...and thanks for the badge!!

[Word]

Better than winning an Oscar.

[Cody]

I wouldn't even spend time reading one article about that swine.

[Phytotron]

animalstalkinginallcaps.tumblr.com

[Phytotron]

So, some may have noticed Nellybell's previous avatar featured that disgusting, self-conscious fraud, exploitative businessman and racketeer, Presidential religious valet*, raging anti-semite Billy Graham. Now he's sporting a Romney avatar. Bwahaha! I would've figured him for more of a Santorum fan. But, considering Romney is himself a self-conscious fraud, exploitative businessman and racketeer, perhaps the affinity makes sense after all.


* Hitch

[Word]

If the GOP needs a crazy candidate in 2030, they just need to post on una forums.

[Phytotron]

I don't get it. Where do you get the 2030 (is the person in question 17?), and to whom are you referring and why? I don't see anything particularly crazy there, or suggestive (even facetiously) of a candidacy (e.g., advocacy or polemics).

[Concord]

most importantly, there isn't a US presidential election in 2030

[Phytotron]

Yeah, that too....

[Word]

Didn't try to be accurate but Nel is about 17 years old, yes. I used 2030 in case a president has to step back (or dies in office), or the elections are post-/preponed for another reason.

For the rest:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16386176

[Phytotron]

I don't believe you; I think you're walking back from something.

Didn't try to be accurate but Nel is about 17 years old, yes.

OK, do you get the relevance of this? (Or did you, honestly, before I made that comment?)

I used 2030 in case a president has to step back (or dies in office)

That would not affect, and has never affected, the timing of the election. In such an event, the VP (or on down the line of succession) assumes the Presidency until the next scheduled election.

or the elections are post-/preponed for another reason.

Has never occurred, not even during the Civil War, and unlikely it would.

And neither of those explain why 2030 in particular. What, are you anticipating something?

For the rest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16386176

What does this (rather banal article) have to do with anything?


I still don't get what your original statement even means, or has to do with that forum thread. All he's doing there is making primary predictions.

I'm just trying to understand you, man.

Denzel-explain.png (148.16 KiB) Viewed 3497 times

[Word]

I just picked a random date somewhere in the future when Nel could be old enough to be president. That's all. (In Germany, the election intervals changed in 2005 when we voted then-chancellor Schröder out of order, so without having read your constitution I just assumed there could be a similar scenario in the US some day, so the date didn't really matter. What if, for example, there's a second Watergate affair with both president and vice president involved?)

What does this (rather banal article) have to do with anything?

It's exemplary for my view of the GOP candidates (of which I know that it's simplified). religious fundamentalists with strategies like using fragments of Obama's interviews and deliberately leaving out the context...it's hard for me to imagine how anyone can get voters (or devoted fans) like that. now I'm getting reminded that I'm a Roman Catholic, right?

[Word]

confused "quote" and "edit"

[Titanoboa]

confused "quote" and "edit"

I've done that a few times when tired. The difference here being that it was on our clan forums and I was admin, thinking I hit "quote"

[Phytotron]

So, you knew enough that the President has to be 35, but not the other stuff?

What if, for example, there's a second Watergate affair with both president and vice president involved?

Just like I said, line of succession.

(And I do hope you understand that the Watergate is an actual building, and what you meant was "Watergate-like affair.")

exemplary for

Exemplary is an adjective meaning "serving as a model or example worthy of imitation; commendable." Noun form, exemplar.

I think exemplifies is the word you were looking for there, which doesn't have that positive connotation, but just means "typifies" in a value-neutral sense.

religious [believers of any sort] with strategies like using fragments of [passages from religious texts] and deliberately leaving out the context...it's hard for me to imagine how anyone can get [converts and devotees] like that.

Yep, religions do it all the time, all of them.

Keep in mind as well, we don't have the sort of limitations on speech and expression that you do. Regardless, you mean to tell me that your politicians never spin, smear, or misconstrue their opponents' words and positions?


I still don't get what that article or that forum thread has to do with anything, but whatever.

[Word]

So, you knew enough that the President has to be 35, but not the other stuff?

yes

(And I do hope you understand that the Watergate is an actual building, and what you meant was "Watergate-like affair.")

yes, just translated it the way I'd say it in German...didn't know one has to add a "-like"

Regardless, you mean to tell me that your politicians never spin, smear, or misconstrue their opponents' words and positions?

not in official TV advertisements for their election campaigns. sometimes that happens during a discussion but they usually have to apologize as soon as the mistake is noticed. they tend to make unrealistic promises as well, but I find that this is something different. I'm not saying I like most of our politicians any more than those of another country.

religious [believers of any sort] with strategies like using fragments of [passages from religious texts] and deliberately leaving out the context...it's hard for me to imagine how anyone can get [converts and devotees] like that.

There's a difference though, because the way politicians/religious fanatics use certain phrases is either deliberately dishonest (historically false and disprovable) and their only tolerated interpretations are the most obvious ones so they can appeal to everyone.
The Catholic Church I'm familiar with does cherry-pick, but it is aware of the other passages as well, and it treats them sometimes more criticallly than any atheist would (because atheists don't even take them seriously or put them under the general suspicion of being a how-to guide for reaching personal fulfilment within a religion by any means necessary). The bible is sometimes vague or describes an issue in a way we today aren't used to, but not against better judgement.
http://www.acarpenterfromnazareth.com/2 ... -from.html