Republican National Convention '08

scaeagles · 09-05-2008, 09:42 AM

You see, that's exactly why I read instead of listen or watch.

I have no doubt in your sincerity in how you've interpretted it. If I was watching, I really doubt that I'd have interpretted it that way (even if I caught the wink). I haven't heard or read any analysis of it being interpretted that way.

The mannerisms and visual queues mean different things to different people. The words are the words. You could be right that I miss what the body language is saying in reading rather than watching, and you're probably right to an extent. But I think this is a case where you read something into it that many or most don't or didn't.

innerSpaceman · 09-05-2008, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

You see, that's exactly why I read instead of listen or watch.

I have no doubt in your sincerity in how you've interpretted it. If I was watching, I really doubt that I'd have interpretted it that way (even if I caught the wink). I haven't heard or read any analysis of it being interpretted that way.

I suppose you wouldn't have interpreted Palin's "Part the Waters" remark about Obama to refer to the false-messiah baloney the Republicans are tying to paint him with.

If you're not up on the code book, good for you, scaeagles. But it's got nothing to do with "interpretation."

It's rather a matter of TRANSLATION. Look it up in the Official Republican Code Book: "Judges Legislating From the Bench" = Approving the Constitutionality of Gay Marriage Rights.

Don't give me any crap about interpretation. The wink wasn't even necessary, it was just the bit that sold it .... and sold him down the river as far as I'm concerned. He can rot in Hanoi Hilton Hell in his foreverafterlife.

sleepyjeff · 09-05-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

It's rather a matter of TRANSLATION. Look it up in the Official Republican Code Book: "Judges Legislating From the Bench" = Approving the Constitutionality of Gay Marriage Rights.

Republicans have been complaining about legislating from the bench for decades.......long before Gay Marriage became a major issue.

Imo the "wink" was for the pro-lifers who have been very wary of this candidate.

According to a google search in which I typed in "judges legislating from the bench" + "blank"

When "blank" was "gay marriage" 6,150 results turned up
When "blank" was "guns" 6,680 results turned up
When "blank" was "immigration" 6,990 results turned up
When "blank" was "abortion" 9,830 results turned up.

So isn't it, if not highly likely, at least conceivable that he was not winking about gay marriage at all?

09-05-2008, 09:42 AM	#1
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	You see, that's exactly why I read instead of listen or watch. I have no doubt in your sincerity in how you've interpretted it. If I was watching, I really doubt that I'd have interpretted it that way (even if I caught the wink). I haven't heard or read any analysis of it being interpretted that way. The mannerisms and visual queues mean different things to different people. The words are the words. You could be right that I miss what the body language is saying in reading rather than watching, and you're probably right to an extent. But I think this is a case where you read something into it that many or most don't or didn't.
	Submit to Quotes