General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

90. I don't think there is any question now what this was all about. The OP was clear, a link was

Sat Jan 18, 2014, 06:52 PM

Jan 2014

provided, no quotation marks PLUS a disclaimer at the bottom to say the comments paraphrased. The 'outrage' was hilarious considering the actual quote the objected to was posted almost immediately and was even more clear that Bernie did not agree with the President on the storing of data.

I could have quoted him stating that 'it was a clear violation of the US Constitution' and 'has to change'. But I assumed people would, and they did, watch the interview.

Even more damning for them is that this OP was to correct the OP that completely distorted Bernie's position but when I asked if any of them had gone to that OP to correct those gross distortions, not only was there no answer, one of the 'demanders of accuracy' REC'D that complete distortion.

What can be concluded from all this is obvious.

Thanks for you comment, your dialogue scenario is perfect!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

253 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Thank You Bernie Sanders: 'The Devil Will Be In The Details' .. 'I Do Not Agree With The President' [View all] sabrina 1 Jan 2014 OP

No where does Sanders say or imply that. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #1

Say or imply what? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #2

He did not say: "I Do Not Agree With The President" ProSense Jan 2014 #3

He was asked what he thought about the President's statement about finding sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #5

That was not his response. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #6

"Look, the devil is in the details but I don't agree with the overall position of the president ..." eomer Jan 2014 #9

Don't expect an answer. Rex Jan 2014 #12

I listened to the whole thing, including ProSense Jan 2014 #21

FYI single quotes are for paraphrased material. pa28 Jan 2014 #24

"Paraphrased material" isn't designed to change the meaning or context of a quote. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #25

and removing qualifiers is disingenuous. nt arely staircase Jan 2014 #37

Good point that will be ignored. Rex Jan 2014 #58

Well of course. Distraction, not accuracy is the real purpose here. pa28 Jan 2014 #81

He stated what he believed the job of the NSA should be, 'looking for terrorists' which btw sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #31

You can't be ProSense Jan 2014 #33

You did twist what he said and took it out of context. You should qualified your comment as I sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #57

No, I did not. You are projecting. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #59

but..but..does this means Sanders is an egotist like Assange ? Swagman Jan 2014 #68

And attention! Lol! sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #69

are you making a comparison between the two? VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #77

Oops. bvar22 Jan 2014 #30

Do you know if anyone went over to correct the other OP which completely distorted Bernie's position sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #35

Believe it or not, SOMEONE in this very thread went and rec 'cd THAT thread! Rex Jan 2014 #54

Omg, I am going to have to go see that for myself! sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #63

It is painful to watch this go one anymore! Rex Jan 2014 #65

I wondered how long it would be before Bernie joined all the other great Progressives under the bus! sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #82

He has tire tracks on his face. Enthusiast Jan 2014 #165

Some search for TRUTH. bvar22 Jan 2014 #110

Not a chance. bvar22 Jan 2014 #64

Bernie also says that the 'current surveillance program is clearly a violation of the 4th Amendment sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #76

Your thread was awesome. And this little gem here blew me out of the water Autumn Jan 2014 #89

lol. Great find and post indeed! Hypocrisy knows no boundary it seems for some... Purveyor Jan 2014 #102

Just imagine if you will. Autumn Jan 2014 #103

If you want to know what would have happened had Edward Snowden appeared in 2006 all you sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #146

As you see, it's not a question of "what", it's "who". Autumn Jan 2014 #107

Indeed! When it's a D, it's all cool. neverforget Jan 2014 #129

That was revealing and if you read further down that thread there are several other great links sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #138

Incredible. What a different tune is being piped now that Obama is in office. JDPriestly Jan 2014 #160

... Enthusiast Jan 2014 #166

amoral public relations flak for the DLC bobduca Jan 2014 #152

"It really is a matter of having an internal Moral Compass." woo me with science Jan 2014 #233

+1 sarcasmo Jan 2014 #128

see post #9! n/t wildbilln864 Jan 2014 #20

Sabrina's represntation of the discussion is accurate Jack Rabbit Jan 2014 #126

That is an excellent post, Jack Rabbit. Thank you for taking the time to do this. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #147

He said "I do not overall agree with the President on that issue" at 4:14. Autumn Jan 2014 #8

Can you believe all the flip flopping going on to control the debate? Rex Jan 2014 #13

All I can say is Autumn Jan 2014 #16

BAWHAHAHAHAHA! Rex Jan 2014 #18

Lol, amazing isn't it? I am still wondering if the other OP distorting Bernie's position was sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #36

No demands for links or quotes, accuracy or any of that shit . Autumn Jan 2014 #44

