»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Foot in Mouth Disease....Democratic-style
| The Alley |
|
Foot in Mouth Disease....Democratic-style |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid apologized on Saturday for saying Barack Obama should seek — and could win — the White House because Obama was a "light skinned" African-American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." Obama quickly accepted, saying "As far as I am concerned, the book is closed." Reid made the comments in private during the long 2008 campaign, according to a new book about that election, which elevated Obama from first-term Illinois senator to the first black president. After excerpts from the book appeared on the website of The Atlantic, Reid released a statement expressing regret for "using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments." http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-09-Obama-Reid_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomWashington-TopStories+%28News+-+Was hington+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo WASHINGTON – Republicans on Sunday accused Democrats of a double standard by accepting Sen. Harry Reid's apology for racial remarks about Barack Obama instead of demanding Reid's ouster as majority leader. In a private conversation reported in a new book, Reid described Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign as a "light-skinned" African-American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." Reid, D-Nev., apologized to Obama on Saturday, and the president issued a statement accepting the apology and saying the matter was closed. GOP Chairman Michael Steele, in appearances on two Sunday news programs, compared Reid's predicament with the circumstances that led Senate Republican leader Trent Lott to step down from that post in 2002. Lott had spoken favorably of the 1948 segregationist presidential campaign of Strom Thurmond, and in spite of apologies for those remarks at Thurmond's 100th birthday, Lott was forced out as leader. "There is this standard where the Democrats feel that they can say these things and they can apologize when it comes from the mouths of their own. But if it comes from anyone else, it's racism," said Steele, who is black. "It's either racist or it's not. And it's inappropriate, absolutely." Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Jack Reed of Rhode Island joined other Democrats in saying Reid's apology and Obama's statement were enough. They also rejected comparisons to the Lott episode. "I think that's a totally different context. Harry Reid made a misstatement," Reed said. "He owned up to it. He apologized. I think he is mortified by the statement he's made. And I don't think he should step down." Steele responded: "All I know is that if (Senate Republican leader) Mitch McConnell had said those very words, that this chairman and this president would be calling for his head, and they would be labeling every Republican in the country as a racist for saying exactly what this chairman has just said." Lott apologized for "a poor choice of words" four days after speaking at a birthday celebration for then-Sen. Thurmond, R-S.C. The Mississippi Republican had said the nation would have been better off if Thurmond had won the presidency in 1948. Thurmond was an ardent segregationist and the Democratic governor of South Carolina when he mounted his third-party campaign. Calls for Lott to step down as Republican leader intensified, and he resigned as Senate leader less than two weeks later. Lott resigned from the Senate in 2007. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100110/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_reid Is Reid's comments a big deal? No, I don't think so but I didn't Lott's were, either and yet he was hounded out of office while Reid gets immediate absolution by the same people who hung Lott. The double standard gets a little old....and yet it continues. |
||
| © Copyright 2010 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
The double-standard is amazing. How can they not see it? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Senator Reid's gaffe was to expose a racial stereotype he wasn't aware of holding. Apparently he notions about african American speech patterns was patronizing, and it made him look foolish and stupid in front of people who had a more compete understanding. "I'm sorry," in this case covers a loss of face. Acceptance of the apology indicates an allowance for face to be recovered. It may be offered by the offended party. Acceptance of the apology by some other party doesn't allow recovery of face. In legal terms, recovery may be enforced as an obligated, but the injury is not removed. Hence victims of crimes may be bitter about sentences that are less than satisfactory to them, and regard the injury as not made whole. What Mr. Steele says, then, has no direct bearing on the injury. For him to involve himself attempts to piggyback his political issue, which may or may not be valid, onto a separate issue. Senator Reid's issue was with President Obama, and his patronizing behavior toward President Obama. In offering the apology, in fact, Senator Reid is fact ahead of almost any of those who have smeared President Obama in that he has offered either