Posted on 09/11/2009 9:26:24 AM PDT by conimbricenses
It was not a factual observation. It was your opinion.
You're right. It's not "old news" until all of know the truth.
Again, you remain incorrigible to that fact and unable to so much as apologize for a mistaken identification in which you and you alone bear responsibility.
No. I came here, made a factual observation, was asked a question and civily reponded to the question, then you attacked my behavior as being strange.
That state also led you into making genuine personal attacks on a mistaken premise of your own doing, and remains the case as you incorrigibly shirk any responsibility for the way you impugned the character of others. Once again, if that is the case with you there is nothing further I can say or do to help you.
Once again, the record shows that you attacked me first and it also shows that you have never acknowledged the error of your false attack on me in #63.
You did, however, plainly malign me and mistake my identity. And you remain completely unapologetic about doing so, even though the wrong was solely your own.
Obama, ACORN, the (Socialist) New Party and the Working Family Party (an Acorn front group)
numerous sources
Posted on Friday, September 11, 2009 11:08:18 AM EDT by ETL:
...and yet you cannot so much as identify an "attack" beyond your own mislabeling of a factual observation, seized upon post hoc after I pointed out to you that you were maligning me out of mistaken identity for which you and you alone bore responsibility.
I apologize for the mistaken identification which I immediately acknowedged when you brought it to my attention. Now, acknowledge that your #63 is false and apologize for attacking me first. Thank you.
Uh, your number 63.
Outstanding. And complete with the ACORN logo on that lady’s shirt.
There was a wrong committed on this thread, and it was solely your own.
Interesting. I have pointed out and documented a factual error in your #63 and you still deny it. You don’t offer refute my documentation, just denial. Amazing.
That’s because there is nothing factually erroneous with making a correct and valid observation about your motive and behavior. There is something factually erroneous with mischaracterizing a valid observation as an “attack” though, and you did exactly that post hoc once you realized you had maligned me after I called you out.
I knew about his work with ACORN. And I lived in Hyde Park - Obama’s Chicago neighborhood - so I know what a “community organizer” is - BUT I had no idea he was into the MalcolmX/black power thing. And you’re telling me YOU knew that? Hmmmm.
I am not referring to your ‘observation’. I am referring to your #63 where you falsely posted how I responded to your first post to me. I have repeatedly posted the exact sequence which refutes your chronology but you have never addressed your error.
Yes.
You are obviously an individual with issues, ColdWater. Among them seem to be the characteristics of hypersensitivity to criticism - even when merited, general incorrigibility for your own wrongs, and a bizarre need to get the last word on everything. Though you remain mildly amusing, you have ultimately come to bore me with your antics.
You’ve encountered a classic internet troll who is plainly more impressed by his own supposed knowledge of Obama’s ACORN connections than the meaningful use of that knowledge to shame Obama. If he is a conservative, and I am beginning to have my doubts, his strategy of helping the cause is largely counterproductive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.