He loves me, he loves me not?
Oct. 14th, 2004 01:18 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
azuriteOkay, so today Scott and I had lunch out over between Magnolia and Matador walk, right across from the construction work of the new student union and the Plaza del Sol. Our usual eating spots over by the Brown Therapy center and the Engineering Auditorium were taken, so we walked the extra distance all the way down Lindley to the plaza near the Science buildings. And we talked and ate and laughed and everything like usual, but there was this one part when we were faking singing songs for a split second or something-- and Scott said something along the lines of (and don't quote me exactly on this) "I love you."
O_O The other day he said "two people in love," and when we left the lunch area, he said, "Come, my love!" in that fake uber-romanticized way (admittedly, sap that I am, I fell for it). But I'm still kind of freaked out. I have two options: 1) take him/it seriously... or 2) brush it off as nothing, silly. Wait for a "real" confession, if any. Regardless, I'm not going to be the first one to say anything; I mean, I just... I don't know how, I can't, I'm terrified. Again, just over a month! Look at my past entries and see how amazing this month has been, and all the worries and hopes I've had about this relationship. It's scary.
Well, on a more... er, mundane topic? The debates. As in, the last two. I actually took notes.
Starting with the third and final one, did anyone notice how Bush's supposed "power tie" was gone? I don't know whether it was on purpose or not, but I swear to God, Bush and Kerry were wearing the SAME. EXACT. SUIT. Right down to the tie. They both had dark navy suits, American flag lapel pins, and red ties with gold star-shapes on them. What happened to the blue power tie? Did they decide to dress the candidates alike so they wouldn't be so "distracting?"
I very much enjoyed this third debate, as the questions were all over the map, and clearly put the candidates in some tight spots. Not to mention that there seemed to be more time for responses and rebuttals, and after the previous two debates, they seemed to have more experience in handling the tough questions, the style of responses from opponents, and so on.
I definitely enjoyed the questions in regards to the candidates' faith in regards to their lifestyle, choices, and politics, as well as the question regarding the strong women in the candidates' lives-- after all, George W. Bush is saying the "W stands for Women." I have a great deal of respect for Bush after this last debate, but, as with the majority of the nation, my mind was up and made long before the debates. I honestly don't believe that there really are any "undecided voters;" I'm sure those of you that watched the second debate remember the woman who posed the question to Kerry about not wanting federal dollars to go toward abortion.
I have this to say about that: Kerry made the perfect response. The option must be available for women, even if YOU personally (or your daughter, sister, best friend, etc.) never make use of it. And technically speaking, YOUR federal tax dollars aren't going specifically to Abortion Clinic X, but to Hospital Here. People that need an abortion (and yes, need) should have the option available, whether they pay for everything out of pocket or through health coverage.
I speak from experience, okay? I came dangerously close to needing an abortion. Not because my life would have been in danger (actually, I don't even know that for a fact. I'm seriously underweight and unable to donate blood, so who's to say I'd survive a pregnancy?), but because I would NOT have been able to support the life of a child. I need to know that the option is available to me. I'm not saying it's going to be some sort of sick comfort and a deterrent to having safe sex, but at least I'm aware of my options. A so-called "abstinence education" doesn't work, and the majority of America knows it. But educate people about other options, and they just may use them. Tell them what they can't have, and they'll go underground to get it-- possibly harming themselves AND others.
So that was probably more information than you needed to know. Back to the debates. So for the second debate, I watched it on CSPAN On Demand, and I actually took notes. What can I say, I was bored, it was late... here we go:
Bush: he twitched his foot-- a lot. I saw it from the get-go, and a few times after that, when they actually did full body shots. It shows nervousness and the inability to remain still. Believe me, I know it's hard (people in my speech class today had a hard time with that), but politicians have to learn these things. There's a duality to everything-- you want to appear strong, resolute, and firm, but you also want to appear human, and able to relate to your voters.
At times he appeared a bit overeager and zealous, but some might see that as passion and conviction. He threw Kerry's words from the first debate back at him, but that wasn't always effective-- saying the "he can run, but he can't hide" only works in so many different contexts. And that's a limited "many." I appreciate that he acknowledged the lack of WMDs in Iraq, which is a big step for him-- after all, later on in the same debate, he was unable to cite three mistakes he made. Politicians aren't seen as perfect, and while Bush is trying to be known for his steadfast resolution, you do have to be human at times. Didn't Bush himself say even the President is human? Why can't he admit mistakes then? He doesn't have to say Iraq was a huge mistake, just say that we (and yes, WE as a nation, WE as a body of people, voters, legislature, etc.) went about it the wrong way.