Golly gee I dunno...that really kinda makes them look...well Rex Jan 2014 #48

Hey, I only quoted a couple of posters in this thread Autumn Jan 2014 #50

LOL! Rex Jan 2014 #52

I did forget to use quotation marks and credit the poster Autumn Jan 2014 #55

I agree, if they care so much they can find it. Have a great movietime! Rex Jan 2014 #56

You know what really sucks worse than no exact quotes when someone is paraphrasing? Autumn Jan 2014 #71

Think of it as 'reality tv'. But more fun! sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #84

Spaceballs, the 25th anniversary edition Autumn Jan 2014 #86

Shouldn't you have quotation marks or something around the title of the movie? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #91

Oh shit!!! Rex Jan 2014 #88

It's rather amusing, and all too common. Autumn Jan 2014 #92

There is no such thing . . . HuskyOffset Jan 2014 #176

That is so interesting, thanks for the information from one who still has Autumn Jan 2014 #199

Lol, I didn' and look what happened, 'forget' anything important, such as the paraphrase commas and sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #85

Lol, I was just told that one of the people in this thread DEMANDING accuracy sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #66

One can only wonder! Rex Jan 2014 #47

Doing the math bobduca Jan 2014 #153

Bingo. Rex Jan 2014 #179

She has nothing of substance so she tries to find an error in the OP to use rhett o rick Jan 2014 #182

It smacks of desperation when you pick a minor point and use it to try to hijack the thread. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #181

Thank you for correcting the record. woo me with science Jan 2014 #4

No problem. The problem they are having now is that they are so obvious they are probably sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #94

Yeah. What is their cause? Enthusiast Jan 2014 #168

What is The Motive? bvar22 Jan 2014 #245

Thats the best description of PRO SENSE's role on this board yet. bobduca Jan 2014 #253

Their Cause or is it Cos? bobduca Jan 2014 #252

Do you think the people doing the messaging are all paid operatives? Cali_Democrat Jan 2014 #158

I think your post is called JAQing. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #183

Fuck Ron Paul. nt Cali_Democrat Jan 2014 #188

If you wish, I wont stop you. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #190

LOL. bvar22 Jan 2014 #200

*giggle* Cali_Democrat Jan 2014 #221

Lol! n/t sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #248

' I paraphrased his comments from the interview, they are not direct quotes' one_voice Jan 2014 #7

Here's the direct quote, thanks to Autumn above: sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #10

overall. overall. overall Autumn Jan 2014 #14

The word "overall" is their Benghazi !!! bvar22 Jan 2014 #201

"overall" is their Bengazi" sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #213

They are having some difficulties controlling the message. Rex Jan 2014 #15

why did you change the quote? nt arely staircase Jan 2014 #19

And the context. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #22

I included the quote provided by two DUers in this thread. Here it is again, better sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #26

Been there? He rec'cd that thread! Rex Jan 2014 #60

Whaaat? You're kidding right? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #67

Huh?? I didn't quote him, see note at the end of the OP. You know what paraphrasing means? But sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #23

then why not just say that? arely staircase Jan 2014 #29

Did you read the OP?? Btw, have you corrected the other OP which completely distorted Bernie's sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #40

Omg! I just read this again: Why did you not say that'?? Are you seriously asking that question? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #49

Oh look...it's the barley-comprehensible meltdown guy DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2014 #197

doesn't fit the narrative joshcryer Jan 2014 #28

she removed words that were clearly qualifiers of Sander's disagreement. arely staircase Jan 2014 #32

Not only that, ProSense Jan 2014 #38

I guess you didn't see the link. Or the note at the end of the OP. Surely if you had you would not sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #53

Let me ask you something. You are claiming a concern for accuracy here, yet you rec'd a total sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #106

Are you ProSense Jan 2014 #116

You rec'd a thread that called Bernie a sellout and that implied when we found out what he sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #121

You do recognize snark, don't you? n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #122

I recognize that a lot of people fell for it AND sadly, hoped it was true. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #134

Lol, you should quit while you are only this far behind. Did you go to the other OP which distorted sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #41

My my...they are totally ignoring your posts now...the truth is too hard for them to write up some Rex Jan 2014 #51

I know. It's hilarious. When you have to make stuff about something that is RIGHT THERE sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #61

Yeah...gee this is not about accuracy in reporting, what could it be then? Rex Jan 2014 #62

It is hilarious to watch them flailing in their own shit, bvar22 Jan 2014 #73

I like the self-congratulatory derisive nature of these posts. joshcryer Jan 2014 #144

Ouch! THAT's got to hurt! Rex Jan 2014 #194

But it's not intent or context that matters, only the exact, precise words! Scootaloo Jan 2014 #72

