Debate : 11106


Off-Topic / Debate / 11106

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) Katie, at the risk of enflaming your obvious passion on this issue, have you been reading Bruce's clarifications (and/or mine) of Bruce's original point? He's several times rephrased the original post, but it seems that you're irritated at a (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Duane Hess

(...) You can clarify all you want, I've read them all. I think Katie raised a valid point though. (...) It may not be that it *isn't* convincing, or viable. It may just be that women and minorities are too busy fighting other fires to participate. (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) By her own assertion, though, she "was trying to respond to the "a failing on minorities and women to understand the Libertarian message."" She's responding to a point that wasn't being asserted; in effect, she's having an argument with an (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Katie Dokken

(...) Not even going there. (...) party. Who is doing that? I'm certainly not doing that. If my posts sound that way, then I'm perhaps choosing the wrong words. You can take this whole "LP" thread and insert any other party you'd like there and the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) Ah, thank you. Your phrasing has made me realize what I've been missing in your previous posts, and some clarification from my "side" is indeed in order. Let me paraphrase and see if I'm understanding you: You're objecting to the assertion (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Katie Dokken

(...) Yes, this is exactly what I was trying to say. (...) While I don't have numbers in front of me because politics is not my area of expertise, I am under the understanding that voter totals seem to be going down more every year, across the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) Now *that's* a worthy debate. It was actually my impression that the recent presidential election had higher than usual turnout, especially among African-Americans, but I don't have the numbers at hand to back that up, either (I'll check on (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Duane Hess

(...) <snip> (...) That's not my intent at all. I'm sure we all could find other things to do with our time if much of our resposibility were removed. (...) Comprehension has nothing to do with it in my mind. I've seen the question arise about how (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) What I don't get is how people can't seem to comprehend that I didn't say that. You went right by my explanation of the whole quote and used the out-of-context quote again. That a mistake was made is okay, but the same one over and over? I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) I think we crossed some signals here, since you appear to be responding to part of my post as if it were part of Duane's. I was questioning why your post was singled out in the manner of a LP recruitment poster, but I absolutely wasn't saying (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Dang, am I getting your post mixed up with Duane's? Did I count the arrows incorrectly? Sorry if I did. I'm running under the Teddy Roosevelt Bullmoose banner! You heard it here first! Contributions accepted. Cash only, don't expect receipts. (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Duane Hess

(...) I've been re-reading your original and unsnipped post. It's taken me a while, but I may have just sorted out what you were trying to say. I still find it to be an inflammatory question, although I now think it to be mostly rhetorical. Am I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) It wasn't meant as rhetorical - it was a searching question. It most certainly wasn't a statement of the way things are. Examples tossed out for discussion - there could be other possiblities that I hadn't thought of, nor was I trying to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) That's a recognized English word now. I wish I were still in college so I could use it in a paper! Dave! (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Doh! Was Re: boulders on shoulders —Maggie Cambron

(...) The semester after I got my M.A. in English our comp exams were made available for everyone to view (no names!). As I looked through them I noticed one professor wrote "Duh!"(1) in the margin to comment on what someone had written (no, it (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) I'm not sure "Duh" is a variant form of "Doh" (or verse-vica, vice-versey, victor-victoria). I've heard Homer say "Duuuuu-uh!" before, and the context is decidedly different. Doh attends misfortune (usually as an exaggeration, as when someone (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Dave Schuler

(...) I'm scrambling to find an online reference, but I read in the paper yesterday that "D'oh" in that form is indeed a Homerism (or, more correctly, a Castellaneta-ism), but it's a modification of "Do-o-o-o" used Laurel and Hardy films, where it (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Maggie Cambron

(...) Well, I would believe this, since I rarely watch the Simpsons, and, come to think of it, the people I hear utter the word "d'oh" are largely people who do watch the show. I found one reference which discusses both words, but I'm not sure what (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) It also shows up as a variant of the syllable "Do" as in "Do, a deer..." (...) "Inciteful?" Get thee to a .punnery! :) (...) You should grade college level history papers! Trust me, I'll be gracing .o-t.fun with a hefty heaping of (anonymous) (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Steve Bliss

(...) Or, in Michigan, on the evening highway: "Doh! A deer!!!" *crash* Steve (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Found this quote from the Iliad: Achilles spear flashed and caught Hector in the neck, Hector uttered a final "Doh!" from the gates of Hades, and fell, thunderously. So, yes, Doh! is a complete Homerism. Bruce Lost somewhere on the wine-dark (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Dave Schuler

(...) Well, any port in a storm. Dave! (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Matt Brooks

(...) I don't mean to wine about it, but you must have been hard pressed to squeeze that one out. (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) It's not like he's performing at the Cabernet. Getting on the pulp-it and labelling such vine humour so is just sour grapes. For what it's worth, I thought it a corker. Worts and all. best LFB (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Matthew Gerber

(...) Sorry, Matt. I'm afraid he has you over the barrel on this one. Tanks a tun, by the way, for your continued cooper-ation. It is appreciated, that's sure fer - ment that in the nicest possible way. All of this punning is driving me to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Doh! —Tim Courtney

