Obama is smart enough, has the personality, as well as the temperament that he always sees in shades of grey and nuance, and he would have created these two opinions almost simultaneously.
Obama can have those two opinions together at one time for they are not contradictory.
But he specifically mention opinion 1 to one audience to get a desired result. While on the next day spoke opinion 2 to another audience to get a different desired result. He refrained to mention opinion 2 to the first audience for it would get him in trouble, same thing for the next day but in reverse.
In other words he was purposefully two faced.
In relationships this would make you a ho.
Obama can have those two opinions together at one time for they are not contradictory.
But he specifically mention opinion 1 to one audience to get a desired result. While on the next day spoke opinion 2 to another audience to get a different desired result. He refrained to mention opinion 2 to the first audience for it would get him in trouble, same thing for the next day but in reverse.
In other words he was purposefully two faced.
In relationships this would make you a ho.
This message last edited by Roland00 on 22/08/2010 at 05:39:35 AM
An amusing column on the NYC mosque by Maureen Dowd....
- 20/08/2010 12:33:27 AM
1504 Views
She has a point. Bush had the guts to weather the storm on DPW.
- 20/08/2010 12:42:21 AM
903 Views
DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means.
- 20/08/2010 12:50:14 AM
767 Views
Re: DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means.
- 20/08/2010 12:56:44 AM
1033 Views
Once again, listen to the Economist and don't use abbreviations that aren't obvious.
- 20/08/2010 06:38:08 PM
786 Views
That abbreviation was obvious and all over the place at the time the incident happened.
- 20/08/2010 07:59:08 PM
821 Views
I certainly don't remember seeing it anywhere. The abbreviation was unnecessary in any event.
- 20/08/2010 10:43:05 PM
748 Views
Sure, I could've done that, if I had realized it would puzzle people. I did not. *NM*
- 20/08/2010 10:59:42 PM
489 Views
well since Christie is actually a republican he makes a better example than Bloomberg
- 20/08/2010 01:53:44 PM
843 Views
Gingrich thinks he is a deep thinker?
- 20/08/2010 09:42:15 AM
707 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He makes historical references as often as possible, or at least in pretty much everything I've seen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
861 Views
As he was a history professor and writes histories and alternate histories, this is not surprising
- 20/08/2010 05:33:48 PM
1009 Views
I'm aware of that
- 20/08/2010 11:47:32 PM
734 Views
Re: I'm aware of that
- 21/08/2010 12:40:29 AM
1017 Views
Conservatives love Rome. I don't know why.
- 21/08/2010 01:20:27 AM
815 Views
Rome was more often than not governed by aristocrats and did, after all, invent the republic.
- 21/08/2010 04:50:53 PM
1146 Views
Except there doesn't seem to be any conflict between either position.
- 20/08/2010 10:06:20 AM
956 Views
He has to learn he needs to be crystal clear on sensitive issues
- 20/08/2010 02:03:43 PM
1016 Views
In Washington, one must always present the APPEARANCE of integrity...
- 20/08/2010 02:40:24 PM
902 Views
Clinton lied about the BJ but what is your airtight proof that Bush lied?
- 20/08/2010 07:44:53 PM
971 Views
This is a bit along the lines of what I have been thinking.
- 20/08/2010 07:49:15 PM
989 Views
I didn't see the problem either. He was simply stating the obvious.
- 21/08/2010 01:39:44 AM
726 Views
Then restating it for those who refused to hear it, so that someone else could refuse to hear it.
- 21/08/2010 04:22:30 PM
995 Views
Yes, his backtracking was quite pussy-ish. *NM*
- 21/08/2010 04:00:31 AM
364 Views
How did he "backtrack" exactly?
- 21/08/2010 04:35:33 PM
1046 Views
c'mon Joel. are you being intentionally thick?
- 21/08/2010 05:02:27 PM
1054 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
1007 Views
did you take into your consideration
- 22/08/2010 03:50:59 PM
749 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
944 Views
I agree he is not backtracking
- 22/08/2010 06:49:36 PM
852 Views
While we're picking sides, I'm with Mook and Roland.
- 22/08/2010 08:20:11 PM
779 Views
- 22/08/2010 08:20:11 PM
779 Views
I like how he's got rhetorical talents when it works
- 22/08/2010 08:32:15 PM
803 Views
nope just human
*NM*
- 22/08/2010 08:37:17 PM
426 Views
*NM*
- 22/08/2010 08:37:17 PM
426 Views
that's not what Paul just said.
- 22/08/2010 08:42:24 PM
867 Views
- 22/08/2010 08:42:24 PM
867 Views
He couldn't stay out, no.
- 22/08/2010 08:56:47 PM
914 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
923 Views
- 22/08/2010 09:03:54 PM
923 Views
key word: seem
- 22/08/2010 09:06:40 PM
843 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
739 Views
Seems I interpret his speech on the iftar differently from you and Tash - see my reply to Tash. *NM*
- 22/08/2010 09:25:13 PM
503 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
487 Views
Joel
- 22/08/2010 05:37:45 AM
1056 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
975 Views
nonsense
- 22/08/2010 03:39:30 PM
917 Views
I still don't see how it can be misinterpreted except by intent by the listener.
- 22/08/2010 04:08:52 PM
892 Views
so we have reached the point of no return...
- 22/08/2010 04:18:46 PM
903 Views
In your case it would have to be number 2.
- 22/08/2010 07:38:20 PM
877 Views
ah, but I have no agenda here...
- 22/08/2010 07:41:59 PM
709 Views
lol.<3
- 22/08/2010 08:49:35 PM
886 Views
- 22/08/2010 08:49:35 PM
886 Views
that it is...
- 22/08/2010 08:57:05 PM
886 Views
hee. Well, I still don't agree with you, but at least you're snuggly.^_^ *NM*
- 22/08/2010 09:09:22 PM
665 Views
Tash you are very much a fair person in this world
- 22/08/2010 08:34:38 PM
981 Views
Or there is another option: 3) He was using tact.
- 22/08/2010 09:01:49 PM
911 Views
I really have to disagree with your interpretation of that first speech.
- 22/08/2010 09:22:32 PM
1176 Views
Lies, prevarication and deceit again, eh?
- 22/08/2010 01:17:45 PM
1368 Views
- 22/08/2010 01:17:45 PM
1368 Views
that was a decent explanation....
- 22/08/2010 05:18:18 PM
819 Views
In the interests of fairness ( this does not support or detract from my position), here is the full
- 22/08/2010 09:22:50 PM
1113 Views
