Reply With Quote
Giggling my ass off at that one.
Still giggling.
Do tell us, what do you need to "verify" something? Two articles citing the quote? Three? An article from a source you think is unbiased?
Giggling my ass off at that one.
Still giggling.
She didn't say that, that's what she responded to.
OK, It's awesome someone had the same suggestion as a college of hers.
Only WC could spin that as Bachman implying, "I don't agree with that idea, but it's awesome you said that, because another colleague of mine had the same dumb idea."
Who's spinning?
Only WC could spin that as Bachman implying, "I don't agree with that idea, but it's awesome you said that, because another colleague of mine had the same dumb idea."
I didn't imply any such thing.
I want the context that says she agrees with the ides. The only quoted remarks I find is she is giving a feelgood response to someone asking what she thinks of his proposal. Notice, there is no indication if she likes the idea or not. She says it's awesome he had the same idea as a colleague. She didn't say it's an awesome idea.
A typical political non-answer of a question.
Only WC could spin that as Bachman implying, "I don't agree with that idea, but it's awesome you said that, because another colleague of mine had the same dumb idea."
Wow...
You are spinning it however you can to think the worse of me.
I am open that the words could be either way. I do not see how the journalist of the Forbes article gets his interpretations from the quotes I can find.
Again, it's a non-answer.
The way I see it...
She didn't say she agreed with or disagreed with the idea.
She was making nice with someone by not taking a stand, but complementing him on having the same idea as someone else, who again... She doesn't say she agrees with or disagrees.
From what I can find, the guy she refers to had the idea of eliminating income taxes for two months, and payroll taxes for a year.
Only WC could spin that as Bachman implying, "I don't agree with that idea, but it's awesome you said that, because another colleague of mine had the same dumb idea."
apparently quotes from the venerable GOPnet are more context-y than quotes from that rag forbes.
Damn libs.
Usually when someone says "it's awesome" they tend to agree with an idea.
Do you really believe this, or are you playing devil's advocate?
http://www.libertarianrepublican.net...n-nh-gets.html
Libertarian Republican .net seems to find the Forbes' reporter's conclusion acceptable.
It's quotes has less context than the ones I provided.http://www.libertarianrepublican.net...n-nh-gets.html
Libertarian Republican .net seems to find the Forbes' reporter's conclusion acceptable.
Why do you guys always fall for what the journalists wants to tell you?
Sorry, I need more complete context. I want better context than I found even, but at least the more complete context I found shows she said "awesome" to the same idea. Not the idea itself.
You guys can follow the spin all you want. I want something less slippery.
Seems to be pretty supportive of an idea to me.
That would be the proper context, it would seem. Not "it's awesome [that this guy had an idea]", but rather "[The idea is] awesome."
Last edited by RandomGuy; 06-30-2011 at 04:47 PM.
Scenario 1: Despite being very vocal throughout her campaign about supporting tax cuts, she does not think that it's a good idea to get rid of income taxes for a year. But, she thinks that it is "awesome" that someone does think that. She also thinks that more money in the hands of the taxpayers is a good thing. She sees no need to specify that her thinking more money in taxpayers hands is a good thing and it being awesome that someone wants to get rid of income taxes for a year are mutually exclusive. Upon seeing that the media has incorrectly portrayed her remarks to the public as meaning that she supports the idea of getting rid of income taxes for a year, she does nothing.
Scenario 2: She thinks getting rid of income taxes for a year is an "awesome" idea.
I'm going to go with #2.
You want something that doesn't make her look like a moron.
Quit being a jackass and admit that.
She said awesome immediately followed by saying her colleague had the same idea. Different context than what the other articles say.
Yes, I believe this.
Yes, she went on to agree it would boost peoples spending and the economy. Don't know if she said the harmful impact it would have on the government deficit and debt.
We don't know if she agreed the idea was good or not. There is plenty of room to interpret this either way without complete context.
Two questions for you:
What statistical probability do you assign to "usually?"
Do statistics make facts?
She's a politician.
Could she be saying to herself just as shown as a pro, but also know it cannot be done for the cons involved?
Can you say with certainty she would actually support the idea with the cons involved?
Talk is cheap, and she didn't commit to the idea in any way I see.
I'm sure we will hear more about this in the coming hours or days.
(edit)
Quote was not Bachmans, it seems.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 06-30-2011 at 04:47 PM. Reason: carefully re-read something.
To answer the question:
"usually" would be more than 75% of the time to me, if I had to put a number on it.
Not that it is really all that relevant.
Calling something awesome is generally understood by a majority of people to mean that you like something.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 06-30-2011 at 04:50 PM. Reason: less snark
No Sherlock.
(edit)
Quote was not Bachmans, it seems.
Didn't I say that earlier?
Now children...
Have we all learned how the media makes it sound like people say things they didn't?
The other quote quite clearly was.
Given that she herself admitted supporting a very similar idea less than 3 years ago, it begs belief to imply that "awesome" refered to something other than the idea of the moratorium.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
