Weapons of political destruction

[Psychoblues]

Now, just who do you think is being "condescending" at this point, jimnyc?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Now, just who do you think is being "condescending" at this point, jimnyc?

That would be me!

Why, do you not like it when people speak down to you?

 

[Psychoblues]

Do you suppose that you are somehow "speaking down to me" or are you actually that egotistical? That's OK. Ego without intelligence or vice versa is fairly irrelevant without the other. Times haven't changed to that degree, or do you disagree?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Do you suppose that you are somehow "speaking down to me" or are you actually that egotistical? That's OK. Ego without intelligence or vice versa is fairly irrelevant without the other. Times haven't changed to that degree, or do you disagree?

I don't suppose, I know exactly what I'm doing. And I disagree. Take a long look at Isaac Brock's posts on this board. It appears that not only does he run circles around you in the intelligence department, he doesn't need to try and belittle others while stating his points. I can certainly learn from him, but you need the full blown course. So why don't you check your ego at the door before you post.

 

[Psychoblues]

I won't even pretend to compete with Isaac Brock or anyone else on this board, jimnyc. I speak my mind, as you do, and welcome comment. That's it. Are you advocating this is a competitive board and the "losers" should just go away?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Are you advocating this is a competitive board and the "losers" should just go away?

No, just those that can't learn to post without making constant condescending remarks to other members. I like the way you thought of the word "loser" though. Wouldn't have been my first choice, but...

 

[Psychoblues]

Oh jimmy NEW YORK CITY!!!!!!!! Each time I catch up on this board I see condescention from every angle. It's a USMB thing, or haven't you figured that out yet? Almost every conversation is ultimately reduced to condescention and insults, that's the impression that I get!!!!!!!!

At this time of night I'll just have to give you a for your observation as I'm way too tired to give much else.

God bless USMB and the USA that made it all possible!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[wonderwench]

Wow, talk about thread drift coming full circle.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Oh jimmy NEW YORK CITY!!!!!!!! Each time I catch up on this board I see condescention from every angle. It's a USMB thing, or haven't you figured that out yet? Almost every conversation is ultimately reduced to condescention and insults, that's the impression that I get!!!!!!!!

You say your post wasn't condescending and then you use a reference to others doing it as your excuse. Do you see the problem I would have with that? No need for you to explain yourself any further, I believe we just beat it out of you.

As for your cheers, I believe this is more suitable for you! :alco:

 

[wonderwench]

This thread makes the Dysfunctional Care Bears cry.

Thomas Sowell wrote a thoughtful and intelligent piece. Instead of discussing it, this thread has devolved into cross-insults.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by wonderwench
Thomas Sowell wrote a thoughtful and intelligent piece. Instead of discussing it, this thread has devolved into cross-insults.

I apologize for my part, WW, it certainly wasn't intentional to screw up your thread.

 

[jon_forward]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I apologize for my part, WW, it certainly wasn't intentional to screw up your thread.

Hell, I spent the last half hour looking fer my bong!!!:scratch: :scratch: :scratch: :scratch:

 

[wonderwench]

jim - no esta problema. I just really dislike it when serious discussions of any topic get derailed into back and forth sniping.

jon - don't drink the bong water, and check you PMs.

 

[jon_forward]

cant drink the water if I cant find the damn bong!!!!...actually I been real good as I have to find honest employment type work....not jones about no bong..I have not had a smoke[cig] for 2 weeks....I w..a..n..t..to..KILL SOMETHING!!!!

 

[wonderwench]

I have a family of rats up in the eaves of my house. Come on down!

 

[Bry]

Quotation marks ('...' "...") are also called 'inverted commas' in British English.

1 special use of words

We often put quotation marks round words which are used in special ways - for example when we talk about them, when we use them as titles, or when we give them special meanings.

Michael Swan, "Practical English Usage", Oxford, 1995.

 

[jimnyc]

Let's be realistic, Bry. If someone wants to emphasize something on a message board they have the options of using bold or italics.

Use quotation marks [ “ ” ] to set off material that represents quoted or spoken language. - this was taken directly from Websters.

99% of people will use quotation marks to show they are quoting someone elses words. Furthermore, if it was just meant to place emphasis or give the words "special meaning", that could easily have been stated from the first reply when I asked why he quoted those words when they were never spoken. Instead, the facade continued to give others the impression that those words were indeed spoken.

 

[Bry]

I understand what you say and agree at least that psychoblues only had to clarify his usage to avoid the misunderstanding, rather than exacerbating the misunderstanding in the way that he did.

Just thought you might like to be aware that his usage is stylistically acceptable, if a bit misleading. I frequently use quotes in the same way, without intending to imply direct speech or writing, in keeping with what I have seen in academic writing. I just went to look it up for my own edification, as I wasn't sure myself, and thought you might be interested as well. BTW, the book I quoted from is not prescriptive but descriptive: it does not recommend usages, but merely reports what conventions might actually be encountered. I think you are right that bold or italics would be preferrable where the options are available.

In any case, I found this article which discusses the debate on
imminent threat and it seems to side slightly with the administration in this case, though the weighing of the two sides is done very objectively. I'll just give the link rather than posting the entire article.

http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031103.html

 

[jimnyc]

"I, like everyone that I know including my most right-wing personal friends, all agree that this war in Iraq was precipitated on warnings of "imminent threat" and that without it was not justified. That's gonna be a hard lick for the warmongers to overcome, don't you agree? Type in "imminent threat" on about any search engine you care and you'll find remarks attributed to this Administration."

I might add that this further gave the impression that Psycho was trying to say that this is what the administration stated.

this war in Iraq was precipitated on warnings of "imminent threat"

No bones about it, this clearly states that their were warnings of an imminent threat. It clearly states there was a warning, and then uses those words in quotations to state what that warning was.

Type in "imminent threat" on about any search engine you care and you'll find remarks attributed to this Administration."

This also gives the impression that if I searched on this term I would find these remarks attributed to the Bush administration.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bry
I understand what you say and agree at least that psychoblues only had to clarify his usage to avoid the misunderstanding, rather than exacerbating the misunderstanding in the way that he did.

One clarification after my intitial reply and this all would have been avoided.

You know more about quotations than I do, so I certainly won't disagree with you as to what alternative uses they have! It was quite obvious that we figured he was using them to literally quote the Bush administration. Rather than clear up that misconception, he decided to play word games.

I was just simply saying that those particular words were never used and that I don't think it should have been written as if they did.

Excellent article you posted! The only thing I'd like to comment on is the quotes from Fleischer and Rumsfeld. Let's keep in mind, when someone states Iraq was a threat, that could have also applied to the Middle East region, not just the USA. I do believe, based on what now may be faulty intel, that Iraq was an imminent threat to the region. I also believe they were a general threat to the USA.