I'm also glad that he recognizes that one person (either Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein) isn't responsible for all the terrorism in all the world. One person doesn't force other people to become suicide bombers, or believe wholeheartedly in Ji'had. He also recognizes that not every other country in the world agrees with "us" and our methods, but has he really stopped to wonder and care as to why? Yes, he's firm on the idea that we have alliances, but he's also firm that this is "America's War" even though terrorism is a global threat. We went into this because of VENGEANCE.
To me, it seems as thought he's making decisions and opinions for the rest of the world. Sorry, he can't speak for those people, those countries, those individuals. On a more presentation-related note, he had very big gestures, and a wide, varying pitch. He also blinked a great deal, which, as I said before, does a lot to detract from his credibility. Someone who blinks a lot is considered to be unsure, or worse, a liar. I do give him credit for the line "that almost made me want to scowl," because it proves he has a sense of humor and again, can admit to things he doesn't like or agree with.
And if we're going to bring back issues from the past, what about the whole AXIS OF EVIL? I mean, how can someone say that and not burst out laughing? To me, it sounds like something some twisted villain from an anime would say. I mean... I can't take him seriously when he says that. Plus, he got to the point where he was a little rude at times... and his credibility level just dropped like a rock when he said "rumor on the Internets." Rumor? No. Internets? NOOOO! I already went over that before.
He had lousy pauses-- you really need to formulate a strategy when to plan them. Supposedly Kerry practiced for 10 or more hours for the debates (PER debate), with a whole team of people to assist him, including a friend to act as "Bush." Did Bush do the same thing, or is he so self-assured that he doesn't need practice, just a "review?" I can't stand overconfident blow hards (I happen to think Seto Kaiba has weaknesses, so he makes up for it). In his words, he said "there will be no draft!" It sounds like a promise to me, so if he gets re-elected, will he hold to it?
Plus, he referred to several pre-9/11 bills that Kerry voted on about cost cuts or tax increases for homeland security. Why mention those? It's useless. Of course people wanted to cut costs before 9/11-- we had no idea we were in that much danger! We had no idea what to expect, what would happen, or how our lives would change! This America is a different America! Beyond that, he seemed to imply that Canadian drugs were dangerous. Okay, I get that America has to, like any other country, protect its consumers from dangerous drugs, but honestly! It's not like Canada is a third world country, and what about the NAFTA? What do Canadians think about this?
More on Bush: he stuttered, but he used good vocabulary, better than the previous debate. However, his dialect is a bit of a turnoff: "Missurah?" I know he can't help it, but... ^^;; I also saw Bush WINK. o_O It wasn't even at the end of the speech, but he WINKED. W.T.F.!? He also referred to Kerry as Kennedy. I know he's constantly trying to draw the comparison between the two, with Kerry supposedly the more liberal (!) but still- a flub like that? In reference to past questioners, he didn't remember names as Kerry did-- he called one woman "this lady," and in response to Kerry's rebuttals, had a tendency to stand up too soon-- and come off as TOO overeager. Bush also likes to emphasize that the stock market/economy was in recession when he got into office. Actually, NO, it was on the VERGE of recession. True, three months isn't a bucketload of time to revitalize the economy, but he could have tried to save our economy instead of plunging it into debt.
Speaking of adding and subtracting, how does Bush, a so-called environmentalist (my ASS!) propose to "increase the wetlands by 3 million?" And by 3 million WHAT? Acres? Miles? Inches!? He didn't even address the Kyoto Treaty until later, then stating that it would cause Americans to lose jobs. -_- Well maybe if you brought back the manufacturing sector to the U.S. and stopped outsourcing, that wouldn't be a problem! I'd rather feel safer and happier knowing that our great nation, a superpower, world leader, and influencer of nations, isn't responsible for turning the ice caps into ice CUBES, that melt faster than we can do anything about it! Oh yeah, and Bush? You DO own a timber company.
