Republican Slime

Dixie said:
pre·sump·tu·ous: ...full of, characterized by, or showing presumption or readiness to presume.

pre·sump·tion: ...the act of presuming.

The adjective Obama used to describe presumption, was "certain". If there was in fact certainty, then "presumption" becomes the proper noun. It's no big deal, I'm sure it was just an oversight by his speechwriters, but it's probably why it stood out to me, and I thought he mispronounced a word.
Click to expand...

he didn't say persumptuous...he said, presumptuousness.... correct word.... used correctly....pronounced correctly...and look, word moron.... as if you have a fucking CLUE about the nuance of language....you were the guy who claimed that REFUDIATE was a word.

You are CERTAINLY not the guy to be offering criticisms of a polished speaker and writer like Barak Obama.

redneck racist hick slanderous motherfucker.
 
maineman said:
he didn't say persumptuous...he said, presumptuousness.... correct word.... used correctly....pronounced correctly...and look, word moron.... as if you have a fucking CLUE about the nuance of language....you were the guy who claimed that REFUDIATE was a word.

You are CERTAINLY not the guy to be offering criticisms of a polished speaker and writer like Barak Obama.

redneck racist hick slanderous motherfucker.
Click to expand...

Hey maine, that obama is pretty clean and articulate for a, you know...
 
-DAMOCLES: “(Cypress), The only dishonest person here is yourself, becuase you "must" be right in all things. Even when directly PROVEN wrong.”



-DIXIE: "Technically, I am going to have to say, you didn't prove this. Sorry Damo!"

"If the meaning of "repudiate" is as you said, that describes AssHat's viewpoint precisely. He never gave any basis for rejecting my arguments, he never presented any tangible evidence to support his arguments, and he correctly stated that he had repudiated me personally, which is obvious."

-ASSHATZOMBIE: "Umm. I meant repudiate. I did NOT mean refudiate, or refute, or repute. to reject as having no authority or binding force: to repudiate a claim."


-CYPRESS: "Dixie, The word is repudiate....NOT refudiate."

******************************************************************


Oops. Shall I be expecting an apology from Damo? The question is: will I get it? Asshat, Dixie, Maineman, and Myself all clearly understood what was going on in this thread. The only person who either didn't understand - or decided to intentionally mispresent people's posts in this thread - was Damocles.



-HYPOTHETICAL DAMOCLES RESPONSE:

“Oh shit. All you guys are right. Dixie and Asshat showed me what the context of their conversation was. Boy was I wrong. Even Maineman told me I was totally misrepresenting things. And cypress told me MULTIPLE TIMES that he had never even read Asshat’s posts (so how was he to even have a clue what “context” Dixie and asshat were using?) -- , he was just responding to Dixie that there was no such word in the English language as “refudiate”; that the actual word is ‘repudiate”.

Boy, do I feel like an ass.
 
Cypress said:
-DAMOCLES: “(Cypress), The only dishonest person here is yourself, becuase you "must" be right in all things. Even when directly PROVEN wrong.”



-DIXIE: "Technically, I am going to have to say, you didn't prove this. Sorry Damo!"

"If the meaning of "repudiate" is as you said, that describes AssHat's viewpoint precisely. He never gave any basis for rejecting my arguments, he never presented any tangible evidence to support his arguments, and he correctly stated that he had repudiated me personally, which is obvious."

-ASSHATZOMBIE: "Umm. I meant repudiate. I did NOT mean refudiate, or refute, or repute. to reject as having no authority or binding force: to repudiate a claim."


-CYPRESS: "Dixie, The word is repudiate....NOT refudiate."

******************************************************************


Oops. Shall I be expecting an apology from Damo? The question is: will I get it? Asshat, Dixie, Maineman, and Myself all clearly understood what was going on in this thread. The only person who either didn't understand - or decided to intentionally mispresent people's posts in this thread - was Damocles.



-HYPOTHETICAL DAMOCLES RESPONSE:

“Oh shit. All you guys are right. Dixie and Asshat showed me what the context of their conversation was. Boy was I wrong. Even Maineman told me I was totally misrepresenting things. And cypress told me MULTIPLE TIMES that he had never even read Asshat’s posts (so how was he to even have a clue what “context” Dixie and asshat were using?) -- , he was just responding to Dixie that there was no such word in the English language as “refudiate”; that the actual word is ‘repudiate”.

Boy, do I feel like an ass.
Click to expand...


he certainly owes you as much.... and, in my past dealings with Damo, he is one of a very few who will graciously admit mistakes.
 
maineman said:
he didn't say persumptuous...he said, presumptuousness.... correct word.... used correctly....pronounced correctly...and look, word moron.... as if you have a fucking CLUE about the nuance of language....you were the guy who claimed that REFUDIATE was a word.

