Um....how do you know if I misinterpreted it if you don't even know what I think about it?
I don't.
Which is why I said I think you misinterpreted it.
As in, IMO.
We could only wish that your views were less entirely predictable. That might add interest. One need only watch Beck each day to predict with 100% accuracy what you'll be posting on the next day, Mellie, and what your exact position will be.
Well, ya thought wrong. I chose the second option.
He didn't deny knowing how to use the Nintendo Wii. :shock:
You apparently fail to understand that your poll choices made it all too clear that you were going to choose an option involving "stretching the truth" or "lying." If you were less biased, you'd see how stupidly biased your poll options were.
So you really believe he DOESN'T know how to operate those things? :shock:
What other poll options are there?
I have a confession to make. I have owned an iPod, iPhone, 2 blackberries, a MacBook, 3 PCs and a flat screen TV. I don't know how to program our alarm clock.
So you really believe he DOESN'T know how to operate those things? :shock:
What other poll options are there?
- Other
- This poll is stupid.
- Don't care.
- Obama may have difficulties with some technology.
- I'm just here for the tittie pics.
Durr.
Also, a poll should never be phrased as a negative. So, instead of "Do you really believe that Obama doesn't know how to work technology?", more properly the poll should be phrased as:
"Do you believe that Obama knows how to work technology?"
The term "really" is unnecessary and implies that he is lying.
Further, ideally a poll would include more than a false dichotomy (affirmative or hard negative). The term "of course" turns both of the negative responses into hard negatives. Thus, your poll is inherently skewed and illogical. It forces people to pick one of three equally untenable options.
When I create a poll (for work), I usually try to provide at least 5 options. Hard affirmitive, soft affirmative, unsure/other (please explain), soft negative, hard negative. That eliminates the issue of a poll being based upon a false dichotomy.
Creating a poll without bias is actually an art form. But, to be truthful, I think you WANTED a biased poll to reaffirm your own paradigms.
Many are possible...
- Other
- This poll is stupid.
- Don't care.
- Obama may have difficulties with some technology.
- I'm just here for the tittie pics.
Other problems:
1. A poll should never be phrased as a negative. So, instead of "Do you really believe that Obama doesn't know how to work technology?", more properly the poll should be phrased as:
"Do you believe that Obama knows how to work technology?"
2. The term "really" is unnecessary and implies that he is lying.
3. Ideally, a poll would include more than a false dichotomy (affirmative or hard negative). The term "of course" turns both of the negative responses into hard negatives. Thus, your poll is inherently skewed and illogical. It forces people to pick one of three equally untenable options.
When I create a poll (for work), I usually try to provide at least 5 options. Hard affirmitive, soft affirmative, unsure/other (please explain), soft negative, hard negative. That eliminates the issue of a poll being based upon a false dichotomy.
Creating a poll without bias is actually an art form. But, to be truthful, I think you WANTED a biased poll to reaffirm your own paradigms.
Is it wrong that the first thing that jumped out at me, more so than his message, was the utter bull**** nature of it?
Its actually one of the things I detest most about Barack Obama. He is a 100%, complete, wholey, political machine. There's essentially NOTHING else there when he speaks. I can not listen to the man without immediately realizing and viewing it through the filter that he's the truest definition of the bull**** politician I have ever seen in my life.
Why did this immediately jump out at me?
"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction"
So, aside from the message that we're a culture that is SO information rich that we're inundated with so much info that its hard to tell fact from opinion and pure fiction, is the notion that somehow much of this technology we have is actually bad. That its distracting, that its something to not even bother learning or using, to the point where our President himself doesn't bother with it.
And yet, if my memory serves me from a year or so back...
Barack Obama gifts for the Queen: an Ipod your Majesty
Barack Obama met the Queen at Buckingham Palace today and gave her a gift of an iPod loaded with video footage and photographs of her 2007 United States visit to Richmond, Jamestown and Williamsburg in Virginia.
Wait, so President Obama gave the Queen of England an object of distraction and diversion that is so damaging to our very culture that Barack Obama doesn't even bother to learn how to use one? A piece of technology he's seemingly attributing part of the blame for the downfall of intellectual observation of fact from fiction?
But...wait a moment. He doesn't know how to use an iPod. But...I could've swore, in 2008, back when it was important to make him look hip and cool for the youngin's that...ah yes, rolling stone
Barack Obama's iPod: Bob Dylan, Yo-Yo Ma, Sheryl Crow, Jay-Z
The Illinois senator's playlist contains these musicians, along with about 30 songs from Dylan and the singer's "Blood on the Tracks" album.
That's right, there was an entire piece about what's on Barack Obama's Ipod, making him identifiable and "hip" to the youth of America who were tired of backwards out of touch politician...you know, like that cowboy George Bush or old guy John McCain.
Sorry, this is what I can't stand about the guy and why even when he makes relatively decent points I can't take them at face value and ASSUME he's saying them for wholly benevolent reasons and not specifically for calculated, planned, political reasons.
This statement by him was not simply about misinformation or people being to easily led by what's "Fake" or not. This was not him speaking just as much about the Michael Moore's and John Stewarts of the world as he is the Rush Limbaugh's and Bill O'Riely's. This is completely and utterly him attempting to use a school ceremony at a predominantly black school to push a political message to spread out into the masses.
Perhaps at some point I may've been able to give him a break, but I just can't anymore. His dishonesty, his disingenuous attitude, his utter and complete fake "above the frey" persona is nothing but a cheap, insulting, cover of a pure political beast to the very core.
I've never used any of those things either, so the same applies to me, I guess.
Obama is known for his blackberry, though, so he's not completely computer illiterate; I'm sure he could learn all those things easily enough ... as could I. But that doesn't make his statement a lie.
That's because the Japanese already bought him off. We're bailing them out next.
There's really no reason for me to retype something I already basically said multiple days ago in another thread so...
He said it for the same reason he says everything. It was what was political advantageous at that time to state to make the point he wanted to make to push his political agenda, and nothing more. The man is a political machine and nothing else, everything and anything coming out of his mouth can not be taken as anything more than that, any more truth than that, because truth for him is completely and utterly a maleable object that can be contorted to whatever design is needed in any given instance.
I could say the same thing about you. Talk about political hackery.