Me too. I wouldn’t want people to get the wrong impression, just because you deliberately misquoted me.
Not so. I asked for a cite for your claim that:
From you, I got nuthin’. From a couple of others we got a statement from ONE Republican to the effect that Republicans want to be sure that Obama is a one-term president. In neither quote did we get a cite of any Republican saying that ruining the economy and making millions of Americans miserable was a Republican goal, which your post very much seemed to indicate was the case.
One possibility remains however, and that is that you have subsequently decided to claim that the comma in that sentence separates what the Republicans actually said from what you tried to portray them as having said. In other words, everything after the comma is a fantasy dreamed up by you. You more or less admitted this when you stated:
So to me, the issue had been settled: the Pubbies said they wanted to make sure Obama was a one-term president, and the rest was hooey.
Now you’re claiming that I misquoted you. Would yo care to show just where it was I did that?
Not necessarily. What if he truly believes that the biggest stumbling block to sustaining the American Economy is the policies of the current Administration? He can’t pass his own policies without the threat of a veto (if he can get them through the Senate).
It’s right here:
You misquoted somebody; if it wasn’t me, who was it?
Oops. You’re right. I put the quote mark in front of “will” when it should have gone in front of the word, “ruin”. My bad.
:rolleyes:
Look, we can settle this very easily. Do you deny that your post was meant to lead people to believe that Republican leaders have said that their most important job was to ensure that Obama was a one-term president even if it meant ruining the economy and making millions of Americans miserable?
If not, then we can dismiss the post-comma part of your statement as fantasy. If so, then I didn’t misquote you. I’m perfectly fine with either result.
They have to destrpy the economy to save it.
I do. You found it inconvenient to admit a Republican leader said making Obama a one term president was the most important goal, so you made a silly attempt to dismiss it by deliberatley misquoting me.
You may do what ever you wish; it does not change the fact that you deliberately misquoted me, and it does not change the fact that Republicans would destroy the economy in order to damage Obama.
So you admit then that no Republican leader has gone on record saying that the Republicans would be willing to ruin the economy and make millions of Americans miserable in order to ensure that Obama was a one-term president?
I never claimed they did.
Well then, as I said the last time you said this, the issue is settled. Thank you.
Apology accepted.
Hmm…I wonder which one of us will have the last word on this issue? 
However, I think, since you’re the one who’s post was shown to be wrong, it would be more sporting to let you have it. So, knock yourself out.
Your post is your cite?
Quoth John Mace:
In that case, the number 1 priority would be sustaining the economy, and getting Obama out of office would be but one of a number of possible means to that end (other possibilities being convincing Obama to compromise on the relevant policies, or getting a veto-proof supermajority in Congress). That’s not consistent with getting rid of Obama being the first priority.
Not really. Just because you would say it that way, doesn’t mean everyone else needs to.
In his mind, fixing the economy and getting rid of Obama are one and the same.
Then he expressed hinself poorly, because his words imply one is most important.
That’s your theory, but after the Republicans’ performance with the debt ceiling issue, I don’t think it’s the most likely possibility.
Again, not really, unless he thinks that the ONLY thing that will be accomplished by getting rid of Obama will be to improve the economy. I doubt very much that he does. In his mind, getting rid of Obama is necessary in order to fix the economy and, to pick one other very important issue, to make sure more SCOTUS justices like Roberts are put on the court.
Well, the only thing that is uncertain is what he meant. His words are indisputable, one thing is most important, and it is not improving the economy. Otherwise he would have said said “improving the economy is the most important goal, and making Obama a one term president is how to achieve it.”
He did not say that, so if that is what he meant, he expressed himself poorly.
It was a classic gaffe. He said what he meant.