Kerry: He kept a neutral face throughout most of the second debate, and he's apparently very good at taking notes. He's schooled himself in this respect, and it's a very good thing. He met eye-to-eye with Bush, but every now and then, he looked, well... bored. He also constantly refers to Bush as "this president," which gets irksome at times. He also made very wide hand motions, in arcs to the left and right, and up and down as well. It was very strange. He also spewed the same facts over and over again, and not all of them are 100% correct. He also dropped names far too many times, and mentioned the "backdoor" draft... He doesn't want to overextend us the way Bush has, but he doesn't want to instigate a draft. He wants to create two more units, but... how? So many soldiers have done more than their fair share of overtime. So what then? You can't keep calling them back and forth, or extending their tours of duty. It's not right. Maybe the government should try and make the volunteer military effort more appealing, instead of so frightening and restrictive.
Then there was the infamous "if vs. when" flub. Kerry made a mistake, corrected himself, and then confused the moderator and even the President! It's not a matter of "if" but a matter of "when." It's not that hard a concept to grasp. Kerry also refers back to former querents, often by name, which is a good thing, but the one thing I noticed throughout ALL his debates is that he can get off topic easily. I noticed a lot of the questioners actually appeared kind of young, but apparently not enough to significantly get to the candidates as "Oh my gosh! There are 18-24 year olds out there who are actually VOTING and CARE!"
Why did Kerry differentiate between nations and countries? Okay, I'm no Oxford graduate, but is there a significant DIFFERENCE between the two? It sounded weird. And in reference to how he'd hunt down and KILL the terrorists-- well, that sounded a bit extreme. KILL KILL KILL! America is a bloodthirsty nation. At least, if I were from another country and heard that, that's what I'd think. What about "bring to justice?" At times, Kerry seemed to smirk, which again, conveys arrogance, and is a major turn-off IMHO. He also self-plugged the website, but then, at least he has knowledge of the Internet and what's on the page-- while Bush doesn't know about what's a rumor and what's not, and how the Internet is both singular AND plural. Like FISH.
Kerry was gutsy with that camera promise of his, but if he gets elected, he, like Bush with his no draft promise, will have to deliver. It's good that he detailed more plans than before, but what was with that Red Sox quip? He also made a simply flub-- Bush didn't short No Child Left Behind (I believe that was the act in question) by $84, it was $84 BILLION. There's a huge difference there. He had a short burst of stuttering when he started talking about embryos and stem cell research, which, especially with Reeve dead, I think we have to push forward. I was glad, on the other hand, to see Kerry with a sense of humor. I also appreciate how Kerry openly respects, even if he doesn't agree with, other people's opinions, as per that woman who didn't want federal funding for abortion. There needs to be a separation of church and state in every possible way. The first draft of the Constitution wasn't perfect; that's why there are amendments. I'm not saying everything the Constitution says is perfect and can be interpreted only in one way, but above all else: separation of church and state. Schools do NOT need to regulate the Pledge of Allegiance, nor the use of the words "under God" in the pledge. I have an extreme dislike for people who live in this nation, complain about it, rally against it, and claim to VOTE and then not do so-- those same people that do a great disrespect for all that they are given and take for granted in this country. I don't like people who openly sit down during a pledge. At least stand up-- you don't have to put your hand on your heart, or take your hat off, or say anything. But to sit down? It's just so rude.
Last, for the second debate, I blame the camera guys for showing the teleprompter. That sort of killed the whole "impromptu" aspect of it. Okay, so it wasn't impromptu at all, but... reporters should appear natural at all times, even if things are scripted. Showing the teleprompter killed that.
I can't get over the fact that they renamed Amelda "Alister." Yes, it's spelled exactly like that. W.T.F!?
Oh geez, I'm exhausted.
O_O The other day he said "two people in love," and when we left the lunch area, he said, "Come, my love!" in that fake uber-romanticized way (admittedly, sap that I am, I fell for it). But I'm still kind of freaked out. I have two options: 1) take him/it seriously... or 2) brush it off as nothing, silly. Wait for a "real" confession, if any. Regardless, I'm not going to be the first one to say anything; I mean, I just... I don't know how, I can't, I'm terrified. Again, just over a month! Look at my past entries and see how amazing this month has been, and all the worries and hopes I've had about this relationship. It's scary.
Well, on a more... er, mundane topic? The debates. As in, the last two. I actually took notes.
