| Author | Post |
|---|
HardyHeaven
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Thu Apr 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 01:39 am |
|
stiggywiggy wrote: HardyHeaven wrote:
Here's my exact quote.
Give me some time to forget about Sarah, will you? I can barely get through the day without having a Palin flashback, like a bad dream where Sarah says, over and over, "
So you're going to get away from FOX News because you keep hearing her misquote from SNL? Are you under the impression that SNL is broadacst by FOX News?
As to what accent to I find acceptable ... any accent other than her distinctly hokey one.
HOKEY? Palin's accent is hokey? You think she fakes it, just to irritate members of the accent police, such as yourself?
Most successful people learn to neutralize their regional dialect.
Too bad nobody taught JFK how to pronounce "Cuba." Then he could have been REAL "successful."
Her venacular is hokey, yes.
People in the public eye usually learn to adjust their speech patterns so that they appeal to the widest possible audience. I'm a wide public audience. Sarah Palin's speech, accent and venacular don't appeal to me. **shrug**
____________________
If you don't know which God to worship, why don't you start with the one you've been lying to all these years? --A.A. Catchy Phrase #372
|
HardyHeaven
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Thu Apr 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 01:40 am |
|
Oh, and I'm tired of Fox News talking about her. Did I mention that?
She's old news (for now anyway). Time to move on.
Last edited on Sat Nov 29th, 2008 01:41 am by HardyHeaven
____________________
If you don't know which God to worship, why don't you start with the one you've been lying to all these years? --A.A. Catchy Phrase #372
|
HardyHeaven
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Thu Apr 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 01:44 am |
|
I'm going to step away from the computer for a moment and eat some dinner.
I hope that in my absence, Stiggy isn't overwhelmed by the compulsion to start half a dozen new threads about Sarah Palin.
What are the chances .....
____________________
If you don't know which God to worship, why don't you start with the one you've been lying to all these years? --A.A. Catchy Phrase #372
|
manonfire
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Tue Aug 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1843 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 01:45 am |
|
HardyHeaven wrote:
Learn to read, Stigs.
I didn't say that Sarah said, over and over, that she can see Russia from her house.
I said that I was having flashbacks, bad dreams, in which Sarah Palin says, over and over, that she can see Russia from her house.
There is a distinction.
Here's my exact quote.
Give me some time to forget about Sarah, will you? I can barely get through the day without having a Palin flashback, like a bad dream where Sarah says, over and over, "I can see Russia from my house", and "I'm just sooo mavericky!"
As to what accent to I find acceptable ... any accent other than her distinctly hokey one.
Most successful people learn to neutralize their regional dialect. Do you think Obama would have won the election if his speeches had consisted of comments directed toward his 'homies' or 'home boys', or if he combatted every with disagreement with a reference toward 'yo mamma'?
Most successful people learn to neutralize their regional dialect.
Hiram: Like LBJ, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, JFK, Will Rogers...?
____________________
Hyper, Limana, A2, and Evelyn, put your glasses down, and step away from the Kool-Aid!
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:20 am |
|
AyHyperbole wrote: stiggywiggy wrote: AyHyperbole wrote:
"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska."
Yeah....? And.....? I would say that if Putin does indeed rear his ugly head and invade America's airspace, that it would most likely be Alaska. Maybe you were thinking Nebraska?
She didn't say "if." She said "as." And why on earth would she discuss an invasion by Putin? There is absolutely no chance of that happening.
Really now? I guess the builders of our arsenal of ICBMs that surround Russia a hundred-fold more than any other nation, didn't get the memo about that.
Besides, even in some alternate universe where Putin *did* want to launch a suprise attack on America, it would make just as much sense for him to hit, say, Vandenberg as it would to hit Elmendorf. Just because something's a bit closer doesn't make it the right strategic choice.
I think Pearl Harbor serves as a perfect example to expose that fallacy of that thought.
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:22 am |
|
HardyHeaven wrote: Her venacular is hokey, yes.
People in the public eye usually learn to adjust their speech patterns so that they appeal to the widest possible audience. I'm a wide public audience. Sarah Palin's speech, accent and venacular don't appeal to me. **shrug**
I wouldn't think much of someone who adjusted their speech patterns in order to appeal to you.
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:24 am |
|
HardyHeaven wrote: Oh, and I'm tired of Fox News talking about her. Did I mention that?
