Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How many times have you overheard a partial conversation, assumed to know what was said...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:27 PM
Original message
How many times have you overheard a partial conversation, assumed to know what was said...
...and made a total ass of yourself when you reacted then found you were wrong about it?

Remember that line from "Heard it through the Grapevine"?

"They say believe maybe half of what you see, son and none of what you hear..."

I am amazed that some of you assume to know what Edwards and Clinton said; you are sure they were conspiring to shut out other candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sallyseven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. They think that because they want to believe it.
They think that DK is for real. This is a joke for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NavyDavy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. I agree with you 100%....just giving the repukes more
material to attack his fellow Dems
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't know maybe it was the "authoritarian directness" of HRC that gave me a clue?
Yeah, this is significant. I want to see it on YouTube ... see if HRC swaggered as much as I believed initially. ... Whoa! Talk about your on-mic unguarded moments?!? :wow:


Welcome the new American "Iron Lady" - America's Maggie Thatcher! :scared: :thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. It's possible they were talking about having more time...
Or restructuring debates in another way, rather than eliminating people.

One thing I've learned is it doesn't pay to make assumptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamJordan23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
4.  Edwards admitted that they were talking about limiting the number of debators.
Edited on Fri Jul-13-07 06:44 PM by TeamJordan23
But of course, now he had the time to put some spin on it and say they were talking about splitting it into two groups.

But I wonder who he meant when he said "They are not serious."

If the conversation was about something else, he would have stated that today. But he didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. All 8 favor limiting the number of debators
They are all colluding to exclude these 11 Democratic candidates for president.

Warren Ashe (D-Virginia)
Randy Crow (D-North Carolina)
Laura Davis-Aaron (D-Tennessee)
Michael Forrester (D-Colorado)
Dan Francis (D-New York)
Alfonzo Jones (D-California)
John Joseph Kennedy (D-Georgia)
Karl Krueger (D-South Dakota)
Sal Mohamed (D-Iowa)
James Prattas (D-Hawaii)
Ole Savior (D-Minnesota)

http://www.politics1.com/p2008.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. It's no where near as clever as you believe, and the fact you keep posting it tells
me you believe it's very clever.

So who do you support? Clinton or Edwards?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. It isn't a matter of being clever. It is a matter of presenting all relevant facts on this issue
How many people even know that these candidates are running because they are excluded from the conversation by the CMSM? The current candidates all tacitly support this. If some truly advocated open debates they would call for all 19 Democratic candidates to debate, not just 8.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-14-07 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. And you support who for Prez?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamJordan23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Please back up that accusation. If the candidates are indeed invited to the debates, than shouldn't
we ask the media/tv station that is sponsoring the debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. See my reply to post 9
It is tacit nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. I am so sick of this whole thing. Who cares what they said. I mean,
people talk all the time and I am sure this is not the first conversation about this.
As long as no one is cut out of the right to debate, it's stupid to keep talking to death about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
8. There statement on the subject don't match up, is one clue. Denial isn't a river in Egypt.
Rationalzation isn't something that only Repos do. Or do you believe it's not rationalization when Dems do it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
10. In a recent debate
John Edwards said, "Of the three candidates who can be elected." John Edwards staffers in my state ask Kucinich volunteers, "Shouldn't we all get behind a candidate who can win?"

There's an arrogance here that offends me.

There's also an interesting message at work - unless you vote for the winning candidate, you're throwing your vote away.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
14. Beaverhausen, that is exactly why ..............

..... I created a thread about this earlier today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3375051

~~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-13-07 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
15. Didn't people learn anything from /Three's Company/? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-14-07 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
17. always one of my favorite sayings
"They say believe maybe half of what you see, son and none of what you hear..."

also - recommended viewing on the same subject -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conversation

60's movie by Francis Ford Coppola
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC