>>>Again, that is all fine and good if there's a level of consistency. But when there's a pattern of aggressively challenging certain sources - and taking other sources (usually formal authority figures) with such high faith....
>
>If this is how you characterize a response to your calling Obama a liar: all you need do is provide stats or figures to support the pronouncements. Check the post to which you initially responded, for a sample.
John, you've been given more than ample proof of many lies by Obama. Your reply was that it was "partisan". That's a great game - ask for proof, receive it, dismiss it as partisan, and continue ask for proof as if you've received none.
Go back a year - when Obama appeared on national TV shows (like David Letterman) and continued to tell people that the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration that reacted to that silly anti-Islamic YouTube video. He was on David Letterman weeks after the attack. when both the CIA and State Department already realized the attack was coordinated by Ansar Al Sharia.
Obama had previously painted a narrative during the Democratic Conversion that "GM was alive and Al Q was dead", so it was extremely embarrassing. This is as big a lie as it gets - he wouldn't dare admit they were caught with their guard down and had ignored the increase in Al Q training facilities in North Africa - and decided to manufacture this bunk of a lie.
You've refused to acknowledge this. You've refused to use your "plural of anecdotal is not data" mantra when the President himself reads a letter from a single citizen as validation of his program (which, of course, blew up in his face when the citizen received subsequent letters from her state).
If you want to say, "I like Obama and I don't want to hear any bad news and I think people just bring up bad news because they hate him", then fine, I won't continue to bring these up. But you can't have it both ways - ask for information and then dismiss it because his opponents are using the information.
