All bow to the leader - Rush Linbaugh....

Damocles said:
It didn't change its meaning at all.

He still hopes the policy fails. (I don't. I hope we all get rich.)

Intelligent people don't pretend that there is nothing in context that may change the implied motivation behind any sentence.
Click to expand...

According to you, its not that he hopes it will fail, it is that he belives it will fail. Again big difference, why did he not just say so?
 
Jarod said:
But what Rush said was, "I hope Obama's plan fails"

Not, "I know Obama's plan will fail in the long run, so I hope it fails in the short run."

HUGE DIFFERENCE and to later try to justify it by changing the clear meaning is disingenous and silly!
Click to expand...
Again.

Yes, what he said is, "I hope if his policies are socialist that they fail."

What he continued to say was what I have reported he has said.
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish. Your analogy fails.

Day 1: Some guy says that he hopes that another person doesn't live forever. (further explaining how he once read a story where somebody lived forever but kept getting older until they were incapable of doing anything but sit in agony.)

Day 2: You read about it somewhere, without the further explanation included, and say that they said that "They hope that other person dies"

Day 3: Person who hoped that other person didn't live forever explains what he meant by the sentence taken out of context.

Day 4: Some lawyer pretends it is the same as confessing to a crime.
Click to expand...

This analogy sucks badly, I havent changed a single word Rush said. In your analgoy you changed what the person said from "I hope hw dies not live forever" to "I hope he dies" - you have changed the words, I have not changed Rush's words.
 
Jarod said:
According to you, its not that he hopes it will fail, it is that he belives it will fail. Again big difference, why did he not just say so?
Click to expand...
Jeebus! What density is this?

I have told you what the man said. You have told me you would take him at his word.
 
Damocles said:
Again.

Yes, what he said is, "I hope if his policies are socialist that they fail."

What he continued to say was what I have reported he has said.
Click to expand...

You claim to have reported it, but that has been put through your own filter, come on give me a cite where Rush tries to backtrack like you claim he did.
 
Jarod said:
This analogy sucks badly, I havent changed a single word Rush said. In your analgoy you changed what the person said from "I hope hw dies not live forever" to "I hope he dies" - you have changed the words, I have not changed Rush's words.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if the sentence isn't changed, what matters is the motivation you assign to the sentence.

Fine we'll fix that.

Day 1: Some guy says that he hopes that another person doesn't live forever. (further explaining how he once read a story where somebody lived forever but kept getting older until they were incapable of doing anything but sit in agony.)

Day 2: You read about it somewhere, without the further explanation included, and repeat the sentence, saying, "They said that because they want them to die."

Day 3: Person who hoped that other person didn't live forever explains what he meant by the sentence taken out of context.

Day 4: Some lawyer pretends it is the same as confessing to a crime.
 
Damocles said:
It doesn't matter if the sentence isn't changed, what matters is the motivation you assign to the sentence.

Fine we'll fix that.

Day 1: Some guy says that he hopes that another person doesn't live forever. (further explaining how he once read a story where somebody lived forever but kept getting older until they were incapable of doing anything but sit in agony.)

Day 2: You read about it somewhere, without the further explanation included, and repeat the sentence, saying, "They said that because they want them to die."

Day 3: Person who hoped that other person didn't live forever explains what he meant by the sentence taken out of context.

Day 4: Some lawyer pretends it is the same as confessing to a crime.
Click to expand...

This is better, but still pittafull.

In this analogy, the guy wishes the person will die, the reason he wishes the person dies might be different but the guy still wishes the person will die.

In your defense of RL you have change the words he said from, "He hopes the plan will fail" to "He hopes the plan will fail in the short run, because he knows it will fail in the long run"

You changed Rush's words.

Had Rush intended to convey the meaning you keep trying to say he intended, why not just say that. What he said was he hopes the presidents plans fail. Not he knows the presidents plans will fail.
 
Darla said:
1.the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.

Hmmm.

I'm not convinced. I need to hear more from Jarod and Damo.
Click to expand...

LMAO... instigator
 
Jarod said:
This is better, but still pittafull.

In this analogy, the guy wishes the person will die, the reason he wishes the person dies might be different but the guy still wishes the person will die.

In your defense of RL you have change the words he said from, "He hopes the plan will fail" to "He hopes the plan will fail in the short run, because he knows it will fail in the long run"

You changed Rush's words.

Had Rush intended to convey the meaning you keep trying to say he intended, why not just say that. What he said was he hopes the presidents plans fail. Not he knows the presidents plans will fail.
Click to expand...
Far better than the murder suspect analogy though which was total fail.

See? We can add and subtract from it and explain what we mean during a conversation.

Let's make it that at step one he says, "I'd rather he die of drowning than to live forever. I only wish that because...."

Then step two they only report the first sentence.

Everything else is the same. Except you maintain that he never said the rest of the stuff and that everybody should believe that he means that he hopes the guy fails to swim.
 
I have yet to hear Rush's own words about how he was justifying away his prior statement. I have heard Dama's interperation of it.
 
Darla said:
1.the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.

Hmmm.

I'm not convinced. I need to hear more from Jarod and Damo.
Click to expand...
You madam are a glutton for punishment. I keep falling asleep in the middle of the thread. Please, both of you, stop.
 
Damocles said:
Far better than the murder suspect analogy though which was total fail.

See? We can add and subtract from it and explain what we mean during a conversation.

Let's make it that at step one he says, "I'd rather he die of drowning than to live forever. I only wish that because...."

Then step two they only report the first sentence.

Everything else is the same. Except you maintain that he never said the rest of the stuff and that everybody should believe that he means that he hopes the guy fails to swim.
Click to expand...

Fail again...

You cant see that you are changeing Rush's origional words from, "I hope he fails", to "I know he will fail."

You are not changing the reason he hopes/knows he will fail, you are changeing the words all together!
 
Jarod said:
Fail again...

You cant see that you are changeing Rush's origional words from, "I hope he fails", to "I know he will fail."

You are not changing the reason he hopes/knows he will fail, you are changeing the words all together!
Click to expand...
My last statement on this. I promised Soc that I'll end it.

1. He hopes they'll fail.
2. I reported what he said was why he hopes they fail.

Nothing is changed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top