Seriously, what is the difference between the two, and where do you see that, prior to the manufactured outrage over the supposed difference, anyone acknowledged such a difference?
Ah, here it is in the Gospel Principles lesson manual:
“Bishops” is listed separately from “pastors (presiding oficers)”, so apparently it refers to stake presidents and perhaps some lower auxillary presidents.[/tangent]
“Binder? I just met her!”
It’s not the same.
In the case of “you didn’t build that,” the people who picked up on that statement knew what Obama was saying; they just saw the opportunity to pull those words out of context and use them against him.
In this case it appears some people really are reading the text of the Libya statement and actually cannot comprehend what appears to me to be reasonably plain English.
I guess this has been beaten to death, but how about one more post on it. Perhaps a simple example, devoid of grammatical rules or explanatory statements, might change your mind.
What if George W Bush had made the following statement shortly after Sept. 11, 2001?
It’s of course an altered version of Obama’s recent Rose Garden speech (see italics). Would you assume he was making a general statement about terrorist acts, or about the specific WTC attacks?
From Anduril: I know you love your idol so much that it pains you that he’s being attacked. But you have to let go of your idolatry of Obama before it’s too late.
Thus spaketh the guy slavishly repeating Fox News talking points…is too funny!
This is the kind of behavior I was describing earlier. No more of this, please.
Thank you John T. If the Obama administration takes longer than a day to respond, Williard will be there with his spit stained talking points.
Yes, really. :dubious:
Missed the edit window:
Or not, if this line of discussion goes contrary to what Marley23 was just talking about.
To be fair, for a long time now this sort of test has been largely irrelevant. Google’s search algorithms are so personalized that (even when you are not logged into your Google account) it draws heavily on the profile they’ve built up of you to present the results it’s expected you want to see.
Yeah, the Straight Dope didn’t suddenly become one of the top ten message boards in the world in the past two years 
then made a “concerted effort” to go and find more women–
So all five of Romney’s multiple personalities got together in order to hire more women? 
I see what you did there.
There’s SO much wrong with what Mitt said on women in the workplace, but there’s something I found even simpler and even more headsmacky in his quote:
Hey Mitt, what’s this “IF” shit? Is hiring women somehow optional these days?
Apparently he confused POTUS with his personal life coach.
“Shiny negro.” That’s so wrong. I’m still laughing.
Didn’t mean to cross the line. Meant to point out the irony of the “obama worship” meme being parroted by the right. Didn’t think I was being overly personal. Again, I apologize.
Point of order: Obama referred to Benghazi as an act of terror again, in Colorado, the day after the Rose Garden speech.
[QUOTE=Barack Obama]
Let me say at the outset that obviously our hearts are heavy this week – we had a tough day a couple of days ago, for four Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Libya. Yesterday I had a chance to go over to the State Department to talk to friends and colleagues of those who were killed. And these were Americans who, like so many others, both in uniform and civilians, who serve in difficult and dangerous places all around the world to advance the interests and the values that we hold dear as Americans.
And a lot of times their work goes unheralded, doesn’t get a lot of attention, but it is vitally important. We enjoy our security and our liberty because of the sacrifices that they make. And they do an outstanding job every single day without a lot of fanfare.
So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. (Applause.) I want people around the world to hear me: ** To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. **It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.
[/QUOTE]
Can we put this “he never called it terror” thing to bed now?
I think righties are having a hard time figuring out if this the right time to complain, “Geez, wouldja drop this purely semantic issue and get back to real stuff like jobs, the economy, gas prices, abortion, anything but this tedious word-wrangling shit awready?” or to pull the double-down card of “I will die a martyr’s death on a fiery pyre before we let you get away with the claim that he didn’t say, or didn’t mean, the words ‘act of terror’ in the right way, or at the right time, or to the exclusion of other words.”
I do enjoy watching them argue with themselves. If someone made a show called “Republicans in Agony” I’d watch it every night and twice on Sundays.
Even that’s a slightly dubious claim: