Active Users:662 Time:27/10/2026 04:44:17 AM
How did he "backtrack" exactly? Joel Send a noteboard - 21/08/2010 04:35:33 PM
I know that's Dowds position, too, I just have no idea how she got there, but since you seem to maybe you can help me understand. What particulars of his first statement did he reverse in his second? Here's the most widely quoted part of the first:

"Recently, attention has been focused on the construction of mosques in certain communities -– particularly New York. Now, we must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of Lower Manhattan. The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country. And the pain and the experience of suffering by those who lost loved ones is just unimaginable. So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. And Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.

"But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. (Applause.) And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. The writ of the Founders must endure. "

Here's the second again:

"I was not commenting, and I will not comment, on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about. "

Please show me the conflicting portion(s) of those two statements, because I can't find them. I know much of the right dearly wanted to read the first as an endorsement of the mosque just as the much of the left wanted to read the second as a repudiation of it--I'm just not sure what basis either had for their respective interpretations of quite explicit terms. I mean, I think I remember this scene from one of my favorite films:

Prince Humperdinck: Surrender.
Westley: You mean you wish to surrender to me? Very well, I accept.

Irksome as it sometimes is, in the real world we have to content ourselves with what people actually said rather than what we wish or think they said.

Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
An amusing column on the NYC mosque by Maureen Dowd.... - 20/08/2010 12:33:27 AM 1622 Views
wow, that was an interesting read - 20/08/2010 02:03:52 AM 987 Views
Gingrich thinks he is a deep thinker? - 20/08/2010 09:42:15 AM 823 Views
We've been through this, too, haven't we? - 20/08/2010 10:12:15 AM 1132 Views
He makes historical references as often as possible, or at least in pretty much everything I've seen - 20/08/2010 12:37:02 PM 974 Views
As he was a history professor and writes histories and alternate histories, this is not surprising - 20/08/2010 05:33:48 PM 1121 Views
I'm aware of that - 20/08/2010 11:47:32 PM 845 Views
Re: I'm aware of that - 21/08/2010 12:40:29 AM 1143 Views
Re: I'm aware of that - 21/08/2010 01:19:37 AM 997 Views
Re: I'm aware of that - 21/08/2010 01:59:48 AM 901 Views
Conservatives love Rome. I don't know why. - 21/08/2010 01:20:27 AM 928 Views
Rome was more often than not governed by aristocrats and did, after all, invent the republic. - 21/08/2010 04:50:53 PM 1267 Views
"One man, one vote" always reminds me of Pratchett - 21/08/2010 05:03:35 PM 893 Views
Me too *NM* - 21/08/2010 06:53:22 PM 554 Views
Except there doesn't seem to be any conflict between either position. - 20/08/2010 10:06:20 AM 1084 Views
When has logical consistency trumped politics? *NM* - 20/08/2010 01:50:55 PM 457 Views
True, but it does mean there's no "there" there. - 20/08/2010 02:41:49 PM 908 Views
He has to learn he needs to be crystal clear on sensitive issues - 20/08/2010 02:03:43 PM 1122 Views
In Washington, one must always present the APPEARANCE of integrity... - 20/08/2010 02:40:24 PM 1031 Views
Clinton lied about the BJ but what is your airtight proof that Bush lied? - 20/08/2010 07:44:53 PM 1103 Views
Ask and ye shall receive: - 21/08/2010 06:42:50 PM 1270 Views
This is a bit along the lines of what I have been thinking. - 20/08/2010 07:49:15 PM 1112 Views
that sort of illustrates the problem - 20/08/2010 08:56:42 PM 943 Views
