snopes confirmed

[beags]

I know the other side will try to say this is not true. Then they will demand to see snopes.

But you know what, they confirmed this to be true.

You have to like the boldness of our elderly people. I can't help it, I kind of like his boldness.

www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/haroldestes.asp

[robinpa]

The letter you reference may very well be true, although this has circulated quite a bit over the last few years. What I find really interesting about it though isnt its urban legend status that it has garnered, but the factual inaccuracies Mr. Estes lists in his letter. For the purposes of my evaulation of his letter I am assuming it to be a real letter sent by Mr Estes as it appears to be. As to the inaccuracies heres what I mean:


1 - "We're no longer a Christian nation."

This was just one part of the speech Obama gave and this sentence was taken out of context. Here's what Obama actually said:

Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation — at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.


Obama was describing the various groups that comprise our nation and that we are not just a christian nation anymore like we were when the country was founded but we have grown to include people of all religions. But of course Mr. Estes didnt bother to listen to the whole speech Obama made. He only heard the beginning few words and disregarded the rest the same as some of the more ridiculous talking heads at fox news,right winger radio shows and right winger blogs.


2 - "America is arrogant."

In this case this was also taken out of context from a speech Obama gave but it was also paraphrased for effect. Here's the speech that Obama gave to the European students in Strasbourg, France on April 4, 2009 where that statement came from:

It's always harder to forge true partnerships and sturdy alliances than to act alone, or to wait for the action of somebody else. It's more difficult to break down walls of division than to simply allow our differences to build and our resentments to fester. So we must be honest with ourselves. In recent years we've allowed our Alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there's something more that has crept into our relationship. In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.
But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad.

On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth. They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated. They fail to acknowledge the fundamental truth that America cannot confront the challenges of this century alone, but that Europe cannot confront them without America.

In that speech Obama is talking about the state of our relationship with Europe and that there has been mistrust and an unwillingness to work together to face the challenges that affect the world as a whole. The arrogance Obama was speaking of was our own past leaders unwillingness to try harder to bridge the growing divide between them and us. The arrogance was that those past leaders didnt think we needed to in order to be prosperous. He wasnt saying America as a whole is arrogant, he is saying that some of our past leaders and their foriegn policies have been arrogant. But again rather than listen to the whole speech and try to understand what the president was trying to say, Mr. Estes took one word out and made up his own interpretation.


3 - "America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

Once again here is another bit taken out of context and paraphrased for effect. This was taken from Obama's speech at Cairo University in Egypt, June 4, 2009. Heres what Obama really said.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.


This is probably the most inaccurate of the inaccuracies. Obama was not saying that America hasnt lived up to her ideals. Obama was clearly saying that after 9/11 we as a country were so angry and hurt over the attack that we allowed our emotions to guide our thinking and our decision making processes to the point that we took steps that were not in keeping with our ideals. Torturing detainees with water boarding, as well as the abuses at abu ghraib were examples of those actions that were taken that were not in keeping with our ideals as a country. But Mr. Estes once again only heard what he wanted to and disregarded the rest.

4 - "America is mean- spirited"

This statement actually came the closest to being accurate but not completely. Mr. Estes wrongly says Michelle Obama said it when those were not her words. Here is what Mrs. Obama said in 2008:

we’re a divided country, we’re a country that is “just downright mean,” we are “guided by fear,” we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. “We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day,” she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I’m young. Forty-four!”

In that statement, Mrs Obama was stating a fact. After 8 years of Bush, 9/11, 2 wars ( one over non existant WMDs), and the credit and housing market collapse, this country was mean. She was stating that because she was trying to show us that we as country have to change.

The statment of America being "mean spirited" was made by Obama in 1990 and it was intended to describe the country back then. Heres the portion of the speech where it was said.

America suffered when the movements of the 1960s dissipated, he said. Those movements succeeded in raising doubts about harmful traditions of sexism and racism, but failed to offer a viable alternative.

“Hopefully, more and more people will begin to feel their story is somehow part of this larger story of how we’re going to reshape America in a way that is less mean-spirited and more generous,” Obama said.

“I mean, I really hope to be part of a transformation of this country.”And the future of black people and of America generally? “It depends on how good I do my job,” he said.

Obama was talking about wanting to change America for the better. He was also stating fact that our country has been mean spirited in the past. But again he said that back in 1990 during the height of Bush 1's presidency.


So all in all I would hope for Mr. Estes' sake that the letter is a hoax or urban legend and not real. Because if it is real and if those are Mr. Estes' exact words without any editting or changes, then he is not just bold, but clearly he is senile as well. Also, if the letter is real then it shows him to be yet another of the many brainwashed souls out there who spends way too much of his time getting his news from non-credible sources like Fox News, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, and the rest of the neo con Cirque de stupide.

[beags]

Good answer Rob.

Everything a politician says is taken out of context. It happens on both sides.

What I found interesting about this was for a change, the letter isn't a hoax, it was actually written to the president and sent to congress as well. It was a military person (or former military) who wrote it.

Were the statements taken out of context? Perhaps so, as you stated, but they were still said. People will percieve them how they want to.

