My quotes were one hundred percent accurate

Also failed:
" You must pass the bill to know what's in it " - Nancy Pelosi (not an actual quote)

What she said was "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."

It's still the same general message and it's still stupid, telling voters that they can't find out what a bill consists of until it's already enacted.

The Clinton and O'Donald statements can't be verified, but it seems like you're nitpicking on the rest.

Btw he did not have anything to do with creating the internet, period

Can I quote you on that? hehehe See previous link. Do you know what ARPANET is? Do you know how politicians get stuff done? 2 + 2 = 4.

What she said was "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."

Failed quote *again*. When you include a '.' in a quote, then that should mark where the person's sentence *actually* ended. If the person says other things after the quote, you should have an ellipsis (...) to represent the fact that you have *elided* what was said.

Your own link proves you misquoted.

This is basic intellectual honesty 101.

Do you know how politicians get stuff done? 2 + 2 = 4.

NUH AH!! 2+2 = 5. Orwell said so himself. If Orwell said it, it must be true!! All hail Orwell.

The Clinton and O'Donald statements can't be verified, but it seems like you're nitpicking on the rest.

The Al Gore one is way off. The only one worthy of any benefit of the doubt is the Obama one. So "nitpicking on the rest"?! What rest?!

Notice how all my quotes are of what you guys have *actually* written? It is *not* fricken hard, guys.

Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V on Windows, equivalent on Mac. A tad trickier on mobile devices, but still doable. And if you can't be bothered to actually quote, then don't put it in fricken quotation marks.

Steel beams can't melt fire. Not possible. Nuh-uh.

For those interested in intellectual honesty, here's a decent intro into quote mining (what these guys are doing here): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context

NUH AH!! 2+2 = 5. Orwell said so himself. If Orwell said it, it must be true!! All hail Orwell.

I have a feeling you have no idea how apt your invocation of Orwell is on this thread.

@ WCT: I have a feeling you have no idea how overly nitpicky and pathetic both sides of this argument is.

Both of you made mistakes here. Accept it, and move on.

Edited 1/29/2016 04:02:58

I know, it is so annoying. I could rival the terra-cotta warriors of Qin Shihuangdi with the army of straw men in this thread.

XD

Though I think stone warriors beat straw warriors...

here's a decent intro into quote mining (what these guys are doing here)

WCT you should give me some credit. All my quotes we're a 100% accurate.

Gaffers.

Y'all are pretending like Gafs mean everything.

if we were to record people 24/7 from when they are 1.... no one would ever become president.

if we were to record people 24/7 from when they are 1.... no one would ever become president.

+1. Except Teddy. Everyone loved Teddy. Oh how I miss Teddy.

Teddy Rosevelt?

Of course. I still think he could win today. Literally who hates Teddy except people who hate Americans??

Edited 1/29/2016 04:28:35

@Jai, I was referring to the people I had previously replied to, i.e. Conservative and Eklipse. Sure, whatever, maybe yours were; I have no idea and don't really care. I don't particularly feel like checking everyone's quotes ever made. I focused on the most egregious initial batch and followed up with Eklipse's defense of one of them.

My purpose here is not specifically to identify in/accurate quotes, but to highlight some dishonest argumentation that caught my eye.

@ WCT: I have a feeling you have no idea how overly nitpicky and pathetic both sides of this argument is.

Both of you made mistakes here. Accept it, and move on.

Care to quote my "mistake", O Dishonest One?