It does - 22/08/2010 04:56:54 PM 863 Views
Can't find anything now on the context of the second statement. - 21/08/2010 05:05:51 PM 999 Views
I didn't see the problem either. He was simply stating the obvious. - 21/08/2010 01:39:44 AM 851 Views
maybe - 21/08/2010 02:49:40 AM 1084 Views
Wow that is probably the best Dowd column I have ever read - 21/08/2010 01:35:36 AM 875 Views
Yes, his backtracking was quite pussy-ish. *NM* - 21/08/2010 04:00:31 AM 420 Views
How did he "backtrack" exactly? - 21/08/2010 04:35:33 PM 1186 Views
c'mon Joel. are you being intentionally thick? - 21/08/2010 05:02:27 PM 1182 Views
Having read those quotes I don't think he was backtracking on anything. (With link to speech) - 22/08/2010 06:27:06 AM 1125 Views
*NM* - 22/08/2010 01:37:23 PM 450 Views
did you take into your consideration - 22/08/2010 03:50:59 PM 862 Views
I can't imagine why they would express concern over it. It wasn't controversial. That is on them - 22/08/2010 03:58:32 PM 1056 Views
that would be - 22/08/2010 04:02:08 PM 1146 Views
But quote B just reiterated what he said the first time. - 22/08/2010 04:13:21 PM 1020 Views
I agree he is not backtracking - 22/08/2010 06:49:36 PM 981 Views
I agree with you, Joel and Tash on this one. - 22/08/2010 07:52:34 PM 1051 Views
While we're picking sides, I'm with Mook and Roland. - 22/08/2010 08:20:11 PM 890 Views
I never fail to be impressed with your intelligence - 22/08/2010 08:25:11 PM 1051 Views
I like how he's got rhetorical talents when it works - 22/08/2010 08:32:15 PM 927 Views
nope just human *NM* - 22/08/2010 08:37:17 PM 480 Views
that's not what Paul just said. - 22/08/2010 08:42:24 PM 992 Views
He couldn't stay out, no. - 22/08/2010 08:56:47 PM 1046 Views
I don't want to argue with you on a Sunday, my religion says I have to relax. - 22/08/2010 09:03:54 PM 1033 Views
key word: seem - 22/08/2010 09:06:40 PM 965 Views
I was only using that term for you guys. I don't feel like beating you with a rolling pin until you - 22/08/2010 09:14:39 PM 851 Views
good thing - 22/08/2010 09:39:52 PM 1255 Views
he could have and should have stayed out - 22/08/2010 09:57:57 PM 987 Views
I think he's certainly got rhetoric talents... - 22/08/2010 08:54:11 PM 1426 Views
You don't really seem like you're taking a side to me. - 22/08/2010 09:14:02 PM 1074 Views
I'm not even taking the time to comment on something so obvious as what he did. *NM* - 22/08/2010 02:53:10 AM 558 Views
Except, of course, that you just did. - 22/08/2010 12:30:00 PM 991 Views
Joel - 22/08/2010 05:37:45 AM 1173 Views
That last line was golden. *NM* - 22/08/2010 05:40:56 AM 510 Views
His phrasing in the first speech implied that it was a bad idea. But legally they have the right. - 22/08/2010 06:32:59 AM 1089 Views
nonsense - 22/08/2010 03:39:30 PM 1029 Views
I still don't see how it can be misinterpreted except by intent by the listener. - 22/08/2010 04:08:52 PM 999 Views
so we have reached the point of no return... - 22/08/2010 04:18:46 PM 1036 Views
In your case it would have to be number 2. - 22/08/2010 07:38:20 PM 997 Views
ah, but I have no agenda here... - 22/08/2010 07:41:59 PM 844 Views
lol.<3 - 22/08/2010 08:49:35 PM 998 Views
that it is... - 22/08/2010 08:57:05 PM 1013 Views
Tash you are very much a fair person in this world - 22/08/2010 08:34:38 PM 1094 Views
Or there is another option: 3) He was using tact. - 22/08/2010 09:01:49 PM 1015 Views
On the off chance that this: - 23/08/2010 12:38:48 AM 1201 Views
I do remember your reply... - 23/08/2010 02:57:29 AM 1462 Views
Lies, prevarication and deceit again, eh? - 22/08/2010 01:17:45 PM 1479 Views
that was a decent explanation.... - 22/08/2010 05:18:18 PM 929 Views
Thanks. - 22/08/2010 05:41:28 PM 1007 Views
I do feel bad for them - 22/08/2010 08:40:36 PM 905 Views
Re: Joel - 22/08/2010 07:53:51 PM 1069 Views
Agreed. *NM* - 22/08/2010 08:25:38 PM 619 Views

Reply to Message