Tommy Thompson's son: "We have an opportunity to send Obama back to Kenya"

[Lief 🗽]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/wisconsin-gubernatorial-candidates-son-says-we-h

lol

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Why does Thompson keep doing everything he can to lose?

[Ogre Mage]

Clearly, Team Thompson learned nothing from the "do away with Medicare and Medicaid" video.

Jason Thompson is one of many examples of why the GOP does so poorly with minorities.

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

[DrScholl]

Tommy Thompson has jumped the shark himself. He called Baldwin anti-Jewish, which is a big no no in campaigns.

[All Along The Watchtower]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

[Zioneer]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Oh come on, there's video of Tommy Thompson's son saying Obama is from Kenya.

[Niemeyerite]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

"We have the opportunity to send President Obama back to Chicago -- or Kenya" --->"We have an opportunity to send [President] Obama back to (...) Kenya".

I don't find it that different. It's not fabricated at all.

[Ogre Mage]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Do you think Jason Thompson's words were acceptable?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[minionofmidas]

Time to send him back to his grandmother's womb.

[Ogre Mage]

A second video of Jason Thompson has surfaced:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/17/tommy-thompson-son-birther-joke_n_1974001.html

This didn't happen twice by accident.  This racist son of a Thompson has no problem repeatedly stirring up the white nativist base against Obama.

[Keystone Phil]

Boy, Tommy Thompson's son is going to take a beating at the polls over this one.

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Do you think Jason Thompson's words were acceptable?

Haven't commented one way or the other. You are trying to deflect from the fact that it is simply unacceptable to fabricate quotes.

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

"We have the opportunity to send President Obama back to Chicago -- or Kenya" --->"We have an opportunity to send [President] Obama back to (...) Kenya".

I don't find it that different. It's not fabricated at all.

First of all, it is unclear that you quoted him correctly. Specifically, the actual text seems to be:

"We have the opportunity to send President Obama back to Chicago."


[Audience member  interjects, "Or Kenya!"]

"Or Kenya!"

Your editing makes it appear Thompson said "Kenya" in the same sentence when it is clear that his sentence ended with "Chicago."


Second, it is clear that Thompson was being serious in noting his desire to send Obama back to Chicago, while he seems to be joking about Kenya. The dishonest editing makes it appear that he was being serious regarding Kenya. 

Again, Thompson's son is responsible for what he said, and, not responsible for fabricated quotes assigned to him. He, himself, has apologized for the remarks he did make. Some jokes are in very bad taste. You have every right to bring up what he did say. You have no right to fabricate quotes.

[Ogre Mage]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Do you think Jason Thompson's words were acceptable?

Haven't commented one way or the other. You are trying to deflect from the fact that it is simply unacceptable to fabricate quotes.

I can see that.  Your failure to condemn Thompson's words certainly tells us something.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If only one could bring one's sense of moral outrage to bear on the actual substance, eh, Bob?

[BigSkyBob]

If only one could bring one's sense of moral outrage to bear on the actual substance, eh, Bob?

Well, as Dingel famously said, "If I let you set the substance of a bill, and, you let me write the process, I will screw you every time!" Allowing people to fabricate quotes with impunity is allowing them to, "screw you every time!"

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Oh come on, there's video of Tommy Thompson's son saying Obama is from Kenya.

Again, I was commenting about a fabricated quote at a certain event and time.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If only one could bring one's sense of moral outrage to bear on the actual substance, eh, Bob?

Well, as Dingel famously said, "If I let you set the substance of a bill, and, you let me write the process, I will screw you every time!" Allowing people to fabricate quotes with impunity is allowing them to, "screw you every time!"

Be that as it may, substance is called 'substance' for a reason, so perhaps after you've pointed out that people have, by your definition, fabricated quotes it might behoove you to move on to what the person against whom this doubtless unfathomable calumny has been perpetrated actually said rather than continuing to crow about the by-your-definition-fabrication over and over again after you've already made your opinion of it loud and clear to all and sundry.

[BigSkyBob]

The quote in the title was not an actual quote.

Why does the Chicago-emdash-or make it a jot better?

Quotes should be quotes. Fabricating quotes ought to unacceptable on principle.

It really wasn't a fabricated quote. But you knew that.

It really was fabricated. I know that because I am aware of his actual quote, which simply isn't what was cited.

Do you think Jason Thompson's words were acceptable?

Haven't commented one way or the other. You are trying to deflect from the fact that it is simply unacceptable to fabricate quotes.

