the politics of fake outrage.

[mathewsleep]

this phenomenon seems to be ever reoccurring to me: fake outrage.

so what is it?

fake outrage • \ˈfāk ˈau̇t-ˌrāj\ • noun
*1 : the false anger and resentment aroused by a statement or action that could be considered insulting, but doesn't actually stir real outrage.
2 : the act of pretending to be insulted by something in order to suggest to others that something offensive had taken place.

recent examples of fake outrage include, but are not limited to:

suggestions that barack obama is in love with reagan because when asked about him he didn't reply with venom.
the thought that hillary clinton hates mlk and thinks he didn't do much for the civil rights movement.

in nonpolitical recent events:

muslims getting insulted by cartoons.
muslims getting insulted by teddy bears.

what this means for politics:

the art of fake outrage is a clever one. first, you have to wait for you opponent to say something that could be misconstrued as offensive. you then need to use selective quoting to take what they said out of context. then you're ready to go. at you next q&a session, have someone ask you about the afore mentioned potentially offensive topic and you simply dodge the question, but do so in a way that makes you look good for not flinging slime for bringing it up.

people listening will wonder what was so offensive that you wouldn't even talk about it. they'll do some research and discover the misquoted text somewhere then the false outrage can begin. if someone who supports you sees this, they will of course be smart enough to realize that nothing offensive has taken place. knowing that neither opponent would be so dumb as to actually say what you have implied they said. but that doesn't matter. they will pretend to be offended and the fun begins.

[saltpoint]

1. Good topic. Thank you for posting this. Just a couple thoughts to start with:

I recall the fundamentalist Baptist preacher in Texas blasting Jimmy Carter in the 76 campaign for the interview with PLAYBOY.

To me, that is a classic case of fake outrage.

And of course, its intent was to weaken and wound a Democratic presidential candidate.

[mathewsleep]

2. good example

i wasn't alive then, but it does seems to fit the mold.

i'm sure the baptists made it seem like carter was a porn hungry sinner.
they probably said shit like, how dare this man propagate such filth.

when in reality they knew he didn't, but they had to pretend he did.

[mathewsleep]

5. another carter example

his recent book about israel. people made it seem like he was anti-semitic.

[saltpoint]

8. Exactly. A lot of people just couldn't wait to beat the crap out of Jimmy Carter

over that title -- and some of them, I bet, hadn't even read one word of the text inside.

There's a form of cowardice behind that kind of mud-slinging.

[lwcon]

3. Want to help propagate a new term for this?

"Twistunderstanding"

http://www.correntewire.com/twistunderstanding

However, I have to disagree with you about Obama/Reagan. Obama has throughout the entire campaign thrown progressives under the bus (our problems are just a "divisive food fight," Hillary's healthcare plan didn't work because she didn't reach across the aisle enough, progressives need to conflate religion with "values," etc., etc.).

By itself, the Reagan line wasn't that important, but it's yet another example in a long pattern of statements that reject the reality on the ground in a country that went off the rails with the Reagan Revolution and has been spiraling toward disaster ever since.

On the other hand, the twistunderstanding that painted the Clintons as racists was a fallacious as McCain's "outrage" about John Kerry's botch joke. Not saying that HRC is above doing it, but I'm not with you on this example.

[saltpoint]

7. Iwcon, thank you for mentioning McCain's "outrage" on Kerry's botched joke,

not only because I respect Kerry and distrust McCain, but also because it's a perfect example of what the OP is getting at.

Coming from John McCain, the comments stung even more, since McCain milks his own war-hero status to the last drop every time he puts in an appearance. He ought to have shown reflexive good will toward a fellow veteran, one who has treated him with dignity and respect for years, and McCain dropped the ball.

I was opposed to McCain politically for his far-right positions already but after that slam on Kerry, and the fake outrage over the joke, I was ashamed for McCain as well.

[mathewsleep]

9. i like it, twistunderstanding

and the reason i included to reagan bit was because people are suggesting that he's a secret republican because of what he said in very selective quotes. he didn't praise reagan. he just said that he changed politics. he never said for the better.

[mathewsleep]

10. the kerry mccain thing is a perfect exsample

no one actually thought that kerry meant that the troops are dumb, but someone had to convince people that he did.

[saltpoint]

11. McCain and others took the short-term cheap shot to advance their own

self-importance and trashed a good man (and fellow veteran to McCain's service) in the process.