acknowledgement or apology in any fashion at all. I would include virtually the entire Republican Party in this, in one form or another. Nor would I expect an opposition party to behave substantially differently. A bit more politeness would be nice, but is probably too much to ask in a robust Democracy. Senator Lott's remarks, I would point out, were somewhat different. Senator Reid was embarrassed because he found himself in the position of patronizing an African-American presidential candidate. Senator Lott embarrassed himself and perhaps his entire party as well by suggesting that African-Americans did not deserve the same services as White Americans, and by suggesting that segregation was the correct policy for the country to follow. He suggested that the country was the poorer for not having followed that policy in 1948. This was not an accidental insult directed at a single person. Nor was it done in the process of attempting to praise that person. If in fact it had been, an simple "I'm sorry" directed toward the offended person might well have saved Senator Lott's face and his posterior as well. The "I'm sorry!" didn't work because there weren't enough people in the country who believed Senator Lott Meant it, because there was in fact nobody specific he could direct it to,and because his own party wouldn't stand behind his leadership in the the Senate after his making so foolish a statement as that. The fact that his long term constituency in Mississippi because disgusted with him en masse while previously they had followed him through thick and thin showed how far he had misjudged those he had been representing. Senator Reid is not my favorite democrat in the Senate. Right now, I'm very fond of Bernie Sanders, the closest thing to an out and out socialist among them. I think the majority leader is nowhere near liberal enough and does too many things the way the insurance companies would like them done. If you're going to be nasty about the man, I'd rather you went after him about something that actually had a stench of brimstone about it. This simply seems human and doesn't paint Mr. Steele in a very good light. It suggests he can't tell the difference between Senator Ried and Senator Lott's behavior. which he really should be able to do both in degree and kind. And so should you. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
WASHINGTON (AP) DUDE, HOW DO YOU GET AWAY WITH THESE APPEARANCES OF ACTUAL JOURNALISM? dot, dot, dot... I was nearing the Washington Monument, or I would have been had I been extended the extra-special-tripled-secret-journalist-press-pass --- but I'd traded that for 5 grams of cocaine, a case of Johnny Walker Blue, dry ice and a Cordova. I was sweating and picking chicken out of my teeth with a solid gold toothpick given to me by Bob Wood. Bob Wood. I always thought the name suspicious. OH. Woodward. Yeah, that's me. I am bobbing woodward, foaming at the mouth as I watch "The Good German" and "The Damned" and thinking, as I ride my brakes, "I don't get it." I got lost in the circle, just like Annette Benning in that American President movie... (Yeah, that one. It made me want to vote.) Not bloody likely that'll happen again. I'm chewing on roots and smoking some crap they call "Mojo"; it tastes like ass, but it's legal. I wish I had my Cadillac. I wish I had a "gig". I wish I had a trunk fulla Unka Cyd, and I was driving into Vegas. It'll never be the same again, and me and Rove are gonna do time in San Quentin and nobody's gonna know our names...Mexico is our next transition, 'cause they can't handle their own shhhhhhhhhhhhhh...it's a destiny made manifest, and the Baja is just a stripper's wish, with Euro's upherbutt. Um. Light this up? Will ya? love, H.T. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
Skin & dialect? What does Sidney Poitier & James Earl Jones have to say about this? Certain presences command a distinguished difference whether we’uns like it or not. Or else we’d never had to “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” & we’d not been as mesmerized or curious about who was “Luke’s Fathah.” Purely an “It” factor may well supersede prejudice or bias, but the fear & jealousy of the masses will always try to nail –it- down with a democratic effort and a republican standard (or vice versa) . Thankfully, each of those notions help to cultivate a stronghold of individuality, despite it all. As for double standards? If men don’t like them, why do they create them?  Mornin' folks! Gotta run, now. Huggins. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Lott was stabbed in the back – at least that’s how he saw it according to his book – Herding Cats. He was pretty specific who did the stabbing too.  |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Senator Reid was embarrassed because he found himself in the position of patronizing an African-American presidential candidate. Certainly took him a long time to get embarrased, wouldn't you say, Bob? He doesn't claim that he "patronized" Obama...he claims he misspoke. I wonder exactly where he misspoke. He called Obama light-skinned. No misspeaking there. Obama IS light-skinned. He called Obama articulate and only used the black diction when he wanted to. No misspeak there. Obama IS articluate and he DOES lapse into black dialect when it suits him. So where is the misspeak? Is he apologizing for being truthful? Senator Lott embarrassed himself and perhaps his entire party as well by suggesting that African-Americans did not deserve the same services as White Americans, and by suggesting that segregation was the correct policy for the country to follow. He suggested that the country was the poorer for not having followed that policy in 1948. This was not an accidental insult directed at a single person. Nor was it done in the process of attempting to praise that person. You got all of that out of Lott's one-liner at a private birthday party? You have outdone yourself in false justifications. Btw, I do not see anywhere in Lott's comment where he said blacks did not deserve the same services as whites.But, since you want to carry it out and expound on it with your own thoughts, let's do the same with Reid's comment. BY saying that Obama had a chance because he was light-skinned and articulate when he wanted to be, he basically said that any black not light-skinned or not articulate enough to sound white would not have a chance to be president. How many people did that insult??? Senator Reid's issue was with President Obama, and his patronizing behavior toward President Obama. Not by what I just said. Do black mothers now tell their children that they can be anything they want, except president, because they are not light enough? See how ridiculous it can get when one decides to expound in a silly manner as you did with Lott? This simply seems human and doesn't paint Mr. Steele in a very good light. It suggests he can't tell the difference between Senator Ried and Senator Lott's behavior. Well, maybe Mr. Steele is just upset because he has found out he is too black to be president....what a downer. No, he is upset because he can see the double standard here and so should you. You simply choose not to....ok, that's up to you. Bill Clinton made a comment to Ted Kennedy that, years ago, people like Obama would be serving them coffee. No one had a problem with that. Jesse Jackson referred to Obama with the N-word over an open mike. No one had a problem with that. WHen Democrats do it, there never seems to be a problem. Let a republican do a one-liner at a private party and the outrage breaks eardrums and he is gone. Tell me honestly, Bob....if a republican had made the same comment Reid did, would you and the democrats simply say, "No big deal. Obama accepted his apology and it's over". I think you know as well as I it would be the lead story on every major network news station and democrats would be screaming for heads to roll. Obama accepted his apology.....wow. What is he supposed to do...not accept it? Reid runs the senate. Reid is an extremely important player in getting the health care bill passed. Obama would have accepted anything Reid could possibly have said...and with a smile (even through gritting teeth). |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. “Republicans are not accepting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's forgive-and-forget approach, after saying Monday it's time to move on after being quoted over the weekend describing Barack Obama as "light-skinned" with "no Negro dialect" unless he wants one. “ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/11/reid-says-used-better-choice-words-d escribing-obama/ Then the Republicans are idiots or are pandering to idiots. On this I agree with George Will. We are at war children; people want to kill us for being alive. Grow up. . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Senator Lott made a comment about the 1948 election, saying it would have been better if the segregationist candidate had won, Mike. If you want me to believe that you can't tell the difference between wanting a segregationist administration in the white house and Senator Reid's comment that, as you point out, President Obama was in reality more electable as a light skinned and reasonably accent free (mid-atlantic accent, I think) guy than as a darker skinned guy, more heavily accented, and with perhaps a Gullah or an ebonics speech pattern, well, I guess I have little choice than, reluctantly, to take you at your word. you know what you mean better than I do. I think John is right, by the way. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Democrats are preparing to throw the race card back in the laps of Republicans as part of a counterattack designed to help save Harry Reid’s political career. First, Reid’s allies plan to distribute the NAACP vote ratings of Republican senators who have scolded him. The data will be made available to editorial boards, cable programs and the blogosphere — including votes on minimum wage, community-oriented policing, education funding and HIV/AIDS programs. Separately, the Congressional Black Caucus plans to issue a new statement Monday, defending Reid and brushing back Republicans. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100111/pl_politico/31340 Assemble, musketeers!  |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
