Why Bush froze in the classroom

[hack89]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3934788900154749704

[greyl]

1. Oh shit that's brilliant! :)

You should post it in GD. :thumbsup:

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. I knew there had to be some

reasonable explanation why he had glue on his butt.

LOL. That was fun.

[salvorhardin]

3. Classic!

Thanks for that bit of levity. Just beautiful!

[Jazz2006]

4. Lol ~ that's good. And yes, you should post it in GD.

:toast:

[Grateful for Hope]

5. This is old

Don't you have something more recent to share with us?

[Bolo Boffin]

6. This is negative thinking.

Nice kitties.

[Grateful for Hope]

7. Not negative thinking

just a neutral observation.

Thank you for complimenting my sweet kitties. They ARE nice!

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bolo Boffin]

9. Six, seven, eight...

:nopity:

Latkoff weeps over you, Buddy.

[salvorhardin]

10. Doesn't it makes you wonder

About the conceptual metaphors employed by someone like that?

[BuddyYoung]

11. Laser sharp "conceptual" metaphors stung both OCT'ers simultaneously

I got a TWOfer!

No wonder why some OCT'ers act like they have a bad case of the Heebie Jeebies.
Now, back to your regular on-going effort to distract by parsing minutia.
As you were, gentleman(?).

[Bolo Boffin]

12. Buddy, do you ever post anything but "pull it" and reframing attempts?

On edit:

Sorry, I forgot to include your "stroke posts" for people who post some new CT here at DU.

So your entire output is limited to:

1. "Pull It!"

2. Reframing attempts

3. Encouraging words to alternate theorists

Am I missing anything?

[BuddyYoung]

13. See Post #11 for more on your special interest.

Now, kindly answer the questions PG has repeatedly asked you.

[Jazz2006]

22. Well, yes you did miss something....

You nailed numbers 1 through 3 perfectly, those being pull it, make stuff up, and rah rah. But you missed #4 in her/his repertoire: the paid shill/freeper/troll/rightwinger/bush apologist/netvocates schtick which s/he utilizes more often than the first three combined.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salvorhardin]

15. Your post makes no sense

Which is sad, because it would actually be productive to explore the conceptual metaphors employed by those who believe in a variety of alternative explanations for 9-11 and those who believe in the basic official narrative. As has been repeatedly pointed out, even us who feel the official narrative is more or less true have questions and do not necessarily believe that the Bush administration was entirely forthright.

Conceptual metaphor: In cognitive linguistics, metaphor is defined as understanding one conceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain; for example, using one person's life experience to understand a different person's experience. A conceptual domain can be any coherent organization of experience.

This idea, and a detailed examination of the underlying processes, was first extensively explored by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in Metaphors We Live By. Other cognitive scientists study subjects similar to conceptual metaphor under the labels "analogy" and "conceptual blending."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_metaphors

The framework most promoted by Lakoff to explain differences between conservative and liberal worldviews is the 'strict father' vs. 'nuturant parent' model. While I think it'd be overly simplistic to reduce all of politics to this dichotomy it provides a useful tool for analyzing right wing and left wing rhetoric. I think it'd be similarly interesting to explore conspiracist and skeptical metaphors.

So given that by way of introduction, what do you think are conceptual metaphors employed in either camp? No snark please, let's try to understand why proponents of each school of thought believe the way they do.

[BuddyYoung]

16. Your post is more of the stream of disinformation flowing since 911.

What exactly is "the basic official narrative"? Please tell us what that narrative is, and give your reasons and evidence for supporting it...and it's okay if your belief is based on being a "team player" - just say so.

[salvorhardin]

18. I made no value judgement either way

Well, this is sad but predictable. Since you obviously have nothing to say I have no further interest in your words.

[hack89]

14. Excuse me sunshine, but it is not my job ...

to entertain you.

Perhaps you should lighten up and take the hair shirt off every now and them.

[BuddyYoung]

17. You may be a "hack", but you're also a hoot!

nt

[Jazz2006]

19. So is almost everything posted by CTers here....

in case you hadn't noticed.

Oddly, CTers never seem to mention that when there are 100 threads on the same old topics repeating the same old stuff.

Go figure.

[BuddyYoung]

20. Rightwingnut CTers ALL use the same tactic: avoid facts at all cost.

nt

[Jazz2006]

21. You've seen the light!

"Rightwingnut CTers ALL use the same tactic"

Let me be the first to welcome you out of that dark place full of CTers you've been living in recently.

Welcome to the "Leftwing non-CTer" crowd.

Feel the sunlight!

Bask in its warmth!

Now, doesn't that feel better?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.