In that instance at least, there are 6th graders with a firmer sense of fairness and self-respect than McCain exhibited.

[mathewsleep]

13. i forget

about that shit mccain pulled. it's so easy the think of him as a good man. he's no better then the rest of them.

[saltpoint]

14. I want to feel that there is a deeply humane man in McCain, but since his

loss to Dubya in 2000, he just seems to be crawling the sewers.

The guy is thrown into a damn cage for 5 years and he comes out ready to hug Bush and bomb Iran back to the Stone Age, taking a cheap shot at a fellow veteran along the way.

I really don't get it, but to your point in the OP, it would definitely come under the topic of fake outrage. "Total bullshit" is another category McCain scores highly in.

[avrdream]

43. Yuck, don't bring up that hug again. Someone will post a picture.

Nice discussion here about fake outrage. I, too, had forgotten how McCain dissed Kerry that time.

We are bound to see much more of this twistunderstanding going forward.

[saltpoint]

56. I love the humor in your subject line, avrdream! Excellent!

And you're right -- that's a horrific photo. Makes me cringe every time i see it.

[Plucketeer]

55. I have thought about McVain's transformation since the new millenium's start

I think he musta sold his soul to the Devil in a moment of weakness and we're getting to see the results of the transaction with every sicking sentence this guy vomits. Under glamorous, hero, fighter jock, eats-terrorists-for-breakfast McPain, this would be one ugly place to try and live.
I don't believe in God, but I could see myself desperate enough to cry for his help if McBane was sworn in on January twentieth of two thousand and nine. :scared:

[saltpoint]

57. Hi, Plucketeer. Yep -- it is an unnerving thought -- John McCain picking

thenext Supreme Court.

We'd get someone as conservative as Roberts only with a third of the brains.

And the Cabinet would likely be Bill Kristol types.

Whichever of our candidates wins the nomination in Denver (and I think you and I are for the same guy), we need to pull together and build on the Senate and House majorities and elect a president.

A great deal is riding on it.

[saltpoint]

4. The outrage of some fundamentalist Muslims over the Danish cartoons is

a launch point.

The cartoons were hard-hitting and there was a sharp, negative vibe to some of them, granted.

But the degree of objection was way disproportional to the offense.

In the presidential race this cycle, I would trust Senator Clinton to honor the gains of the MLK legacy and I would trust Senator Obama to eclipse the "accomplishments" of Ronald Reagan, likely within the first few weeks of his administraiton.

Your post is valuable because we could use some common purpose against Republican tactics and against Republican priorities. If we are the 'We the People" -- if that's us -- then the Bush emphasis on dissmantling the government is an act against us.

[mathewsleep]

12. the cartoon thing

was just nuts. i think the best case scenario would be if that was fake outrage. if it was real, that's just sad.

[SoFlaJet]

6. Fake Outrage

is what Bill Clinton has been showing a lot of lately. Hey so where IS his outrage about what he said he and Chelsea saw yesterday in Nevada? Is he concerned that maybe some Edwards or Obama voters were being disenfranchised? Didn't think so...

[saltpoint]

15. Witch-burning. It comes to mind because the fire-belching preachers of

that era felt that the slightest assertion of independence and well by a woman was fodder for moral outrage.

Fake moral outrage, I mean.

This woman is a witch! Look -- she swims! Look -- she can survive without a husband! Look -- she owns property!

So the twigs were gathered and the witch was burned.

You have to be pretty insecure to burn someone alive.

[mathewsleep]

16. you mean women can

survive without a husband?

huh...?

just kidding. i was raised by a strong single mom. she pwned.

[saltpoint]

17. Good for your mom. And good for you.

A lot of communities out there are a hell of a lot strong for having a good number of single moms.

There offspring tend to be very resourceful and aware souls, too.

:toast:

[saltpoint]

18. I'm put off when Senator Obama is debased on either an inauthentic charge

or when fake outrage is slathered onto his campaign over a minor flaw because he's the guy I heard on the tv from Boston in 2004 and watched him lift an arena of delegates off the ground into a higher notion of themselves and the Democratic process. He did that with his gift of insight and speech, but he'd likely been doing it for years in his commitment to community-building in Chicago. It's of a piece with his being a leader, a builder, an inspirer. Bush is none of those things.

I'm put of when Senator Clinton is debased on either an inauthentic charge or when fake outrage is slatered onto her campaign because there is something to be said about her being a woman seeking the presidency. Had she divorced her husband over Monica Lewinsky, I would not have blamed her, although I don't want fake-outrage weasels like Kenneth Starr debasing her husband over a blowjob. There are points in favor of female leaders and if you were choosing one apart from her husband's political legacy or not, it would not escape your notice that she has an Ivy League education. Where I come from, that's still an enviable and admirable accomplishment. I don't believe Roe v. Wade is safe under a Republican administration compared to a Democratic administration, but I think Senator Clinton would choose SCOTUS appointments with a view toward keeping it preserved.

I've posted on my favorite candidate in the race already and will not cheerlead at the moment, except to say that just as with Obama and Clinton and Kerry, Edwards is also the victim of exaggeration, or fake moral outrage.

History is crammed with examples like this, and unfortunately, they occur in communities and neighborhoods and schools as much as they do in world capitals.

[mathewsleep]

19. we all have to choose based off of

our hearts. we can't choose based off who everyone else supports, or how if thought to a winner. we have to choose are hope. and vote for it. till the end.

[saltpoint]

20. Yes.

:thumbsup:

[Blue-Jay]

21. My impression of the Indignation Crew in GDP...

[mathewsleep]

22. how do you know that she is a witch?

she looks like one!

[PatSeg]

23. I don't think all the outrage is necessarily "fake"

though it isn't always valid. I think it has become a habit. After seven years of Bush, we are in the habit of being outraged on a daily basis and many people have redirected that outrage to our candidates. We've become hypersensitive to political pandering and insincerity, and we often see it where it doesn't exist, as well as ignore it if it is directed at our chosen one.

My goal first and foremost is to put a Democrat in the White House and to not be a hypocrite in the process.

[saltpoint]

26. As for your first and foremost goal, can the Democrat start tomorrow morning?

At the latest?

Any of our 8 announced candidates will do nicely, and can expect my support.

Probably true what you say about reactions often becoming a habit. There's a way to observe it -- the Bill Kristol bunch -- the neocon, pro-occupation, pro-Surge bunch of pundits. They respond like clockwork to issues surrounding "patriotism" and "the terror threat."

Also I thought of Jesse Helms, the late lizard-brained icon of far-right wing Republican politics... and his absurd fake outrage over Andres Serrano's PISS-CHRIST art work. Granted, the artist likely knew the piece would provoke outrage, but Helms' "outrage" resulted in his trying to gut funding for all artists everywhere, which is way disproportional to the alleged offense.

[PatSeg]

44. I sense a hugh sign of relief emanating from the White House

as the focus has been shifted from Bush to the Democratic candidates. Meanwhile, who knows what they are doing under the radar? Whatever it is, it will take everyone by surprise when it hits the front page and everyone will be wondering how we didn't notice the signs.

[saltpoint]

52. Agree that whoever's left there is probably up to no good. I mean hell,

Bush is on his third miserable Attorney General, having appointed two previous miserable Attorneys General already.

So yes, it could be a long year until next year next time, but it will get here, and the first votes for a new president have been cast.

I'm taking whatever uplift there can be offered, and running with it!

[PatSeg]

62. I've learned to never underestimate him

Whatever the worst thing I can imagine, I fear he'll top it with something totally unexpected. He has nothing to lose and that is scary.

[jillan]

24. Fake outrage - here's another example -

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man."

Notice how the msm picked out 2 of the 4 words that Biden used to describe Obama.

Obama didn't care about what Biden said.
JJ jr. didn't care. Only the MSM cared and totally misconstrued what Biden said.

I have many times heard Obama being described as articulate - and having a clean record.
Even heard those words coming out of Axelrod's own mouth.
Where's the outrage? :shrug:

To quote the OP:

"the art of fake outrage is a clever one. first, you have to wait for you opponent to say something that could be misconstrued as offensive. you then need to use selective quoting to take what they said out of context. then you're ready to go. at you next q&a session, have someone ask you about the afore mentioned potentially offensive topic and you simply dodge the question, but do so in a way that makes you look good for not flinging slime for bringing it up".

That is exactly what they did to Biden.

[saltpoint]

25. pirhana, you know I have an abiding respect for Senator Biden, so it will

not surprise you very much to know that I think Joe Biden and Barack Obama are cut from the same rare cloth of public servants.

