[quote]Sloth wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Does this really need to be explained yet again? Read my post above. All you need is another source that’ll say “no, she knows her shit.” Why hasn’t even one come forward yet?
Instead of rolf’ing if you had thought for even a moment or two you’d have realized how simple this would be.
Example for the sloths among us:
Anonymous #1, 2, & 3: “she didn’t know shit about Africa!”
Anonymous #4, 5, & 6: “yes she did.”
See how easy that is? Again, I’d like to see such evidence. It’s scary to think (and nearly imposible to believe) that she was so ignorant.
Please, god, prove this report wrong.
Are you kidding? “Sources” have come foward. Steve Biegun, a fellow who can actually be checked on, since he identifies himself, had this to say.
He says there’s no way she didn’t know Africa was a continent, and whoever is saying she didn’t must be distorting “a fumble of words.” He talked to her about all manner of issues relating to Africa, from failed states to the Sudan. She was aware from the beginning of the conflict in Darfur, which is followed closely in evangelical churches, and was aware of Clinton’s AIDS initiative. That basically makes it impossible that she thought all of Africa was a country.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWViMjhiZjI4ODlkZjg0NDg5MTJmNmIwYmFiNDRmNWU=
There’s the counter-source you were looking for. One that can be verified as real, since he’s named. I guess you should’ve read up more.
Just admit it, you folks fell for bad reporting.[/quote]
I doubt it was bad reporting, if you mean in the sense of ‘erroneous’. Making errors on purpose is not the same as ‘erroneous’.