Starting with the third and final one, did anyone notice how Bush's supposed "power tie" was gone? I don't know whether it was on purpose or not, but I swear to God, Bush and Kerry were wearing the SAME. EXACT. SUIT. Right down to the tie. They both had dark navy suits, American flag lapel pins, and red ties with gold star-shapes on them. What happened to the blue power tie? Did they decide to dress the candidates alike so they wouldn't be so "distracting?"
I very much enjoyed this third debate, as the questions were all over the map, and clearly put the candidates in some tight spots. Not to mention that there seemed to be more time for responses and rebuttals, and after the previous two debates, they seemed to have more experience in handling the tough questions, the style of responses from opponents, and so on.
I definitely enjoyed the questions in regards to the candidates' faith in regards to their lifestyle, choices, and politics, as well as the question regarding the strong women in the candidates' lives-- after all, George W. Bush is saying the "W stands for Women." I have a great deal of respect for Bush after this last debate, but, as with the majority of the nation, my mind was up and made long before the debates. I honestly don't believe that there really are any "undecided voters;" I'm sure those of you that watched the second debate remember the woman who posed the question to Kerry about not wanting federal dollars to go toward abortion.
I have this to say about that: Kerry made the perfect response. The option must be available for women, even if YOU personally (or your daughter, sister, best friend, etc.) never make use of it. And technically speaking, YOUR federal tax dollars aren't going specifically to Abortion Clinic X, but to Hospital Here. People that need an abortion (and yes, need) should have the option available, whether they pay for everything out of pocket or through health coverage.
I speak from experience, okay? I came dangerously close to needing an abortion. Not because my life would have been in danger (actually, I don't even know that for a fact. I'm seriously underweight and unable to donate blood, so who's to say I'd survive a pregnancy?), but because I would NOT have been able to support the life of a child. I need to know that the option is available to me. I'm not saying it's going to be some sort of sick comfort and a deterrent to having safe sex, but at least I'm aware of my options. A so-called "abstinence education" doesn't work, and the majority of America knows it. But educate people about other options, and they just may use them. Tell them what they can't have, and they'll go underground to get it-- possibly harming themselves AND others.
So that was probably more information than you needed to know. Back to the debates. So for the second debate, I watched it on CSPAN On Demand, and I actually took notes. What can I say, I was bored, it was late... here we go:
Bush: he twitched his foot-- a lot. I saw it from the get-go, and a few times after that, when they actually did full body shots. It shows nervousness and the inability to remain still. Believe me, I know it's hard (people in my speech class today had a hard time with that), but politicians have to learn these things. There's a duality to everything-- you want to appear strong, resolute, and firm, but you also want to appear human, and able to relate to your voters.
At times he appeared a bit overeager and zealous, but some might see that as passion and conviction. He threw Kerry's words from the first debate back at him, but that wasn't always effective-- saying the "he can run, but he can't hide" only works in so many different contexts. And that's a limited "many." I appreciate that he acknowledged the lack of WMDs in Iraq, which is a big step for him-- after all, later on in the same debate, he was unable to cite three mistakes he made. Politicians aren't seen as perfect, and while Bush is trying to be known for his steadfast resolution, you do have to be human at times. Didn't Bush himself say even the President is human? Why can't he admit mistakes then? He doesn't have to say Iraq was a huge mistake, just say that we (and yes, WE as a nation, WE as a body of people, voters, legislature, etc.) went about it the wrong way.
I'm also glad that he recognizes that one person (either Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein) isn't responsible for all the terrorism in all the world. One person doesn't force other people to become suicide bombers, or believe wholeheartedly in Ji'had. He also recognizes that not every other country in the world agrees with "us" and our methods, but has he really stopped to wonder and care as to why? Yes, he's firm on the idea that we have alliances, but he's also firm that this is "America's War" even though terrorism is a global threat. We went into this because of VENGEANCE.
To me, it seems as thought he's making decisions and opinions for the rest of the world. Sorry, he can't speak for those people, those countries, those individuals. On a more presentation-related note, he had very big gestures, and a wide, varying pitch. He also blinked a great deal, which, as I said before, does a lot to detract from his credibility. Someone who blinks a lot is considered to be unsure, or worse, a liar. I do give him credit for the line "that almost made me want to scowl," because it proves he has a sense of humor and again, can admit to things he doesn't like or agree with.
