High stakes on the Corner - A $5 bet for the Democratic nomination.
10 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Pfft, what a lame expedient for kneejerk Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
And not just the usual Clinton bashing, but hypothetical "this thing that could theoretically be done - depending on how events break - is JUST the type of thing Clintons live to do, even if no Clinton (nor anyone) has ever done it" bashing.
And this NRO bet announcement exists *why*? And you linked to it *why*?
Is this a snapshot of what it's like to be a Republican in the post-GWB era? The very highest political goal a rightwinger can root for is that he'll get beaten by somebody not named Clinton? It's kind of like Big Pussy getting whacked on the boat, while requesting "Not the face."
Can't a guy enjoy a little irony? Isn't there a hint of deus ex machina justice to see the Democrats forced into a position where their superdelegates may override the popular vote of their rank-and-file? That's not funny? C'mon.
The situation that *has* occurred is the improbable deadlock between two candidates heading into a national convention. It's been a loooong time since a national party convention where the candidate hasn't already been decided. - Eric
It would also be interesting if Hillary had an affair with Monica Lewinsky's brother. But why don't we let them do it first, before we begin the psychoanalysis?
While we're waiting for that happy event, how would it be "ironic" if the Democrats were to be bedeviled by popular vote mischief, when they were also the aggrieved party in 2000? Repetition is not irony.
Hey, maybe irony is "the mistaken belief that getting the last word means 'I win'"!
OK, let's elaborate: the Democrats have spent the last seven years rending their clothes that the 2000 election was "stolen" because Al Gore won the popular vote but a smaller group (either the Supreme Court or the Electoral College) overturned the "will of the people."
And now we have a good chunk of those same Democrats arguing, well golly, it's just dandy if 800 superdelegates tip the balance away from Obama to Hillary.
My dictionary lists "incongruity" as a characteristic of "irony." I guess yours dwells on what the meaning of "is" is.
And your interpretation redefines "we don't torture." Hee! Isn't it ironic how dumb non sequiturs work both sides of the aisle? No? Oh come on, SURE it is! It's the textbook definition of irony! Arguably!
Incongruity is incongruity. Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Circumstance is circumstance. Coincidence is coincidence. Cynicism is cynicism. Irony is irony. Yet they're not all each other.
Wouldn't it be ironic if this were the last word, and I "won"? I certainly think it - and strap yourself in for the last word of this comment - is.
How ironic. Failing to make any kind of logic, you've moved onto semantics. And not even the good semantics, but the dime-store "a cigar is just a cigar" kind of stuff.
What say we just dive into epistemology? Do we know what words mean? Are we even here? Are you merely obtuse or genuinely addled (assuming you exist)?
Let me assert my Godliness over this blog - of which you can be sure - by stipulating that I will have the last word and this means I have won the debate. You lose.
10 comments:
Pfft, what a lame expedient for kneejerk Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
And not just the usual Clinton bashing, but hypothetical "this thing that could theoretically be done - depending on how events break - is JUST the type of thing Clintons live to do, even if no Clinton (nor anyone) has ever done it" bashing.
And this NRO bet announcement exists *why*? And you linked to it *why*?
Is this a snapshot of what it's like to be a Republican in the post-GWB era? The very highest political goal a rightwinger can root for is that he'll get beaten by somebody not named Clinton? It's kind of like Big Pussy getting whacked on the boat, while requesting "Not the face."
Can't a guy enjoy a little irony? Isn't there a hint of deus ex machina justice to see the Democrats forced into a position where their superdelegates may override the popular vote of their rank-and-file? That's not funny? C'mon.
What kind of "deus ex machina" resolves a situation that has yet to occur?
The situation that *has* occurred is the improbable deadlock between two candidates heading into a national convention. It's been a loooong time since a national party convention where the candidate hasn't already been decided. - Eric
It would also be interesting if Hillary had an affair with Monica Lewinsky's brother. But why don't we let them do it first, before we begin the psychoanalysis?
While we're waiting for that happy event, how would it be "ironic" if the Democrats were to be bedeviled by popular vote mischief, when they were also the aggrieved party in 2000? Repetition is not irony.
Really? I'll have to recalibrate my definition of "irony."
Really? I'll have to recalibrate my definition of "irony."
It's ironic that you don't know what irony is.
And by "ironic," I mean... well... pretty much anything.
Seriously, the concept of irony is being fudged out of existence. Nowadays, it's generally used as a synonym for "interesting" or "coincidental."
Hey, maybe irony is "the mistaken belief that getting the last word means 'I win'"!
OK, let's elaborate: the Democrats have spent the last seven years rending their clothes that the 2000 election was "stolen" because Al Gore won the popular vote but a smaller group (either the Supreme Court or the Electoral College) overturned the "will of the people."
And now we have a good chunk of those same Democrats arguing, well golly, it's just dandy if 800 superdelegates tip the balance away from Obama to Hillary.
My dictionary lists "incongruity" as a characteristic of "irony." I guess yours dwells on what the meaning of "is" is.
And your interpretation redefines "we don't torture." Hee! Isn't it ironic how dumb non sequiturs work both sides of the aisle? No? Oh come on, SURE it is! It's the textbook definition of irony! Arguably!
Incongruity is incongruity.
Hypocrisy is hypocrisy.
Circumstance is circumstance.
Coincidence is coincidence.
Cynicism is cynicism.
Irony is irony.
Yet they're not all each other.
Wouldn't it be ironic if this were the last word, and I "won"? I certainly think it - and strap yourself in for the last word of this comment - is.
How ironic. Failing to make any kind of logic, you've moved onto semantics. And not even the good semantics, but the dime-store "a cigar is just a cigar" kind of stuff.
What say we just dive into epistemology? Do we know what words mean? Are we even here? Are you merely obtuse or genuinely addled (assuming you exist)?
Let me assert my Godliness over this blog - of which you can be sure - by stipulating that I will have the last word and this means I have won the debate. You lose.
Post a Comment