@wally: He's only served three years so far, Walt. Bush served a full eight. Let's see how it totals out after either four (we can divide by two to get an estimate of how many he'd have taken in eight) or eight.
And for someone that chides me constantly for using the tu quoque argument, you seem to use it a lot yourself.
I chose Bush as his immediate predecessor, not as a tu quoque argument. IMO, being President is incredibly demanding, and they deserve any time off they can manage. According to factcheck.org--I think it was them--Obama's vacation time is in line with all other recent Presidents, and considerably less than Bush's--adjusted for relative time served. I'm not so stupid that I would compare three years to eight, Bob.
My point is, there are several justifiable bases for criticizing Obama, and I would even join you in a few. Why stoop to Fox-like pointless and false snipes?
@wally: when you start becoming a grammar Nazi, you're flailing a bit, Walt. What's next, publicly pointing out my typos?
I'd be less inclined to criticize Obama's golf jones if the MSM hadn't used golf to bludgeon Bush as uncaring. The famous juxtaposition of coffins arriving at Dover with Bush saying "Now watch this drive" was a low blow even by MSM standards.
Sic—generally inside square brackets, [sic], and occasionally parentheses, (sic)—when added just after a quote or reprinted text, indicates the passage appears exactly as in the original source. The usual purpose is to inform readers that any errors or apparent errors in the copied material are not from transcription—that they are reproduced exactly from the original writer or printer. A bracketed sic may also be used as a form of ridicule or as a humorous comment, typically by drawing attention to the original writer's mistakes.
Typical Leftist tactic. Pointing out typos and grammar errors falls into the same category, especially when applied selectively.
A newsroom comprised entirely of leftists/liberals is no more capable of ideological objectivity than an all-white newsroom would be of racial objectivity, or an all-male newsroom of gender objectivity.
Captain Louis Renault
"Round Up the Usual Suspects."
The Drawn Cutlass Philosophy
Be as decent as you can. Don't believe without evidence. Treat things divine with marked respect, and don't have anything to do with them. Do not trust humanity without collateral security, it will play you some scurvy trick. Remember that it hurts no one to be treated as an enemy entitled to respect until he prove himself a friend worthy of affection. Cultivate a taste for distasteful truths. And, finally, most important of all, endeavor to see things as they are, not as they ought to be.
Ambrose Bierce
The Foe
When I am free to walk the streets of Mecca or Medina as the agnostic I am and receive nothing but curious glances, I will believe Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.
Sign On. You Know You Want To.
A Few Words From Some Founding Fathers
All Men Are Created Equal. (Thomas Jefferson, Founding Father)
But Differ Greatly In the Sequel. (Fisher Ames, Founding Father)
Jeff Cooper's Rules of Gun Safety
All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.
Bob's Addendum To Cooper's Rules
A Gun is not a Toy. Don't Play With It.
Bob's Theory of Hush Puppies
Bob's Theory of Hush Puppies: The best hush puppies are oblong shaped, rather like dog turds. The worst ones are spherical, like balls. The spherical ones are usually made from the recipe on a pre-packaged box of hush puppy mix.
Restaurant Ratings
My restaurant ratings, mostly intended for BBQ restaurants, will be on a 1-5 scale, with 1 being the worst and 5 being the best. Unlike most reviewers, I don't intend to play games with the rating scale by introducing fractions such as "2 and 1/2" or "4 and 3/4," I've always considered that stupid and a signal that the reviewer is trying to avoid making an honest 1-5 judgment.
Here is the breakdown of the ratings:
1 out of 5: waste of time, crap, unable to finish eating; apathy by staff/ownership
2 out of 5: edible, but no effort to impress; staff/management going through motions; desultory.
3 out of 5: average; reasonably good food, moderate effort by staff/management
4 out of 5: good; tasty, well-prepared food, staff alert, restaurant clean.
5 out of 5: great; excellent food, cooked fresh. Staff attentive and proactive, management responsive to complaints. Restaurant spotless.
On Self-Reliance
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
9 comments:
I don't suppose it matters that he hasn't taken nearly as many vacation days as Bush. Yeah, I didn't think so.
@wally: He's only served three years so far, Walt. Bush served a full eight. Let's see how it totals out after either four (we can divide by two to get an estimate of how many he'd have taken in eight) or eight.
And for someone that chides me constantly for using the tu quoque argument, you seem to use it a lot yourself.
I chose Bush as his immediate predecessor, not as a tu quoque argument. IMO, being President is incredibly demanding, and they deserve any time off they can manage. According to factcheck.org--I think it was them--Obama's vacation time is in line with all other recent Presidents, and considerably less than Bush's--adjusted for relative time served. I'm not so stupid that I would compare three years to eight, Bob.
And just to be querulous, it's "someone who", not "someone that".
My point is, there are several justifiable bases for criticizing Obama, and I would even join you in a few. Why stoop to Fox-like pointless and false snipes?
@wally: when you start becoming a grammar Nazi, you're flailing a bit, Walt. What's next, publicly pointing out my typos?
I'd be less inclined to criticize Obama's golf jones if the MSM hadn't used golf to bludgeon Bush as uncaring. The famous juxtaposition of coffins arriving at Dover with Bush saying "Now watch this drive" was a low blow even by MSM standards.
You and your tu quoque arguments :)
Querulous, yes. Flailing, no. And I have already pointed out typos, and will continue to do so. No need to thank me. I consider it a public service.
@wally: [sic]:
Sic—generally inside square brackets, [sic], and occasionally parentheses, (sic)—when added just after a quote or reprinted text, indicates the passage appears exactly as in the original source. The usual purpose is to inform readers that any errors or apparent errors in the copied material are not from transcription—that they are reproduced exactly from the original writer or printer. A bracketed sic may also be used as a form of ridicule or as a humorous comment, typically by drawing attention to the original writer's mistakes.
Typical Leftist tactic. Pointing out typos and grammar errors falls into the same category, especially when applied selectively.
A bracketed sic is a typical leftist tactic? You are a truly funny man, Robert.
Post a Comment