<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Joker</title>
	<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: gabriel</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4946</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4946</guid>
					<description>Yesterday, the Kerry camp claimed that he had meant to say:
"I can't overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq."  Today, he claims he missed the punch line "Just ask President Bush."  

I'm sorry, but I don't find it creditable.  I do find meaning of the original speech fairly straightforward.  Plain meaning, context and reason all point towards the view that Kerry was maligning the soldiers.  

Now, implying that a lack of education pushes people into the Army isn't the worst thing in the world- but it is what he said and meant.  It's not an absurd statement either- most people would probably think he's right- though they'd think it demeaning to point it out (I understand that on the facts, soldiers are not undereducated).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday, the Kerry camp claimed that he had meant to say:<br />
&#8220;I can&#8217;t overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don&#8217;t study, if you aren&#8217;t smart, if you&#8217;re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq.&#8221;  Today, he claims he missed the punch line &#8220;Just ask President Bush.&#8221;  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry, but I don&#8217;t find it creditable.  I do find meaning of the original speech fairly straightforward.  Plain meaning, context and reason all point towards the view that Kerry was maligning the soldiers.  </p>
<p>Now, implying that a lack of education pushes people into the Army isn&#8217;t the worst thing in the world- but it is what he said and meant.  It&#8217;s not an absurd statement either- most people would probably think he&#8217;s right- though they&#8217;d think it demeaning to point it out (I understand that on the facts, soldiers are not undereducated).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Daniel Larison</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4945</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:02:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4945</guid>
					<description>John Hood at The Corner wrote earlier today:

I don't know if this places me into Derb's posse or not, but I have to admit that I don't think John Kerry meant to suggest that if you are uneducated, you end up as a soldier stuck in Iraq. His folks have released what they claim is the original prepared text, and it shows that Kerry was planning to make fun of Bush's education. It came out wrong. That's it (assuming you don't think the prepared text was fabricated after the fact).

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWY1YzAyY2VjZjZhOGQ2ZWQ3YzVhYThjZDMxODgxODk=

I understand why people took what he said badly.  I can understand why the initial reaction was harsh, when people thought he said something that he did not mean to say.  He should have apologised for giving any impression that he was referring to soldiers, and made it clear what he meant.  That's all fine and understandable, and I agree with people who say that he should have apologised.  But I will rapidly lose patience with people who continue to chant that he was insulting the soldiers.  Not because I care whether John Kerry lives or dies (I don't), but because it is now clearly and manifestly untrue that this is what he was trying to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Hood at The Corner wrote earlier today:</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if this places me into Derb&#8217;s posse or not, but I have to admit that I don&#8217;t think John Kerry meant to suggest that if you are uneducated, you end up as a soldier stuck in Iraq. His folks have released what they claim is the original prepared text, and it shows that Kerry was planning to make fun of Bush&#8217;s education. It came out wrong. That&#8217;s it (assuming you don&#8217;t think the prepared text was fabricated after the fact).</p>
<p><a href='http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWY1YzAyY2VjZjZhOGQ2ZWQ3YzVhYThjZDMxODgxODk=' rel='nofollow'>http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWY1YzAyY2VjZjZhOGQ2ZWQ3YzVhYThjZDMxODgxODk=</a></p>
<p>I understand why people took what he said badly.  I can understand why the initial reaction was harsh, when people thought he said something that he did not mean to say.  He should have apologised for giving any impression that he was referring to soldiers, and made it clear what he meant.  That&#8217;s all fine and understandable, and I agree with people who say that he should have apologised.  But I will rapidly lose patience with people who continue to chant that he was insulting the soldiers.  Not because I care whether John Kerry lives or dies (I don&#8217;t), but because it is now clearly and manifestly untrue that this is what he was trying to do.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: gabriel</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4944</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:51:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4944</guid>
					<description>Yeah, I've read Lashawn Barber's post, and I don't find it persuasive at all.  If the Kerry camp was only claiming that he flubbed the last line, it might be remotely plausible.  However, they claim he meant to put the entire previous sentence in the negative.  Nor did he mean to say "you can do well" either.  Why we should accept this transparent reinterpretation rather than the plain meaning of Kerry's words is a mystery to me.

