Obama Twice Mistakenly Mentions ‘My Sons,' While Defending Contraception Mandate

reply to post by aching_knuckles

Why is this post not in the Hoax bin? This question is about this topic

I agree, why is this not in a hoax bin? Obama did not "Mistakenly Mentions ‘My Sons', as the post author claims. He made this same speech to two different audiences at two different times, so it was an obvious intentional euphemism over gender inequality. Whether you dislike how he phrased it or not, it was clearly a deliberate phrase, and one that the vast majority of us perfectly understood.

Has ATS jumped the shark that it now allows political trolls to hijack it's forums?

Originally posted by xuenchen


Problem: What will supporters think now ?

That you people are not just idiots but so desperate it is sad. I thought Obama had a chance of losing this next election but by the looks of the crap you are trying to use against him, he might as well wait around for his 3rd term to start.

Threads like these explain exactly why as a people we are completely #ed. There is many threads in the global meltdown that have 1 to 2 pages of replies on something that is very important to everyone, or, at least should be, then we have this tripe with 10 pages.

Neo96, I feel sry for you bro, your anger is misguided, you've been duped like many others, time to wake up.

I'm not even sure what the OP is trying to insinuate this suppose slip up was suppose to mean? LOL. He said exactly what he meant to say, there was no slip up, he didn't mistake his two daughters for two sons, someone is blinded by hatred, or can't read, one of the two.

reply to post by aching_knuckles

Four censored posts in a row. I think you broke my record lol.

Ok, I think romneys tactic of using nets to catch poor people has some merits, but I wasnt aware amercians had a right to hunt and shoot their families...

As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property, and he will fight the battle on all fronts to protect and promote the Second Amendment.

Well, only in Amercia.

Edit to add: He also wants enhanced access to opportunities to protect your family? Yikes! Personally I prefer not to have opportunities to protect my family.

Originally posted by narwahl
Ok, I think romneys tactic of using nets to catch poor people has some merits, but I wasnt aware amercians had a right to hunt and shoot their families...

As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property, and he will fight the battle on all fronts to protect and promote the Second Amendment.

Well, only in Amercia.

Edit to add: He also wants enhanced access to opportunities to protect your family? Yikes! Personally I prefer not to have opportunities to protect my family.

edit on 31-5-2012 by narwahl because: (no reason given)

Human is the most dangerous game. Romney knows this.

As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property, and he will fight the battle on all fronts to protect and promote the Second Amendment.

I thought this had to be a misquote from a Rmoney supporter, but it actually comes from the Rmoney campaign itself. (mittromney.com).

Jeebus, who does this guys PR copy? "Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property". Isn't hunting and shooting your family an exclusive goal from protecting them? And how exactly does one hunt your home or property? Do you give your home a 30-pace head start before going after it with a .30-06?

My old English teacher would have been apoplectic in seeing a sentence like that.