And if we're going to bring back issues from the past, what about the whole AXIS OF EVIL? I mean, how can someone say that and not burst out laughing? To me, it sounds like something some twisted villain from an anime would say. I mean... I can't take him seriously when he says that. Plus, he got to the point where he was a little rude at times... and his credibility level just dropped like a rock when he said "rumor on the Internets." Rumor? No. Internets? NOOOO! I already went over that before.
He had lousy pauses-- you really need to formulate a strategy when to plan them. Supposedly Kerry practiced for 10 or more hours for the debates (PER debate), with a whole team of people to assist him, including a friend to act as "Bush." Did Bush do the same thing, or is he so self-assured that he doesn't need practice, just a "review?" I can't stand overconfident blow hards (I happen to think Seto Kaiba has weaknesses, so he makes up for it). In his words, he said "there will be no draft!" It sounds like a promise to me, so if he gets re-elected, will he hold to it?
Plus, he referred to several pre-9/11 bills that Kerry voted on about cost cuts or tax increases for homeland security. Why mention those? It's useless. Of course people wanted to cut costs before 9/11-- we had no idea we were in that much danger! We had no idea what to expect, what would happen, or how our lives would change! This America is a different America! Beyond that, he seemed to imply that Canadian drugs were dangerous. Okay, I get that America has to, like any other country, protect its consumers from dangerous drugs, but honestly! It's not like Canada is a third world country, and what about the NAFTA? What do Canadians think about this?
More on Bush: he stuttered, but he used good vocabulary, better than the previous debate. However, his dialect is a bit of a turnoff: "Missurah?" I know he can't help it, but... ^^;; I also saw Bush WINK. o_O It wasn't even at the end of the speech, but he WINKED. W.T.F.!? He also referred to Kerry as Kennedy. I know he's constantly trying to draw the comparison between the two, with Kerry supposedly the more liberal (!) but still- a flub like that? In reference to past questioners, he didn't remember names as Kerry did-- he called one woman "this lady," and in response to Kerry's rebuttals, had a tendency to stand up too soon-- and come off as TOO overeager. Bush also likes to emphasize that the stock market/economy was in recession when he got into office. Actually, NO, it was on the VERGE of recession. True, three months isn't a bucketload of time to revitalize the economy, but he could have tried to save our economy instead of plunging it into debt.
Speaking of adding and subtracting, how does Bush, a so-called environmentalist (my ASS!) propose to "increase the wetlands by 3 million?" And by 3 million WHAT? Acres? Miles? Inches!? He didn't even address the Kyoto Treaty until later, then stating that it would cause Americans to lose jobs. -_- Well maybe if you brought back the manufacturing sector to the U.S. and stopped outsourcing, that wouldn't be a problem! I'd rather feel safer and happier knowing that our great nation, a superpower, world leader, and influencer of nations, isn't responsible for turning the ice caps into ice CUBES, that melt faster than we can do anything about it! Oh yeah, and Bush? You DO own a timber company.
Kerry: He kept a neutral face throughout most of the second debate, and he's apparently very good at taking notes. He's schooled himself in this respect, and it's a very good thing. He met eye-to-eye with Bush, but every now and then, he looked, well... bored. He also constantly refers to Bush as "this president," which gets irksome at times. He also made very wide hand motions, in arcs to the left and right, and up and down as well. It was very strange. He also spewed the same facts over and over again, and not all of them are 100% correct. He also dropped names far too many times, and mentioned the "backdoor" draft... He doesn't want to overextend us the way Bush has, but he doesn't want to instigate a draft. He wants to create two more units, but... how? So many soldiers have done more than their fair share of overtime. So what then? You can't keep calling them back and forth, or extending their tours of duty. It's not right. Maybe the government should try and make the volunteer military effort more appealing, instead of so frightening and restrictive.
Then there was the infamous "if vs. when" flub. Kerry made a mistake, corrected himself, and then confused the moderator and even the President! It's not a matter of "if" but a matter of "when." It's not that hard a concept to grasp. Kerry also refers back to former querents, often by name, which is a good thing, but the one thing I noticed throughout ALL his debates is that he can get off topic easily. I noticed a lot of the questioners actually appeared kind of young, but apparently not enough to significantly get to the candidates as "Oh my gosh! There are 18-24 year olds out there who are actually VOTING and CARE!"
