Originally Posted By cmpaley <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/4296467.html" target="_blank">http://www.chron.com/disp/stor y.mpl/life/4296467.html</a> Interesting article. No registration required.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer You're doing it wrong - just cut and paste the parts of the article that you agree with and don't make any comments of your own.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And then keep doing it like a child because you know others don't like it.
Originally Posted By DlandDug In Orwell's world, government statements were issued with no context to a populace that clearly understood they were being manipulated. The Bush administration's recent shift in rhetoric was not simply sent out as a fiat. Indeed, the very statemnent that is usually used to "prove" that Bush is engaged in doublespeak is itself completely truncated, in order to strip it of context. Here's the Bush statement we get from the Usual Suspects: "Listen, we've never been stay the course..." And here is what Bush actually said to George Stephanopoulos on This Week: "Listen, we've never been stay the course, George. We have been -- we will complete the mission, we will do our job and help achieve the goal, but we're constantly adjusting the tactics. Constantly." Now it is certainly within anyone's right to dispute the substance of what he is saying. But to strip a comment of context and then label it Orwellian is intellectually dishonest.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder At times in the past, when Bush would say "stay the course", does anyone really think he always knew exactly what he meant, especially in light of the way he explained it to Stephanopoulos? At times in the past, I'd be willing to say Bush meant don't change a thing. And that's what's so laughable about this re-defining of the phrase.
Originally Posted By DlandDug No argument there, SPP. Even members of the GOP are pleased that Bush is getting away from such an emphatic use of language where it no longer applies.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>But to strip a comment of context and then label it Orwellian is intellectually dishonest.<< Indeed. Kind of like the way the GOP is siezing on Kerry's botched punchline as 'an attack on our fighting men and women.'
Originally Posted By friendofdd >>>Indeed. Kind of like the way the GOP is siezing on Kerry's botched punchline as 'an attack on our fighting men and women.'<<< It seems to me , having both heard and read his comment in full, that this is not stripped of context. The discussion is about how it sounded to hearers.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Hmmm. Kerry's comment isn't being taken out of context, more's the pity. And it certainly isn't being labeled Orwellian. Let's just say it's being bandied about as the best possible distraction going into the final weekend before election day. That is, until Karl Rove produces bin Laden in a dress.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I'll never know.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder If Rove can produce bin Laden wearing anything, then I'll applaud. Not getting bin Laden is one of the main failures of this Administration.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Indeed. Kind of like the way the GOP is siezing on Kerry's botched punchline as 'an attack on our fighting men and women.'<< Methinks Kerry is the Democrat's version of Dan Quayle.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Doesn't Bin Laden wear a dress to begin with?<< There are plenty of things to make fun of bin Laden about without resorting to cheap shots about the style of clothing most men in that region wear.
Originally Posted By DAR You're right Tom. The good Muslims wear traditional garb. The terrorist Muslims wear dresses. Thanks for the correction.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>If Rove can produce bin Laden wearing anything, then I'll applaud<< Monday.