My understanding is that Senator Reid was quite unpopular in Nevada before this. Saving his career is unlikely in general, and using this as an avenue to do so is even more unlikely than unlikely. Trent Lott was thrown to the wolves by his own party. I don't know whether they found his thinking on segregation distasteful or not any more than I would claim that I could tell you that the Democrats would, entirely, find his thinking distasteful or not. (I would hope the Democrats would, as a group, feel revulsion.) The Republicans knew that the country as a whole would find the statement and the position disgusting and did what was necessary to distance itself from the man. If Reid had done something on the same scale, I would hope the Democrats would do the same. I am sorry you don't distinguish between what seems to be an effort at ethical behavior and a cartoon. I think there is a distinction. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Speaking of double standards.... BOSTON – Massachusetts' top election official says it could take weeks to certify the results of the upcoming U.S. Senate special election. That delay could let President Barack Obama preserve a key 60th vote for his health care overhaul even if the Republican who has vowed to kill it wins Democrat Edward M. Kennedy's former seat. Secretary of State William F. Galvin, citing state law, says city and town clerks must wait at least 10 days for absentee ballots to arrive before they certify the results of the Jan. 19 election. They then have five more days to file the returns with his office. Galvin bypassed the provision in 2007 so his fellow Democrats could gain a House vote they needed to override a veto of then-Republican President George W. Bush, but the secretary says U.S. Senate rules would preclude a similar rush today. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100113/ap_on_el_se/us_kennedy_successor_delay hmmm..so, if the left needs a democratic replacement in congress ASAP to veto a republican bill, that's ok. If it's a republican replacement who may vote against a democratic bill, it must be delayed by the law they ignored in the first instance until the bill is voted on. If there is anyone who does not consider this a double standard PLEASE enlighten us. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Do you mean like the fiasco in the redistricting of Texas, double standard, or is there some other double standard you have in mind? Having The Hammer try to use The Air Force to get The Democrats back to Texas to finalize the vote type double standard? Like that? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Bravo, Bob. You completely evaded the question while pointing fingers somewhere else. I wouldn't have expected anything less. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I'm sorry, Mike. I thought the topic was racism, Steele, Reid, and President Obama, with the focus on how Republicans couldn't call an African-American something racist without getting flack for it. You felt that Democrats could. I pointed out that this was not the situation, explained things and suggested that you were confusing Senator Lott's situation inappropriately with Senator Reid's. The notion of a double standard was yours. Unlike you, I do expect something more. You chose not to respond to my comments about the original topic. You decided to change the subject to Massachusetts. You decided to discontinue the topic of racial politics. You asked if anybody did not consider this a double standard. If you did not want an answer, you should not have asked the question, should you? Republicans have been playing fairly shoddy political games for quite a while, including the ones in Texas. If the Republicans felt that these were unfair tactics — and I think they are unfair tactics — it seems they'd avoid them. Complaints about Democratic use of a legal political nature hardly compare to use of attempts to use the Federal Power structure to bring the Democratic members of the Texas legislature to heel by the Then Republican House Whip, The Hammer. Attempts to force Federal prosecutors to bring charges selectively against Democrats and Democratic organizations were of dubious legality as well, and resulted in a major legislative and Administrative scandal that involved both Rove and Cheney. I believe it is stupid for the Democrats not to force prosecution on these matters. Other folks, believing that politicians should not be hounded after they leave office, feel differently. I think it might actually tend to keep them honest while they're in office myself, but then I'm no politician, and I have little or no understanding of what sort of logic runs these guys. If you didn't want my best shot at a straight answer, though, you shouldn't :A) have changed the subject in the first place; b) asked a question whose answer you weren't equipped to give an actual response to. quote: While the above is not entirely terrible as an attack on me, it doesn't actually address the comments I made to you. It doesn't disprove or even address them. Mocking me doesn't make the points I raise wrong, all it does is smear me and make me look more unattractive than I already do. Even ugly people can be right. To disprove ugly people, you still need to disprove the truth of what they have to say, not make more fun of the way they look or of how awkwardly they dress. These are the tactics of bullies who think that beating up those who disagree with them can make the truth go away. Deal with the substance of what I say, Mike. If you don't believe there is any substance, say why and make your case as best you can. If you're going to change the substance of the discussion in mid stream, take responsibility for it yourself, don't try to fob it off on me. It's not attractive. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
