|
Friday, 7 September 2018
quote [ Former president Barack Obama talked about the state of U.S. democracy at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign campus ]
In case you were wondering who the leader of the Democratic party was....well now you know.
It sure was nice to hear a Democrat make a speech...a damn good speech that laid out Democratic party ideals and pretty much defines what it means to be a Democrat then lays out a Patriotic argument to come together and ends with his loudest message of all... VOTE! Vote like your life depends on it cause this time it does.
|
5432 said @ 8:35am GMT on 9th September
Ambiguity, vagueness, and obscurantism are always an option, especially when “The Religion of Peace” is concerned. And, as you quite rightly point out, equivocation is never flat out wrong. We need not use the term “racism” when “meanness” will suffice, and we certainly need not speak of “violence against women” which is pointlessly divisive. After all, the term “violence” is sufficient . But there may be some clarity to be found in recognizing that it wasn’t the Amish with a snuff channel on YouTube hacking the heads of journalists and Jews, in fact, the number of folks decapitating people who were not followers of the prophet (PBUH) could be rounded down to zero. And it sure as fuck wasn’t the Baptists that left smoking craters in Lower Manhattan. So yes, being mealy mouthed is always an option, the preferred one of politicians, especially "progressive" ones, and there fellow travellers. Which was my point. But then again, it may bear some consideration that if you can’t name a problem, your odds of solving it are pretty slim.
5432 said @ 8:36am GMT on 9th September
Ambiguity, vagueness, and obscurantism are always an option, especially when “The Religion of Peace” is concerned. And, as you quite rightly point out, equivocation is never flat out wrong. We need not use the term “racism” when “meanness” will suffice, and we certainly need not speak of “violence against women” which is pointlessly divisive. After all, the term “violence” is sufficient . But there may be some clarity to be found in recognizing that it wasn’t the Amish with a snuff channel on YouTube hacking the heads of journalists and Jews, in fact, the number of folks decapitating people who were not followers of the prophet (PBUH) could be rounded down to zero. And it sure as fuck wasn’t the Baptists that left smoking craters in Lower Manhattan. So yes, being mealy mouthed is always an option, the preferred one of politicians, especially "progressive" ones, and thier fellow travellers. Which was my point. But then again, it may bear some consideration that if you can’t name a problem, your odds of solving it are pretty slim.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
5432 said @ 8:35am GMT on 9th September [Score:-5 Boring]
Ambiguity, vagueness, and obscurantism are always an option, especially when “The Religion of Peace” is concerned. And, as you quite rightly point out, equivocation is never flat out wrong. We need not use the term “racism” when “meanness” will suffice, and we certainly need not speak of “violence against women” which is pointlessly divisive. After all, the term “violence” is sufficient . But there may be some clarity to be found in recognizing that it wasn’t the Amish with a snuff channel on YouTube hacking the heads of journalists and Jews, in fact, the number of folks decapitating people who were not followers of the prophet (PBUH) could be rounded down to zero. And it sure as fuck wasn’t the Baptists that left smoking craters in Lower Manhattan. So yes, being mealy mouthed is always an option, the preferred one of politicians, especially "progressive" ones, and thier fellow travellers. Which was my point. But then again, it may bear some consideration that if you can’t name a problem, your odds of solving it are pretty slim.
