Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Move over, Cynthia McKinney (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Move over, Cynthia McKinney
vegimo
Member
Member # 6023

 - posted      Profile for vegimo   Email vegimo       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Asked and answered, vegi: IT WAS NOT MEANT AS A JOKE:"

Which is why you edited your post to change "bitter joke" to "bitter reference" and add the facepalms, right? I am asking a question here, not speculating about your intent.

Posts: 255 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, because I appeared to have presumed correctly that you would not grasp what a "bitter joke" is, i.e. that it's not one of the haw haw sorts.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
and "misogynistic," like "lie," speaks to intent.

I understand that you and many others assume that the word "rape" only applies to women. People are you are part of the reason that it's near impossible for male victims to get help. But please grasp at some level that I make no such assumption. I see rape as a human problem, not just a "woman's issue." So please don't project your assumptions into my thinking when you project absurd motive inferences.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vegimo
Member
Member # 6023

 - posted      Profile for vegimo   Email vegimo       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OK, let's imagine that a "person like you" understands why it is all right for you to say the things you do, and "people like me" project absurd motive inferences regarding what you say. Does that make what you say any less jarring to "people like me?"

I have black friends. I know a gay guy.

Posts: 255 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Does that make what you say any less jarring to "people like me?""

Your post at August 20, 2012 09:55 PM, on page 1, your first post on this thread, seemed intentionally malicious. That makes it very difficult for me to care what you think.

Hell, veg, you broadsided me without even making it clear which statement you'd found offensive. How exactly can you convince yourself that's a vaguely motivated harsh personal attack constitutes some noble attempt on your part to improve the debate?

If anyone other than vegimo and Al (vegimo's chief enabler on this thread) found my Missouri remark offensive, then I apologize and will speak more carefully on this delicate subject.

"understands why it is all right for you to say the things you do"

Maybe it's not OK. Maybe what I said was over the top and hurtful to some innocent persons. Maybe I would have acknowledged that if you hadn't acted like a sit-in brainwasher and smeared me with "misogyny."

Consider the fact that when you said "not funny" that I didn't even know what you thought was supposed to have been funny. I thought you were upset that I was comparing Akins to that moron McKinney.

You could simply have said, "Pete, your crack about Missouri seems to trivialize rape. Was that meant to be a joke? If so, it's a bad one." If you'd said that, then I'd have taken it as a valid critique of how I post, rather than as a "now I've got you you son of a bitch" game that frames your vague complaint in a laundry list of other grievances.

[ August 21, 2012, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vegimo
Member
Member # 6023

 - posted      Profile for vegimo   Email vegimo       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You are correct, I was vague and I was harsh. I apologize for that. I also should not have implied that you were a misogynist. I don't generally believe in calling people names or applying labels to them, so I am sorry for that as well. To be absolutely clear, I was saying that the phrases were offensive.

"Focking" is not a term I have ever used before, and I will never use it again.
"Get off [person's] leg" is not a phrase I have ever used before, and I will never use it again.
Those items, along with the remark about a demand for an apology and the list of people, were a compendium of things that annoy me about you. I should have addressed them as they came up, not all at once, and for that I apologize.


Now I am done.


Edited to add (even before I posted because I just refreshed the screen):
Your last edit mirrors what I just said...you got me.

Posts: 255 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Apology accepted. I apologize for my original statement, which I concede *was* ugly, offensive, and did not clearly communicate what I wanted.

I concede that your most recently articulated criticisms are valid and on point. Please feel free to call me on these when they occur. I've actually been working on editing out the word "focking" over the last week. I think there's a time and place for "get off my leg," but certainly not every day or even every week. Note that neither one of us demanded an apology here, and I can understand why such demands would annoy you. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that I've made such a demand in all of 2012).

Cheers.

[ August 21, 2012, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
At least Akin has opened a possible second career. If he fails to win election to the Senate, maybe President Romney can make him Surgeon General.

Ahahahahaha
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
threads
Member
Member # 5091

 - posted      Profile for threads   Email threads   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow, it's both shocking and refreshing to see a politician held responsible for being a complete dumbass. Kudos to republicans for dumping him.
Posts: 778 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's see how it pans out if they decide that if he wins they will gain control of the Senate.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
Wow, it's both shocking and refreshing to see a politician held responsible for being a complete dumbass. Kudos to republicans for dumping him.

