Ticomaya wrote:I sorta missed the "[positive]" in the first part of your response. Or are you suggesting "being rude to an individual on the subway" as the positive?
Hehheh, good catch. True, you had to derive the accompanying positive (re political ethics - not peddling the most hateful political stuff, opposing torture in all its euphemisms) from context and stuff. So it wasnt as straightforward the way I said it was. Will do better next time.
Ticomaya wrote:But, just for the old year ... I would also prefer a patriotic, polite person, over a nice-smelling, terrorist-apologist euroweenie. ("Patriotic" being the negative -- it is a negative, right? -- and "nice-smelling" being the positive.)
Hmmm, patriotic as negative... doesnt really work for me, I kinda think of patriotism - good, nationalism - bad. But it might work for some I guess. But it doesnt work for you, in any case, and thats what counts here.
Plus, of course, you need to work on the parallel opposites to get a proper retort here. I mean, in my version, you had the rude <-> polite opposition, and the opposition between hateful politics peddler / torture apologist <-> scrupulous political ethics. You line em up like that, pick a positive from the one and wed it to the negative from the other, and vice versa. I mean, focus here.
So, whatta we got here. You got your terrorist-apologist euroweenie (negative); polite (positive); nice-smelling (positive) and patriotic (positive - well, far as you and I are concerned anyway). Three positives, that doesnt work. Well, patriotic is the positive equivalent to terrorist-apologist euroweenie, obviously. So then you got, say, nice-smelling, and you need a negative to match that - smelling like a fresh turd, for example.
OK, try this on for size. You prefer a guy who smells like a fresh turd but is patriotic, over someone who's nice-smelling but a terrorist-apologist euroweenie. That work for you?
Nightie night..
