Replies

democrats often endorse. why is it a stab if he wants obama and edwards criticism of kerry last couple years, or edwards wife many comments about kerry, are they a stab in back.... or simply the edwards expressing? thinking you are seeing this awfully slanted.

Wow. These people are political idiots and incredibly stupid.

No, you're approaching the post all wrong. It demonstrates advanced literary technique and is clearly the work of an inventive wordsmith of exceptional talent. You have to read the text similarly to the way you would read Molly Bloom's soliloquy in Joyce's Ulysses. Amazingly though, in a mere 45 words the writer leaves Joyce, Eliot, and Faulkner in the dust and takes stream of consciousness to the next level by transcending the expectation that nonlinear internal monologue will ultimately reveal concrete ideas. By breaking this constraint, we are left with thought at the most pure and basic form, primordial and independent of higher meaning, presenting us with almost endless possibilities of interpretation. Personally, I think it is an innovative example of anti-globalization literature, using the Kerry endorsement to represent the interdependent relationship between the formerly colonized (Obama) and the former colonizer (Kerry) in a post-colonial world that continues exploit and oppress the common man (Edwards). Consistent with this criticism of global corporatism, the author's refusal to capitalize letters makes a bold political statement.

j/k

No, you’re approaching the post all wrong. It demonstrates advanced literary technique and is clearly the work of an inventive wordsmith of exceptional talent. You have to read the text similarly to the way you would read Molly Bloom’s soliloquy in Joyce’s Ulysses. Amazingly though, in a mere 45 words the writer leaves Joyce, Eliot, and Faulkner in the dust and takes stream of consciousness to the next level by transcending the expectation that nonlinear internal monologue will ultimately reveal concrete ideas. By breaking this constraint, we are left with thought at the most pure and basic form, primordial and independent of higher meaning, presenting us with almost endless possibilities of interpretation. Personally, I think it is an innovative example of anti-globalization literature, using the Kerry endorsement to represent the interdependent relationship between the formerly colonized (Obama) and the former colonizer (Kerry) in a post-colonial world that continues exploit and oppress the common man (Edwards). Consistent with this criticism of global corporatism, the author’s refusal to capitalize letters makes a bold political statement.

You were an English major, weren’t you.

No, you're approaching the post all wrong. It demonstrates advanced literary technique and is clearly the work of an inventive wordsmith of exceptional talent. You have to read the text similarly to the way you would read Molly Bloom's soliloquy in Joyce's Ulysses. Amazingly though, in a mere 45 words the writer leaves Joyce, Eliot, and Faulkner in the dust and takes stream of consciousness to the next level by transcending the expectation that nonlinear internal monologue will ultimately reveal concrete ideas. By breaking this constraint, we are left with thought at the most pure and basic form, primordial and independent of higher meaning, presenting us with almost endless possibilities of interpretation. Personally, I think it is an innovative example of anti-globalization literature, using the Kerry endorsement to represent the interdependent relationship between the formerly colonized (Obama) and the former colonizer (Kerry) in a post-colonial world that continues exploit and oppress the common man (Edwards). Consistent with this criticism of global corporatism, the author's refusal to capitalize letters makes a bold political statement.

IOW, the condensed version would read: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$hit...."

(Who says you never learned anything in college....)

No, you're approaching the post all wrong. It demonstrates advanced literary technique and is clearly the work of an inventive wordsmith of exceptional talent. You have to read the text similarly to the way you would read Molly Bloom's soliloquy in Joyce's Ulysses. Amazingly though, in a mere 45 words the writer leaves Joyce, Eliot, and Faulkner in the dust and takes stream of consciousness to the next level by transcending the expectation that nonlinear internal monologue will ultimately reveal concrete ideas. By breaking this constraint, we are left with thought at the most pure and basic form, primordial and independent of higher meaning, presenting us with almost endless possibilities of interpretation. Personally, I think it is an innovative example of anti-globalization literature, using the Kerry endorsement to represent the interdependent relationship between the formerly colonized (Obama) and the former colonizer (Kerry) in a post-colonial world that continues exploit and oppress the common man (Edwards). Consistent with this criticism of global corporatism, the author's refusal to capitalize letters makes a bold political statement.

Wow! That's good. I'd love to hear your thoughts as to the perplexing reemergence of the Mad Hatter and March Hare as the Anglo Saxon messengers.

Your book reports must have been fun to read. ;-)

LOL Of course, silly me. Thank you for stating what should have been obvious; the institutional racism, the social caste that bind the common man and a criminal justice system that controls a disproportionately high number black males...it’s all there (implied or otherwise) and yet I, the right wing nut job, missed it. For you an A, for our liberal elite DUmmie friend an A+ and for me a F.

democrats often endorse. why is it a stab if he wants obama and edwards criticism of kerry last couple years, or edwards wife many comments about kerry, are they a stab in back.... or simply the edwards expressing? thinking you are seeing this awfully slanted.

This was either written by a North Korean propagandist or Miss South Carolina.