Hmmm?? I think this reporter kind of likes Obama....

[mattrock]

Originally posted by generulpoleaxe

Originally posted by Amazon warrior

Originally posted by No Such Agency
It\'s good that people are optimistic about Obama\'s chances of improving US international relations. I don\'t think GW did you any favours in that department, between invading an enemy (whether justified or not) and encouraging the insult and mockery of allied nations (not at all justified).

That hardly makes him a \"god\". Yes it\'s just a metaphor, but I think Obama\'s humanity, in the positive sense, is one of his assets. He is just a guy, brighter than many and wealthier and luckier than most. It\'s what you do with that chance that tells what kind of guy you are.

In ancient Roman times, when a general triumphed (i.e., majorly kicked arse on the field of battle and distinguished himself in various proscribed ways), he got a massive procession through the streets of Rome. Fancy chariot, firey steeds, the whole works. And a public slave to stand behind him on his chariot, and whisper in his ear that he too was mortal and all this would pass. I think more politicians could do with being reminded of their humanity and not their \"godhood\", no matter how metaphorical (and arguable) that might be.

Nah, they gave up the mortality reminder after JFK.

Oh now, see?! That\'s just not right.

And I tried not to laugh but I failed miserably... lol

 

[AinuLainour]

Originally posted by airhead
as have you.

...likewise.

In what way, exactly, did I miss the mark, Ainu? You\'ve conceded my point regarding the lack of objectivity in media anymore, so that can\'t be it... Surely you aren\'t asserting that it is the job of Journalists to promote their pets, be they people or cause? So that only really leaves my sarcastic implication that Fox\'s erroneous actions do not in any way offer license and absolve from accountability others who would do the same. If you\'re contesting that, though, you\'re effectively putting forth the proverbial \"but mom! HE did it first!\" argument which...come to think of it...would actually be pretty typical from the left. So hey! Looks like this game can be played both ways! :beer:

I\'m not even left.. in fact, in Canada, the Democratic party is still slighty right of centre. I\'m more of a centralist, but YES, Republicans have their Fox, and Democrats have MSNBC, either network caters to the extremes of their average viewer\'s political leanings. Anyhow, the original point which you avoided was that the clip was taken out of context, and only Skeeve (up to that point) seemed to recognize the metaphorical value of said clip.

Or, inappropriately, as the case may be. And I failed in no such way. I understand the metaphorical use of the word, \"god\"...I just think that in this case (as would have been the case even in reference to Reagan, my own little right-wing darling) it was a bonehead thing to say.

You\'re failing to recognize the official point, which I addressed immediately to avoid any uneducated opinions on the media. Archetypes in our society are filled by people like Obama, like it or not. The fact that the metaphor, placing Obama in the status of a modern-day \"god\", was even made is making you and some others very angry, past the point of understanding the term itself. Reagan WASN\'T a bad president, revitalizing the economy is (obviously) not a task most presidents cannot do.

Obama is recognized around the world as a powerful man with the world at his fingertips, just like most presidents. The difference is the respect that he seems to command internationally - recent presidents haven\'t really been \"revered\" as Obama has been. I don\'t revere the guy, but he\'s a positive force in the world. That\'s just me. In short, Obama is filling the god archetype, his words seem to have the power move mountains (figuratively, of course). If you don\'t like Democrats, find real arguments to use and, in the future, attempt to try to interpret metaphorical devices from another point of view. He\'s not a literal god, the media will never be entirely unbiased, and let\'s continue arguing the benefits of apples versus oranges.

Well, now that depends on how you understand the metaphor, I suppose. But if you are understanding it in terms of unchallenged power, I\'m almost certain you could come up with better examples than Obama or royalty. It just that those examples may not serve your argument quite so readily...

Presidential power plus respect can equal nigh unparalleled heights, a better example is hard to find these days.

Scary, isn\'t it? And it\'d make a great argument too, were that the sense in which the reporter had used the word.

See previous archetypal point. :duh:

That, or you assumed them...and in so doing made greater implication of your own standing that I could ever have done on my own, short of coming right out and laying it bare...which I did. :beer:

You lay your leaning right out of the gate,
\" At least they* aren\'t trying to pretend otherwise anymore.

