It's not what you know, it's what you know that ain't so.
No the definition is quite clear. Why don't you like that fact?
Yes, if my "rabble" isn't your "rabble". But I'll stick to citing the rabble I know. Worldviews that get too complicated don't do anybody any good.
It is more of an "I disagree" than a "dislike". Do you know the difference?
No, Oaktree is right. You do need a dictionary:
You don't like what he says though, do you? Why?
But of course he can be all three. That is obvious.
I'm sorry to inform you that you can laugh at me till you pass out for lack of oxygen, and it doesn't affect me in the least. I do not crave your respect.
I thought I was becoming a cynic, but your comments in this thread paint me an optimist by contrast.
An individual paid by a cabal to brainwash the rabble cannot be the same as an individual who admits publicly to being a "low voltage atheist" and who risks a long-standing audience by renouncing his political affiliation.
I don't need a dictionary. You are just plain wrong.
If Clinton or Trump aren't your first choice, VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
It's amazing that I even have to write that...
Hmmm.. Will isn't really a conservative. He is a talking head hired by behind-the-scenes opinion shapers, in order to feed the public whatever current flavor of pablum that they desire them to consume. That you would consider anything he wrote, regardless of how shiny or well polished, art, is entirely laughable.
Soviet propaganda from Radio Latvia during the 1980's was more impressive.
Yes, well any of us would be lucky to have a fraction of the mental clarity and wit that Will has at 75. Here we are peddling our snide and inconsequential opinions in comment fields while he is influencing millions.
It's not existential. Our republic can't be snuffed by a single moron, however profound. And has survived much worse threats in the past, actually. So your hyperbolic pearl clutching is less than convincing.
Additionally, considering the fact that your HRC Democratic Party vote here in Tennessee isn't going to have any effect at all in the general election, the only logical conclusion which I can draw from that, is that you are completely unconcerned with her history of deceit and arrogant elitism.
You can do whatever you want with your own personal and private vote, of course. But it isn't rationality which you are exhibiting, despite all your expletive strewn rants.
It's bald triumphalism, antithetical to rational thought, as I stated above.
You appear to be in need of a dictionary.
But you are right about George Will.
If you mean to say "the ravings of a lunatic" when you say "a piece of art", then sure.
After all, Will's book, published in 1984 (how surreal is that) titled "Statecraft as Soulcraft" is widely considered a piece of art in certain lunatic asylums (AKA: Think Tanks).
Whatever you think of its message, George Will's column from yesterday is a piece of art.
I am saving it in a box with my October 2007 copy of The New Yorker, which had the cover illustration of Ahmadinejad being propositioned in a men's restroom.
Somewhere in that box, I think I've also got Gore Vidal's interview where he was asked to comment on William F. Buckley's death.
It isn't triumphalism.
As for George Will, he as stated outright that he is a conservative and that is why he supports Hillary.
I'll be so glad when this is all over....gotta admit though....do kinda like watching the GOP slowly implode...kinda fun!
It isn't tribalism.
@Oak. I believe the operative word in your link is "may"
The whole story may just be a collection of facts glued together with assertions and beliefs
It's a choice between a rational human being and someone whose head is so far up Putin's ass that when Vlad opens his mouth, all you see is orange fuzz.
By Flyer Staff
download this issue
click here to see more »