If there is anyone who does not consider this a double standard PLEASE enlighten us. You may refer to post #11 for the rest. I can understand your trying to go somewhere else since this action in indefensible. An offensive against me doesn't change that. The topic of the thread is the double standards democrats use. My post is an example of that and remains on topic. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Unfortunately you’re wrong Mike, whatever Galvin decides to do can’t be classed as a double standard, for the simple reason that no standard exists – it’s a choice based on individual circumstances. In fact the whole process of confirming the election result to the Senate is specifically designed to make his ability to choose central to the process and to avoid a rigid standard. The reasons are pretty obvious once you look at the process. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Yes, and those individual ccircumstances are whether a democrat gets in quickly to be able to vote against a republican bill or a republican gets delayed so as not to be there to vote for a democratic bill. You don't want to call that a double standard? Fine with me... |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Not even close Mike. Galvin has bypassed the certified confirmation process twice before, because the circumstances regarding the election allowed him to make that choice. Another confirmation not so long ago was delayed by 328 days due to the circumstances which allowed that choice to be made. In every case the circumstances and laws surrounding confirmation allow a choice and can result in a different outcome. If you want to try to argue that a process that can be different every time is a standard while insisting that a different choice is somehow simultaneously a double standard I’m more than willing to listen to you try. quote: I don’t call it a double standard simply because it isn’t one Mike, whether it’s fine with you or not doesn’t really come into it, I’m just stating the facts and I’m willing to defend them if you think I’m wrong. All you need to do is explain why you think I’m wrong and I’ll explain exactly why you’re mistaken. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Bushwah, Mike, with the accent on the first syllable. If that was your intention, you should have made that clear in the introduction. Clear enough so that even a Democrat like me would have gotten it and allowed you to play alone in your little toxic swamp of why me and mine were hypocrites. Apparently you take me for a hypocrite and a fool, to take part in a discussion like that one, with a deck as stacked as a game of tic-tac-toe and no actual discussion in the cards. Have I invited you to talk about why all Republicans are fools? I have not; nor would I. You can and should make a more informed and thoughtful comment instead of another personal ad hominem assault. You are capable of addressing the issue rather than the man, and should actually do so. You are more thoughtful than this, I do believe. Grinch is correct, by the way. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
As usual Mike you affirm the consequent. At worst -- the difference between Reid's statement and Lott's is like this: "Gee, that's funny, you don't look Jewish" vs. "You know, those Nazis were on to something." |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, that's the last time I say "Assemble, musketeers!" |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
So your contention, grinch, is that Galvin's decision has nothing to do with blocking a negative vote on Obama's bill? All you need to do is explain why you think I’m wrong and I’ll explain exactly why you’re mistaken. Why should I even consider a discussion with that type of ego? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Because you might learn something. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You don't have to admire the source of a good point for it to be a good point. A joke told well by a fool is still funny. Grinch has a better grasp on this stuff, near as I can tell, than either you or I do. If you disagree with something specific he's said, lay it out in the open, man; don't bluster and sputter instead of addressing the point. Say something interesting about the subject, not about Grinch's Ego or my low character. Pfui. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Bob the tweaker strikes again, or should I say Sancho Panza? |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: What decision Mike, he hasn’t made one yet, all he’s said is that it could take weeks which is correct, it could take weeks, it could take a month or it could take 328 days – it has at least once before. There’s even a small chance that he won’t put forward any name at all. As I’ve said there is no standard, it all depends on the circumstances. quote: Discussing things with people who have a big ego is fun Mike. Especially when they’re obviously as wrong as you believe I am – you get to shoot their arguments, and ego, down in flames. A word of caution though, sometimes it’s easy to mistake confidence for ego. If someone sounds confident sometimes it’s because they’ve got the evidence to back up their claim – ego doesn’t even come into it. Now where were we – oh yes – you were going to explain why I’m wrong so that I can produce the evidence to prove you’re mistaken. