Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 08:49 AM
Original message |
Everyone is parsing becuse it is far easier than developing a deeper understanding |
|
Gibbs said X and Y and, can you *imagine*, Z.
No he didn't.
Well, actually he did.
But meant something else. He wasn't talking to you.
He said XYZ. Here's a link to a clip.
And then there's Rahm.
Oh sure, bring back that old canard.
Canard? CANARD? He called me Q. And R and S.
He wasn't talking to you.
I know you can parse words and phrases, and infer meanings and reparse when the principal corrects his misstatement with another misstatement all to be parsed and reparsed.
But you see, here's the bottom line.
We *all* know what it meant. The stultified discussion that occurs here due to the constraints of the site prevent us from having a completely open discussion about what these quite likely unintended, but oh so telling quips mean and at whom they were really aimed. The duck theory is operative, and this all sure as hell is walking like one.
Ever since this administration took office - and for many, well before then - the tendency toward the more conservative and the unsympathetic eye toward the more liberal, has been easy to see. One need only look at the policies espoused, the content, not the names, of the bills signed. There is little in there for a liberal to love.
The comments by Rahm and Bobby are simply iconic parts of a pattern. And without the parsing needed by some to make their little points in defense, the comments are aimed at everyone - every single person - to the left of this administration.
|
Lost4words
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:03 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I heard that! Great Post |
|
But you see, here's the bottom line.
We *all* know what it meant. The stultified discussion that occurs here due to the constraints of the site prevent us from having a completely open discussion about what these quite likely unintended, but oh so telling quips mean and at whom they were really aimed. The duck theory is operative, and this all sure as hell is walking like one.
The shocking thing for me is how many buy into the current situation, most, it would seem, became political in the last year or so. They will one day be great foot soldiers for the cause after they pass through the blind allegiance stage.
Its a New Party and a New America they tell me, I guess they are correct. Time answers all questions.
|
disillusioned73
(963 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
5. I take your comment as a compliment.. |
|
because I seriously didn't "become political" until recently.... so I must be the exception cause I passed the "blind allegiance" stage during the healthcare "reform" debacle - which is why I chose disillusioned as my tag
|
Lost4words
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
10. as it was intended, I believed Bill Clinton walked on water |
|
I really thought as many do now that this leader would guide our nation through the fog, I didnt understand the DLC at that time and felt Democratic values were not for sale. In the USA profit now trumps God and everything has a price, some tell me it has always been this way. paraphrased quote from the film Casablanca,
"Welcome to the fight, with you on our side I am sure our side shall win"
|
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:04 AM
Response to Original message |
|
"the comments are aimed at everyone - every single person - to the left of this administration"
I agree with the conclusion. The only modification I'd make is to add "... and call them on it". They don't really mind if you are to their left, as long as you accept their compromises/sellout/capitulations as "necessary and supportable". Whoa be you if you suggest they failed.
|
xchrom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:09 AM
Response to Original message |
JohnnyLib2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:11 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Straight to the point, minus the b.s. |
stray cat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message |
6. In our simplicity and parsing we are no different than the extreme right or tea partiers |
|
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 09:20 AM by stray cat
I wish progressives were also rationale and reasonable and informed but of course they are prone to the same defects as any group in society
|
Electric Monk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
13. Sure, if you say say so. |
nc4bo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Well if orgs like Code Pink, Move-On, FDL, DKos, etc. are considered to be "the Pro's" |
|
than he/they certainly are talking about us.
These people also get $$ and media time and more often than not, represent those who feel they aren't adequately represented in this or previous Administrations.
Who are these "Professionals"?
So I'd like to hear some specific names otherwise, Gibby IS referring to all of us who continue to stand up for what we believe is right.
|
stray cat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Read the full exchange is the point of the poster and it seems you need to |
nc4bo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. So what if I still come to the same conclusion? nt |
Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. To be fair, you missed the point |
|
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 09:57 AM by Stinky The Clown
The latest exchange is nothing when considered alone. It is part of the larger pattern. In that larger context, it simply is one more polka dot to be added to a polka dot dress (or whatever analogy you might choose).
The OP wasn't about Gibbs or Emanuel, even as it cited them both. It requires more thought than that.
|
Barack2theFuture
(353 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 09:49 AM
Response to Original message |
phantom power
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 10:52 AM
Response to Original message |
blueworld
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 11:03 AM
Response to Original message |
15. Well, here's what I haven't understood for at least the last 5 years |
|
Am I really that "left"? Are core Dems actually "Centrist"? What is the definitive criteria for each of the endless labels? I thought Michael Moore made the excellent point years ago noting that when you list a set of goals, most people agree on them whether Dem, GOP, Conservative whatevah. The only debate usually involves the method of attaining the goal, not the goal itself.
So, I would love to find out how many Dems nationally who label themselves "Conservative" or "Centrist" actually quack just like I do. Our feathers may be different colors, but we're all ducks, know what I mean? Why do so many in D.C., like Gibbs, segregate different classes, label them & select particular groups to court or ignore? I don't get it.
Last point. My family is truly a mini-UN, with different religions & split between northern immigrants & southern DARs. We debate with gusto. When things get out of hand we use humor. My pro-union Mama was "debating" with an anti-union Uncle who threw up his hands & said, "People are plain stupid. When I die I want to come back as a higher form of life". My Mama answered, "You mean a woman?". Everyone laughed, grabbed another brew & started arguing about authentic BBQ.
DU used to be like that, and I sincerely hope it always will be.
|
autorank
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-10 04:38 PM
Response to Original message |
16. "iconic parts of a pattern" k*r |
|
Isn't that the unvarnished truth.
We are nothing to them.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:14 PM
Response to Original message |