I can see that.  Your failure to condemn Thompson's words certainly tells us something.

Am I smelling a whiff of hypocrisy in your remarks?

A man publicly declared Sarah Palin to be a "c#unt," and, subsequently gave Barack Obama a million dollar donation. Obama refused to return the donation when his sexism was exposed. I seem to remember deafening silence here concerning Obama accepting seven-figure contributions from such a sexist pig. If we are going to judge silence, what is one to conclude?

Again, I did not comment on Thompson's actual remarks because my being asked was simply an attempt at distracting the conversation away from the plain fact that a quote had been fabricated. Once again, I am confronted with the tactic of inflating a charge against someone, and, defending that tactic by accusing anyone who points it out as defending the indefensible.

[BigSkyBob]

If only one could bring one's sense of moral outrage to bear on the actual substance, eh, Bob?

Well, as Dingel famously said, "If I let you set the substance of a bill, and, you let me write the process, I will screw you every time!" Allowing people to fabricate quotes with impunity is allowing them to, "screw you every time!"

Be that as it may, substance is called 'substance' for a reason, so perhaps after you've pointed out that people have, by your definition, fabricated quotes it might behoove you to move on to what the person against whom this doubtless unfathomable calumny has been perpetrated actually said rather than continuing to crow about the by-your-definition-fabrication over and over again after you've already made your opinion of it loud and clear to all and sundry.

Quote marks have a meaning. They mean the person quoted stated the remarks between the marks verbatim. A quote had been fabricated not by "my definition," but, rather by the definition. Though I am simply right, other posters have made arguments about why fabricating quotes is a valid act. I answered those arguments. Instead of actually arguing why either my initial argument, or my rebuttals of their rebuttals were inaccurate, you launch into a purely ad hominem attack about me being repetitive. That's pathetic.

As to "moving on" to what Thompson said. That is impossible at this point. I was not asked to comment on what he said. I was told to give a yes-or-no answer to whether his remark was "unacceptable," whatever that means. There is an entire American tradition of biting satire directed against politicians in office. Giving an affirmative answer not only condemns the particular remark, but, a large number of satirists as well. Do I want to condemn an entire genre?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If only one could bring one's sense of moral outrage to bear on the actual substance, eh, Bob?

Well, as Dingel famously said, "If I let you set the substance of a bill, and, you let me write the process, I will screw you every time!" Allowing people to fabricate quotes with impunity is allowing them to, "screw you every time!"

Be that as it may, substance is called 'substance' for a reason, so perhaps after you've pointed out that people have, by your definition, fabricated quotes it might behoove you to move on to what the person against whom this doubtless unfathomable calumny has been perpetrated actually said rather than continuing to crow about the by-your-definition-fabrication over and over again after you've already made your opinion of it loud and clear to all and sundry.

Quote marks have a meaning. They mean the person quoted stated the remarks between the marks verbatim. A quote had been fabricated not by "my definition," but, rather by the definition. Though I am simply right, other posters have made arguments about why fabricating quotes is a valid act. I answered those arguments. Instead of actually arguing why either my initial argument, or my rebuttals of their rebuttals were inaccurate, you launch into a purely ad hominem attack about me being repetitive. That's pathetic.

First of all, I don't think you're entirely clear on what 'ad hominem' means, since I'm not criticizing you as a person (although you're making it more tempting by the second), but rather giving you helpful pointers on your debating style. Second, JulioMadrid provided an entirely acceptable (and accurate, if you know anything about how elision in citations and quotes is typically handled) alternative to both the original quote, which was misleading, and your insisted-upon full version, which wasn't any better anyway. At this point cooler heads should have prevailed, but you continued in your outrage at the unforgivable sin visited upon Jason Thompson, in a thread that should at this stage have moved to discussion of Jason Thompson himself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Entertaining, albeit as a joke, a racist canard about one's father's political opponent-by-proxy isn't 'biting satire directed against politicians in office', not least because it isn't actually funny. Failing attempts at 'satire' that employ racist conspiracy theories as figures of fun should certainly be condemned, yes, as should other types of unfunny attempts at humor. Your apparent conflation of generic universals with particulars is interesting, particularly for someone like me who's making a study of the aesthetics of Tendai Buddhism, but not actually a relevant response to the question of whether or not it's the case that racist conspiracy theories ought not be joked about. Sorry. (It's also not the case that you were limited in your range of potential responses to 'Yes' or 'No', which you should know, since you didn't answer 'Yes' or 'No'.)