The OP cites strong examples of fake outrage and your exampe adds one more to the list. The press was feral and slobbering over that incident between Biden and Obama, and weakly failed to cover the civil exchange of words between two civil men.

I was very ashamed of the media generally in that incident and it still brings a rush of shame to me to consider the way it was handled. Where were the damn editors? -- is one question.

[jillan]

28. Hi OC!

For whatever reason (actually I have my theories) the msm picks and chooses which stories they want to build up as outrage, and which ones they want to ignore.

The press is controlling this election, and I am sure you feel that too. Altho with Edwards, there really hasn't been any fake outrage stories surrounding him, has there? Edwards, Dodd and Richardson may be the 3 that escaped that this campaign season.
Being ignored by the media, a completely different topic.

[saltpoint]

29. Dodd appeared to have escaped the fake outrage coverage, but unfortunately,

he escaped the coverage altogether, too.

Agree with you on the selectivity and cliqueishness of the MSM. A case could be made easily and persuasively that they are just not doing their jobs.

Given as fiercely equal time and coverage in the media, I believe all 8 of our candidates would still be in the race.

And it's made worse when what coverage they do manage is "fake outrage," and it is all over the media.

[jillan]

30. I'm actually glad that the field is dwindling down now.

Am I glad about who is left standing? That's another story.

[saltpoint]

32. Understandable. Especially when the three Democrats who are no longer

in the race all three are foreign policy adepts.

Where I come from, that means a great deal.

[jillan]

39. Sorry - I was referring to Hil-bama.

[saltpoint]

40. Whoops. Sorry -- I thought you meant the three who had dropped out.

[Two Americas]

31. sure there have been

There have been many fake outrage stories about Edwards, don't you think? - the haircut, the house, his wife's illness, his wealth, his "flip-flopping," etc.

Kucinich, too - the UFO thing for one.

[saltpoint]

34. On the point of fake outrage and Kucinich... the UFO story was the craven

media at its most craven, IMO.

The topic is controversial to begin with, but any number of people have seen things that defy easy explanation. My parents and I saw something or other in the sky when I was very young. We had not idea in hell what it was. It wasn't menacing, but it was bright and odd and we'd never seen anything like it before or since.

Kucinich is a damned smart guy. For the media to overblow coverage of the UFO comments was craven. I just don't know any other word for it. Well, 'crap' works pretty well.
The networks and cable news refuse to cover his policy proposals but use up "valuable" air time pretending like this was a real story worthy of people's attention.

[jillan]

38. You are right - how could I forget about that haircut?

You know - that could have been the beginning of the end for Edwards.

They took one story and used it to portray him as a hypocrite, fairly or not.

Just like what they did to Biden.

Who will be the next victim?

[Two Americas]

46. just noticed

Just noticed the Biden photo in your sig line.

I am an Edwards supporter, but that doesn't mean I am not a Democrat and not a human being. Biden and his supporters got mistreated badly. I don't understand that - how people can savage fellow Dems and candidates the way they do - just as the worst of the right wing talk show mouthpieces would.

I am very sorry what happened to Biden and have nothing but empathy and understanding for all of the good people who supported him. That has to take precedence over cheer leading for a candidate, doesn't it?

[mathewsleep]

54. i remember

when that happened. i knew it was 100% bullshit from the start. they've done that to biden countless times. to think that biden was implying black people aren't clean is just retarded.

damnit, now i'll be attacked for saying something is retarded.

[pdxmom]

27. You have described the entirety of right-wing talk radio and Faux News. n/t

[Two Americas]

37. right wing propaganda

The same style of debate, the same talking points, and the same vitriol that right wing talk radio has elevated to an art form has now permeated people's thinking here.

The goal of right wing propaganda was never to promote a point of view or philosophy - here is a hint: they don't have one - but rather to so confuse, upset and discourage people that no thoughtful discussion is ever possible. By making a mess of everything, the entrenched power in the country can stay in power because that keeps the people weak and divided and distracted. They don't need to "win" the game - blowing up the playing field is all they have to do.

Notice how some people here take the same approach. They don't try to persuade anyone, they don't try to make fair or compelling arguments, they just turn the discussion into such an uproar that everyone becomes discouraged and confused and angry. That makes for a stalemate, and also drives many people away from the discussion in disgust.

We need to ask ourselves this question: who wins with a stalemate? Those few who are already winning, already in power, already controlling everything are who wins. Who loses? The other 90% of the people in the country.

