“The objective fact is that he didn’t say something else.”
Wasn’t that you?
I never said, by the way, that my interpretation was “objective fact” I said it was objective fact that the sequence of events I described had played out many many times, that many people had gotten outraged specifically at the transcript but balked after hearing the audio and as such it was not “irrational” for me to discuss or present that scenario.
You, apparently, have no better recourse than just running around screaming that I’m crazy and whining about being directly quoted. Poor form, I think.
Well, I’d say that his body of work, at least for me, allays any suspicions that he’s some kind of closeted racist. I don’t think he’s a racist. I actually think he’s a pretty damn bright and articulate man (heh) but I can see how someone would think otherwise over this out of context comment.
Oh please. I can only assume you weren’t around for his 1988 presidential campaign where he embarrassed himself by getting caught by plagarizing a British politician and bullshited his audience by telling them his father worked in a coal mine while the truth was that his dad worked a car dealership. This guy is so shallow and phoney, but he does come across as tough when he interogates witnesses in committees.
I dunno about “pop a gasket,” but my immediate reaction was that it was a bone-headed insensitve thing to say, regardless of the guy’s party affiliation. I still think it was a stupid thing to say, but I’d rather save my ire for more important things.
And admit it, Shodan, if Biden was a Republican, you wouldn’t say anything vaguely close to
Due respect, I have to side with Apos here. Isn’t it a bit passive-aggressive to slide out of so many arguments with these sudden announcements that you aren’t making any progress and therefore the discussion should cease? Doesn’t that presume your correctness? Maybe sometimes the progress needs to be made on your end. We all admire your politeness and civility, but if you’re not going to finish the arguments, maybe you shouldn’t start or join them.
No, actually, it doesn’t presume my correctness. However, when the argument becomes about whether I’m presuming my correctness, it’s an argument I’m no longer interested in. As long as it focuses on the facts of the case and not on who’s buying into hype or whatever, I’m happy to continue the discussion.
This post, of course, violates that rule, so this really will be my last one on the subject :).
That bill passed 74-25, it seems pretty bipartisan, although only Democrats voted against it. Hillary was the only senator to abstain from voting on this measure.
The provision that gets everyone upset is a provision that was lobbied for by credit card companies. It basically said that if you make more than average person in your state, then you have to jump through some hoops to get your consumer debt erased by bankruptcy. Some people who made good money were using bankruptcy as a financial planning tool instead of a last resort to get out from under insurmountable debt and get a fresh start. I don’t feel that strongly about Biden, but was that really a fatal flaw?
If the race for the Democratic nomination somehow turns out to be Clinton-Biden, I’d like to see how New Jersey plays out, being between Clinton’s home state of New York and Biden’s home state of Delaware.