"Matthew Gerber" <matthew@digitaliris.com> wrote in message news:GFB06o.4pn@lugnet.com... (...) What the ale are you talking about? -Tim (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Doh! —Matthew Gerber

(...) Now look here, Bud, wiser heads will prevail here, not those with your flat, tastless puns. 8?) Matt (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Doh! —Tim Courtney

"Matthew Gerber" <matthew@digitaliris.com> wrote in message news:GFB37y.CL5@lugnet.com... (...) I won't hops into that froth of your puns now. I had a great aunt Ethyl who could tell them better than you can. I woudn't counter me if I were brew, (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Doh! —Julie Krenz

The other morning, Dan Castellaneta, the guy who voices Homer, was a guest on a radio show I was listening to.(1) He explained the orgins of D'oh! Here's what my sleepy brain remembers: The script called for Homer to make a frustrated grunt. Dan (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Dave Low

(...) I think the "Mary Poppins" episode is called "Supercalifragilisti...Frustrated Grunt]cious" (or similar). I'm sure a local comic shop guy can verify... --DaveL (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Shiri Dori

(...) Actually, the way I understood it, "duh" originates from the Russian "yes" (dah)... as in, duh = "yeah yeah yeah..." I'm not sure if that is true, but in Israel we tend to have jokes about that, us having tons of Russian immigrants and so (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Maggie Cambron

(...) That sounds as good as any other explanation. But how about this: is the word used in the following post (URL) variant of "duh" or "doh" or just a typo? Or should I be asking the actual author of the post (who would most likely never admit to (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Julie Krenz

(...) lol...and I *still* don't see the humor in that feedback!!! Julie (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Ack, I didn't intend to induce such feelings. :) Anyways, WOW, Larry used "doi!" I haven't seen or said that in at least 15 years. It's right up there with "durrrrrrr"! It is in my experience a derivative of "duh," but only in the sense of (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Dave Low

(...) "Durrr!!" is a playground favorite in Australia, usually accompanied by the tongue in the lower lip, and "Durr-brain" is a fairly common insult. Like "you spastic!!" it's a disability based putdown. --DaveL (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Maggie Cambron

(...) Hey, now that you mention it, wasn't there a character in Archie comics called "Big Moose", a big dumb blond guy (please, no offense anyone!) who was always scratching his head and saying, "Duh..."? (...) They say "durrr!" a lot in "Bridget (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) I think it was just "Moose", but he did say, "Duh." He'd beat the stuffings out of Archie every time Archie was unfortunate enough to stumble across Moose's girlfriend. I did know a guy named Moose...I remember him picking up a piano and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Kyle D. Jackson

(...) Ah yes, "Midge", quite the babe. Not sure why I remember that. Anyhoo..., I believe they used to print it as "D'uh" or "D-uh" in the Archie books. It's like it is two syllables crammed together, or at least there's an inflection when (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Tim Courtney

"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:GFBFF7.L4n@lugnet.com... (...) Handflapping...like, taking your hand in the horizontal position across your chest, positioning all your finger down, and hitting your chest repeatedly with (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Maggie Cambron

(...) Yes, it helps a lot! I'm tempted to say, "Oh, duh, it's so obvious now," but I suppose that wouldn't be PC! (...) Well, you could take comfort in the fact that YOU know when to post something publicly and when to take it to private email! ;-) (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Doh! —Tim Courtney

"Maggie Cambron" <mcambron@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:GFCK2C.Mu2@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) Doh! (...) Well duhhh ;-) :-D -Tim (23 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Katie Dokken

(...) At the risk of starting another thread, I have been reading the posts, but this whole new thing of reading a post, responding, then going and downloading my email, pulling up the emailed link for the posting, clicking on the button to post the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) I meant it as something of a joke, but I see I was correct: that ain't a chip on your shoulder, it's a boulder! If you are a Libertarian who can't be bothered, that's a personal problem of yours. If you are saying there are hordes of (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Katie Dokken

(...) Applause.wav Clap, clap, clap, excellent performance. In one posting, you've relegated me as nothing more than a person with personal problems. Excellent comeback! I can see there is no point in debating anything with you. You obviously know (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) It's easier to mock than say something substantive, I suppose. Let me note I never said I had superior knowledge of what it's like to be a woman. Anyway, here's some more rope - you're just proving the title of this string. Bruce (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Dave Schuler

(...) Fair enough. I should assert outright that a previous post of mine will probably have hit before this one makes it to the board, so I'm sorry if I overlap. We've gotten to the crux of your dispute with his post; that he seems to be speaking on (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: boulders on shoulders —Duane Hess

(...) Now we're getting somewhere! You've spelled out the heart of the debate in my mind perfectly, although I was trying to remove the LP from my portion entirely since I can neither float nor sink the LP stance. -Duane (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

LP Demographics —Larry Pieniazek

I have to echo Duane on this... GREAT analysis, Dave! While I am not sure that there might have been a few categories missed I don't see that as at the crux... the point is that there are filters you can apply I think you could apply your filters (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: LP Demographics —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Yup. Most simply don't have a clue as to what the Libertarian Party is about. (...) Almost every Libertarian I met is fairly-well educated. (...) Essentially. One can view that as being bound by one's principles, or trapped by them, depending (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)