View Story | 15 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Cow·ard –noun 1. a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.
Cow·ard
–noun 1. a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.
Those who support a minority opinion and have not the support, skill, intellect, nor fortitude to move that opinion to the majority by legal means sometimes resort to "alternative" methods to advance their position. Simple manifestations of this are the bully (terrorist), and the cheat (republicons).
In this instance we have a hybrid of sorts known as the dastard (Cheney).
das·tard –noun 1. a mean, sneaking coward. –adjective 1. despicably cowardly; "the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on...December 7th"- F.D. Roosevelt
das·tard –noun 1. a mean, sneaking coward.
–adjective 1. despicably cowardly; "the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on...December 7th"- F.D. Roosevelt
These malcontents lack the courage to face real adversity and lose. Instead they sneak around, avoid, behavior which may be considered admirable, and commit dastardly acts.
By definition, a coward.
by Jake Williams on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 01:18:10 PM PDT
the only sensible voice in the entire thread (naturally, nobody's listening to you)
God bless our tinfoil hearts.
by aitchdee on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 04:24:37 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
But there have been other good opinions in this thread as well.
Because I and others don't agree with you on the use of "coward" doesn't make us senseless. It means we disagree.
With leaders like Bush and Pelosi, who needs enemies?
by SpiffPeters on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 04:36:37 PM PDT
with what some people characterize as bravery and some characterize as cowardice, that's fine--that's a perfectly reasonable opinion to hold (heck, I may even agree with you).
If you're (still) saying that you disagree with what constitutes the proper usage of the word "cowardly," then indeed you are (still) wrong. Because as much as it pains me to defend GWB, his use of the word today, in the context in which he used it, whether you agree with the characterization or not, is not incorrect.
Do I need to haul out the OED? ;-)
by aitchdee on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 04:54:21 PM PDT
If anyone can spot a coward, it would be GWB.
He is calling the act cowardly. He is calling the persons murderous extremists (a bit redundant). So, I stand corrected. But I still think there were many sensible opinions stated.
I doubt that Al Qaeda is concerned, from a tactical perspective, what we think of their tactics. We certainly don't care much about what they think about how we engage the enemy.
It's a war. Al Qaeda leadership does what they can with what they have.
Regardless, a life was lost that was the hope of many. A sad day indeed.
Whoever wrote these three paragraphs for W earned their pay today. Very appropriate.
"Laura and I extend our deepest condolences to the family of Benazir Bhutto, to her friends, to her supporters. We send our condolences to the families of the others who were killed in today's violence. And we send our condolences to all the people of Pakistan on this tragic occasion.
The United States strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine Pakistan's democracy. Those who committed this crime must be brought to justice. Mrs. Bhutto served her nation twice as Prime Minister and she knew that her return to Pakistan earlier this year put her life at risk. Yet she refused to allow assassins to dictate the course of her country.
We stand with the people of Pakistan in their struggle against the forces of terror and extremism. We urge them to honor Benazir Bhutto's memory by continuing with the democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life."
by SpiffPeters on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 10:15:13 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 15 comments