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, you have already determined that anything I might say would have to be wrong so..there are many other ways to waste my time. SInce you have made that claim, then even the remotest possibility that I may come up with anything to disprove a statement of yours would not lead to an admission of that fact. Instead, it would involve your rearranging your logic to make my comment a "mistake", in order to validate your claim. We saw that in your claim of "no pork" in the stimulus bill and other occasions....so there's no need for all the keystrokes that would be wasted in such an endeavor. I'll pass. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You seem ready enough to call me names, Mike. Why not use something beyond the smearing and mud-slinging part of your brain and engage in a discussion based on facts and logic. I'm sorry. They're in the dictionary. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You should try reading the novel before you try using Sancho Panza as a put down, Mike. I guess Comics Illustrated didn't get into the details. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Giving Mike an occasional tweak is fun. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
AH, Bob, I simply fall back on the old axiom "consider the source" and your tweaks are easy to ignore. By all means, continue if it gives you pleasure. My dog licks his gonads for no other reason than it gives him pleasure so why should you be any different?  |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I don't know,Mike, is your dog a very nice dog? I've found that I usually get along with dogs pretty well, and that this is the sort of thing that they do when they're in a meditative mood. It makes me wonder if you've been having any good conversations with your dog recently. They don't understand the words, most of the time, but they appreciate being included in the conversational banter, and they will often raise their heads and occasionally nod along, if you've managed to catch their interest. I suspect you'd have a rather decent relationship with a dog, truth be told, since you have at the heart of you a fairly affectionate and decent nature. The dog, being a pack animal, however, is unlikely to be a Republican and is more likely to have Democratic principles at heart himself, which does go to show you that at it's core your basic observation may have something of substance to it. You've simply found an abrasive way of putting it. Myself, I'm not that flexible, and even when I was a baby and may actually have been flexible enough to have accomplished such feats of acrobatic skill, was not inclined to do so. The famous Psychiatrist, Andras Angyall, who name I may have misspelled slightly, had a patient once who strapped himself into a specially constructed leather harness. Angyall's students were shocked and appalled by what he did while in this harness, which is why they sent him to Angyall for treatment in the first place. Angyall was much impressed with the man, and had him in shape and functioning very well indeed within about three years. The trick was in understanding the strengths of the man, is what Angyall said. Once you understood the man's strengths, and were able to help him see his strengths, the treatment went very quickly. Never in his life, said Andras Angyall, had he ever met a man who was so relentlessly independent. And who might argue with this, and with the reasonably quick cure? Certainly not I, who would like to be more flexible than I am, but am cursed with having to settle for what Robert Frost called once, "Moving easy in harness." I guess that's Po Biz. I've got to exercise this evening, so I guess I'll see you tomorrow, and best wishes to you. Sorry if I've been barking up the wrong tree here. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Mike, Bob, I do’t know about you but I think that it’s probably a good idea to let this one go, for lots of reasons. The main one being that instead of discussing the issue at hand a few of our comments are straying off target and going perilously close to becoming personal attacks rather than topical debate and some people reading this may get the false impression that we actually mean some of the things we say. We’ll no doubt pick up the discussion at some point down the road in another thread, these forums are like that. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Oh my, yes, that makes excellent sense to me. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Here's some encouraging news, perhaps, Michael. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/barnes-massachusetts-senatorial-race-and-obamacare |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
And this: http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2010/01/14/massachusetts-shocker-brown-up-15-in-pajamas-mediacrosstarget-poll/ |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
