I agree with you, Joel and Tash on this one.
TaskmasterJack Send a noteboard - 22/08/2010 07:52:34 PM
People inferred something he did not mean to imply in his first comment, so he released a second comment to correct and clarify. That isn't a backtrack.
An amusing column on the NYC mosque by Maureen Dowd....
20/08/2010 12:33:27 AM
- 1420 Views
She has a point. Bush had the guts to weather the storm on DPW.
20/08/2010 12:42:21 AM
- 826 Views
DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means.
20/08/2010 12:50:14 AM
- 683 Views
Re: DPW? I keep sitting here trying to figure out what that means.
20/08/2010 12:56:44 AM
- 942 Views
Once again, listen to the Economist and don't use abbreviations that aren't obvious.
20/08/2010 06:38:08 PM
- 669 Views
That abbreviation was obvious and all over the place at the time the incident happened.
20/08/2010 07:59:08 PM
- 750 Views
I certainly don't remember seeing it anywhere. The abbreviation was unnecessary in any event.
20/08/2010 10:43:05 PM
- 673 Views
Sure, I could've done that, if I had realized it would puzzle people. I did not. *NM*
20/08/2010 10:59:42 PM
- 458 Views
well since Christie is actually a republican he makes a better example than Bloomberg
20/08/2010 01:53:44 PM
- 775 Views
Gingrich thinks he is a deep thinker?
20/08/2010 09:42:15 AM
- 634 Views
He makes historical references as often as possible, or at least in pretty much everything I've seen
20/08/2010 12:37:02 PM
- 741 Views
As he was a history professor and writes histories and alternate histories, this is not surprising
20/08/2010 05:33:48 PM
- 931 Views
I'm aware of that
20/08/2010 11:47:32 PM
- 661 Views
Re: I'm aware of that
21/08/2010 12:40:29 AM
- 945 Views
Conservatives love Rome. I don't know why.
21/08/2010 01:20:27 AM
- 742 Views
Rome was more often than not governed by aristocrats and did, after all, invent the republic.
21/08/2010 04:50:53 PM
- 1059 Views
Except there doesn't seem to be any conflict between either position.
20/08/2010 10:06:20 AM
- 877 Views
He has to learn he needs to be crystal clear on sensitive issues
20/08/2010 02:03:43 PM
- 943 Views
In Washington, one must always present the APPEARANCE of integrity...
20/08/2010 02:40:24 PM
- 807 Views
Clinton lied about the BJ but what is your airtight proof that Bush lied?
20/08/2010 07:44:53 PM
- 872 Views
This is a bit along the lines of what I have been thinking.
20/08/2010 07:49:15 PM
- 913 Views
I didn't see the problem either. He was simply stating the obvious.
21/08/2010 01:39:44 AM
- 652 Views
Then restating it for those who refused to hear it, so that someone else could refuse to hear it.
21/08/2010 04:22:30 PM
- 894 Views
Yes, his backtracking was quite pussy-ish. *NM*
21/08/2010 04:00:31 AM
- 327 Views
How did he "backtrack" exactly?
21/08/2010 04:35:33 PM
- 957 Views
c'mon Joel. are you being intentionally thick?
21/08/2010 05:02:27 PM
- 983 Views
Having read those quotes I don't think he was backtracking on anything. (With link to speech)
22/08/2010 06:27:06 AM
- 931 Views
did you take into your consideration
22/08/2010 03:50:59 PM
- 676 Views
I can't imagine why they would express concern over it. It wasn't controversial. That is on them
22/08/2010 03:58:32 PM
- 871 Views
I agree he is not backtracking
22/08/2010 06:49:36 PM
- 785 Views
I agree with you, Joel and Tash on this one.
22/08/2010 07:52:34 PM
- 838 Views
While we're picking sides, I'm with Mook and Roland.
22/08/2010 08:20:11 PM
- 712 Views
I like how he's got rhetorical talents when it works
22/08/2010 08:32:15 PM
- 729 Views
nope just human *NM*
22/08/2010 08:37:17 PM
- 395 Views
that's not what Paul just said.
22/08/2010 08:42:24 PM
- 789 Views
He couldn't stay out, no.
22/08/2010 08:56:47 PM
- 834 Views
I don't want to argue with you on a Sunday, my religion says I have to relax.
22/08/2010 09:03:54 PM
- 851 Views
key word: seem
22/08/2010 09:06:40 PM
- 770 Views
I was only using that term for you guys. I don't feel like beating you with a rolling pin until you
22/08/2010 09:14:39 PM
- 669 Views
Seems I interpret his speech on the iftar differently from you and Tash - see my reply to Tash. *NM*
22/08/2010 09:25:13 PM
- 473 Views
I'm not even taking the time to comment on something so obvious as what he did. *NM*
22/08/2010 02:53:10 AM
- 451 Views
Joel
22/08/2010 05:37:45 AM
- 976 Views
His phrasing in the first speech implied that it was a bad idea. But legally they have the right.
22/08/2010 06:32:59 AM
- 900 Views
nonsense
22/08/2010 03:39:30 PM
- 849 Views
I still don't see how it can be misinterpreted except by intent by the listener.
22/08/2010 04:08:52 PM
- 823 Views
so we have reached the point of no return...
22/08/2010 04:18:46 PM
- 831 Views
In your case it would have to be number 2.
22/08/2010 07:38:20 PM
- 808 Views
ah, but I have no agenda here...
22/08/2010 07:41:59 PM
- 634 Views
lol.<3
22/08/2010 08:49:35 PM
- 813 Views
that it is...
22/08/2010 08:57:05 PM
- 770 Views
hee. Well, I still don't agree with you, but at least you're snuggly.^_^ *NM*
22/08/2010 09:09:22 PM
- 588 Views
Tash you are very much a fair person in this world
22/08/2010 08:34:38 PM
- 890 Views
Or there is another option: 3) He was using tact.
22/08/2010 09:01:49 PM
- 811 Views
I really have to disagree with your interpretation of that first speech.
22/08/2010 09:22:32 PM
- 1093 Views
Lies, prevarication and deceit again, eh?
22/08/2010 01:17:45 PM
- 1281 Views
that was a decent explanation....
22/08/2010 05:18:18 PM
- 753 Views
In the interests of fairness ( this does not support or detract from my position), here is the full
22/08/2010 09:22:50 PM
- 1011 Views