He is incapable of not being derisive.
If he wanted to, President Bush could change the tone in Washington with a single syllable: He could just say "ic." That is, he could stop referring to the opposition as the "Democrat Party" and call the other side, as it prefers, the Democratic Party.
The derisive use of "Democrat" in this way was a Bush staple during the recent campaign. "There are people in the Democrat Party who think they can spend your money far better than you can," he would say in his stump speech, or, "Raising taxes is a Democrat idea of growing the economy," or, "However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses."
It may be a rhetorical strategy, but its more likely that he is just uneducated and thinks that because he can use “Republican” both as a noun and as an adjective, he can do the same with “Democrat”. Too bad “Democrat” is a noun and “Democratic” is an adjective, and they aren’t interchangeable. Bush is just an idiot with a child’s knowledge of grammar.
Don’t piss him off. He’ll just go nukular on you.
I disagree, Andy. Bush is a hedgehog: He’s good at one thing and that one thing is staying on message. If it was just his normal mediocre mind operating, sometimes he’d say “democrat”, sometimes “democratic” and other times “democratical”. The consistency with which he says “democrat” indicates that this is one of the first lessons that Unca Turdblossom taught him.
I don’t see why it makes a difference. Why is one preferable to the other?
And does anyone here have any sense of irony (or intellectual honesty)whatsoever? This site calls Bush “Dear Leader”, after a murderous commie dictator, and consistently calls Rs Rethuglicans.
And does anyone here have any sense of irony (or intellectual honesty)whatsoever? This site calls Bush “Dear Leader”, after a murderous commie dictator, and consistently calls Rs Rethuglicans.
And therein lies the difference between partisans in front of computer keyboards, and the President of the Entire United States.
Personally, I hold the latter to a higher standard.
Or, I should say, I _once held_ the latter to a higher standard.
Why would you hold him to a higher standard? He’s equal to the people who elected him. That’s why they like him so much.
BTW, He doesn’t comprehend grammar OR history. But his speech writers do.
So let me get htis straight. Calling the president “Dear Leader’ after a North Korean dictator is equivalent to the president confusing Democrat and Democratic?
Wow.
Dugger, you did NOT get it straight.
The leader of the country continuously and deliberately disrespecting the opposition party rhetorically in the international media is NOT equivalent to a bunch of anonymous bloggers calling the President names on an Internet blog with a fraction of a percentage of the exposure.
“Dear Leader” is a pejorative of an imperious ass of a leader written by a private citizen whose jurisdiction extends to exactly one weiner dog.
“Democrat” said the way Bush does on purpose is a put-down by the leader of the free world to about 40% of the voting public in the country he is the leader of.
Republicans have been truncating the name of the Democratic Party for decades. It didn’t start with Bush. It goes back decades.
I’ve always wondered why Democrats appearing on TV talk show (and the hosts of the shows themselves, for that matter) didn’t correct Republican representatives who spoke about Demcocrat ideas.
So let me get htis straight.
You failed to do so. Care to try again? Let me know if I can he’p.
I don’t see why Democrat vs. Democratic (is it that you get some good vibe from the connotation of democratic?)is a put down. Is there some unbiased documented history here?
And OW, you are a major blogger – not just a monoweinerdogowner.
I’m still not the president. And the idea that you’re pretending not to get this is ludicrous.
Is there some unbiased documented history here?
The WaPo column that Oliver linked covers it pretty well.
“I don’t see why it makes a difference. Why is one preferable to the other?”
It’s sort of like when I refer to you as Asshole instead of Dugger. Which do you pefer?
“I don’t see why it makes a difference. Why is one preferable to the other?”
Typical clueless dugster.
Why not try to recognize how one is the correct name of the political party. The other is incorrect, and consciously used by some Republicans to annoy.
Speaking of how succesful the right was in reaching out to the Democrat Party, here is a poignant example, from the salad days of Mission Accomplished.
http://www.atomfilms.com/af/content/right_brothers_bush
Dugger | Nov 22, 2006 2:04:21 PM
“I don’t see why it makes a difference. Why is one preferable to the other?”
BLINK.
BLINK.
Your arrogant, cocky pre-midterm election ravings were more intelligent and less ridiculous.
Dugger, it’s sort of like the difference between calling Joe Lieberman a Jewish politician and calling him a Jew politician.
Don’t they both mean the same thing? Well, no, they don’t.
Until the Republicans cut it out, I vote that we retaliate by referring to them as the “Republicancer party”
I think since the election, Dugger’s brain’s broken altogther.
Dugger -
Here’s a little advice typically dispensed on Fark.com…
READ THE F***ING ARTICLE!!
From said article:
The provenance of the sneering label “Democrat Party” stretches back to the Harding administration. William Safire traced an early usage to Harold Stassen, who was managing Wendell Willkie’s 1940 campaign against Franklin D. Roosevelt. A party run by political bosses, Stassen told Safire for a 1984 column, “should not be called a ‘Democratic Party.’ It should be called the ‘Democrat party.’ “
Happy Thanksgiving y’all!!
Well you see, George, if he reads THE FACTS, he’ll have nothing over which to argue (pointlessly). Though I don’t think that will actually stop him.