The Couric Fallout

sink · 02-10-2008 12:49pm

Mordeth wrote: »

i suggest you remove the word liberal from 'social liberalism' and see what you are left with.

Social meaning 'of or related to society' not socialism as you are trying to imply which is a completely separate system. Just because they share some syllables does not mean they equate. You are trying unsuccessfully to build a straw man.

02-10-2008 1:18pm

cooker3 wrote: »

and here it is.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4493093n

Honestly It's pretty cringeworthy
(especially in comparison to Biden)

That was terrible to watch. I think I'd actually have had more respect for her if she said that she doesn't know, although she knows she can't admit that.

banquo · 02-10-2008 1:49pm

Get Bartlet on her ass.

Bartlet during deabte in The West Wing wrote:

That's the ten-word answer my staff's been looking for for two weeks. There it is.

Ten-word answers can kill you in political campaigns. They're the tip of the sword.
Here's my question: What are the next ten words of your answer? Your taxes are too high? So are mine. Give me the next ten words. How are we going to do it? Give me ten after that, I'll drop out of the race right now.

jmayo · 02-10-2008 2:09pm

Mordeth wrote: »

"Don't try to use a hyperbolic argument founded in ignorance. " Indeed.

the definition of liberal is very different in the states, and you know it. There are still classical Liberals (big L), libertarians, constitutionalists and the very occasional republican but liberal over there means big government. It means social welfare, free public healthcare, public roads, public schools.. hardly the maximum freedom.

Sorry FFS next time I will include a dictionary defintion of all the words I use.
When I say liberal in my statement I meant voters who do not believe in the right wing fundatmentalist religious codswallop of creationism, no rights for women in deciding the fate of their bodioes, etc.
I guess I meant what some of us in this part of the world label as liberal ot at least what the term used to mean.

sink wrote: »

... It's perfectly reasonable to rebut jmayo with a clear truthful argument but you choose to attack ignorance with ignorance. ...

I beg your pardon sink for being ignorant in the face of a mighty social liberal one as yourself :P
Next time I will go elsewhere with my ignorant views or as I answered above, I will include dictionary definitions of any contentious terms/words, shall I :rolleyes:

BTW we are now arguing about a side issue when in fact the issue is that one of the candidates for US VP is a complete gob***** for want of a better description.
No matter what she believes in, she has no grasp of the wider world.

sink · 02-10-2008 2:18pm

jmayo wrote: »

I beg your pardon sink for being ignorant in the face of a mighty social liberal one as yourself :P

Kneel before me and seek permission before you speak.

jmayo wrote: »

Next time I will go elsewhere with my ignorant views or as I answered above, I will include dictionary definitions of any contentious terms/words, shall I :rolleyes:

There are plenty of intelligent people from small towns in America. You basically called everyone who lives outside a major metropolis stupid and that is why I called you ignorant. I don't however disagree with you that there are plenty of Americans who are ignorant, just as there are plenty of Irish people who are ignorant. I have yet to see a scientific study to investigate if stupidity is more prevalent in America in comparison to the rest of the developed world.

Inquitus · 02-10-2008 2:37pm

sink wrote: »

just as there are plenty of Irish people who are ignorant.

Very true, we did vote down Lisbon!

banquo · 02-10-2008 2:41pm

Inquitus wrote: »

Very true, we did vote down Lisbon!

Now now, let's stay on topic

Cadet? · 02-10-2008 3:04pm

Mordeth wrote: »

"Don't try to use a hyperbolic argument founded in ignorance. " Indeed.

the definition of liberal is very different in the states, and you know it. There are still classical Liberals (big L), libertarians, constitutionalists and the very occasional republican but liberal over there means big government. It means social welfare, free public healthcare, public roads, public schools.. hardly the maximum freedom.

Now this is why I don't understand Republicans.....

Are these bad things?!!!

oscarBravo · 02-10-2008 3:26pm

Cadet? wrote: »

Are these bad things?!!!

Depends whether or not you need them.

Inquitus · 02-10-2008 3:30pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Depends whether or not you need them.

No it doesn't, I don't need Social Welfare, Free Healthcare etc, nor do my nearest and dearest, but I still think it is right to guarantee these things to those who need them, to supply a health and social safety net to all citizens, and i don't mind paying my share.

Hobbes · 02-10-2008 3:30pm

Sure aren't Republicans all for socialised banking systems?

btw, whats all this got to do with Palin?

BlitzKrieg · 02-10-2008 3:32pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Depends whether or not you need them.

and if it works properly or not.

Cadet? · 02-10-2008 3:33pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Depends whether or not you need them.

Last post as it's off-topic.

The point is not whether or not you or I, or my friend or your friend needs these things- we mightn't. But someone, indeed large numbers of people, will and will always need these things. Isn't America about giving everyone a chance?

oscarBravo · 02-10-2008 3:35pm

Inquitus wrote: »

No it doesn't, I don't need Social Welfare, Free Healthcare etc, nor do my nearest and dearest, but I still think it is right to guarantee these things to those who need them, to supply a health and social safety net to all citizens, and i don't mind paying my share.

Sure. My reply was tongue in cheek. There are those to whom the idea of funding social programs through taxation is anathema; we had one such in here a couple of weeks ago explaining that the reason for the current economic crisis is over-regulation of the market. Go figure.

Inquitus · 02-10-2008 3:37pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

we had one such in here a couple of weeks ago explaining that the reason for the current economic crisis is over-regulation of the market.

Now that I would liked to have seen!