[mzmolly]

45. Indeed! One such 'outrage' is the notion that "White men can't talk"

:eyes: beyond absurd.

I actually got an email from my R/W brother in law about how 'silenced' he is in today's political climate. I reminded him that 1800 WHITE mostly MALE talk show hosts around the nation parrot that EXACT same meme. I've neard nothing back. Guess I "silenced" him? ;)

[saltpoint]

49. There you go with using facts again, mzmolly. Facts are very off-putting for

most right-wing people.

You probably frightened him!

[mzmolly]

51. LOL

I HOPE I frightened him! :P

Have a nice Sunday OC :hi:

[NanceGreggs]

33. Couldn't agree more!

The Biden quote about Obama (upthread) is a classic example. When I first heard the quote, it never occurred to me that it was meant to be insulting. I immediately heard the word 'clean' in the context of the statement, obviously meaning a man with a "clean" record, a candidate "clean" of political scandal.

Of course, within minutes I was being told (by people here and elsewhere) that this was a blatant insult. If it was so blatant, why didn't I hear it? Maybe because I wasn't scrounging around looking for an insult that simply wasn't there.

This is a great discussion, BTW - :kick: and RECOMMENDED!

[saltpoint]

35. You might not have heard it as an insult, ma'am, because you're always too

busy writing affirming and informative pieces for the rest of us to read and enjoy -- and not least, in the service of tossing the poop-head Republicans out and putting as many Democrats as we can count in.

Who knows why an affinity for fake outrage and insult have never developed in your personality, but frankly, their absence is definitional in you, and so no wonder you didn't hear it.

- _ - _ - _

Great post.

[NanceGreggs]

48. "Looking" for an insult ...

... is like dumpster-diving. Even if there's nothing there at the bottom of the garbage heap, you're going to come out of it dirty.

Another "fake outrage" incident (from, oddly enough, the idiots on FAUX-News) that comes to mind is the "Obama doesn't wear a flag-pin on his lapel!" That one really showed the childishness of it all.

We have troops dying in a quagmire, we're torturing people, the economy is going down the toilet - but stop the presses, hold the phone! THAT MAN IS NOT WEARING A FLAG-PIN!!!"

Whenever I hear that kind of fake outrage being expressed, I am, for some reason, transported back to my high school days, listening to mindless chatter in the cafeteria about who just dissed Debbie Johnson by referring to her as "Deb".

Mindless ...

[saltpoint]

50. "We have troops dying in a quagmire, we're torturing people, the

economy is going down the toilet -- but STOP THE PRESSES, HOLD THE PHONE! THAT MAN IS NOT WEARING A FLAG-PIN!!!"


Ab so lute ly per fect.

[mathewsleep]

53. exactly!

they wanted people to think, that they thought, that obama was antiamerica. none of them could really have believed that, could they have?

[PatSeg]

36. Unfortunately, too many people wait for the media to

tell them how they should react and then react accordingly. The media put a "tag" on Biden a long time ago and look for every opportunity to reinforce it. Chris Matthews said almost the exact same thing about Obama recently and it was completely ignored. I about fell off my chair!

[Muttocracy]

64. "articulate" in Newsweek

http://www.newsweek.com/id/91682 (Jan 21, 2008)

Article about Spike Lee film coming out on DVD. First sentence:

"Filmmaker Tyler Perry has built a mini-empire in Hollywood by portraying a certain type of African-American character: articulate, urbane and upwardly mobile."


vs.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/56820 (Feb 1, 2007)

At War With His Mouth

"... In the midst of heaping praise on Obama, Biden mentioned that his Senate colleague was the “first mainstream African-American” candidate who was “articulate and bright and clean.” Biden quickly sought to clarify the remark—that he hadn’t meant any sort of aspersion on African-Americans or their hygiene habits—but the damage was done. By Thursday, it looked like Biden’s pithy words in the little pink paper may have done in his long-shot presidential candidacy for good. ..."

If the gaffe does destroy Biden’s chances, few in either party will be particularly surprised. The senator’s biggest enemy has always been his own mouth..."

[PatSeg]

65. And I would say

that the senator's biggest enemy has always been the media.

[Muttocracy]

66. I agree - it blows my mind because

he would give them (1) the straight story (2) lyrical flourish (3) the occasional gaffe. What else could the media want?!?! :)

[PatSeg]

67. Maybe a scandal or two

Something wildly controversial that would make a great headline.

