My favorite fakenewsmen will be on the cover of Rolling Stone this month. You should go read the article's excerpt. It's a riot.

If you apologize on the Don Imus show does that mean it only happened in the '80s?

no

I have- did before it was ever posted here.

This is my main frustration with people here- some of you see perfectly fit to tell me what I think, what I've done or not done- how I misunderstand, misspoke- whatever- and you lay it at my feet no matter what I say is my intent, what I have done, what I personally think.

This guy makes an ass of himself- and you spin yourself into dervishes finding ways to say "he did not mean it that way" - it's everyone elses problem- not his. He is not responsible for the reactions- or for upsetting anyone.

THAT has been the main thing that has undermined my respect for certain people and their tactics- it's only used when it suits their own bias.

Is there anyone in politics who this doesn't apply to? I mean, isn't that the crux of politicing? Who do you think is not being self-serving in today's political arena?

Oh, I think anybody is responsible for the words they say ... but how can anyone be responsible for other people's reactions or upset? Those reactions are completely up to the persons having them ... or do they have no free will while the speaker has complete free will? (don't answer that, Alex).


In a very real sense, I feel a speaker bears a certain responsiblity for how his or her words are taken ... in that if they are not taken they way the speaker meant, then the speaker has failed in some way. I think John Kerry failed in a big way. But even that failure does not make him, or anyone, responsible for reactions. He is only responsible for his words, not what others make of them.

If, based on reactions, a speaker judges to adjust his words, that is wisdom. If anyone claims a speaker responsible for the reactions to those words, that is folly.

Totally what I've been trying to tell people ALL FREAKING DAY. Thanks, iSm.

Hey, I read a columnist today- don't remember who, but if it's important I'll look it up.... Anyway, she suggested that perhaps the opponents of stem cell research should think about providing tiny coffins and services for all those frozen embryos that will be destroyed. I mean, they're babies, right? Morbid and macabre, but a valid question nonetheless.

Wow that brings back memories...I used to argue with anti-choice people about why they didn't have funerals for MaxiPads...because a lot of early miscarriages happen during the first trimester. They look like periods. I know, because I had one. Do I want someone else telling me that was my son's older brother/sister? Nope. Should I have had a funeral? I don't believe so...as the fertized egg was obviously not viable. What if I was considering aborting? *throws that out*

This was your opening post:
Dervish much?

Once again, I am going to post the quote from the article:
Looks to me like a slam at the president. Looks to me that if anyone reads it differently they are willfully misinterpreting the meaning of what was said.

So:
Gosh, imagine my disappointment at losing the respect of one of the more disrespectful people I've ever run across.