I dropped by a FB site, "PalinPatriots" earlier, and ran across this post by Christine Pierson ... so I just had to 'try' to set her straight. I know, hopeless! (I post under the name Karen Ono (italics) and responses are blockquoted. )
Christine Pierson: I just heard through the grapevine that BO will be calling the annual Christmas tree a holiday tree. He is really anti-Christian.
Dianne Simons: ofcourse he is a muslim
Karen Ono:Another email conspiracy --- like the one about the coin Sarah talked about --- debunked.
Non-Religious themes at the White House started with Laura Bush.
Harlan Mary:I am surprised he didn't call it the Allah Tree...He's a piece of dog squeeze
Karen Ono: Christine .. I am curious ... why would you want to believe what you 'heard' instead of informing yourself to see if it's true?
I never understand people who resist 'facts' in favour of believing what confirms their bias.
That is a serious question.
Karen Celinski:I don't really trust Snopes. They are very soft on Obama.
And Sarah trusting that thing about the coins does bother me. But many ppl bought it, so it just goes to show she's not perfect.....
Karen Ono: Karen ... anyone who 'reads' knew that coin story was old. Sarah should have known this, she is supposed to be informed... I understand that 'some people' would believe whatever they 'hear' but I expect someone who calls herself a leader to check her facts..
And if you don't trust Snopes then that information is widely available .. point is that ... Christine's post is false, Laura Bush actually is the one who removed 'religion' from the WH tree, it was widely reported every year.
As for being 'soft' on Obama ... that makes no sense ... they document their answers very well. You just don't 'like' that much of what you want to believe is debunked.
Karen Celinski:uuhhh. I read Snopes all the time. And they are soft on Obama. I stand by what I said. Take your Lib glasses off and look.
Karen Ono:Ok then show me a story where that happened, just one story that they debunked that was in fact true??
Since Snopes sources/documents their answers, then you must be able to give some evidence to support your comment.
Karen Ono: Karen ... so it's my 'lib glasses' that cause me to know that Christine's story is false?
If 'lib glasses' help me sort out facts from fiction, then I wonder, what is wrong with that?
So my question stands: why would you want to believe what you 'heard' instead of informing yourself to see if it's true
IRONY here: Karen Celinsky 'stands by' what she says SO MUCH that within a minute ... Karen Celinsky had deleted all of her posts!
How is that for the courage of her convictions??
I wonder how long my 'one-sided' conversation with Karen Celinsky will stay up there?