FYI - Tony worked as a speech writer for H.W.
Can Tony Snow salvage Bush’s poor public opinion poll rating?
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
FYI - Tony worked as a speech writer for H.W.
Can Tony Snow salvage Bush’s poor public opinion poll rating?[/quote]
It doesn’t matter. Bush won’t be running again.
[quote]doogie wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
FYI - Tony worked as a speech writer for H.W.
Can Tony Snow salvage Bush’s poor public opinion poll rating?
It doesn’t matter. Bush won’t be running again.[/quote]
It does matter a great deal as the Democrats will try to link the Republicans encumbants with Bush and Bush’s low public opinion numbers.
Bush’s numbers do not need to make a huge jump forward to stop being a liability but they need to start steadily increasing very soon to take the sting out of the ‘dark cloud’ he brings to this November’s elections.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
doogie wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
FYI - Tony worked as a speech writer for H.W.
Can Tony Snow salvage Bush’s poor public opinion poll rating?
It doesn’t matter. Bush won’t be running again.
It does matter a great deal as the Democrats will try to link the Republicans encumbants with Bush and Bush’s low public opinion numbers.
Bush’s numbers do not need to make a huge jump forward to stop being a liability but they need to start steadily increasing very soon to take the sting out of the ‘dark cloud’ he brings to this November’s elections.
[/quote]
I find that a hard sell. Especially when congress has a lower approval rating than Bush does.
I am becoming less and lass a fan of the republican congress as they act more and more like the democrats they unseated.
pauley wrote,
“Please, point out where exactly I accused you of being ignorant, mispronouncing something or where I did one of the two, otherwise your point is moot.”
In your first post you wrote:
“I’ve been a big fan of your mental midgetry for quite a while”
pauley, I’m a busy man. Unlike pox, I cannot post on every subject at all hours of the day.
If you persist in the intellectual laziness shown above, this conversation if finished.
Further, if your next post doesn’t have some sort of acknowledgment that you did call me ignorant, then we are done.
"I did notice this, your exact words were:
Further, you are saying that Fox “didn’t pipe it” through.
It’s this little thing called context. Within the context of your statement most would take your quotes to be a quotation or rough (ergo the quotes) paraphrase of the foregoing remarks (which I believe your last paragraph above indicates). There is nothing in the statement or surrounding statements that would indicate that you thought marma’s use was questionable or that you would interpret the verb in an unconventional manner."
Next time I’ll write out my intentions in very small words. Given the above example of intellectual laziness, I’m worried even this strategy will fail.
“I did go to the Fox page, I surely did not see any criticism of the President there, let alone those examples discussed above. But perhaps that was a different www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/ than you went to. This is part of the reason that I used such general language in addressing your assertions - I thought the idea being advanced was incorrect to an extent that it needed to be addressed.”
I addressed this issue in my earlier post. As a rule, I don’t have time to repost the obvious.
I’m in a generous mood. Therefore, I’ll give you a complimentary spoon-feeding. This is your only freebie.
Remember, (I know you don’t), where I discussed going to Tony Snow’s website? Next, go down to the tab that says, “Thud.” Click the tab. Read left to right. Use your pal, the internet dictionary, to help you with the words above two syllables.
When you are all done, read it three more times.
Hopefully, you’ll put together the fact that the very title, “Thud” is a criticism. Then the light will start illuminating your head. Bingo!!! You’ll see that “Thud” on Fox’s webpage is a Fox approved criticism. After that, the cards will fall in a predictable pattern. You’ll realize that living in your parent’s home at age 28, is not ideal. You’ll begin to wash more. You will eschew your girlfriends.