I don't think there is any question now what this was all about. The OP was clear, a link was sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #90

would it be that people provided such links joshcryer Jan 2014 #119

Well, if you close your eyes, then you can truthfull say you didn't "see" the proof, bvar22 Jan 2014 #203

on the issue of data collection joshcryer Jan 2014 #223

Now THAT is some tortured spin, joshcryer...... and another Strawman. bvar22 Jan 2014 #246

you support the NSA? joshcryer Jan 2014 #247

The facts presented here in this OP are not intended to fit the narrative, the one which completely sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #98

yet again I have not addressed you in any way joshcryer Jan 2014 #115

You addressed me again in an indirect way and once again tried to distort my intentions. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #123

uh, removing words from a quote... joshcryer Jan 2014 #124

If someone 'removed words from a 'QUOTE' you might have a point. I made it clear I was sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #136

you have the patience of a saint questionseverything Jan 2014 #139

Thank you, I am glad you did sign up. I am attaching this comment regarding Josh Cryer's sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #145

Your 'paraphrase' was almost a spot on quote. joshcryer Jan 2014 #143

BS. bvar22 Jan 2014 #217

'on that issue' joshcryer Jan 2014 #222

Thank you. It's become a joke at this point and if I were in that position where I have become a DU sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #225

Is that the only thing you could find that you didnt like about the OP? If you look rhett o rick Jan 2014 #184

You didn't watch the video, did you? He flat out says that he does not agree Luminous Animal Jan 2014 #11

Yes I did... one_voice Jan 2014 #34

All that matters is RobertEarl Jan 2014 #42

Did you give your opinion to the other OP which totally distorted Bernie's position being that you sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #43

It's funny that three of you showed up here, all with the exact same criticism Maedhros Jan 2014 #127

uh-huh... one_voice Jan 2014 #130

It's just such a weak criticism. Maedhros Jan 2014 #137

Nice catch, believe me when I say many, many of us notice that Rex Jan 2014 #195

Where'd you go, little one? DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2014 #196

Thank you sabrina 1 for the link... nenagh Jan 2014 #17

You are very welcome nenagh .. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #45

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Jan 2014 #27

K&R natch n/t whatchamacallit Jan 2014 #39

We need a Restore Ephemeral Communications Act hootinholler Jan 2014 #46

He is spot on. He said that the collection of meta is a 'Violation of the US Constitution' sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #140

I agree. Enthusiast Jan 2014 #169

K&R for pissing off all the RIGHT people! Rex Jan 2014 #70

I'm certainly not upset. I told you all from the beginning Snowden would change nothing. stevenleser Jan 2014 #104

Never figured you for an authority type. Rex Jan 2014 #105

I'm not an 'authority type'. stevenleser Jan 2014 #112

I don't know the man, if he thinks he is on a noble mission Rex Jan 2014 #117

So you agree with Bernie Sanders that spying on the American people is a violation of the 4th sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #154

No. nt stevenleser Jan 2014 #173

Seems to me that if you are willing to allow the conservative Republican run NSA to rhett o rick Jan 2014 #191

Rex, just want to correct one thing. Snowden didn't go to Russia, he was on his way sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #150

I guess it boiled down to they have nukes Rex Jan 2014 #155

Why isnt anyone looking at Booz-Allen? How much data do they have control of? And who rhett o rick Jan 2014 #228

Yes and why does the NSA suddenly trust them again - enough to Rex Jan 2014 #230

IMO the NSA works for the same boss as Booz-Allen. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #238

You and I agree on that. Rex Jan 2014 #240

You really said that? bvar22 Jan 2014 #114

Well said...eom. KoKo Jan 2014 #180

Let me guess your point. Because Snowden's revelations didnt change anything, we should all just rhett o rick Jan 2014 #186

The Hope/Change well has done run bone dry. We need some REAL action. Not just more insincere speech blkmusclmachine Jan 2014 #74

If we had ninety nine other Senators like him, truedelphi Jan 2014 #79

I find it amusing when someone scours speeches by Bernie Sanders or ... dawg Jan 2014 #75

Good post, thank you ... especially this ' sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #80

Personality cultists believe that everyone else is also a personality cultist. QC Jan 2014 #108

The problem is that many ARE for Obama, regardless of his policies Doctor_J Jan 2014 #135

Really good point. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #142

Damn, dawg! Enthusiast Jan 2014 #170

Sanders is about the only Senator I have faith in 100% of the time. truedelphi Jan 2014 #78

Bernie rocks my world Autumn Jan 2014 #83

I agree Agony Jan 2014 #96

+1! Democrats of the Wall Street stripe Enthusiast Jan 2014 #171

+100000 No Trojan horse there. woo me with science Jan 2014 #189

HUMONGUOUS K&R BelgianMadCow Jan 2014 #87

Kick Agony Jan 2014 #93

Hilarious thread if you've been following the various personalities for a while Fumesucker Jan 2014 #95

Lol, do you think they don't like me? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #101

To know you is to love you Sabrina Fumesucker Jan 2014 #111

Aw, thank you Fumesucker ... sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #141

. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #192

this deserves another Kick! Agony Jan 2014 #97

And it deserves another kick Autumn Jan 2014 #99

I tried to watch the one on MSNBC could'nt even get the damn thing to load Autumn Jan 2014 #100

Moderates/DLC types: "Hey, look over there, Chris Christie!"� silvershadow Jan 2014 #109

If Bernie Sanders decides to run for POTUS dotymed Jan 2014 #113

That is how a lot of people are feeling, 'fuck political parties'. Not the first time in history sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #118

+10000000 woo me with science Jan 2014 #132

If he runs, he WILL have my vote. NorthCarolina Jan 2014 #175

K&R Solly Mack Jan 2014 #120

nice work! reddread Jan 2014 #125

Thanks! and a Big Recommend.... KoKo Jan 2014 #131

and I suspect he won't like those details stupidicus Jan 2014 #133

Transcript ProSense Jan 2014 #148

My summation was accurate. Jack Rabbit already posted the relevant parts. Bernie is clear on the sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #149

"Thanks for the transcript. " ProSense Jan 2014 #151

I never used the words 'meta data' back then either. They weren't in the vocabulary. But sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #204

Good for you, but don't imply that I changed my views. n/t ProSense Jan 2014 #205

Well, we can let the readers of this thread decide for themselves: bvar22 Jan 2014 #211

When I ProSense Jan 2014 #212

LOL bvar22 Jan 2014 #216

So long as you don't imply that anything HAS changed. n/t sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #214

at first you don't succeed arely staircase Jan 2014 #156

Might as well...even when wrong or disingenuous the Greenies still give praise. (nt) great white snark Jan 2014 #159

What is a 'Greenie'? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #162

Okay, I'm rooting for you. You certainly have been trying, over and over again. The best sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #161

As usual, Senator Bernie Sanders is intelligent, articulate and fair in his discussion of the issues JDPriestly Jan 2014 #157

He just has ODS mindwalker_i Jan 2014 #163

BDS, remember that? 'Bush Derangement Syndrome'. Someone reminded me today, that's what sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #164

Yeah, it's used in the opposite way mindwalker_i Jan 2014 #187

excellent +r solarhydrocan Jan 2014 #167

Recommended 1000X and kicked too. Enthusiast Jan 2014 #172

kick! delrem Jan 2014 #174

Bernie is a grown up, Progressive dog Jan 2014 #177

Yes, because disagreements among intellectuals always means one is right and the other wrong. randome Jan 2014 #178

Does that mean that you support Sen Sander's statements? nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #193

That he doesn't agree with the President? That's merely him making a statement. randome Jan 2014 #209

Really? You believe someone that told you they only collect meta data. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #210

Hell, even if it where true "metamata" is essentially a 24/7 365 warrantless tail. TheKentuckian Jan 2014 #219

It may be very difficult to draw the line between a total security state and a free society, but rhett o rick Jan 2014 #220

Snowden was not able to get at any personal data. That's how well-guarded it is. randome Jan 2014 #242

Who told you Snowden was not able to get any personal data? A Republican? rhett o rick Jan 2014 #244

You are STILL wrong. bvar22 Jan 2014 #215

'Embarrassing myself'? That's not possible when I'm fine with being shown wrong. randome Jan 2014 #241

Those willing to give up their freedoms and liberties for the promise of security are fools. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #185

why do you have to give up your freedoms? The problem is underthematrix Jan 2014 #198

The NSA has been privatized. Our 'security' has been outsourced. That was a Republican sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #202

WHOOP! There it is. bvar22 Jan 2014 #206

WHOOP! THERE it is. Autumn Jan 2014 #207

... woo me with science Jan 2014 #218

I can understand how some might like to have a strong authoritarian government that was sympathetic rhett o rick Jan 2014 #208

In much of Europe Sanders would be considered a moderate frwrfpos Jan 2014 #224

Sabrina! sheshe2 Jan 2014 #226

sheshe2 ~don't talk to me talk to Bernie! sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #227

hey sabrina... sheshe2 Jan 2014 #229

Just click the link in the OP and you can hear him in his own words, on video. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #231

Okay.... sheshe2 Jan 2014 #232

Bernie is the one who deserves an award. For standing by his oath of office. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #234

sabrina~ sheshe2 Jan 2014 #235

I will stick with the country and it's people. No matter how painful it is sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #236

+1, almost 200 recs on misinformation, academy award indeed. joshcryer Jan 2014 #251

sheshe.... Bobbie Jo Jan 2014 #239

Bernie Sanders: "I do nor agree with the overall position of the President". sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #243

Eomerian K&R BelgianMadCow Jan 2014 #237

"...should it be stored at all?" Hell, should it be gathered at all? Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2014 #249

Yes, but Bernie was referring to the President's speech in which he stated sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #250