - for instance, appearing to agree with holycannoli saying this:

I didn't realize I was on the hook for reply to or calling out every poster in every thread I ever participated in. As it is I DID call out FCF several times. But what you are really missing Earthling is that that while FCF's specific understanding of what was said is wrong, what Landsmann actually said is horrifically stupid regardless. You spent all this time arguing some stupid point on interrpretation instead of addressing this, which should tell you something.

 

[Earthling]

Let's try this one more time, the gist of discussion was like this:

-The quote means "Obama is best at writing"
-The quote means "Obama is best at writing"
-Uh, guys, that's not what the quote means in context
-Dur, Earthling is wrong

So now, you're in fact claiming what I already claimed earlier, when you said I was wrong. For the record, here's the quote:

Unfortunetly for you Earthling, this quote is even MORE stupid than the paraphrased one.

 

[Patroklos]

But surely a good measure of power is how effectively you can move events in to your will. by that measurement Stalin was the most powerful of the big three, no one improved their position as much as he did. Plus he fairly effectively drove a wedge between the other two. I realise this isnt the thread for this sicussion, if you want we can take it to history.

Yes, but that was after years of Churchill pushing through his will on the others. And that was also after being ousted via democratic processes as well. Some power is fleeting, especially if you are a British Prime Minister, but while you have that power...

 

[Patroklos]

The headlines is quite clearly misleading, and deliberately taken out of context, knowing that a large number of readers will believe that people are foolishly lavishing praise on Obama's writing skills, and comparing him to a brutal Roman dictator. Surely you can see these basic journalistic tactics?

Except regardless of the conclusion made, the one you are imagining all people will see and the one that the article clearly explains, both ARE foolishy lavishing praise on Obama. I don't think anyone really makes the Julius Caesar connection you mention. When I first saw Julius Caesar my first thought was why the hell Landsmann decided to use that person to bookend with.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

No, you have not rised to the challenge to refute the quote but have also not commented on the validity of the Fox critisism. I am not really sure what you have contributed to this thread.

I have provided the ridicule the thread yearns for. I think it's important to be able to relativate 'a quote' from 'someone' presented in a Fox thing. I think the headline is a little wonky, but that's as far as I go.

I expected you to recognize the stupidty of the quote and I am sure you do, you just won't give me the satisfaction of seeing you say so.

I did point out the quote uses cop-outs like: 'arguably', and 'if you accept this premise'. I did not withhold comment to rob you of any satisfaction. It's just not much of a quote, there's not much to comment on.

"If you accept I would be the most suitable person, I should be president of the EU." - Ziggy

Yes, I didn't catch that. However, I am in no way interested in following you to arguements outside the scope of this thread.

I followed you on the internet fabois actually, but it indeed is outside that scope

 

[Patroklos]

Let's try this one more time, the gist of discussion was like this:

Ah, I see you were not able to actually find a quote so you just made some up. You should be aware that doing so is against forum rules.

So now, you're in fact claiming what I already claimed earlier, when you said I was wrong. For the record, here's the quote:

Thats funny, I don't see anywhere in that quotation where I say you are wrong. What I say is that you are correct, that is the real quote, "but unfortunetly for you, this quote [Landsmann's] is even MORE stupid than the paraphrased one [FCF's OP comment]." Now admittedly the adjective more is a judgement call, and if you want to argue about which one is in fact more stupid whatever, but there is no denying the fact that they are both stupid.

The disconnect here is that you were trying to gotcha FCF. The problem is that your arguement boiled down to: Landsmann didn't say that stupid thing, he said THIS stupid thing! That will show you!!!

 

[Earthling]

Well, if you're not going to respond with regards to whether you were just trolling, calling me wrong when you apparently say you agreed with me the whole time, I'll ask this:

Did you ever call it "foolish" to say that Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, or previous American presidents, were the "leader of the free world?"

 

[Patroklos]

Did you ever call it "foolish" to say that Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, or previous American presidents, were the "leader of the free world?"

Bush, Yes. Clinton, Yes. Reagan, no. I wouldn't say it is so much foolish to do so in the post Cold War world, but the title does not carry anything even near the significance it did when there was an undisputed villian to rally against. People still like to envoke it like that undisputed villian still exists though, which is annoying. Technically the term still applies, even to Obama, and you can use it in some instances where it still makes sense but now its about the same as being Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire in 1798.

 

[Earthling]

Ah, I see you were not able to actually find a quote so you just made some up.

I already quoted frenchcivfan, holycannoli, and I then quoted you again.

Thats funny, I don't see anywhere in that quotation where I say you are wrong.

You're obviously not this incompetent, right? Just because you use a "synonym" or "typo" a word, doesn't mean you can later say you never said something with that meaning. You said my quote was "MORE stupid." You said I should "lose credibility." Any other reasonable poster could read that first page, and it was clear you quoted me to say I was wrong. If that isn't what you meant, it's your problem for not communicating it, but that's what was actually said.

The problem is that your arguement boiled down to: Landsmann didn't say that stupid thing, he said THIS stupid thing!

You completely fail to realize how important that is? You're ok with a journalist making up anything and putting words in someone's mouth, if they said some other "stupid thing?" I mean, say a politician makes a stupid gaffe on something silly, happens all the time, and it's then ok for an article to say "X politician supports child rape?" Then it's ok because "Well they said a weird thing anyway?"

 

[Karalysia]

Obama has been awarded Rookie of the Year by the NBA and will appear on the cover of a videogame.

WASHINGTON D.C. - President Obama said yesterday that he was “somewhat surprised and deeply humbled” by the decision of the National Basketball Association to name him recipient of the Eddie Gottlieb Trophy as the 2009-10 T-Mobile NBA Rookie of the Year. This is the fifty second time the President has been awarded or honored in the past five days.

A panel of 120 sportswriters and broadcasters throughout the United States and Canada unanimously decided Obama should receive the award. Sources close to the panel say the foresight displayed by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee inspired them to preemptively give Obama the award before the 09-10 season started.

At last night’s impromptu ceremony NBA Commissioner David Stern said, “Obama will make a fine Rookie of the Year, and the fact he has never played in the NBA should only serve as an inspirational example of just how far hoping for change can carry someone.”
Video game manufacturer 2K Sports now plans on featuring Obama on the cover of its NBA 2K10 video game.

2K 10 will feature all 30 NBA team, plus one additional team consisting of only Obamas.

Before the ink could dry on the headlines of Obama’s Rookie of the Year award, there was word that the President had received yet another honor. This time he was chosen to grace the cover of the popular video game NBA 2K10. According to a press release issued by 2K Sports, the company felt potential customers would be drawn in by Obama’s message. Meaning they hope his presence on the cover would persuade gamers to change their preference for the rival basketball game, EA’s NBA Live.

While the thought of being so highly regarded and adored by the world over might seem appealing, it does not come without a price. As a practical matter Obama’s mantle is rumored to be on the verge of collapse under the weight of the countless trophies, medals, and awards etc. he has received over the past couple of days. While the mantle space shortage at the White House is troublesome, it pales in comparison to the shortage of time on Obama’s calender for all of the award shows and photo shoots. Since last Friday alone, the President has attended thirty eight awards ceremonies in his honor all over the world.

The President’s absence has led White House staffers to jokingly refer to Air Force 1 as the “White House in the sky,” and its pilot, Frank Norris, has been renamed “Trophy Czar.” One person at the White House is not laughing though, as Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been skeptical of most of the President’s awards. He has wondered aloud if all of the President’s unjustifiable recognition is really part of a clever right wing ploy to devalue the Nobel Peace Prize, or are all these no-name award committees and organizations just trying to ride on the Peace Prize’s coat tails. Others have said the Obama trophy-train is too hot right now not to give him any and every conceivable award. While the real reason behind all of Obama’s recent accolades is up for debate, few will disagree on the illegitimacy of most of the following awards:

Obama was presented with the prestigious Westminster award for best dog handler.

Obama was shocked to learn that one of Micheal Jackson's last wishes was to have his face replaced by the President's on every new copy of his breakout album 'Off the Wall.'

Obama became the first US President to pull down an Emmy.

Vibe named crowned him the Best Rapper of All Time.

The self-proclaimed experts on all living sexy men, People Magazine, said picking Obama was easy.

The Acadamy Awards honored Obama by giving him the biggest Oscar trophy ever made.

Telemarketing company, Telennoy Corp., named Obama best "closer" for the month of September, and gave him next Saturday off.

Esquire named the President the best dressed leader of any free world.

Obama- SI Sportsman of the Year

Obama was presented with a Cable Ace Award honoring his excellence in American cable television programming.

Obama hoists the World Series Trophy sent to him by MLB.