You are CERTAINLY not the guy to be offering criticisms of a polished speaker and writer like Barak Obama.
Click to expand...

Yes, he used the improper word for the context of what he was saying, he should have simply said "there is a certain presumption..."

The root word of what he chose to use, is the word 'presumptuous', it is a compound word using the suffix -ous, which denotes state, condition, or quality of something.

The suffix -ness denotes the state, condition, or quality of something as well, in this case, presumption.

The state, condition, and quality had already been established by the adjective, "certain" in his speech. It was redundant to re-state the quality and condition of the presumption, it was already established.

"there is presumptuousness..." would have been proper, but that was not what he said. Like I said, it was probably an oversight on the speechwriter, or perhaps Obama ad-libbed and screwed up the proper usage? In any case, it was not proper grammar in the context presented.

Now, Maineman, I want to discuss another issue. You have repeatedly made comments about me being racist, redneck, etc. While I can appreciate the nature of your zeal to bash me personally, I have had enough of these comments, and I want them to stop. This is not open for debate. If you can't stop yourself, I can prevent having to read the comments, by adding you to the ignore list. Once you are there, I will never again engage you in any debate here or elsewhere. If that is what you are after, you are about to achieve it. I will not give you another warning, I will not say another word about it. If you want me to put you on ignore permanently and never acknowledge you again, just reel off one more of your infamous lines about me, and that will happen for you.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Umm. I meant repudiate. I did NOT mean refudiate, or refute, or repute.

to reject as having no authority or binding force: to repudiate a claim.
Click to expand...
Repudiating a statement that was backed up with sound reasoning is not a form of argument.

Just saying, "You are wrong." without backing up your statement with refutation is simply making baseless claims. Give us a bit more than simple repudiation because we can all go back and forth stating, "You are wrong." all day long without backing it up, it is meaningless.
 
Dixie said:
Yes, he used the improper word for the context of what he was saying, he should have simply said "there is a certain presumption..."

The root word of what he chose to use, is the word 'presumptuous', it is a compound word using the suffix -ous, which denotes state, condition, or quality of something.

The suffix -ness denotes the state, condition, or quality of something as well, in this case, presumption.

The state, condition, and quality had already been established by the adjective, "certain" in his speech. It was redundant to re-state the quality and condition of the presumption, it was already established.

"there is presumptuousness..." would have been proper, but that was not what he said. Like I said, it was probably an oversight on the speechwriter, or perhaps Obama ad-libbed and screwed up the proper usage? In any case, it was not proper grammar in the context presented.

Now, Maineman, I want to discuss another issue. You have repeatedly made comments about me being racist, redneck, etc. While I can appreciate the nature of your zeal to bash me personally, I have had enough of these comments, and I want them to stop. This is not open for debate. If you can't stop yourself, I can prevent having to read the comments, by adding you to the ignore list. Once you are there, I will never again engage you in any debate here or elsewhere. If that is what you are after, you are about to achieve it. I will not give you another warning, I will not say another word about it. If you want me to put you on ignore permanently and never acknowledge you again, just reel off one more of your infamous lines about me, and that will happen for you.
Click to expand...


one more time.... the guy who claims that REFUDIATE is a word is not the guy anyone should listen to when it comes to the nuances of the english language. The fact of the matter is - from a guy who KNOWS that REFUDIATE is not a word - that presumptuousness is the PERFECT word for the context in which Obama used it. And for a guy who develops film for a living and lives in a trailer park to be telling a best selling author, Harvard Law Review Editor, articulate United States Senator and Presidential candidate that he doesn't speak well is a nauseating combination of stupidity and appalling arrogance.

And like I said before, Dixie.... if you put Cypress and me on Ignore, you would be surprised at how few other folks would bother to read your tripe.... when we chew your ass up, it gets you attention. You don't seem to mind that it is negative attention.... and neither do I.

The fact is: you have expressed several opinions over the years that any objective observer would categorize as racist - interracial marriage legislation... the insensitivity of the confederate flag... affirmative action... Trent Lott's comments... the list goes on and on and on. If you want to change those, and, for example, decide to change your slanderous statements about me, then maybe you wouldn't have those opinions thrown back in your face.

Up to you.
 
The root word of what he chose to use, is the word 'presumptuous', it is a compound word using the suffix -ous, which denotes state, condition, or quality of something.

The suffix -ness denotes the state, condition, or quality of something as well, in this case, presumption.