She's old news (for now anyway). Time to move on.
I think you're the one who brought her up. I just jumped in to correct your error about her Russia quote, and to inquire as to what a "correct accent" is.
You can't seem to answer the latter, so yeah. I guess we can all move on.
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:25 am |
|
HardyHeaven wrote: I'm going to step away from the computer for a moment and eat some dinner.
I hope that in my absence, Stiggy isn't overwhelmed by the compulsion to start half a dozen new threads about Sarah Palin.
What are the chances .....
The chances that I will copy you and make a post about Sarah Palin? I don't know. Give me your odds, and then I'll take the bet.
|
Aldaron
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Australia |
| Posts: | 1321 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:30 am |
|
I think Pearl Harbor serves as a perfect example to expose that fallacy of that thought.
Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
____________________
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:34 am |
|
manonfire wrote: HardyHeaven wrote:
Most successful people learn to neutralize their regional dialect.
Hiram: Like LBJ, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, JFK, Will Rogers...?
Yeah, I guess those guys just never got around to adapting HH's "correct accent." And just imagine how much more "successful" T. Boone Pickens would have been if he'd lost that accent.
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:42 am |
|
Aldaron wrote: I think Pearl Harbor serves as a perfect example to expose that fallacy of that thought.
Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
Were you under the impression that I had asserted that proximity was the sole criterion to determine a target? Do you think that in their desire to be masters of the Pacific, they might have considered attacking the island of Alcatraz? Were you under the impression that in their desire to intimidate the US, they maybe also considered attacking Kansas?
|
Merlin
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Tue Aug 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3113 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:49 am |
|
Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
No, silly! It was because they could see it from their bedroom windows!!!
____________________
"Christians should go to church."
"... it would be better for her to tie a heavy rock around her neck and jump into the midddle of deep bayou than it would to lay a heavy guilt-trip on any of God's little ones . . ."
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 05:48 am |
|
Merlin wrote: Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
No, silly! It was because they could see it from their bedroom windows!!!
So now you're poking fun at an SNL parody of Palin. Did you run out of stuff on the actual Palin?
|
Aldaron
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Australia |
| Posts: | 1321 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 07:39 am |
|
HYPE SAID: "Just because something's a bit closer doesn't make it the right strategic choice."
STIGGY SAID IN REPLY: "I think Pearl Harbor serves as a perfect example to expose that fallacy of that thought"
TO WHICH I RESPONDED: "Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?"
TO WHICH STIGGY BLEATED OUT: "Were you under the impression that I had asserted that proximity was the sole criterion to determine a target? Do you think that in their desire to be masters of the Pacific, they might have considered attacking the island of Alcatraz? Were you under the impression that in their desire to intimidate the US, they maybe also considered attacking Kansas?"
So, with that exchange in mind, let's just look at Stiggy's statements/questions:
Were you under the impression that I had asserted that proximity was the sole criterion to determine a target?
Well, considering that Hype had said that being close doesn't make something the best strategic choice, and you said that Pearl Harbour "perfectly" demonstrates that as incorrect, then yeah: it sure as hell looks like you were claiming that proximity is pretty damn important.
No...not the sole reason. But if you can find where I said that you had said it was the sole reason, feel free to point that out. Good luck.
Do you think that in their desire to be masters of the Pacific, they might have considered attacking the island of Alcatraz?
No, but I don't think the fact that Pearl Harbour is closer than Alcatraz was high on their list of priorities. I think it might have been for other reasons...like being the HQ for the Pacific Fleet and the location of the bulk of the US Navy's Pacific ships.
But I can't be certain...how about you enlighten us, Stiggy? Perhaps they should have gone for Guam first. It's closer.
Were you under the impression that in their desire to intimidate the US, they maybe also considered attacking Kansas?
Well, considering that Kansas is neither closer nor the site of a major US Navy fleet base, I'm at a loss as to why you'd even bring it up.
Mind you, Alcatraz is closer than Kansas, so maybe they should have hit Alcatraz after all. Whaddya think?
____________________
|
Aldaron
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Australia |
| Posts: | 1321 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 07:40 am |
|
stiggywiggy wrote: Merlin wrote: Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
No, silly! It was because they could see it from their bedroom windows!!!
So now you're poking fun at an SNL parody of Palin. Did you run out of stuff on the actual Palin?
