zorbman said: How the hell could anyone in their right mind not misconstrue that as an insult to the armed forces.
Misconstrue?
Well, unlike some I have read what Kerry actually said and he did not say "armed forces" or "troops" he said "you". This is basic English, folks. You is a pronoun which refers to a noun. The way to find out what "you" refers to is to find the previous noun used which in the case of Kerry's speech is the proper noun, "President Bush".
Are you a native English speaker? I only ask because that is one of the most ridiculous grammatical assertions I have ever read. He was admonishing a group of students to work and study hard. The "you" referred to the people that he was addressing. If you think that the "you" I used at the start of this sentence refers to the the previous noun, "people", or the previous pronoun "he", you are really, really lost.
If he had inserted the "us" that he said he intended to (yeah right), that could have been construed to include everybody in the room and a few others outside as well. But he didn't. He wasn't "misconstrued" either. There really is only one way to interprete what he said, ESPECIALLY considering the context, which was addressing a bunch of college students in the land of fruits and nutsQuote: Bush is the "you" referred to as Kerry had referenced him in the sentence just prior to the supposed troops comment. He had said prior to the famous clipped quote, "President Bush had lived in Texas, but now lives in a state of denial."
He mis-spoke (at best). The arrogant cunt was most certainly not misconstrued. Just to continue your education in grammar, I will parse the above sentence with an implied word in parentheses.
"President Bush had lived in Texas, but (he) now lives in a state of denial."
As you will have noticed, the word in parentheses is not "(you)" nor does the verb agree with anything other than a 3rd person subject. Quote:
"In presenting the issue of whether Kerry intended to criticize the troops as a he-said/she-said conflict, these outlets omitted the evidence supporting Kerry's account. Indeed, according to his staff, his prepared remarks demonstrate what he meant to say: "Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."
Which is all very fine, if he had actually said that. But he didn't. He said this. "You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
To further destroy your grammatical analysis, there are ten "you"s in those two sentences. The very first one doesn't refer to Bush, but to the audience, so much for setting up a pattern of usage by which any native English speaker could misconstrue that sentence. The meaning of the sentence as uttered is clear. "If you don't (do well) you get stuck in Iraq". Or do you think the "you" in the last sentence refers to homework?Quote:
Also overlooked is the fact that Kerry's remark came after several one-liners, including one in which he personally accused Bush of "liv[ing] in a state of denial." Furthermore, these outlets ignored entirely the remarks by several prominent Republicans -- such as former Bush campaign chief strategist Matthew Dowd and former House Majority Leaders Dick Armey (R-TX) and Tom DeLay (R-TX) -- conceding that Kerry did not intend to disparage American soldiers. Armey even acknowledged that Republicans were making political hay by "misconstru[ing]" what Kerry said."
http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2006/11/context_needed_.html
What outlets? And why should they restrict their opinions to the mildest reading by any Republican. Kerry is a dipshit, he misspoke and he should have clarified his shit immediately, instead of grabbing a soapbox and declaring victimhood (the natural state of all Democrats), refusing to apologize "to anyone", and then blaming the stupid listener for "misconstruing" what he said. No, John boy, unfortunately we are smart enough to understand what you say, but not smart enough to read your mind. If we could, we wouldn't still be wondering about your military records and why you won't release them.Quote: Republicans are desperate and are grasping for any life jacket they can reach including illusionary ones.
What they are doing is a bit like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic to get the best view of the iceberg.
Maybe, maybe not. Kerry is still a piece of shit, and not just because of this. I really do believe that Kerry thinks only losers go in the military. I just never thought he'd be dumb enough to say it totally out loud. The apparent attitude that troops are dumb is not all that foreign to him. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061102/D8L4QH580.html "During a Vietnam-era run for Congress three decades ago, John Kerry said he opposed a volunteer Army because it would be dominated by the underprivileged, be less accountable and be more prone to "the perpetuation of war crimes."
There were also some much more recent quotes that the troops were "terrorizing innocent Iraqi women and children in the dead of night" Or something like that.
Now there are a great many of you here who think that it's true that military is a bunch of undereducated idiot losers. I did recently see a newspaper article that reported that the military had a 96% rate of HS graduates while the general population is at around 80%. Then there are the service academies, which are harder to get into than most, if not all, Ivy League schools.
And finally, I have never found it particularly smart to denigrate an opponent who has defeated me and gotten better grades than I did. What does that make Kerry? I know the answer, but do you? (For Zorby: the "you" in that sentence does not refer to "answer")
--------------------
|