This looks like a job for me....

-ous doesn't indicate the state, condition or quality of something, it denotes that something possesses the quality of ....

-ness does indictate the state of.

Presumptuous indictates that the subject possesses the quality of presuming.

Presumptuousness is the state of possessing the quality of presuming.

This is a technical matter of language that Obama can't really be pulled up on, especially when I might remind you....

"Our enemies...never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
 
Last edited:
Better pre-retort to Dixie's anticipated reply...

Possessing the quality of something isn't the same as it being that thing.

Poisonous indicates something possesses the quality of being poison, but it doesn't mean poison.
 
"Our enemies...never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
//

That is one of the few true statements from the neocons :D
A Freudian slip without a doubt.
 
one more time.... the guy who claims that REFUDIATE is a word

Gee, I count four times now, where I have stated clearly, that 'refudiate' is not a word. Who are you talking about? Do you have peanut butter in your ears or on your monitor? I don't understand... is there a certain number of times someone has to attempt to penetrate your concrete head, before you comprehend what they say? I admitted I made a mistake, and that's really all I can do here, if you just want to ignore that and keep insisting I made statements I never made, go ahead, it shows what a low-life lying piece of human trash you really are.

On the other matter, it's not up to me, it's up to you. I don't care who I put on ignore, or how many people read my posts. (Last I checked, I had the #1, #2, &#3, most viewed topics.) Don't get me wrong, I love slapping you around like my little crack bitch, and showing everyone what a two-faced hypocrite you really are, but I can live without it. I really think you need to seriously look up the meaning of 'slander' and stop misusing the word. I think it's pretty damn hypocritical to tell a bold face lie like the one I quoted above, then cry about being 'slandered' by me! I also think it's pretty fucking pathetic to continue calling me derogatory names, when you don't know me, and can't speak for my personal character. You've simply made your typical God-like judgements of me, and seem completely oblivious to your sins. It's as if you wish to ignore huge swaths of the Bible you claim to believe in, while you sit in hypocritical mortal judgement of me and others, as if you have some self-ordained right from God, to disobey his Word.

You are smarter than the average pinhead, I'll grant you that. You can argue just about any position, and can find a way to spin almost any statement, you are clever and crafty with words, and I think you missed your calling as a shyster ambulance-chasing lawyer, or a politician... of course, with your dark and perverted background, that might not fly, even by today's standards. So here you sit, trying to be relevant on a political message board!

As I stated, I will not give you another warning, I will not mention it again, you just reel off one of your slanderous attempts at character assassination on me again, and you will forever be ignored by me. That call is entirely YOURS!
 
This looks like a job for me....

No... there are no crayons involved.... sorry!

-ous doesn't indicate the state, condition or quality of something, it denotes that something possesses the quality of ....

Which is essentially the same thing.

-ness does indictate the state of.

Correct.


Presumptuous indictates that the subject possesses the quality of presuming.

Correct!

Presumptuousness is the state of possessing the quality of presuming.

Correct!

This is a technical matter of language that Obama can't really be pulled up on

Oh contraire! It IS indeed a technical matter of language, and he used the wrong word for the context, that IS what this argument is about. You can't just pop in and excuse Obama from the rules of proper grammar, and make everything okay, and Dixie wrong! It don't work like that, moron!

I will say it again... he misused the word, or used it in the wrong grammatical context, either way, it was Obama's error, I just called attention to it. Maine claims he used the right word in the right context, and Maine is wrong. What do you say? Was the word "presumptuousness" the proper word for Obama to have used, in the context he presented it? Yes or no? My argument is, it was redundant to re-state the quality of the presumption, as this had already been established with the preceding adjective and modifier, "certain".
 
Dixie said:
I will say it again... he misused the word, or used it in the wrong grammatical context, either way, it was Obama's error, I just called attention to it. Maine claims he used the right word in the right context, and Maine is wrong. What do you say? Was the word "presumptuousness" the proper word for Obama to have used, in the context he presented it? Yes or no? My argument is, it was redundant to re-state the quality of the presumption, as this had already been established with the preceding adjective and modifier, "certain".
Click to expand...

and I will say it again, any idiot who thinks that REFUDIATE is a word, is not the final arbiter on the nuances of word usage. Given the choice between a moronic film developer and noted REFUDIATOR on one hand, and a best selling author, Harvard Law Review Editor, US Senator, and Presidential candidate on the other, I think the choice is obvious. Obama did not make an error... the alabama moron with an academic and intellectual pedigree smaller than his hat size made the error and has been tapdancing about it ever since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top