It's such a completely non-statement...
it wasn't really a political statement in any way -- it's the sort of
crap people say at pep rallies and whatever... All he was doing was
"boosting" the performers (not that they needed him to) because it's a
polite thing to do when you're speaking at some event where performers
have been invited.
I understand that his specific choice of words might have been a tad
confusing or distressing to ultra-conservatives who don't understand
the context, but if that's also where they're getting "... vulgar
sexual innuendos and crude insults belong in an official campaign for
the presidency of the United States" I'd have to say that either thay
are intentionally distorting what he said, or they are so completely
stupid that they shouldn't be trusted to manage their own bodily
functions. The fact that they're able to dress themselves in the
morning (I assume) makes me lean in the direction of believing the
former.
> Isn�t saying they conveyed the message the same as
> saying they are speaking for?
> Since most people know Hollywood doesn�t represent or
> speak for the heart and soul of America then what did
> Kerry mean?
> -sm
> --- Marlon Moyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "convey" and "are" are very different. No mention
>> of Hollywood being the
>> "heart and soul" of America, but it wouldn't make
>> good politics without
>> twisting it.
>>
>> C'mon now Sam, if you're centrist like you claim,
>> can you see the twisting
>> going on there?
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1
http://www.fusiontap.com
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
