What newspapers? Pravda? I don't see any synonym of "dodge" appearing in the headlined stories appearing in the NYT or in either of the D.C. papers. Yes the words dodge or sidestep connote an inability to tackle a question head on. Keep in mind though that if the case been heard, I suspect the 9th would have been overturned. Tellingly, although Scalia recused himself (because of public comments regarding the lower courts decision), it was conservative Justices who lobbied for Newdow's legal parental standing. Newdow was history no matter if a decision was made or not.
Art: >Did the department head "duck" or "sidestep" >an interview with the candidate? By dictionary reference it is provable the ONE valid answer to the above it "yes". I would also agree that the most common usage of the above would imply something nefarious. JB
CNN online even used the term "sidestep". *One* of the dictionary terms for sidestep is "evade", though I don't believe that is how it was meant. JB
It means what you read into it for you, and who knows what you are reading into a headline. My read is the connotation of the word "duck" "dodge" "sidestep" as it is used typically, as it is being used in this context means abandon willingly a responsibility. Newspapers use language to inflame the readers, both pro and con. They use colorful language to sell papers, not dry and exact terms to avoid misunderstanding. Their use of the word "duck" "dodge" or "sidestep" implies that the court did not fulfill their responsibility. It implies that they were unwilling to examine the issues, when in fact they were perfectly willing to hear the issues if the case were not technically flawed. Their duty is to reject such cases of technical flaw, they did their duty properly. The court did no such thing as "dodge" "duck" nor "sidestep." The court acted properly to "dismiss" and "reject" the case. The member of the atheist cult you quoted is naturally pissed off, he would naturally choose the word "duck" or "dodge" feeling the court had a responsibility to hear the issues of the case, but he was wrong. Surprising actually, that the atheist cult member would not be more reasonable and rational in his choice of words, and understand that what the court did was reasonable, rational, and proper given the circumstances. I guess this is a very emotional issue for this cult group.
What newspapers??? Ummmm Pabst... I QUOTED them in a previous post on this thread, including the washington post and LA times and 2 others. I went to www.latimes.com, for example, and it was on their front page where I did a DIRECT copy and paste. Just checked...STILL the top headline. Now back to the question, which you still havent answered yet which gets to the core of this discussion: WHAT did the newspapers MEAN by dodge/sidestep??? Please answer the question this time. peace axeman
It means what you read into it for you, and who knows what you are reading into a headline. AAaaaaaaahhhh Optional finally ADMITS the word can have several meanings! ME reading into the headline! Thats laughable!! Its CLEARLY YOU that is reading into the headline and implying some kind of cheating...LOL My read is the connotation of the word "duck" "dodge" "sidestep" as it is used typically, as it is being used in this context means abandon willingly a responsibility. Newspapers use language to inflame the readers, both pro and con. They use colorful language to sell papers, not dry and exact terms to avoid misunderstanding. Their use of the word "duck" "dodge" or "sidestep" implies that the court did not fulfill their responsibility. It implies that they were unwilling to examine the issues, when in fact they were perfectly willing to hear the issues if the case were not technically flawed. Their duty is to reject such cases of technical flaw, they did their duty properly. LOL.... now he can read the minds of the newspaper writers too!! Wow ART... we already know you THINK you have magical powers like communicating with god directly, but now you can read these peoples minds too? Amazing...truly amazing! LMAOOOOO The court did no such thing as "dodge" "duck" nor "sidestep." The court acted properly to "dismiss" and "reject" the case. Blah blah blah....keep repeating that to yourself. Whos the PARROT now? LOL! I thought this was already settled. There are MULTIPLE meanings of the word DODGE/SIDESTEP and its perfectly reasonable to read it as "the court failed to address the core issue". End of debate. The member of the atheist cult you quoted is naturally pissed off, he would naturally choose the word "duck" or "dodge" feeling the court had a responsibility to hear the issues of the case, but he was wrong. More Ad Hominem attacks. Cult? Thats pretty funny coming from someone who claims to speak to god himself! LMAOOO Surprising actually, that the atheist cult member would not be more reasonable and rational in his choice of words, and understand that what the court did was reasonable, rational, and proper given the circumstances. Again...MULTIPLE sources CHOSE THE SAME WORDING. YOU are the one with the problem reading to deeply and ASSUMING you KNOW the true meaning of the words they chose. I guess this is a very emotional issue for this cult group. I think its clear who is emotional here.... you keep attacking people with labels as CULT MEMBERS.....calm down ok? I know it hurts when you're wrong...but really...its ok ART. Now run off and go talk to god some more while you read peoples minds...LMAOOOO peace axeman
Thats true when you have someone like Optional777 who thinks he is the SOLE authority on the definition of every word on the planet, and further thinks he KNOWS exactly what newspaper writers MEANT when they wrote something as if he can read their minds Sorry 777, but there ARE multiple valid meanings to words, and you have NO authority to claim WHICH meaning applies in THIS case, since you CANT read the newspaper writers minds, and you cant read mine either. My position stands.... the core church/separation issue was NOT addressed. Period. It was dodged, sidestepped, avoided, call it whatever you want, im not interested in another silly semantic war with a guy who thinks he can speak to god and read minds peace axeman