It's shockingly refreshing to see anyone seeing the half full side of the glass during election season. Kudos to you, sir.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mynnion
Member
Member # 5287

 - posted      Profile for Mynnion   Email Mynnion   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
First Akin's comments are stupid and he should be called on them. I could actually respect his ProLife stance if it did not contain exclusions except in the case of maternal danger (the need for fetal toxic cancer treatments etc.).

If an individual truly believes that human life begins at conception then the ethical question becomes whether the life of a child is more important then the trauma the victim of rape, abuse,... will have to experience by bringing that CHILD to term. It is easy to see how an individual with that belief system could side with the CHILD. Abortion becomes murder. I think the phrase "War on Women" used ProChoice crowd (and our liberal political representatives) is really an unfair representation of these beliefs.

It is equally unfair for the ProLife crowd (and our conservative political representatives)to call the ProChoicers baby killers. Their belief that the FETUS is not potential but not a true human precludes that.

I am stating the above because I don't think Akin's comments should be condemned based on his beliefs. Those can be sorted at the ballot box. My issues is with his ignorant spreading of untruths and his insensitivity.

Threads
quote:
Wow, it's both shocking and refreshing to see a politician held responsible for being a complete dumbass. Kudos to republicans for dumping him.
Maybe I am not giving the GOP enough credit but I doubt they would have called him on this if it hadn't blown up.
Posts: 1271 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chael:
quote:
Originally posted by G3:
So Akin says something that is truly moronic that he tries to backtrack on, what, within 12 hours? 24? No way he actually believes this, just something he popped off with the likely end result being that the power structure of the Democrats in Missouri stays intact and a very hot wedge issue has the potential to become prominent in other races.

All this at a time when voter enthusiasm on the left is nearly non-existent and it looks like truly conservative candidates that are truly outside the traditional R/D power base may win.

We gonna go with coincidence on this?

Well.. yes? Akin said something inflammatory and stupid, and unfortunately for him there generally aren't take-backs on verbal gaffes in politics, no matter how one didn't actually /mean/ what came out of one's mouth (and given how he phrased the take-back I read, I'm not so sure that he didn't mean what he said--it sounded more like he was trying to assure everyone that he didn't mean to cause pain with his comment, which does not speak to whether or not he believed what he said). He fumbled, and the opposing party is going to jump all over it.

What is unusual about this?

First, there are indeed "take-backs" for verbal gaffes in politics if you're a liberal. We all know this, see Joe Biden.

Second, Akin said something not just inflammatory but insanely inflammatory and that certain special kind of Joe Biden stupid. Akin knows that, as a Republican, he's going under the microscope. He knows he will not get the free pass routinely handed out to liberals. He knows he cannot say these types of things. Yet he does it. I don't know, is Akin a Joe Biden type of guy? Does he have a track record of being just that kind of special stupid?

What is unusual is the scope of damage done by this comment. If the left can get abortion front and center as a election issue, they can fire up a base that is more than a little dispirited. With this comment, Missouri becomes significantly harder for the right to win and virtually assures a democrat victory in the senate race.

[ August 22, 2012, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: G3 ]

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would say that pulling all the Republican money out of Missouri is what's virtually ensured a Democratic victory in Missouri.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But what, specifically, did the GOP call him on? The "this" in this case was not his position: his position is exactly the same as that of the GOP, who once again endorsed the policy calling for a constitutional change to outlaw abortions (really, to extend relevant constitutional protections to "unborn children" without mention of possible exceptions):
quote:
“Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed... We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.
His problem, rather, was to awkwardly illustrate how difficult it is to reconcile that proposal with the widely held belief (even among GOP supporters) that women pregnant as a result of rape might have legitimate reasons for killing their unborn babies.

I find it interesting (convenient, even) that the GOP can endorse both such a policy (allowing the policy to play well in specific locales) as well as a presidential nominee who opposes the same policy (avoiding greater backlash at the less granular, electoral college level).