Why did Kerry differentiate between nations and countries? Okay, I'm no Oxford graduate, but is there a significant DIFFERENCE between the two? It sounded weird. And in reference to how he'd hunt down and KILL the terrorists-- well, that sounded a bit extreme. KILL KILL KILL! America is a bloodthirsty nation. At least, if I were from another country and heard that, that's what I'd think. What about "bring to justice?" At times, Kerry seemed to smirk, which again, conveys arrogance, and is a major turn-off IMHO. He also self-plugged the website, but then, at least he has knowledge of the Internet and what's on the page-- while Bush doesn't know about what's a rumor and what's not, and how the Internet is both singular AND plural. Like FISH.
Kerry was gutsy with that camera promise of his, but if he gets elected, he, like Bush with his no draft promise, will have to deliver. It's good that he detailed more plans than before, but what was with that Red Sox quip? He also made a simply flub-- Bush didn't short No Child Left Behind (I believe that was the act in question) by $84, it was $84 BILLION. There's a huge difference there. He had a short burst of stuttering when he started talking about embryos and stem cell research, which, especially with Reeve dead, I think we have to push forward. I was glad, on the other hand, to see Kerry with a sense of humor. I also appreciate how Kerry openly respects, even if he doesn't agree with, other people's opinions, as per that woman who didn't want federal funding for abortion. There needs to be a separation of church and state in every possible way. The first draft of the Constitution wasn't perfect; that's why there are amendments. I'm not saying everything the Constitution says is perfect and can be interpreted only in one way, but above all else: separation of church and state. Schools do NOT need to regulate the Pledge of Allegiance, nor the use of the words "under God" in the pledge. I have an extreme dislike for people who live in this nation, complain about it, rally against it, and claim to VOTE and then not do so-- those same people that do a great disrespect for all that they are given and take for granted in this country. I don't like people who openly sit down during a pledge. At least stand up-- you don't have to put your hand on your heart, or take your hat off, or say anything. But to sit down? It's just so rude.
Last, for the second debate, I blame the camera guys for showing the teleprompter. That sort of killed the whole "impromptu" aspect of it. Okay, so it wasn't impromptu at all, but... reporters should appear natural at all times, even if things are scripted. Showing the teleprompter killed that.
I can't get over the fact that they renamed Amelda "Alister." Yes, it's spelled exactly like that. W.T.F!?
Oh geez, I'm exhausted.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-14 10:55 am (UTC)Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-14 05:58 pm (UTC)Not every woman is like your cousin, and not every man is like the father.
Oh, and by the way-- "If a woman was STUPID enough to get pregnant without the financial or mental means of supporting his or her baby then adoption would be a perfect option..."
FYI-- women are "her" and "she," NEVER "him" or "his." If a woman was "stupid" enough to do anything, it's HER fault. But smarts aren't the only thing that come into play when people have sex, and the rest of the world understands that.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-14 07:40 pm (UTC)Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-15 03:15 am (UTC)*grin*
Date: 2004-10-15 06:42 pm (UTC)Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-15 06:55 pm (UTC)By the way, I'd been on the Pill before, and yes, I took a chance having sex when NOT on the Pill. But then I GOT the Pill, I'm on it NOW, and there aren't any consequences to be spoken of.
End of story.
Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-16 02:36 am (UTC)Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-16 03:14 am (UTC)se·man·tics ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-mntks)
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)
Linguistics. The study or science of meaning in language.
Linguistics. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent. Also called semasiology.
The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.
Next time, know what a word means before you throw it out there. We're obviously not agreed on anything, but considering this is my journal and my space, I'd appreciate if you'd either come forward and state things clearly and with enough guts to say who you are, why you're here, and where you hail from, or get the heck out.
Now it's your turn; I have a word for you to look up: shmuck.
Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-16 08:27 am (UTC)schmuck also shmuck
( P ) Pronunciation Key (shmk)
n. Slang
A clumsy or stupid person; an oaf.
I can assure you that I am neither clumsy, nor stupid, and most certainly not an oaf.
It has been enlightening, I'll admit that much. And now for the information you so kindly requested:
Name: Shiro Nakamura
Residence: Jamaica, Queens (New York)
Current occupation: College student majoring in Pharmacy
Political status: Republican
Until another controversial topic of debate, adieu.
Re: Agree with most, but not the abortion
Date: 2004-10-17 08:47 pm (UTC)All the same, thanks for an interesting discussion.