Ummm,,,,Ahhhh...Um...Ahhhhh....Ummmm

[JohnR]

Spence, what I mean is that (almost) regardless of the subject, if it is critical of the left you start off with a tiny slice of agreement and then drive the topic of discussion to other points, real or imagined.

No harm no foul. Like I said, I didn't even watch the event, so I cannot (and did not) form an opinion. But I did know how the flow and rhythm (a/k/a thr Spencism) would be for your response .

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Spence, what I mean is that (almost) regardless of the subject, if it is critical of the left you start off with a tiny slice of agreement and then drive the topic of discussion to other points, real or imagined.

No harm no foul. Like I said, I didn't even watch the event, so I cannot (and did not) form an opinion. But I did know how the flow and rhythm (a/k/a thr Spencism) would be for your response .

Well, I work as a consultant focused on executive value messaging. I'd just take this as good discipline in forming arguments, which need to be properly structured to be consistently effective.

If this is somehow unique enough that it deserves a personalized ummm proper'ism, then I must be even more special than I had previously thought

-spence

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Well, I work as a consultant focused on executive value messaging. I'd just take this as good discipline in forming arguments, which need to be properly structured to be consistently effective.

If this is somehow unique enough that it deserves a personalized ummm proper'ism, then I must be even more special than I had previously thought

-spence

Yuze makin' mah point.

You probably can fix all the world's problems in PowerPoint too

Sorry Spence, just making a note that your cadance, err, executive value messaging in debate, is pretty consistent. I suppose that is pretty good in many arenas

[Cool Beans]

Originally Posted by spence

Well, I work as a consultant focused on executive value messaging. I'd just take this as good discipline in forming arguments, which need to be properly structured to be consistently effective.

If this is somehow unique enough that it deserves a personalized ummm proper'ism, then I must be even more special than I had previously thought

-spence

This explains a lot!
You are actually trained in "double-speak".
Hell, you actually make your living at it....
You should write speeches for Obama, you compose very eloquent posts that almost make a point/decision, but there always seems to be that "back door" to be able to "deny it all".....

Don't take this wrong Spence, you are one of the more competent liberals I've ran into to. Always a fun debate......

[eastendlu]

Back to the topic at hand i don't understand why all the criticism of how Obama thought and paused about answering the questions asked i mean ummm ammmm as in if the guy says something in the least bit one way or the other someone will be making a mountain out of a mole hill anyways so i can understand his pausing to answer.Considering the pressure he or for that matter anyone else that has been POTUS i think he handled himself well at least when you look into his eyes you know their is intelligence in there not like the last guy.