Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bushism"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Distortion: ...did you just imply that I'm too conservative? That's a first...) |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:...*blinks* I'm sorry, should I put back the statement that Bush stated that liberals think that every misused word is a Bushism? Or should I put back the stuff about the truth most likely being that liberals are meanie poopie heads who are biased against Bush? I'm willing to discuss, but as a disclaimer, I think Bush makes more slip-ups than most others and that it's not just liberal bias. I'm merely trying to bring the article away from pure opinion without being reverted for being too liberal. | :...*blinks* I'm sorry, should I put back the statement that Bush stated that liberals think that every misused word is a Bushism? Or should I put back the stuff about the truth most likely being that liberals are meanie poopie heads who are biased against Bush? I'm willing to discuss, but as a disclaimer, I think Bush makes more slip-ups than most others and that it's not just liberal bias. I'm merely trying to bring the article away from pure opinion without being reverted for being too liberal. | ||
:If you tell me which section is too pro-Bush, I'll gladly help to improve it! --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 16:55, 9 October 2007 (EDT) | :If you tell me which section is too pro-Bush, I'll gladly help to improve it! --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 16:55, 9 October 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::I give up. I guess I'll be banned before I'll say more about this. --[[User:Aralin|Aralin]] 08:31, 10 October 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 12:31, October 10, 2007
Hello, Ed Poor! I wanted to ask you about the examples you deleted. I understand the last one is unsourced (but easily verifiable). However, the third one ("If you want to help, give cash money to the Red Cross and the Salvation Army") had an undisputable source. Why did you delete it, exactly? -Aralin 15:06, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
- Perhaps you could explain how it's a Bushism, for those of us who are a little slow? HelpJazz 16:03, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
- Sure, and sorry. It is redundant, that is, more than is needed, desired or required. Repetitive, verbose, superfluous, tautologous. -Aralin 16:28, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
- I know what redundant means, thanks.... Are you trying to say that it's a Bushism because he said "cash money"? That seems to be the only redundant part, and it's not exactly a made up phrase. Or am I missing something?
Distortion
Jenkins, you have completely distorted this article. By general consensus, a Bushism is a word or a phrase misspelled or incoherently said by George W. Bush. I know he has many virtues, but he's not the Great Communicator, like President Reagan was, or at least plain spoken. -Aralin 16:46, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
- ...*blinks* I'm sorry, should I put back the statement that Bush stated that liberals think that every misused word is a Bushism? Or should I put back the stuff about the truth most likely being that liberals are meanie poopie heads who are biased against Bush? I'm willing to discuss, but as a disclaimer, I think Bush makes more slip-ups than most others and that it's not just liberal bias. I'm merely trying to bring the article away from pure opinion without being reverted for being too liberal.
- If you tell me which section is too pro-Bush, I'll gladly help to improve it! --Jenkins 16:55, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
- I give up. I guess I'll be banned before I'll say more about this. --Aralin 08:31, 10 October 2007 (EDT)