--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 > > > > pieces of > > > > legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. > > > > Sunnis are > > > > turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a > > > > change. The Democrats > > > > have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works > > > > they look very bad. > > > > > > It is such a cynical view from both sides to use the death of > > > men, women and children as a political pawn to score points. > > > really sickening and cold-hearted. Whether the surge "works" or > > > not, I just want this damned war to be over soon, and for us as > > > a country to recognize that it has solved nothing.:-) > > > > *Nobody* is "invested in failure" in Iraq. Of all the > > right's calumnies, that is perhaps the most unspeakably > > vile. > > > > It's the old "stab in the back" strategy, dragged out > > and dressed up in an effort to excuse the failures > > that have already occurred. > > Uh, Judy...using your *own* standards, aren't > you insinuating above that either Jim or MDixon > used the phrase "stab in the back?"
Nope. (BTW, the question mark should go outside the quote marks, since it's not part of the quoted phrase.) Obviously I wouldn't be referring to Jim, because he isn't right wing. For MDixon, see below. > You put it in quotes, after all. AND, you did > so just after using quotes *fairly* "properly" > (that is, accprding to the rules in Judy Stein's > Big Book Of How To Write Gud) to *misquote* > MDixon, who really said "invested in *the* > failure," not "invested in failure." If you > were doing the quote properly, you should have > said "invested in ... failure," indicating with > the elipses that you had left out one or more > words. Not needed when the original is right there to see. I was broadening the *idea* slightly by leaving out "the" and not including "surge" at the end: not only is nobody invested in the failure of the surge, nobody is invested in failure in Iraq generally. > *By your own standards*, what you attributed to > MDixon was technically a misquote of what he > said. *By your own standards*, what you attributed > to someone -- either Jim or MDixon -- was a made- > up quote of your own, something that neither of > them said or probably ever imagined. "Stab in the back" is a historical reference (which is why I preceded it with "old" and followed it with "dragged out and dressed up," you see). MDixon certainly has the *idea* in mind; it's one of the current right-wing talking points that the Democrats' push to withdraw the troops will bring about failure in Iraq, as if the venture hadn't already failed big-time. I'm obviously not suggesting that's what Jim had in mind, because he isn't right wing, and he wasn't referring to failure per se but to *any* means of using the war for political advantage. (Google the phrase to find out how it and the idea behind it have been used in the past by the right against the left.) > If it had been *me* you were having this dis- > cussion with, and I had done what you just did, > you would have been screaming to high heaven right > now accusing me of maliciously claiming that you'd > said something you didn't. Nope, because I'd have had the good sense to see from the context that you weren't attempting to suggest that it was a phrase I had used (even if I weren't familiar with the historical background). > You would have put this down to my long-estab- > lished disregard for truth and honesty, and to > my obvious malevolent intent towards you and my > desire to portray you negatively here on FFL. > And then you would have whined for a couple of > more paragraphs, doing a smashing rendition of > the Poor Me Blues. > > But it's *OK* when you do it. Right? > > Rules of punctuation usage and rules of "argu- > mentation ethics" are only for *other* people. > They don't *apply* to you. Right? > > And yes, for the others here who are rolling > their eyes and thinking of Sal's song (nice work > on that, Sal...more creativity and originality > of thought in one post than Judy has displayed > in 13 years), YES this is a silly nitpick. It's > *insane* for me to claim that Judy meant to > attribute the phrase "stab in the back" to > either Jim or MDixon, just because she put it > in quotes. > > So why isn't it insane when she claims the same > thing about me and Vaj? Because of the context, of course. Sorry. Nice try, no cigar.