I’ll list them so I can send a thank you card for letting you go:
Alyssum
Amaryllis
Azalea
Blossom
Bluebell
Camellia
Clover
Daffodil
Dahlia
Fern
Forsythia
Freesia
Gardenia
Hyacinth
Iris
Ivy
Jessamine
Lilac
Magnolia
Marigold
Morning Glory
Pansy
Poppy
Posey
Primrose
Sunflower
Tansy
Tiger Lilly
Tulip
You will give up your boyfriends:
Almond
Badger
Barley
Bear
Bracken
Breeze
Canyon
Chestnut
Coal
Comet
Condor
Cougar
Coyote
Drake
Dune
Dusk
Eagle
Field
Finch
Flame
Flint
Fox
Frost
Harbor
Horizon
Lake
Mountain
Nature
North
Planet
Reef
Ridge
River
Rock
Shade
Sky
Skylark
Star
Stone
Storm
Thicket
Thunder
Tiger
West
Wolf
Finally, you will give up your life-long obsession with blaming others for your misfortunes.
Come over to us pauley, a bright future awaits!!!
“This is where we come to an impasse with respect to our interpretations of the word “pipe” (yes, it is proper english for one to put a word in quotations when referring to it as a specific word - just thought I would make that clear first) and the respective definitions that we were working from. If I had been using the same definition as you this might be true, however, using the commonly accepted definition as applicable here - it is not.”
That paragraph caused me actual physical pain.
I winced.
I said a prayer for you: “Please, Lord, let them accept brother pauley into the local options high school. He’s been led along the path of the uninformed. He’s a soul that is trying to find the light. Help him!!!”
"I did notice that the links were the majority of the page.
I have NEVER made any claims about Fox News, none whatsoever, let alone that which you propose above. So again your point is irrelevant."
I know you are doing your best. Sadly, it just isn’t enough.
Here’s a paragraph from your first post:
“Linking to a page, being affiliated with a person or the Heritage foundation’s Townhall.com project does not constitute conveyance or transmittal of these viewpoints, only association with the pundit and the forum in which the opinions were voiced.”
That, of course, is stating the Fox didn’t approve the links on that page.
That is, of course, false.
“I like your 160 pound weenies remark though.”
Don’t worry, I wasn’t specific enough to blow your cover. There are a sea of guys who look exactly like you. It would be impossible to pick you out of the crowd.
“And this has relevance how exactly?”
Sorry, was it the three syllables in the word: specific that threw you?
I was making fun of you and your hippie pals.
“You might want to note that I did not bring up anything political, let alone dogma, in my comments.”
It’s true. You didn’t. However, I extrapolated. Oops!!! However, I surmised. Nope!!!
However, I used logic to deduce the fact that you are a leftie. You voted for john “do you want to windsurf with me, widow trellyan” kerry.
Forgive my presumption (Oh, hell, look it up.).
JeffR
I don’t believe that I implied that you were ignorant, small minded perhaps, but not ignorant. Mental midgetry is colloquial terminology, so I suppose both your and my understandings of it are correct - therefore I suppose in this light a case can be made that I did call you ignorant.
I did look at the links at www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/ and recall no such thing. But seing as the network has pulled the site, I suppose I will have to concede this point to you for lack of evidence with which to refute or confirm your claim.
Feel free to insult my intellect, arguments and the like, if you had any knowledge of my personal life you could freely insult that too, but you are very far off the mark above.
I have not done this ever, I think you are mistaking some of my liberal tendancies for adherance to dogma exercised by a number the lefties (and a number of the cons) around here.
I guess those four years of university were for naught. Either way, good to have god on my side.
To put this back into context, it was in response to your assertion that I believe that Fox is a GOP mouthpeice. I should have clarified that. It is surely more conservative than other networks, but pundits and commentators on the network often disagree with the GOP.
Not exactly, is is saying that Fox is not the mouthpiece used to transmit these viewpoints in the context of the verb “pipe”- but this gets back to our different uses of the verb- so the confusion is understandable. Fox may be seen to tacitly endorse the statements through providing links.
Damnit, if only I hadn’t mentioned that I was a fan of yours.
By the way, I voted for Peroutka, not Kerry. Futile? Yes, but no moreso than thinking that voting for the Reporklicans or Spendocrats would make for much change in the grand scheme of things, seeing that both parties are bought and paid for by largely the same people.