[mzmolly]

41. How DARE you suggest that people are not rightfully passionate about civil rights!?

:sarcasm: I kid of course.

Nice topic. ;)

[EFerrari]

42. Manufacturing consent -- and silencing opposition . . .

The OP is right on when describing how fake outrage is a tool used to manipulate public opinion.

And the thing goes both ways. Anyone expressing concern can be effectively shut up by the charge of "faking" outrage or concern. The Republics in especial love to club Democrats with their legit concern. Democrats aren't above doing the same. Politics are politics.

So, what are we supposed to do? Who are we supposed to believe? Imho, since most of us aren't Miss Clio, all we can do is resort to facts as much as possible. I don't have to buy into anyone's hysteria but I do better when I respect the facts laid out. (Uh oh! Is it "laid" or "layed" ? :scared: )

The reciprocal gesture is trying to be good about offering fact when an irresistible bone to pick shows up.

It's much harder to be manipulated OR to resort to cheap (and, often abusive) manipulation, to keep me honest, if the facts are out there first.

I'd also recommend organizing a good primary season helmet with a timer ASAP.

[saltpoint]

47. Some mighty good suggestions there, and let's do the primary schedule

first on the list.

I have not heard Miss Cliio's name mentioned for many a moon. Wow. Maybe she'll do a psychic medium time slot as a lead-in for Nancy Grace's program. There's an unbeatable combination if there ever was one. Miss Clio can read people's palms while Nancy runs out and breaks into someone's aparmtent.

A fact-based approach is hard to beat. A more responsible media could help at the press corp/candidate level, and the rest of us could be more fair and balanced in tone and tent. (I'm talking about "fair and balanced" before it was appropirated and misused by FOX News.)

[Catchawave]

58. Welcome to DU mathewsleep !

:toast:

Great post! I think PETA has perfected the art of fake outrage, and how I became a member years ago! They are brilliant, even won some advertising awards about how effective their message is. If I can recall, one mentions "the Democrats could learn from them" and "keeping CEO's awake at night". LOL.

[Blue_In_AK]

59. This is a nice thread.

I don't have anything to add, really. Carry on.

[saltpoint]

60. You've already added your good will and good energy, and that's plenty,

and it's appreciated.

A civil visit and good will are valuable things in these sharp-tongued times.

:thumbsup: :hi:

[saltpoint]

61. There are instances also when here appears to be "moral outrage" on a

given issue, but in those rare instances, it's genuinely felt.

Case in point is Anita Bryant's crusade against gays in Miami some years back, I believe in the late 1970s.

She had been a runner-up (winner?) of the Miss America pageant and had enjoyed modest success as a vocalist.

From the standpoint of a progressive, her crusade was unresearched, off-the-cuff, xenophobic indignation. But in her case, she likely believed that she was doing the right thing. One stand-out feature of bigotry is stubbornness.

She lost her career with the orange juice industry over her public condemnation of lesbians and gays.

She also lost her marriage.

As sfexpat2000 posted upthread, a few facts might have saved her from both of those sacrifices. She chose not to pursue any, or if any were introduced to her to mitigate her bigotry, she opted against considering them.

Reportedly, there had been threats on her life in the greater Miami area. Novelist Gore Vidal, asked about these alleged threats, dismissed them, saying, "No, I don't think they're true. If there were any threats on Anita's life, I expect it would be from music lovers."

[Tuesday Afternoon]

63. yes.

It happens a lot around here.

[IronLionZion]

68. I think many DUers are angry and frustrated to begin with

So it's a tinderbox of a situation that doesn't take much to light on fire. Things like this don't help our situation. I don't know about the rest of us, but I sure as fuck want to put a Dem in the white house this year and strengthen our majorities in congress, state and local offices too. Hopefully we can appoint some decent judges too. That would help things immensely.

I have long been opposed to the practice of posting quotes out of context with no link to any source. I get flamed badly when I call them out and ask for the full context and a source. Each of us should be asking for this every time.

[LittleClarkie]

69. Indeed, we should. I call that out even if it's not my candidate

I try to call foul when I see something unfair. Hillary the Goldwater Girl etc...

I hate to see things purposely taken out of context.

And now I've gotten both of Obama's books out of the library so I can read his Reagan quotes in context.