Originally posted by centurion1211
What dispute?
I was responding to my friend Intrepid's post, where I clearly did not criticize what Reid said.
Don't want to have to bring up the "T word" ...
Obviously you are free to bring up any word you like. I will once again frame my 'dispute' (aka disagreement) with your partisan reference to
"thrown under the bus" to an otherwise commendable act by Sen Reid. Perhaps it was a poor choice of words but you don't seem to regret or retract
them so I shall continue. To throw someone under the bus:
...to reject or betray (someone); to treat as a scapegoat; to put out of favor or at a disadvantage...
www.doubletongued.org...
...meaning “to sacrifice; to treat as a scapegoat; to betray....for a temporary and often minor advantage.
www.word-detective.com...
an idiomatic phrase meaning to sacrifice another person (often a friend or ally), who is usually not deserving of such treatment, out of malice or
for personal gain.
David Segal, a writer for the Washington Post, calls the expression "the cliché of the 2008 campaign."
en.wikipedia.org...
In short, the term implies undeserving betrayal. My main issue is that in "doing the right thing" by failing to support Rep Weiner, you unfairly
maligned Senator Reid rather than accept his actions. I interpret that as a self serving swipe unnecessarily added to an otherwise neutral story.
And that is fine to be bias, heck I sure am, but you seem to want to come off as impartial or feel justified by your assessment.
And for the umpteenth time, I too feel Mr. Weiner should resign. If another Democrat pooted in my elevator I would certainly want to get off at the
next floor. As the old saying goes in Washington: " If you want a friend, get a dog" (in Weiner's case I'd suggest a Dachshund - LOL)
My criticism has not wavered since my first reply. The "bus" crack was unnecessary and smacks as partisan. So if you'd simply like to agree to
disagree that is fine with me. But if you'd like to resume, by all means bring it.......
/MD
