DC Tom Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Wait... it's Monday today, right? Or did I sleep through Tuesday again? Since "Monday" is apparently an epithet equivalent to "!@#$", I've decided to make "Wednesday" equivalent to "!@#$wit". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Since "Monday" is apparently an epithet equivalent to "!@#$", I've decided to make "Wednesday" equivalent to "!@#$wit". Does that mean tgregg just called today "!@#$"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Does that mean tgregg just called today "!@#$"? Well, I am an insensitive assclown most days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Well, I am an insensitive assclown a Thursday Sunday most days. Fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Fixed :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 okay, Bill O'Reilly. Sure, let's ignore Obama's past statements, the fact that he was parroting that crazy lady who was openly making that point, & suspend disbelief so we can be "Super Centrist: the most reasonable man in the room". Edit: After regrading your statement I agree, as most here have, that although proper interpretation of the plain wording would suggest business owners didn't build their business it does seem he (erroneously) meant they didn't contribute to the building & maintenance of the roads. But make no mistake, he was absolutely crediting government with more credit than it is due in much the same way an unskilled and easily replaceable line-cook might grossly overvalue his contribution to a restaurant. I understand wanting to think your guy's not a Marxist POS but he said what he said. If you're trying to say we're all in this together you would never communicate it that way. And what would be the ultimate point? If you listen to it, in context, you can't honestly escape the reality that his point is that these greedy, self-congratulatory mother!@#$ers need to stop hoarding all the money and need to start paying their "fair share" instead of getting a free ride on the backs of the rest of us. There is no other logical outgrowth of his statement; especially when framed in the context I've explained previously. Well, why didn't you tell me this before. That clears up all of my confusion. I didn't realize that when Obama speaks you're the only one that can tell us what he means in regards to context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Well, why didn't you tell me this before. That clears up all of my confusion. I didn't realize that when Obama speaks you're the only one that can tell us what he means in regards to context. Everybody knows what he meant. Even you. That's why it's so devastating and why recent Romney adds show the entire quip. If you have another interpretation that is consistent and even remotely plausible I'd like to hear it. So far you've not offered one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts