Comments on: It depends on what “is” is http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/ Ron Coleman’s inactive general topic blog Sun, 04 Jul 2010 02:36:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: If only they will let it sink in « Likelihood of Success http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1433 If only they will let it sink in « Likelihood of Success Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:48:45 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1433 [...] Oh, yeah, right.  We went through that. [...] [...] Oh, yeah, right.  We went through that. [...]

]]> By: Ron Coleman http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1439 Ron Coleman Sun, 22 Jul 2007 02:11:36 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1439 LOL, that is a compelling image, Anon! LOL, that is a compelling image, Anon!

]]> By: anon http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1438 anon Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:51:08 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1438 you can tell he is so Hillary's puppet. He's so sad he's not in control anymore. He looks like wax fruit. you can tell he is so Hillary’s puppet. He’s so sad he’s not in control anymore. He looks like wax fruit.

]]> By: Ara Rubyan http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1437 Ara Rubyan Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:21:55 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1437 Kevin: <i>You’d pull out after D-Day.</i> Of course not. I wasn't born for nearly another 9 years. IJS. Kevin:

You’d pull out after D-Day.

Of course not.

I wasn’t born for nearly another 9 years. IJS.

]]> By: Ron Coleman http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1436 Ron Coleman Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:26:37 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1436 Ara, you are entitled to your view of the Iraq war, as is every private citizen and convicted perjurer. That's not what my post is about. On the other hand, maybe it is. Because why did Bill Clinton use the present tense? Because he did not want to be quoted as saying "there was no military victory" -- which is preposterous -- or "there will be no military victory" -- which is your friend Senator Reid and company. Rather he has utilized a "floating is" -- right now, "there is not" a state of "military victory," ostensibly, because "insurgents" are able to inflict casualties. Reasonable, but unremarkable, and ultimately there is virtually no accountability to it for any period of time other than the two seconds during which he spoke. That, by the way, is to his credit, in a way. Because both he and his wife the Senator understand well what is really going on and what is at stake. So, with this language, they still manage to avoid entirely pandering to the Ara Rubyan Base of the Democratic Party, while remaining -- -- always -- "politically viable." Ara, you are entitled to your view of the Iraq war, as is every private citizen and convicted perjurer. That’s not what my post is about.

On the other hand, maybe it is. Because why did Bill Clinton use the present tense? Because he did not want to be quoted as saying “there was no military victory” — which is preposterous — or “there will be no military victory” — which is your friend Senator Reid and company. Rather he has utilized a “floating is” — right now, “there is not” a state of “military victory,” ostensibly, because “insurgents” are able to inflict casualties. Reasonable, but unremarkable, and ultimately there is virtually no accountability to it for any period of time other than the two seconds during which he spoke.

That, by the way, is to his credit, in a way. Because both he and his wife the Senator understand well what is really going on and what is at stake. So, with this language, they still manage to avoid entirely pandering to the Ara Rubyan Base of the Democratic Party, while remaining –

– always –

“politically viable.”

]]> By: Kevin D. http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1435 Kevin D. Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:14:37 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1435 Ara, You'd pull out after D-Day. This war was lost in your eyes before it ever began. Ara,

You’d pull out after D-Day. This war was lost in your eyes before it ever began.

]]> By: Ara Rubyan http://www.likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/comment-page-1/#comment-1434 Ara Rubyan Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:04:37 +0000 http://likelihoodofsuccess.com/2007/07/20/it-depends-on-what-is-is/#comment-1434 His point, had it been made by William Jefferson Smith, would still be valid. His point, had it been made by William Jefferson Smith, would still be valid.

]]>