The Merciad

Comments (2)

Comments are Closed.
All The Merciad Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest
  • J

    jaybAug 28, 2009 at 7:51 pm

    It never ceases to amaze me just how “out there” people can get, regardless of political affiliation… come back to Earth.

    Next time, spend a little more energy into discussing relevant topics with meaningful data.

    While these types of stories have been around for ages, and surely there are media outlets (print, online, TV, radio) where such nonsense is marketed successfully, it does not excuse the writer from investing some integrity in their work.

  • B

    bulbousJul 2, 2009 at 7:16 am

    I found the following problems with your article:

    First four paragraphs: A pointless introduction filled with fear rhetoric.

    Paragraph 5: This is anti-Obama rhetoric that offers no indication that legitimate sources were used. Angry extremist blogs do not count as legitimate sources.

    Paragraph 6: If you knew anything about military operations, you would understand that the kind of immediate withdrawal of troops that you are implying here is not only illogical but it was never promised by Obama during the campaign. He always argued for a gradual withdrawal, which makes considerably more sense. Moving the war to Afghanistan is an unfortunate but necessary step in U.S. national security. You might want to check some of the publications that provide analysis on this argument, which have been written by experts in the field of national security. You can start with the Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations.

    Paragraph 7: 1. The term “civilian national security force” in no way implies mandatory military service. Your logic here is simply not sound. 2. I Googled the Rahm Emmanuel quote. The concerns here (no where discussed by any kind of legitimate website) stem from a bill called H.R. 1388. I read the bill. There is no mandatory service mentioned. The bill calls for an expansion and additional funding of programs like the Peace Corps. agrees here: and here

    Paragraph 8: Wrong. Obama has never supported banning all guns. He supports reinstating a ban already in place on assault weapons, but has not called for expanding any bans.

    Paragraph 9: Obama has made it clear he opposes the Fairness Doctrine. There is no evidence supporting this claim.

    Paragraph 12: Wrong, wrong, wrong. Providing health care to everyone is not the same as forcing people to limit their choices. Once again your logic is unsound and you have no facts to back up your claim.

    Paragraph 13: This is especially stupid. We are experiencing a slowly evolving energy crisis that is going to require that American make sacrifices. Driving Hummers and squandering our energy resources are not our rights. Spoiled Americans think they are entitled to live a lifestyle that is not sustainable. No one’s rights are being taken away by limiting our energy usage.

    Paragraph 16: As college students and citizens of this nation we should not only be free thinkers but informed thinkers. The sources that you use to inform the opinions you express in this article are doing a great job of brainwashing you. They are fabricated rumors spread by Obama’s opponents who are desperate to destroy him, no matter how crazy it sounds.

    Paragraph 17: I did look them up. You clearly do not know how to check your facts.

    Paragraph 18: Incorrect grammar here.

    Paragraph 19: And here.

    I am saddened that you did not allow Mercyhurst to educate you to know the difference between credible, factual sources and hype found on the internet. Most of your claims were easily debunked on FactCheck,org, where it was determined that many of them originated as rumors and propaganda. Just because an extremist blogger claims that Obama said or did something, doesn’t mean he actually did. You need to find better sources if you want your opinions to be taken seriously.

Activate Search
The end of the America we know: Obama’s not so hidden agenda