[robinpa]

I am not sure I would be willing to say that this letter is 100% genuine just yet beags. Sure there is some compelling evidence that Mr. Estes was a real person and that he may have written a similar letter some years back. But whether the letter he wrote is word for word an exact match with or even remotely resembles the one that has circulated over the last few years and been stamped with many names or not is still in my opinion unconfirmed since no official copy of his letter has been shown publicly or even been seen by anyone other than by the sources snopes cites for confirmation. Also snopes is a site dedicated to urban legends, hoaxes, and scams. Now that Mr. Estes is dead, that final confirmation, may never happen.

[mox]

Good morning!

[beags]

I am not sure I would be willing to say that this letter is 100% genuine just yet beags.

See now this is a typical statement of any democrat who doesn't like what is said against a person in their party. If it were a letter, proven to be true by snopes, and it was against a republican, then some republican would be saying . . . . . I know it's on Snopes, but that doesn't make it real. It hasn't been proven. Yet, right on the link Snopes explains HOW they confirmed the letter to be genuine.

Is that not the first question either side says . . . . . Did you confirm it with snopes? Now we have a snopes confirmation, AND they STILL won't believe it to be true. typical.

It's what I find funny about party followers.

I am not saying what the man said was not taken out of context. I am saying the letter in the link, is confirmed to be the real letter and from Mr. Estes.

[robinpa]

Apr 25, 2013 23:27:09 GMT -5 beags said:

I am not sure I would be willing to say that this letter is 100% genuine just yet beags.

See now this is a typical statement of any democrat who doesn't like what is said against a person in their party. If it were a letter, proven to be true by snopes, and it was against a republican, then some republican would be saying . . . . . I know it's on Snopes, but that doesn't make it real. It hasn't been proven. Yet, right on the link Snopes explains HOW they confirmed the letter to be genuine.

Is that not the first question either side says . . . . . Did you confirm it with snopes? Now we have a snopes confirmation, AND they STILL won't believe it to be true. typical.

It's what I find funny about party followers.

I am not saying what the man said was not taken out of context. I am saying the letter in the link, is confirmed to be the real letter and from Mr. Estes.

To clarify beags, I am not a democrat. My political views are in the middle not the left or the right. I tend to think paradise can be found some where in the middle through compromise. Your assertion that anyone who doubts the validity of the letter you referenced being a "party follower" is not uniformally true and something I would expect fuzzy to say as a blanket generalization, not you. One doesnt have to be a democrat or a republican to doubt such stories. One only needs to be willing to ask questions and research and not just take what they are told as truth unconditionally. I for one would be just as skeptical if this letter had been written by a democrat criticizing Bush if it was just as filled with inaccuracies as the letter you referenced.

Case in point was the conspiracy theories about bush being behind 9/11. There was supposedly some confirmed "sources" that pointed to the planes that hit the towers being military aircraft and not commercial airliners and that bush knew and approved of it. I didnt take that as truth either.

Now I agreed with you that Mr Estes was a real person, and that its appears that he wrote a letter to the president. My doubts were whether or not his letter was word for word exactly like the one that has been circulated. I stated clearly my reasoning for that.

First reason being that other than the confirmation sources snopes cited, no one other than Mr Estes has seen the actual written copy of the letter he wrote. All we have seen is the email copy which could very well have been altered, edited, or changed from the original.

The second reason was that this particular "letter" has been circulated quite a bit over the last couple years and every time it has been emailed around it has been reported to have come from other people and there have been variations of the letter that were different than the one you linked to.

The third reason was that the inaccuracies in the letter were so blatant that it was either written by someone who never actually read or heard the speeches of which they based their false notions on and most likely just repeated verbatim what people like beck, limbaugh, and their ilk told them, or they were too close minded and dim witted to actually understand the speeches from which they got their bogus notions from.

The fourth reason is that the "source" of your information is from snopes which is a site dedicated to internet hoaxes, scams, and urban legends.


As to my disagreement with what was said in the letter I also stated my reasons quite clearly for that because each and every point made in that letter was complete bs. I proved that by quoting the actual speeches where each of those mistaken points were made by Mr Estes by showing how he took parts out of context and paraphrased them in an attempt to change the meaning to suit his political leanings. No point that was made in that letter resembled truth or fact.

Now snopes explained how they confirmed that Mr Estes was a real person and they confirmed that he admitted to writting a letter, but they never confirmed that this particular letter was a word for word exact copy of the one he wrote. Until that is done I will continue to be skeptical. Perhaps you are not as familiar as I am with the various incarnations of that letter and how many times it has made its rounds on the net, but thats still no excuse to take such things as gospel. Stories like that are always designed for one purpose and one purpose only, to attack one party while bolstering another, and thats exactly why they should not be taken as 100% genuine. Please beags dont be like fuzzy and take stories like the one you referenced as gospel.

[beags]

Thank you Rob. I'm sorry I mistook you for a party follower. That was wrong of me. I hate it when people do that to me as well. I am also one of those that are in the middle. I don't register as a republican or a democrat. my in-laws and parents are registers democrats. MY husband is a registered republican. I am not registered as anything, and in the last few elections (Bush included) I voted third party. I will not close my eyes and vote for the lesser of two evils simply because society says my vote won't count if I don't vote for either of the two main parties. If I don't like what the two party system has to offer, I vote third party. I appologize again for insulting you.

Thank you for explaining where your thoughts come from. I understand now. I did like what you wrote the first time. I was impressed actually. I misundersood and thought you were questioning that he wrote the letter.

[robinpa]

No worries beags, I took no offense I just wanted to make sure you understood not only my thoughts regarding it but how I came to my conclusions about it.