...just asinine.\"

*\"they\" seems to denote an opposing side, doesn\'t it?

Thanks for all the \":beer:\" as well, I might take you up on that in 3 years when I\'m legal in your country.

 

[Amazon warrior]

Originally posted by mattrock

Originally posted by generulpoleaxe

Originally posted by Amazon warrior

Originally posted by No Such Agency
It\'s good that people are optimistic about Obama\'s chances of improving US international relations. I don\'t think GW did you any favours in that department, between invading an enemy (whether justified or not) and encouraging the insult and mockery of allied nations (not at all justified).

That hardly makes him a \"god\". Yes it\'s just a metaphor, but I think Obama\'s humanity, in the positive sense, is one of his assets. He is just a guy, brighter than many and wealthier and luckier than most. It\'s what you do with that chance that tells what kind of guy you are.

In ancient Roman times, when a general triumphed (i.e., majorly kicked arse on the field of battle and distinguished himself in various proscribed ways), he got a massive procession through the streets of Rome. Fancy chariot, firey steeds, the whole works. And a public slave to stand behind him on his chariot, and whisper in his ear that he too was mortal and all this would pass. I think more politicians could do with being reminded of their humanity and not their \"godhood\", no matter how metaphorical (and arguable) that might be.

Nah, they gave up the mortality reminder after JFK.

Oh now, see?! That\'s just not right.

And I tried not to laugh but I failed miserably... lol

I also failed my \"don\'t laugh\" check on that one! You got me there GP!

 

[airhead]

Originally posted by AinuLainour

Originally posted by airhead
as have you.

...likewise.

Ah, but I\'ve always warned you that:

 

[Amazon warrior]

....conservatives against punctuation? ???:innocent:

 

[airhead]

Originally posted by Amazon warrior
....conservatives against punctuation? ???:innocent:

Yea, can\'t stand the stuff, it seems to discriminate between my fingers and the thoughts in my head.

-- then --- I get --- to typing --- like --- Capt. Kirk.





lol

 

[mattrock]

Originally posted by AinuLainour
You lay your leaning right out of the gate...

*\"they\" seems to denote an opposing side, doesn\'t it?

No. Actually I was referring to the media as \"they\"...not a certain political group. A miscommunication wherein may lie the basis for our talking past one another.

Thanks for all the \":beer:\" as well, I might take you up on that in 3 years when I\'m legal in your country.

Well, we may have to simply agree to disagree on the issue of Obama\'s fulfillment (or not) of metaphorical archetype, but we can certainly agree on that. Get in touch with me when you are of age and I\'ll be happy to buy you a :beer: !

 

[Minicreatures]

I don\'t have a problem at all with non objective reporting, and I like to see as many varied opinions of it as possible. Debate is good. People are passionate creatures by nature and can\'t help but think that their view is the correct one. Often their opinions motivate them so much that they are driven to actively promote some of their opinions. In fact, if one was to even attempt to be totally objective and just record facts, no one would bother looking at it due to sheer boredom. Or if they did look, they would immediately start imposing their value system on the subject matter and thus render it non objective. The original source is a blog and so we already can surmise that the author has something to say beyond mere factual recording.

My biggest personal beef with this guy would have been more along the lines of lets keep church and state separate please. There was a very good reason it was put in place that way to begin with, and still is. Particularly in political climes where religion is used oft more as a powderkeg excuse for war, jihad, crusade, whatever, \"insert bloody mess here\", than as a font of peaceful practices.

Personally I am not at all anti religious, just when it comes to matters of state. Particularly when the state governs a massive amount of variance among the People on the topic of religions.

 

[StarFyre]

of course that comment is asinine..

Come on people;
since we at least know, that Obama exists



Sanjay

 

[alextheartist]

Does he... does he though..

 

[crazyboyae1]

Yurii you are way to funny, im dying of laughter! lol

 

[Dragon Forge Design]

Nice job of editing on the clip though. I would of like to have herd his follow up to the statement instead of cutting it off as is so that it can lead to an \"See we told you so sort of attitude\"

That\'s my problem with the media in general, Liberal or Conservative. They edit reality into fantasy to serve their purpose.