So the question becomes: give credit for what – for playing politics, or for chastising Akin for honestly holding to the putative GOP beliefs in question?

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Dems will redouble their efforts now in MO, but bear in mind that Akin didn't say anything that a great many Republicans, and in particular MO Republicans, don't believe. The problem is that he said it. That will give ammunition also to Obama and Dems elsewhere who are facing challenges from the Republican wing of the Conservative Party.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would say that it is your form of government that virtually assures a democrat victory in Missouri...
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How so?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lower case 'd'
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ha!

he got you there, Al.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G3:
First, there are indeed "take-backs" for verbal gaffes in politics if you're a liberal. We all know this, see Joe Biden.

Time Magazine has a top-ten list of his gaffes, and a lot of them are just him speaking his mind--apparently that's verboten. One of them was him saying "f---", where a microphone could maybe have picked it up. Oh no--how terrible!

Some of them, on the other hand, are really bad. His most recent "chains" one for example. If most anyone else had said that one to that crowd, they would have been stomped on. Hard.

I guess having a history of saying the wrong thing at the wrong time can be protective coloring. [Wink]

quote:

Akin knows that, as a Republican, he's going under the microscope.

All politicians go under the microscope. You may argue that different politicians are observed for different things, which is reasonable, but being a public figure involves being studied for flaws.

quote:

I don't know, is Akin a Joe Biden type of guy? Does he have a track record of being just that kind of special stupid?

Apparently. From the Washington Post:

quote:

Akin was the candidate Democrats wanted to run against well before his remarks about rape and abortion made national news. He had a history of controversial comments[...]

Mind you, I can't actually find these additional controversial comments, because the one we're talking about has pushed them down to page 1,938 or so. [Wink]
Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"he got you there, Al."

<snort>

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And once again ...
quote:
Originally posted by G3:
If the left can get abortion front and center as a election issue, they can fire up a base that is more than a little dispirited.

So what's happening? This:

quote:
Democrats said that they will feature Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parent Action Fund, Nancy Keenan, president of the NARAL Pro-Choice America and Sandra Fluke ...

<snip>

What's more, the Democrats are expanding their list of women ready to assail the GOP on women's issue....

All just a coincidence. Go back to sleep now.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, yes. I don't see this as a grand "coincidence"--just politics. Something landed in their laps and they're running with it. I don't see why this is so strange. But no big deal--it wouldn't be the first time I've disagreed with someone in my life. [Smile]

[ August 22, 2012, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Chael ]

Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some of them, on the other hand, are really bad. His most recent "chains" one for example. If most anyone else had said that one to that crowd, they would have been stomped on. Hard
I think you are really misunderestimating the crowd, Chael. If anybody else had said what he said in context (aside from maybe a bank executive, which would have been somewhat ironic) they would have been treated the same way (at the time that is - obviously, any politician who makes a statement where you can excise the context and make it look bad will be skewered by political opponents eventually). The full Biden statement in context (from CNN, but you can get it anywhere):
quote:
"(Romney) is going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, unchain Wall Street," Biden said at a campaign event in Danville, Virginia. "He is going to put y'all back in chains."
Do you think Biden meant literal chains and literal slavery or do you think he meant wage slavery? If the latter, where's the beef? If the former... I can't help you. [Smile]
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Donald, I had already read the full statement with context, but thank you for providing it. Of course he /meant/ wage slavery. I believe that if the exact same metaphor were used to the same crowd by a conservative that it would be called race-baiting, in the usual "look how they're trying to divide us!" sort of way, and insensitivity at the very least. It's prime political hay.

But again, to be completely clear with you, I agree that he meant nothing more than wage slavery. I was not addressing his motives, as I believe the comment of mine which you quoted makes plain.

Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chael:
Donald, I had already read the full statement with context, but thank you for providing it. Of course he /meant/ wage slavery. I believe that if the exact same metaphor were used to the same crowd by a conservative that it would be called race-baiting, in the usual "look how they're trying to divide us!" sort of way, and insensitivity at the very least. It's prime political hay.

But again, to be completely clear with you, I agree that he meant nothing more than wage slavery. I was not addressing his motives, as I believe the comment of mine which you quoted makes plain.