Moreover, Kerry's point as actually delivered makes more sense- work hard so you have opportunities and you don't have to join the yokels in Iraq.  How much sense does it make to be saying "Work hard so you don't become President of the United States and foolishly get the country stuck in an unwinnable war?"

And, they haven't released his prepared speech.  Why?  Because either the line was in there more or less as delivered, or (far more likely) Kerry just spoke extemporaneously.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I&#8217;ve read Lashawn Barber&#8217;s post, and I don&#8217;t find it persuasive at all.  If the Kerry camp was only claiming that he flubbed the last line, it might be remotely plausible.  However, they claim he meant to put the entire previous sentence in the negative.  Nor did he mean to say &#8220;you can do well&#8221; either.  Why we should accept this transparent reinterpretation rather than the plain meaning of Kerry&#8217;s words is a mystery to me.</p>
<p>Moreover, Kerry&#8217;s point as actually delivered makes more sense- work hard so you have opportunities and you don&#8217;t have to join the yokels in Iraq.  How much sense does it make to be saying &#8220;Work hard so you don&#8217;t become President of the United States and foolishly get the country stuck in an unwinnable war?&#8221;</p>
<p>And, they haven&#8217;t released his prepared speech.  Why?  Because either the line was in there more or less as delivered, or (far more likely) Kerry just spoke extemporaneously.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Grumpy Old Man</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4941</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4941</guid>
					<description>&lt;a href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2006/11/01/in-defense-of-john-kerry/" rel="nofollow"&gt;LaShawn Barber&lt;/a&gt; thinks it was a flub, and is mystified why the man didn't apologize. Good question.

Freudian slip, tin ear, or both, it sure doesn't inspire confidence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2006/11/01/in-defense-of-john-kerry/" rel="nofollow">LaShawn Barber</a> thinks it was a flub, and is mystified why the man didn&#8217;t apologize. Good question.</p>
<p>Freudian slip, tin ear, or both, it sure doesn&#8217;t inspire confidence.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: gabriel</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4940</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4940</guid>
					<description>And one other thing- apparently much of his partisan audience wasn't "fair-minded" either- all the news reports suggest that his line was met by gasps as well as laughter.  And I'd suggest that a significant amount of the crowd in Pasadena was willing to laugh at the poor yokel troops.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And one other thing- apparently much of his partisan audience wasn&#8217;t &#8220;fair-minded&#8221; either- all the news reports suggest that his line was met by gasps as well as laughter.  And I&#8217;d suggest that a significant amount of the crowd in Pasadena was willing to laugh at the poor yokel troops.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: gabriel</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4939</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:54:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2006/11/01/the-joker/#comment-4939</guid>
					<description>Derb is most definitely wrong here.  By "you can do well" Kerry wasn't referring to the idea that "you'll be good at what you do" but that "you'll be a success in the eyes of the world".  Who uses the term "do well" in this context but to mean worldly success?  Contrast that with the other option "you get stuck in Iraq", and it's extremely clear that he's referring to the troops.

This is a classic case where a public figure said what he actually thought for a moment, and has been caught out on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Derb is most definitely wrong here.  By &#8220;you can do well&#8221; Kerry wasn&#8217;t referring to the idea that &#8220;you&#8217;ll be good at what you do&#8221; but that &#8220;you&#8217;ll be a success in the eyes of the world&#8221;.  Who uses the term &#8220;do well&#8221; in this context but to mean worldly success?  Contrast that with the other option &#8220;you get stuck in Iraq&#8221;, and it&#8217;s extremely clear that he&#8217;s referring to the troops.</p>
<p>This is a classic case where a public figure said what he actually thought for a moment, and has been caught out on it.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

