Active Users:317 Time:17/05/2024 10:15:40 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
I still don't see how it can be misinterpreted except by intent by the listener. Tashmere Send a noteboard - 22/08/2010 04:08:52 PM
Without telling my husband what it was about, I had him listen to it and asked if he saw a problem with it. He understood and stated what was said and meant. When I told him what the second comment was and what the controversy was he was as incredulous as I am. He is no Obama fan but he is fair minded. For that matter there are things Obama has done or not done that I can't or won't defend. But this controversy is so obviously unfair that I couldn't let it go without saying anything. If it had been George W Bush I would have said the same thing as I said here.

If people want to bash someone for something that is valid I have no problem with that. But this whole thing reeks of tabloid sensationalism. Gossip mongering is gossip mongering no matter who is involved.

I see this crap at work going on too much at work where somebody says something and their enemies twist it around to try to make them look bad and other people buy into it without having actually hearing what was said or taking into account the credibility of their sources. It is like they want to believe the worst and jump on it like they were starving for it...I don't get this.
Reply to message
An amusing column on the NYC mosque by Maureen Dowd.... damookster - 20/08/2010 12:33:27 AM 1383 Views
She has a point. Bush had the guts to weather the storm on DPW. Legolas - 20/08/2010 12:42:21 AM 793 Views
DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means. Tom - 20/08/2010 12:50:14 AM 653 Views
Re: DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means. Legolas - 20/08/2010 12:56:44 AM 900 Views
Once again, listen to the Economist and don't use abbreviations that aren't obvious. Tom - 20/08/2010 06:38:08 PM 637 Views
That abbreviation was obvious and all over the place at the time the incident happened. Legolas - 20/08/2010 07:59:08 PM 717 Views
I certainly don't remember seeing it anywhere. The abbreviation was unnecessary in any event. Tom - 20/08/2010 10:43:05 PM 639 Views
Sure, I could've done that, if I had realized it would puzzle people. I did not. *NM* Legolas - 20/08/2010 10:59:42 PM 441 Views
Always assume abbreviations will confuse. Tom - 22/08/2010 06:38:11 PM 801 Views
My vote goes to Dwarf peyote wigwam. *NM* mapthis - 20/08/2010 12:56:46 AM 518 Views
Deep Plied Wedgie. vote for DPW *NM* StarrBecca - 20/08/2010 01:03:08 AM 411 Views
well since Christie is actually a republican he makes a better example than Bloomberg random thoughts - 20/08/2010 01:53:44 PM 738 Views
wow, that was an interesting read BlackAdder - 20/08/2010 02:03:52 AM 752 Views
Gingrich thinks he is a deep thinker? Camilla - 20/08/2010 09:42:15 AM 602 Views
We've been through this, too, haven't we? Joel - 20/08/2010 10:12:15 AM 891 Views
He makes historical references as often as possible, or at least in pretty much everything I've seen snoopcester - 20/08/2010 12:37:02 PM 707 Views
As he was a history professor and writes histories and alternate histories, this is not surprising Isaac - 20/08/2010 05:33:48 PM 894 Views
I'm aware of that snoopcester - 20/08/2010 11:47:32 PM 625 Views
Re: I'm aware of that Isaac - 21/08/2010 12:40:29 AM 911 Views
Re: I'm aware of that snoopcester - 21/08/2010 01:19:37 AM 765 Views
Re: I'm aware of that Isaac - 21/08/2010 01:59:48 AM 653 Views
Conservatives love Rome. I don't know why. Ghavrel - 21/08/2010 01:20:27 AM 709 Views
Rome was more often than not governed by aristocrats and did, after all, invent the republic. Joel - 21/08/2010 04:50:53 PM 1024 Views
"One man, one vote" always reminds me of Pratchett Floffe - 21/08/2010 05:03:35 PM 681 Views
Mmm, that seems to be how Romes patricians dealt with it, too. Joel - 21/08/2010 05:09:09 PM 686 Views
Me too *NM* Camilla - 21/08/2010 06:53:22 PM 446 Views
He did come up with a great plan to take over Congress in 1994. Tom - 20/08/2010 06:39:12 PM 680 Views
Except there doesn't seem to be any conflict between either position. Joel - 20/08/2010 10:06:20 AM 837 Views
When has logical consistency trumped politics? *NM* Macharius - 20/08/2010 01:50:55 PM 351 Views
True, but it does mean there's no "there" there. Joel - 20/08/2010 02:41:49 PM 665 Views
He has to learn he needs to be crystal clear on sensitive issues random thoughts - 20/08/2010 02:03:43 PM 908 Views
In Washington, one must always present the APPEARANCE of integrity... Joel - 20/08/2010 02:40:24 PM 757 Views
Clinton lied about the BJ but what is your airtight proof that Bush lied? random thoughts - 20/08/2010 07:44:53 PM 833 Views
Ask and ye shall receive: Joel - 21/08/2010 06:42:50 PM 1026 Views
This is a bit along the lines of what I have been thinking. nossy - 20/08/2010 07:49:15 PM 874 Views
that sort of illustrates the problem random thoughts - 20/08/2010 08:56:42 PM 728 Views
It does nossy - 22/08/2010 04:56:54 PM 646 Views
