Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Confrontation?
So we have "what is being privately described as a major constitutional confrontation" between the D's and the R's.
No we don't.
We don't have a confrontation.
We don't even have two sides.
The D "side" wants to pull troops out of Iraq in the summer of 2008.
The R "side" wants to keep troops in Iraq until the summer of 2008.
Those are not two sides.
Those are merely two very slightly different phrasings of the same sentence with the same meaning. Any English teacher or editor would consider them to be equivalent phrasings, one a little more active in flavor, the other a little more passive.
If I said "I want you home from work at 5:30", and you said "No, I want to stay at work until 5:30", would we have an actual disagreement? Even the most dysfunctional family couldn't run this up into a satisfying fight. ¶ 3:28 PM
No we don't.
We don't have a confrontation.
We don't even have two sides.
The D "side" wants to pull troops out of Iraq in the summer of 2008.
The R "side" wants to keep troops in Iraq until the summer of 2008.
Those are not two sides.
Those are merely two very slightly different phrasings of the same sentence with the same meaning. Any English teacher or editor would consider them to be equivalent phrasings, one a little more active in flavor, the other a little more passive.
If I said "I want you home from work at 5:30", and you said "No, I want to stay at work until 5:30", would we have an actual disagreement? Even the most dysfunctional family couldn't run this up into a satisfying fight. ¶ 3:28 PM