Overheal · 02-10-2008 3:40pm

Well it had to happen sooner or later: Jon stewart finally speaks on the Couric Chaos

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=186763

Watch part 2 for a great satire as well.

BlitzKrieg · 02-10-2008 3:49pm

sadly most of us being irish we cant watch that

Ludo · 02-10-2008 4:06pm

Just go to:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

You can see all the show there in clip version as opposed to the whole episode in one go which is blocked.

Overheal · 02-10-2008 4:15pm

well thats gay innit. The clips version of last nights ep still isnt up yet though. but Bill Mahers interview twas good as well.

Eglinton · 02-10-2008 4:20pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C3MuuQuTfg

Ludo · 02-10-2008 4:31pm

Overheal wrote: »

well thats gay innit. The clips version of last nights ep still isnt up yet though. but Bill Mahers interview twas good as well.

Sure is gay.

I just Sky+ (tivo to you yanks) it and Colbert every night. We get them a day behind the US on More4 and FX on Sky.

jmayo · 02-10-2008 4:49pm

sink wrote: »

Kneel before me and seek permission before you speak.

sink wrote: »

There are plenty of intelligent people from small towns in America. You basically called everyone who lives outside a major metropolis stupid and that is why I called you ignorant. I don't however disagree with you that there are plenty of Americans who are ignorant, just as there are plenty of Irish people who are ignorant. I have yet to see a scientific study to investigate if stupidity is more prevalent in America in comparison to the rest of the developed world.

Fair enough the statement is strong, but dear God I have met some right gobs***s in parts of America. I guess the problem I find with what I would term small town America is that they are very insular, which for a major developed nation I find hard to understand. I guess the media have a lot to answer for.

You only realise the size of the country when you drive through it, but Canada is a massive country and they seem to be a bit more with it in terms of what is out there in the rest of the world, rather than what is in the next state.
Is there a sizable proportion of the population in any other developed country seeking for a return to pre Darwinian or theory of evolution education ?
I would hazard a guess and note I said developed country.

Yes, we and every country have our fair share of eejits and gombeens.
Sadly most of ours appear to be in the government and the parliament :rolleyes:

Maybe we just come from a more cosmopolitan area of the world, partially due to our size, location and also because we move about more due to things like emmigration/immigration ? And before anyone has a go, by cosmopolitan here I don't mean we will find ould fellows drinking lattes or some such foreign muck in a pub in Mayo.

Washout · 02-10-2008 5:26pm

Eglinton wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C3MuuQuTfg

lol first herard this on the stern show...its even funnier to see the facial expressions.

Cadet? · 02-10-2008 5:30pm

Washout wrote: »

lol first herard this on the stern show...its even funnier to see the facial expressions.

Even AC Slater from Saved by the Bell thinks she's a dolt!

brianthebard · 02-10-2008 5:41pm

Oh dear. Does she know what the supreme court is? I wonder if she is actually a democratic party mole, sent in to become governer, run for vp and **** it up so they might have a chance. I really really hope that's the case.

CtrlSource · 02-10-2008 5:56pm

i'm still hopeful that she'll bomb tonight. But it's not a certainty. Saw a clip of her in a 2006 gubernatorial election debate and she was quite strong - very different to the Palin of the Couric/Gibson interviews.

Hopefully Gwen Ifill will pitch a few toughies at them both which should be no problem for Biden but might throw Palin

Washout · 02-10-2008 6:33pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

i'm still hopeful that she'll bomb tonight. But it's not a certainty. Saw a clip of her in a 2006 gubernatorial election debate and she was quite strong - very different to the Palin of the Couric/Gibson interviews.

Hopefully Gwen Ifill will pitch a few toughies at them both which should be no problem for Biden but might throw Palin

If asked on topics that Palin has been pressed on by Couric, will Biden refer to answers Palin has given to Couric.

CtrlSource · 02-10-2008 6:57pm

Washout wrote: »

If asked on topics that Palin has been pressed on by Couric, will Biden refer to answers Palin has given to Couric.

He absolutely should.

In last weeks debate, McCain scored points by repeatedly charging that "Senator Obama again doesn't seem to fully understand / just doesn't understand..." Even if McCain was wrong at times, from a debating point of view, it was good rhetoric. Overall though, McCain struck a tone that was a tad too negative when compared to Obama's more positive, forward looking tenor.

Biden will hopefully point out Palin's undoubted weaknesses and interact with her answers to really showcase her lack of qualifications and experience for the job

axer · 02-10-2008 7:37pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

He absolutely should.

In last weeks debate, McCain scored points by repeatedly charging that "Senator Obama again doesn't seem to fully understand / just doesn't understand..." Even if McCain was wrong at times, from a debating point of view, it was good rhetoric. Overall though, McCain struck a tone that was a tad too negative when compared to Obama's more positive, forward looking tenor.

Biden will hopefully point out Palin's undoubted weaknesses and interact with her answers to really showcase her lack of qualifications and experience for the job

I hope biden forgets about Palin and lets her talk herself into problems - she is more than stupid enough to take care of that herself. He should focus on McCain instead. He should keep it short and put in phrases like - I would love to hear Palins view on x but not in a condescending way. It is way too risky going after palin. Palin will feel the pressure coming into this one - completely different to anything she has done before - it will be interesting to see how she performs under it.

Hobbes · 02-10-2008 7:41pm

Eglinton wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C3MuuQuTfg

I would just LOVE for Palin to be asked this at the VP debates.

The Couric Fallout

Comments