23
   

can someone tell me about ann coulter?

 
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 02:39 pm
@DrewDad,
Quasi means "resembling"

Now,now, Drew Dad.don't get your blood pressure up. When you bluster that "I cannot back up my loud-mouthed words with facts, you are really engaging in an unprovable metaphor. I think it is impossible for you to ascribe the term "loud mouthed" which after all, refers to voice or speech( check your dictionary) to "words".

Try a good English Textbook--There are sections in some which will teach you about Metaphors and/or similies.

I look forward to our next encounter, Drew Dad, where I will endeavor to produce a great deal of evidence for your perusal. I do not, of course, expect you to produce evidence or documentation. You never do, do you?
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 02:42 pm
@genoves,
I see that you've gone and looked up "pedantic". Aren't you cute? Now go look up "metaphor."

I'll note here, again, that you are the one incapable of producing your evidence.
genoves
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 02:43 pm
@genoves,
Here, Drew Dad,for your edification, is evidence that, despite the hoots of the far left wing, Reagan was listed by Presidential Historians as the tenth best president we have ever had. I have already posted this but you don't seem to be aware of it.


Note:


C-SPAN RELEASES SECOND HISTORIANS SURVEY OF PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP

Abraham Lincoln Retains Top Position;

Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton Advance Since 2000 Survey;
George W. Bush Ranks 36th Overall By Historians

(Washington, DC, February 15, 2009) -- Timed for Presidents Day 2009, C-SPAN
today releases the results of its second Historians Survey of Presidential
Leadership, in which a cross-section of 65 presidential historians ranked the
42 former occupants of the White House on ten attributes of leadership.

As in C-SPAN's first such survey, released in 2000, Abraham Lincoln received
top billing among the historians, just as the nation marks the bicentennial of
his birth. George Washington placed second, while spots three through five were
held by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, and Harry Truman, in that
order.

Based on the results of historians surveyed, George W. Bush received an overall
ranking of 36. Among other recent Presidents, Bill Clinton who was ranked 21 in
the 2000 survey, advanced six spots in 2009 to an overall ranking of 15; Ronald
Reagan moved from 11 to 10; George H.W. Bush went from 20 to 18, and Jimmy
Carter's ranking declined from 22 to 25.

As in 2000, C-SPAN was guided in this effort by a team of academic advisors:
Dr. Douglas Brinkley, Professor of History at Rice University; Dr. Edna Greene
Medford, Associate Professor of History, Howard University; and Richard Norton
Smith, Scholar in Residence at George Mason University. The team approved the
ten criteria, which were the same used in C-SPAN's 2000 Survey, reviewed the
list of invited participants, and supervised the reporting of the results.
Harvey C. Mansfield, William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of Government at Harvard,
also consulted on the names of invited historians with an overall goal of
geographic, demographic, and ideological diversity.

"Bill Clinton and Ulysses S. Grant aren't often mentioned in the same sentence
- until now. Participants in the latest C-SPAN survey of presidential
historians have boosted each man significantly higher than in the original
survey conducted in 2000. All of which goes to show two things: the fluidity
with which presidential reputations are judged, and the difficulty of assessing
any president who has only just recently left office," said Richard Norton
Smith.

"As much as is possible, we created a poll that was non-partisan, judicious and
fair minded, and it's fitting that for the 200th birthday of Abraham Lincoln
that he remains at the top of these presidential rankings," noted Dr. Douglas
Brinkley. "How we rank our presidents is, to a large extent, influenced by our
own times. Today's concerns shape our views of the past, be it in the area of
foreign policy, managing the economy, or human rights. The survey results also
reinforce the idea that history is less about agreed-upon facts than about
perceptions of who we are as a nation and how our leaders have either enhanced
or tarnished that image we have of ourselves. Lincoln continues to rank at the
top in all categories because he is perceived to embody the nation's avowed
core values: integrity, moderation, persistence in the pursuit of honourable
goals, respect for human rights, compassion; those who collect near the bottom
are perceived as having failed to uphold those values," concluded Dr. Edna
Medford.



Methodology C-SPAN's academic advisors devised a survey in which participants
used a one ("not effective") to ten ("very effective") scale to rate each
president on ten qualities of presidential leadership: "Public Persuasion,"
"Crisis Leadership," "Economic Management," "Moral Authority," "International
Relations," "Administrative Skills," "Relations with Congress," "Vision/Setting
An Agenda," "Pursued Equal Justice for All," and "Performance Within the
Context of His Times."

Surveys were distributed to 147 historians and other professional observers of
the presidency, drawn from a database of C-SPAN's programming, augmented by
suggestions from the academic advisors. Sixty-five agreed to participate.
Participants were guaranteed that individual survey results remain
confidential. Survey responses were tabulated by averaging all responses in a
given category for each president. Each of the ten categories was given equal
weighting in the total scores.


dyslexia
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 02:58 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

I see that you've gone and looked up "pedantic". Aren't you cute? Now go look up "metaphor."

I'll note here, again, that you are the one incapable of producing your evidence.
based on this post I can only conclude that you drewdad continue to read and respond to Possum R Fartbubble; are you stupid or just a slow learner?
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:00 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

Here, Drew Dad,for your edification, is evidence that, despite the hoots of the far left wing, Reagan was listed by Presidential Historians as the tenth best president we have ever had.

Why would I care? I asked for proof of who buys Coulter's books.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:01 pm
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:
based on this post I can only conclude that you drewdad continue to read and respond to Possum R Fartbubble; are you stupid or just a slow learner?

Why can't I be both?
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:01 pm
@genoves,
enough about the historians

christ your boring
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:14 pm
@djjd62,
djjd62--When I find a book that is boring, I don't read it.
genoves
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:15 pm
@dyslexia,
Oh, come on, Dyslexia. Don't you know that Drew Dad is not Dyslexic? It does not take him a half hour to read a paragraph. I am sorry about your Dyslexia. Have you tried a good neurologist?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:16 pm
@genoves,
You're asking to be put on "ignore"?

Granted.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:16 pm
@genoves,
i don't believe in the ignore button, so while i didn't read your post again, i did have to scroll past it to catch up
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:35 pm
@genoves,
Quote:
Lincoln continues to rank at the
top in all categories because he is perceived to embody the nation's avowed
core values: integrity, moderation, persistence in the pursuit of honourable
goals, respect for human rights, compassion; those who collect near the bottom
are perceived as having failed to uphold those values," concluded Dr. Edna
Medford.


Reagan failed miserably in all of these areas.

He had no integrity. He lied frequently, on serious issues. That Reagan was no held to account when Clinton was shows all too well just how the USA lacks a real moral compass. For Americans, the rule of law is there to be bent and twisted as the need arises.

He had no trouble providing both financial and moral support to those who would murder, rape and torture. He had no honorable goals, he only sought to bully the poor and the weak. That is a true sign of immorality, something which all too many Americans wholeheartedly embrace.

The perception of these much vaunted historians, by numbnuts like Genoves, surely was way out of whack. It should be noted that these "historians" provided their assessments secretly and that out of 147 asked only what, 65 agreed to participate.

Great scientific study, Genoves. so typical of your mindset.
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:40 pm
JTT wrote:

The perception of these much vaunted historians, by numbnuts like Genoves, surely was way out of whack. It should be noted that these "historians" provided their assessments secretly and that out of 147 asked only what, 65 agreed to participate.

Great scientific study, Genoves. so typical of your mindset.

**************************************************************

SInce you are not a professional Historian, JTT, your comment that the study was "surely way out of whack" is inadmissable. If you could provide an assessment by other Professional Historians that the C-Span study was out of whack, I would be happy to read it, Otherwise, JTT, on this matter, you have no standing without evidence.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 03:57 pm
@genoves,
You don't have all that great a grasp as to what constitutes scientific assessment, do you? Must be your military background. Join the military and surrender your brain.

"special forces"; that's like "special education". And the propaganda sure worked on you.
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 04:08 pm
@JTT,
Do you know what scientific assessment is, JTT? Can you show how and why it was applied or not applied to the Cspan survey. I am curious to know because I am sure that anything you posit can be used in many different ways. The ball is in your court!
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 04:09 pm
SInce you are not a professional Historian, JTT, your comment that the study was "surely way out of whack" is inadmissable. If you could provide an assessment by other Professional Historians that the C-Span study was out of whack, I would be happy to read it, Otherwise, JTT, on this matter, you have no standing without evidence.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 04:24 pm
@genoves,
Yup, you're military or ex-military. You learned that mindlessly repeating things can work on some minds. But it doesn't work on thinking people.


genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 04:53 pm
Re: JTT (Post 3584324)
Do you know what scientific assessment is, JTT? Can you show how and why it was applied or not applied to the Cspan survey. I am curious to know because I am sure that anything you posit can be used in many different ways. The ball is in your court!
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 04:54 pm
SInce you are not a professional Historian, JTT, your comment that the study was "surely way out of whack" is inadmissable. If you could provide an assessment by other Professional Historians that the C-Span study was out of whack, I would be happy to read it, Otherwise, JTT, on this matter, you have no standing without evidence.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2009 05:44 pm
@JTT,
You are right about Genoves. The best thing is to ignore him. He is ignorant and obnoxious, especially so when he repeats things.
 

Related Topics

Take it All - Discussion by McGentrix
Cancelled - Discussion by Brandon9000
John Stewart meets Bill O'Reilly - Discussion by Thomas
BEFORE WE HAD T.V. - Discussion by edgarblythe
What TV shows do you watch? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Orange is the New Black - Discussion by tsarstepan
Odd Premier: Under the Dome - Discussion by edgarblythe
Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"? - Discussion by firefly
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 02:05:53