<<Funny how he and Palin have explained it over and over again, since the out of context train went downhill. >>
Yeah, and funny too how the explanation (1) came AFTER it became apparent how fucking stupid the comments were and (2) was completely at variance with anything else he was saying at the time.
To try to morph his original comment on the economy into a comment on the American worker when nobody had even mentioned the American worker is just desperate and pathetic.
<<Yes, I realize it doesn't fit the neat little "stick a fork in him, he's done" proclaimation, becuase, it's so much the better to try and convince folks he has no clue, completely out there, no sense what-so-ever.>>
Are you kidding or what? NOBODY has to convince anybody, because it's just so fucking obvious the guy has no clue. It isn't just "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" turning into "this is the most serious crisis since WWII," hilarious though that may be. It's EVERYTHING about this pathetic schmuck, like the flip-flop from Monday to Tuesday that he's against the bail-out and then he's for the bail-out, that he'd fire the chairman of the SEC and then he finds out the President can't do that. I mean STARTING from the fact of this guy graduating fifth from the bottom of an 800-man class and THEN reading through all of these gaffes, HOW MUCH PROOF do you actually need that this guy is a fucking moron? I get the feeling that another three gaffes and then another three STILL wouldn't convince you that there was anything fundamentally wrong with McCain.
<<But if it's actually what the original intentions of the comments are, well....that's alot harder to make such a case. >>
Don't you understand the guy is just lying? That WASN'T the original intentions of the comments because the American worker wasn't even on the fucking radar screen, nobody was referring to the American worker directly or indirectly, and the comment was "The fundamentals of our economy are strong." How could that POSSIBLY be taken to mean "the American worker is strong?" Where is there any evidence that this discussion IN ANY WAY concerned the American worker? He's just trying to re-write what he actually said. NOBODY is stupid enough to believe that he didn't mean it, he meant something entirely different.
<<Naaaa, let's just keep taking his words completely out of context, and hope the rest of the electorate is dumb enough to believe it, if that lie is repeated often enough>>
Well, if the words were taken out of context, show us a context in which those words were uttered that demonstrates they were meant to refer to the American worker. Do you even know what "context" and "out of context" mean? It means they don't fit in with the rest of the conversation - - if the whole conversation was about the price of apples in Spain, and he says something about the price of apples in Hong Kong, you can argue that the remark was out of context, he MEANT to say Spain, not Hong Kong. But you can't show one God-damn thing about the context of that remark to indicate it was taken out of context.
In other words, you can parrot the words "out of context" but you can't make them MEAN anything because you can't show ANY context that would give those words a different meaning.
All that you or Insane can demonstrate is that the next day, when he realized how stupid his words were, he tried to convince people that he had really meant something entirely different from what he had said.