Probably not. But then, it's quite difficult at times to pick the parodied Palin from the real one.
____________________
|
Merlin
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Tue Aug 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3113 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 07:55 am |
|
| Actually I was not referring to parody of Palin, nor have I run out of Fascinating Facts About Palin, the Bridge to Nowhere.
____________________
"Christians should go to church."
"... it would be better for her to tie a heavy rock around her neck and jump into the midddle of deep bayou than it would to lay a heavy guilt-trip on any of God's little ones . . ."
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:04 am |
|
Merlin wrote: Actually I was not referring to parody of Palin,
Yes you were, whether you know it or not. It was SNL who had Palin saying that she could see Alaska from her house.
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:07 am |
|
Aldaron wrote: stiggywiggy wrote: Merlin wrote: Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?
No, silly! It was because they could see it from their bedroom windows!!!
So now you're poking fun at an SNL parody of Palin. Did you run out of stuff on the actual Palin?
Probably not. But then, it's quite difficult at times to pick the parodied Palin from the real one.
How so? Got any examples? Anything to compare with our Vice Presidential-elect's belief that FDR was President at the time of the Crash and addressed the nation on TV eighteen years before there was national TV?
It's gonna be pretty hard to top that.
Last edited on Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:07 am by stiggywiggy
|
stiggywiggy
Stiggywiggy
| Joined: | Wed Aug 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:19 am |
|
Aldaron wrote: HYPE SAID: "Just because something's a bit closer doesn't make it the right strategic choice."
STIGGY SAID IN REPLY: "I think Pearl Harbor serves as a perfect example to expose that fallacy of that thought"
TO WHICH I RESPONDED: "Were you under the impression that the Japanese hit Pearl Harbour because it was closer?"
TO WHICH STIGGY BLEATED OUT: "Were you under the impression that I had asserted that proximity was the sole criterion to determine a target? Do you think that in their desire to be masters of the Pacific, they might have considered attacking the island of Alcatraz? Were you under the impression that in their desire to intimidate the US, they maybe also considered attacking Kansas?"
So, with that exchange in mind, let's just look at Stiggy's statements/questions:
Were you under the impression that I had asserted that proximity was the sole criterion to determine a target?
Well, considering that Hype had said that being close doesn't make something the best strategic choice, and you said that Pearl Harbour "perfectly" demonstrates that as incorrect, then yeah: it sure as hell looks like you were claiming that proximity is pretty damn important.
I was claiming that, since it is true. Yet I never claimed it was the sole priority. Why are you struggling with such an elementary concept?
No...not the sole reason. But if you can find where I said that you had said it was the sole reason, feel free to point that out. Good luck.
Why would I need to do that? I never said that you had said that I had said that it was the sole reason. You seem very confused.
Do you think that in their desire to be masters of the Pacific, they might have considered attacking the island of Alcatraz?
No, but I don't think the fact that Pearl Harbour is closer than Alcatraz was high on their list of priorities.
I imagine it was very high on the list. In fact, the proximity of the enemy is USUALLY a high prioroty in any military campaign. You didn't know that? That's one of the reasons why Hitler invaded Poland, for example, instead of Mozambique.
I think it might have been for other reasons
I know. I already gave two. The mastery of the Pacific and animosity towad the US.
...like being the HQ for the Pacific Fleet and the location of the bulk of the US Navy's Pacific ships.
Yep. That too. And yet if that headquarters had been in Lake Michigan, I doubt the invasion would have taken place.
But I can't be certain
Who said you could? No one can speak with 100% certitude about stuff that they were not eyewitnesses too.
...how about you enlighten us, Stiggy?
About what?
Perhaps they should have gone for Guam first. It's closer.
Why? Guam was not the HQ for the Pacific fleet.
Were you under the impression that in their desire to intimidate the US, they maybe also considered attacking Kansas?
Well, considering that Kansas is neither closer...
Exactly!!!! It took you long enough. Geez.
Last edited on Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:22 am by stiggywiggy
|
Aldaron
Dialogue Facilitator
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Australia |
| Posts: | 1321 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Nov 29th, 2008 12:30 pm |
|
How so? Got any examples?
Hockey-mum jokes...pit-bulls in lipstick...
That kind of stuff.
____________________
|
Current time is 11:21 am | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
