The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: ReardenSteel on February 26, 2008, 11:06:52 PM

Title: Reject vs. Denounce (Mia made me look)
Post by: ReardenSteel on February 26, 2008, 11:06:52 PM
She put an "earworm" in my head!  :o

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4791065

Quote
Lone_Star_Dem  (1000+ posts)       Tue Feb-26-08 11:32 PM
Original message
Reject vs. Denounce
 Advertisements [?]I'm not exactly understanding how reject is being portrayed as harsher than denounce.

To my understanding to denounce is harsher than to reject.


To Reject:

1. To refuse to accept, submit to, believe, or make use of.
2. To refuse to consider or grant; deny.
3. To refuse to recognize or give affection to (a person).
4. To discard as defective or useless; throw away. See Synonyms at refuse

To Denounce:

1. To condemn openly as being evil or reprehensible. See Synonyms at criticize.
2. To accuse formally.
3. To give formal announcement of the ending of (a treaty).

I don't get what exactly the big deal was in the first place and why are some acting as if denounce is still not as good as reject?

Quote
izzybeans (1000+ posts)       Tue Feb-26-08 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
24. Don't think of an elephant
 Now remember Obama did not reject the endorsement.

get it.

It's an earworm for the voting both aimed at the automatons who don't pay attention.


 :rotf:

 
Title: Re: Reject vs. Denounce (Mia made me look)
Post by: Wretched Excess on February 26, 2008, 11:13:02 PM

she had a chance to score points in that exchange when she first started;  I thought she was going to go after his imprecision in speech* when dealing with topics of any volatility at all.  but she couldn't bring it home.

and then he dusted her.  she came off as shrill and lint-picking.



*which is supposed to be a clinton trademark, by the way.
Title: Re: Reject vs. Denounce (Mia made me look)
Post by: ReardenSteel on February 26, 2008, 11:22:46 PM
Thoughtful points from Paul at Powerline.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/02/019893.php

Quote
Obama did struggle, however, with "the Jewish question." He failed to explain his allegiance to a pastor who has honored Louis Farrakhan. Indeed, Clinton had to goad him into a fairly half-hearted rejection of "Minister Farrakhan's" support. Obama's initial position was much weaker; he said that if someone thinks he's a good guy, that's okay with him. [Note: I'll get the exact quotation up when I see a transcript]

Obama was also less than fully convincing in his show of support for Israel. He spoke of a special relationship but, perhaps more revealingly, described Israel as one of our most important allies in the Middle East. I wish someone had asked him which allies in that region he thinks are comparably important.


I have to admit, I left with the impression that Obama won that fight but I may be wrong. Maybe I've been blogging to long and just gave BO the "hit points" on HC thus, letting Obama off the hook.

Or maybe I just liked seeing Hill get Clintooned.

With Obama here is just no there, there.