Have you seen the video? Watch it, it comes across quite a bit different. If we're being generous, his meaning is ambiguous and can be construed as "wage slavery".
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Chael, if you believe he clearly meant wage slavery, then your initial claim is a complete non sequitur:
quote:
Some of them, on the other hand, are really bad. His most recent "chains" one for example
Perhaps you misspoke, but a gaffe is not a gaffe if the only problem with a statement is that other people would have the same statement misinterpreted.
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Do you think Biden meant literal chains and literal slavery or do you think he meant wage slavery?"

I think me meant to denote wage slavery, and that he meant to evoke the memory of literal chains. I think Biden was clearly race-baiting, and I think he may have gone too far even with his target audience. OTOH, it's not terribly offensive for white Republicans to stand up and hoot and holler about being offended.

What WRs should be doing is repeating and parodying Biden all over the country, "he's gonna put you people in chains again," etc.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think me meant to denote wage slavery, and that he meant to evoke the memory of literal chains
Well, yes - that what the term "wage slavery" is all about [Smile]
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DonaldD:
Chael, if you believe he clearly meant wage slavery, then your initial claim is a complete non sequitur:
quote:
Some of them, on the other hand, are really bad. His most recent "chains" one for example
Perhaps you misspoke, but a gaffe is not a gaffe if the only problem with a statement is that other people would have the same statement misinterpreted.
I disagree with your interpretation of the word 'gaffe'. While it would be nice if only our intentions mattered, the broader context of the social situation in which we utter our comments /is/ taken into consideration.

I think you and I have idiolects which diverge by more than the norm, judging by past conversations. This dialogue is not likely to be productive.

Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How is that any worse than many, many Republican claims about Democrats? Do you really think that Obama wants to put death panels in place and choose which old people should die? Republicans exhorting the voters to "lock and load" isn't a worse metaphor? Do you really think that Obama is doing things that the nazis would approve of? I don't understand why people are getting so upset about this not particularly wise choice of a metaphor, but it's an apt metaphor nonetheless. Except, of course, that this is an election year, as all years are in these latter days.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*scratches her head* Why does something have to be worse in order to be bad?
Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chael:
*scratches her head* Why does something have to be worse in order to be bad?

Answer the lady, Al.

[Smile]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Because it seems that those who propogate the death panel lie, like the "lock and load" metaphor, believe Obama to do things like nazis, are the ones who find this chain metaphor to be especially outrageous. Thus, "worse."

Doesn't mean it isn't bad. But you still wonder why it is so much "worse" than all that other stuff. [Wink]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chael
Member
Member # 2436

 - posted      Profile for Chael   Email Chael   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah, I see--more of a general rant against smear tactics, then. I agree that there are plenty of people in politics saying terrible things about each other, often to the point of absurdity.

I'm fairly sure that the last time something like this particular conversation came up, it was agreed that one ought not to feel pressured to present a laundry list of bad things, properly designed to encompass the two sides we recognize in our political cage-fight, merely so one could comment on one. But perhaps I am mistaken. [Wink]

[ August 22, 2012, 07:05 PM: Message edited by: Chael ]

Posts: 872 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks, Wayward. Chael, this is politics, so what one candidate said in one news cycle without considering that it goes on all the time only deserves a limited amount of attention. If the hits keep on coming, then you've got a pattern and have more to comment on. If one party does it much more than the other, then you have another pattern. And if you're behind, then fixating on it is yet another pattern. Let's see how long this one stays alive and which ones are raised (and re-raised) in the two conventions.

"Answer the lady, Al."

Hmmm, I seem to remember someone complaining about people getting off his leg....

[ August 22, 2012, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've never used that phrase without much better provocation than you just had, Al. You need to study your man John Stewart, and learn a better sense of timing.

" Chael, this is politics, so what one candidate said in one news cycle without considering that it goes on all the time only deserves a limited amount of attention."

Jesus wept, Al. [Frown] Jesus wept.

[ August 22, 2012, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You may speak freely, Pete. Chael can tell me if that answer doesn't ring true for her. I addressed the specifics of Biden's comment previously.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"You may speak freely, Pete."

I used to be able to speak freely with you, Al, but you took care of that. [Frown]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1