The outraged screams of the right wingers is like sweet wine coursing through my veins today. 
I like snickering at politicians’ verbal bloopers as much as anybody else, no matter what party they belong to—and goodness knows, as a somewhat stumble-prone classroom lecturer, I find plenty of comfort in the sight of seasoned professional public speakers tripping over their tongues on camera—but some of these alleged bloopers from Obama seem a bit, shall we say, misunderestimated. For example:
? What’s supposed to be wrong with this? Are you under the impression that Arkansas is not in fact “nearby” to Kentucky? Sure it is: look at a map.
No, but it was a bit dumb of you to jump to the conclusion that Cervaise really thought that words like “fag” and “retarded” were okay to use in a serious comment, rather than as a sarcastic allusion to another source. Cervaise doesn’t post like that.
(Here’s a helpful hint: when you see another poster use a phrase that you find startlingly uncouth or inappropriate, google that phrase in quotation marks to check whether it’s a quote from something. A google search on “talks like a fag and his shit’s all retarded” turns up multiple hits that will quickly tip you off to its being a stock phrase of sarcasm; some even identify the source as Idiocracy.
As someone who’s extremely un-hip to pop-culture references myself, I can testify that this is an easy and useful strategy to avoid scoring too high on the old whoosh-o-meter.)
Illinois borders Kentucky; Arkansas does not. Therefore, by Obama’s logic, he should be the one with a slight edge with Kentucky voters.
Also, on your other point, there’s something mildly amusing about a person being called a “dumbass” because he or she hasn’t seen the movie, Idiocracy. Isn’t it ironic? Don’t you think?
I’m curious, Stephe96… who did you vote for in 2000 and 2004?
No, as I explained above, Starving Artist was called a dumbass because he jumped to the conclusion that a sarcastically offensive quoted phrase was intended as a serious straightforward comment, and got his ass whooshed.
I understand that you may feel a little touchy about this because you did exactly the same thing, but I think trying to defend the whooshee or nitpick the whoosher just makes you look even more whooshed. Let it go, is my advice.
Huh? I did nothing of the sort. And I’m not defending anybody about anything. I just thought the idea that not seeing a movie called Idiocracy made someone a “dumbass” was sort of funny. I didn’t comment on the quote, didn’t recognize it and don’t really care one way or the other. I’m not quite sure where I was “whoooshed” in this whole exchange, to be honest. Care to point it out to me?
Bush and Bush. Why?
Maybe, except that not having seen Idiocracy wasn’t actually the reason Starving Artist was being called a dumbass. Although naturally, Starving Artist tried to spin it that way, and can you blame him? Being whooshed is embarrassing, after all.
Where you jumped on the bandwagon of Starving Artist’s whooshitude, enthusiastically agreeing with him about how liberals unfairly get away with using non-PC offensive epithets (like Cervaise saying “fag” and “retarded”):
Dumbass. 
IQ test.
I actually can’t agree that either of them are stupid for not getting the reference. I din’t even think it can rightly be called a “whoosh” if you have no familiarity with a reference. The Idiocracy quote would sound fairly left-field and offensive if you didn’t know it was a movie quote.
And to think we didn’t previously know it was possible to actually fail one
Once again, nobody’s being called stupid or whooshed for not immediately recognizing that the phrase was a quote from Idiocracy.
The whoosh lay in the fact that Starving and Stephe were so ready, nay eager, to jump to the conclusion that an insult from a liberal poster (at least, liberal enough to dislike Chris Wallace) using the words “fag” and “retarded” was meant to be taken at face value.
Hell, I’ve never seen Idiocracy either and never encountered that particular quote before this thread. But I was able to deduce that Cervaise’s shocking remark was most likely a quote from something, instead of a non-ironic, earnest attempt to disparage Wallace by likening him to a “fag”.
Hell, I still think my basic point stands. There’s no way I would be allowed to get away with using those words, even if I was quoting an obscure movie. I believe it would be called “hate speech.” But you have to admit, you didn’t immediately know it was a movie quote, did you? You had to “deduce” it and, presumably, look it up. I’ll admit it looked to me like some out-of-left-field insult against Chris Wallace. I don’t know who Cervaise is or what he or she is like. Why is it a “whoosh” that I took a statement at face value? It’s not like the quote added anything to the conversation or, indeed, was even funny enough to warrant further investigation. Ah, well. I’m pretty much done on this topic, to be honest.
I think the point is that if someone says something outrageously out of character, it might be a joke or reference or something other than what it seems. Assuming it is only what it seems without further investigation, merely relying on immediate outward appearances, is risky. Some people use sarcasm, hyperbole, and obscure references more than you might expect.
There’s an author who says there are two kinds of readers: the ones who say “I don’t understand what he wrote, what’s the matter with him?” and “I don’t understand what he wrote, what’s the matter with me?”
Well, to be honest, I don’t follow Cervaise’s posts all that closely. 
Good advice is good advice and that is good advice. Thank you.
My sole response to this whole debacle, such as it is, is:
See? This is why you rehearse.
I do think that Stephe96 has a valid point in that those of us who are conservative posters still would not be allowed to use quotes like that without coming in for accusations that we are using movie quotes in order to promote what is in our case actual bigotry.
In other words, the double-standard in what is deemed permissible language between the liberal and conservative factions here still exists, even when it comes to movie quotes.
An example of this double standard can be seen in the use around here of words like ‘cunt’. You may remember the thread where I was having fun with a liberal poster’s use of the word ‘cunt’. For decades I’ve been reading complaints from liberals and feminists about what a demeaning and offensive word cunt is, how it demeans and objectifies women and is considered on par with the n-word in terms of offensiveness. Conservatives and the unititiated, both here and in society in general, have long been given the old fisheye or outright condemned for using it, yet liberal posters here toss it around all the time. Same goes for words like bitch and twat.
So it’s not out of the question that a conservative poster would read something like Cervaise said about Wallace and take that be his literal meaning, especially when aimed at a Fox News television personality.
You are correct when you say that my not recognizing the movie quote was not the real reason Cervaise called me a dumbass, but it’s incorrect to say that I “spun” my response to it.
There is a certain long-standing animus between Cervaise and me, and for a while there he took to following me around and at the end of every post to me he’d make the claim that my brain doesn’t ‘work right’. So, since he chose to pretend that my not knowing his quote was facetious was the not the real reason for calling me a dumbass, I chose to use that as an opportunity to toss his silly little insult back at him.
And Ogre, if you’re taking my comments in re to Cerviase as a scream of outrage due to Obama’s inauguration, you clearly haven’t read…or if you have, you haven’t remembered…what I’ve had to say about Obama going all the way back to the primary season.
I’m thinking that, when all things are considered, he is very likely what the country needs right now and I’m taking taking a wait-and-see attitude as to how he will govern, and though I’m opposed to certain elements of his philosophy - what I would refer to as socialistic in nature, though I know others would quibble with that characterization - he does seem like someone who will govern thoughtfully and with the intent to govern for everyone and not just those who share his ideology, and as it happens I’ve had a fairly serene and pleasant day, thank you very much. So much so, in fact, that even my barber commented on it when I got my hair cut this afternoon.
So, sorry to deflate some of your glee, but I’m afraid that you’ve been whooshed on your own petard (:D) by taking my comments as being literal evidence of my ire at Obama’s having been sworn in today.
Do you think that they didn’t actually rehearse? As PopeJewish points out (and, yes, this does take some of the wind out of my quoted article) public speaking is difficult. People flub. Heck, there would be no hilarious outtakes and bloopers shows if that were not the case.
No, but Biden can.
Well theu obviously didn’t rehearse enough!