US Election results.
-
Lets just say the part of US that inspires the World isn't the part that voted for G.W.Bush. It is the part that voted for Obama.
-
@chango70 said:
Lets just say the part of US that inspires the World isn't the part that voted for G.W.Bush. It is the part that voted for Obama.
Well, it's just too damn bad you can't vote, isn't it?
-
@bellwells said:
Well, it's just too damn bad you can't vote, isn't it?
Not really. Didn't you read the papers?
-
@rickw said:
Interesting you noted "arrogance" (another word for "audacity")...
@chango70 said:
@rickw said:
@chango70 said:
Errr. No. Arrogance isn't vaguely related to audacity, it's more like stupidity and ignorance. Everyone from around the world can see that this guy had below average IQ and a failure to grasp some of the finer complexities of the World. It was plainly obvious from the moment he opened his mouth. What happened when he took office is plain proof that for some people, first impression is enough to judge them.
Check your thesaurus again.
Check yours mate.
http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/audacity
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/audacity
http://encarta.msn.com/thesaurus_561566101/audacity.htmlOooh, you found two sources that didn't include the word "arrogance".
Your first one uses "arrogance" as the definition of audacity. Does that mean you'll edit again to remove it?
Also, arrogance is not tied to stupidity and ignorance in the dictionary. It's tied to "overbearing" and "presumptious".
Now, the point is, the two words have very similar meanings, and can sometimes be used interchangeably (as noted by stinkie). Would it make you feel better if I rephrased my statement? Try this:
Interesting you noted "arrogance" (a word quite similar to "audacity" in many thesauri)...@chango70 said:
Lets just say the part of US that inspires the World isn't the part that voted for G.W.Bush. It is the part that voted for Obama.
I'd disagree with that somewhat as well. You're comparing unrelated entities, which skews the results of your conclusion, and making a broad generalization that probably is inaccurate at many levels. For instance, anyone who voted for Bush AND Obama would become simultaneously inspiring and uninspiring, which would disprove your statement. But like I said originally, I'm not supporting Bush here.
-
@unknownuser said:
@bellwells said:
Well, it's just too damn bad you can't vote, isn't it?
Not really. Didn't you read the papers?
Not sure I understand what you mean.
-
@unknownuser said:
Aha. Now that's something else entirely. Partizan politics.
@rickw said:
Interesting you noted "arrogance" (another word for "audacity")...
Why's that?
"Audacity of Hope" or "Arrogance of Hope". Take your pick.
-
Mission accomplished = Audacity of Hope.
-
@bellwells said:
@chango70 said:
Lets just say the part of US that inspires the World isn't the part that voted for G.W.Bush. It is the part that voted for Obama.
Well, it's just too damn bad you can't vote, isn't it?
I didn't need to in this case now did I. The results came out that way. I can't wait till January 20, when George W Bush takes his last trip on Air Force One, back to Texas where his cowboy costume wearing ass belongs.
-
@alan fraser said:
The difference between arrogance and audacity is simply that although audacity can have both negative and positive connotations (arrogance or bravura)it usually used in the positive sense, whereas arrogance is always entirely negative.
Exactly they are not interchangeble in context of their negative/positive connotations. When you change a word from one with positive connotation to a synonym with negative connotation it is usually refered to as SPIN. Don't try to spin this one please it's just cringe inducing.
-
The difference between arrogance and audacity is simply that although audacity can have both negative and positive connotations (arrogance or bravura) it is usually used in the positive sense, whereas arrogance is always entirely negative.
-
On a slight side note, it seems pretty clear where the youth of america stand.
-
@chango70 said:
@alan fraser said:
The difference between arrogance and audacity is simply that although audacity can have both negative and positive connotations (arrogance or bravura)it usually used in the positive sense, whereas arrogance is always entirely negative.
Exactly they are not interchangeble in context of their negative/positive connotations. When you change a word from one with positive connotation to a synonym with negative connotation it is usually refered to as SPIN. Don't try to spin this one please it's just cringe inducing.
I've never heard audacity used in a positive sense. So, this may be one of those regional differences in language, rather than your false accusation of "spin", so you can stop cringing now.
-
@remus said:
On a slight side note, it seems pretty clear where the youth of america stand.
So it's true - there is an educational crisis in America...
-
@rickw said:
I've never heard audacity used in a positive sense. So, this may be one of those regional differences in language, rather than your false accusation of "spin", so you can stop cringing now.
??? I don't think it's regional, Rick.
This is from the blurb on the Patton Museum site. He was the first person I could think of with obvious audacity.
"The museum will honor the American Soldier, convey the remarkable heritage of Cavalry and Armor, promote Army Values and preserve the name of General George S. Patton, Jr. and his brand of audacious leadership. The museum will go beyond education and inspiration, helping each visitor to find their own brand of audacious leadership." -
Rick, i was always under the impression that more highly educated people tended to be more liberal in their outlook, which would suggest their isnt an education crisis.
-
@alan fraser said:
@rickw said:
I've never heard audacity used in a positive sense. So, this may be one of those regional differences in language, rather than your false accusation of "spin", so you can stop cringing now.
??? I don't think it's regional, Rick.
This is from the blurb on the Patton Museum site. He was the first person I could think of with obvious audacity.
"The museum will honor the American Soldier, convey the remarkable heritage of Cavalry and Armor, promote Army Values and preserve the name of General George S. Patton, Jr. and his brand of audacious leadership. The museum will go beyond education and inspiration, helping each visitor to find their own brand of audacious leadership."Okay, I've heard it used in a non-negative way once, now.
I wasn't trying to argue that it may have different connotations for different people (after all, that's the nature of language, and underscores the importance of defining one's terms). Just trying to find a reason why I have a negative connotation of "audacity" while you and chango70 seem to have a positive connotation (the most ready explanation being locale, though it may not be correct). I do see both positive and negative definitions for the word, some of which use "arrogant/arrogance" in the definition or in an example of usage. Clearly, then, "arrogance" and "audacity" can be interchageable, despite chango70's protestation(which I suspect, rather than being an argument about a definition [since the negative sense is clearly defined and valid], is rooted solely in chango70's support for Obama - but I could be wrong about that, too).
Now, since we've beat this horse to death, let's move on. Does anyone think Obama will resolve the India-Pakistan standoff, now in its 11,680th day?
-
RickW wrote:
@unknownuser said:
Now, since we've beat this horse to death, let's move on. Does anyone think Obama will resolve the India-Pakistan standoff, now in its 11,680th day?
Hopefully he can be instrumental in getting them to start a constructive dialogue, but frankly unless it directly effects our security or stands to destabalize our efforts in Afghanistan worse than it has, after 11,680 days or 32 years this is an issue that's not exactly new, kinda like the Isreal/Palistinian issue which IMO can wait for him to first tackle the issues that we voted him as President of our country to deal with first, then once we have our country on the right track then concentrate minds, resources and efforts to help out other countries with the skills we would have acquired (hopefully)during our own transformation and bi-partisan negotiations.
-
I heard on the news today that for his first overseas summit, Europe perhaps, he doesn't want to project the image of the typical imperial President. . .so he is not going to use Air Force One.
He is going to walk.
think about it. . .
-
I think if he got rid of Air force one he would be showing that he is leading in the cutting of needless spending.
-
@unknownuser said:
I heard on the news today that for his first overseas summit, Europe perhaps, he doesn't want to project the image of the typical imperial President. . .so he is not going to use Air Force One.
He is going to walk.
He does seemed to have needled the Iranians. They obviously thought he was going to be something of a soft touch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7718603.stm
Advertisement