Can't find anything now on the context of the second statement. Joel - 21/08/2010 05:05:51 PM 765 Views
I didn't see the problem either. He was simply stating the obvious. Tashmere - 21/08/2010 01:39:44 AM 615 Views
maybe damookster - 21/08/2010 02:49:40 AM 859 Views
Then restating it for those who refused to hear it, so that someone else could refuse to hear it. Joel - 21/08/2010 04:22:30 PM 861 Views
Wow that is probably the best Dowd column I have ever read Roland00 - 21/08/2010 01:35:36 AM 641 Views
Yes, his backtracking was quite pussy-ish. *NM* everynametaken - 21/08/2010 04:00:31 AM 309 Views
How did he "backtrack" exactly? Joel - 21/08/2010 04:35:33 PM 918 Views
c'mon Joel. are you being intentionally thick? damookster - 21/08/2010 05:02:27 PM 946 Views
Having read those quotes I don't think he was backtracking on anything. (With link to speech) Tashmere - 22/08/2010 06:27:06 AM 891 Views
*NM* Avendesora - 22/08/2010 01:37:23 PM 352 Views
did you take into your consideration damookster - 22/08/2010 03:50:59 PM 638 Views
I can't imagine why they would express concern over it. It wasn't controversial. That is on them Tashmere - 22/08/2010 03:58:32 PM 840 Views
that would be damookster - 22/08/2010 04:02:08 PM 930 Views
But quote B just reiterated what he said the first time. Tashmere - 22/08/2010 04:13:21 PM 761 Views
I agree he is not backtracking random thoughts - 22/08/2010 06:49:36 PM 747 Views
I agree with you, Joel and Tash on this one. TaskmasterJack - 22/08/2010 07:52:34 PM 806 Views
While we're picking sides, I'm with Mook and Roland. Legolas - 22/08/2010 08:20:11 PM 675 Views
I never fail to be impressed with your intelligence damookster - 22/08/2010 08:25:11 PM 821 Views
I like how he's got rhetorical talents when it works nossy - 22/08/2010 08:32:15 PM 698 Views
nope just human *NM* Roland00 - 22/08/2010 08:37:17 PM 378 Views
that's not what Paul just said. nossy - 22/08/2010 08:42:24 PM 754 Views
He couldn't stay out, no. Legolas - 22/08/2010 08:56:47 PM 800 Views
I don't want to argue with you on a Sunday, my religion says I have to relax. nossy - 22/08/2010 09:03:54 PM 820 Views
key word: seem damookster - 22/08/2010 09:06:40 PM 735 Views
I was only using that term for you guys. I don't feel like beating you with a rolling pin until you nossy - 22/08/2010 09:14:39 PM 634 Views
good thing damookster - 22/08/2010 09:39:52 PM 1038 Views
Seems I interpret his speech on the iftar differently from you and Tash - see my reply to Tash. *NM* Legolas - 22/08/2010 09:25:13 PM 457 Views
Saw it, and yes, I believe we disagree. nossy - 22/08/2010 09:29:31 PM 650 Views
he could have and should have stayed out random thoughts - 22/08/2010 09:57:57 PM 767 Views
I think he's certainly got rhetoric talents... Legolas - 22/08/2010 08:54:11 PM 1171 Views
You don't really seem like you're taking a side to me. TaskmasterJack - 22/08/2010 09:14:02 PM 853 Views
I'm not even taking the time to comment on something so obvious as what he did. *NM* everynametaken - 22/08/2010 02:53:10 AM 436 Views
Except, of course, that you just did. Joel - 22/08/2010 12:30:00 PM 769 Views
Joel Roland00 - 22/08/2010 05:37:45 AM 944 Views
That last line was golden. *NM* Ghavrel - 22/08/2010 05:40:56 AM 406 Views
His phrasing in the first speech implied that it was a bad idea. But legally they have the right. Tashmere - 22/08/2010 06:32:59 AM 864 Views
nonsense damookster - 22/08/2010 03:39:30 PM 815 Views
I still don't see how it can be misinterpreted except by intent by the listener. Tashmere - 22/08/2010 04:08:52 PM 789 Views
so we have reached the point of no return... damookster - 22/08/2010 04:18:46 PM 798 Views
In your case it would have to be number 2. Tashmere - 22/08/2010 07:38:20 PM 773 Views
ah, but I have no agenda here... damookster - 22/08/2010 07:41:59 PM 603 Views
lol.<3 nossy - 22/08/2010 08:49:35 PM 779 Views
that it is... damookster - 22/08/2010 08:57:05 PM 733 Views
hee. Well, I still don't agree with you, but at least you're snuggly.^_^ *NM* nossy - 22/08/2010 09:09:22 PM 569 Views
Tash you are very much a fair person in this world Roland00 - 22/08/2010 08:34:38 PM 856 Views
Or there is another option: 3) He was using tact. Tashmere - 22/08/2010 09:01:49 PM 774 Views
I really have to disagree with your interpretation of that first speech. Legolas - 22/08/2010 09:22:32 PM 1061 Views
On the off chance that this: Vodalus - 23/08/2010 12:38:48 AM 955 Views
I do remember your reply... damookster - 23/08/2010 02:57:29 AM 1189 Views
Lies, prevarication and deceit again, eh? Joel - 22/08/2010 01:17:45 PM 1249 Views
that was a decent explanation.... damookster - 22/08/2010 05:18:18 PM 717 Views
Thanks. Joel - 22/08/2010 05:41:28 PM 772 Views
I do feel bad for them Roland00 - 22/08/2010 08:40:36 PM 669 Views
Re: Joel nossy - 22/08/2010 07:53:51 PM 805 Views
Agreed. *NM* Camilla - 22/08/2010 08:25:38 PM 505 Views
In the interests of fairness ( this does not support or detract from my position), here is the full Tashmere - 22/08/2010 09:22:50 PM 976 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes