On PBS, Cokie Roberts falsely suggested Biden's reference to "Bosniaks" was a gaffe
During coverage of the October 2 vice-presidential debate on PBS' Charlie Rose, Rose asked, "Did either of them make any mistakes that you noticed?" National Public Radio senior news analyst Cokie Roberts responded that Sen. Joe Biden "talked about the Bosniaks." Roberts later said: "[I]f [Gov. Sarah Palin] had said 'Bosniak,' everybody would be making a big deal of it, you know." In fact, Biden correctly referred to certain residents of Bosnia and Herzegovina as Bosniaks. According to the U.S. State Department, as of 2002, the population of Bosnia and Herzegovina consisted of the following ethnic groups: "Bosniak 48.3%, Serb 34.0%, Croat 15.4%, others 2.3%."
The CIA World Factbook states: "Bosniak has replaced Muslim as an ethnic term in part to avoid confusion with the religious term Muslim -- an adherent of Islam."
In a May 11 speech, U.S. Ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina Charles English repeatedly referenced "Bosniaks" and said: "Bosniak political leaders must examine their own their political conduct within governing institutions, particularly where they are the majority, and ask themselves, is this conduct assuaging concerns among other ethnic groups about domination or contributing to it?"
Biden said during the debate:
Look what we did in Bosnia. We took Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks, being told by everyone, I was told by everyone that this would mean that they had been killing each other for a thousand years, it would never work. There's a relatively stable government there now as in Kosovo.
From October 2 broadcast of PBS' Charlie Rose:
ROSE: Did either of them make any mistakes that you noticed?
DORIS KEARNS GOODWIN (presidential historian): I didn't really see any gaffes, nor were there many Tina Fey moments, or what might come on Saturday Night Live. The only one might be when she asked what might trigger a nuclear war, and she went into, "A nuclear war, that's the be-all and the end-all. That's bad. A lot of people, gone." I can see them using that as a moment, but other than that, no, they both handled everything pretty well.
ROBERTS: He talked about the Bosniaks.
ROSE: The Bosniaks, yes.
ROBERTS: The Bosniaks. If she had said --
GOODWIN: Oh, and there was McKiernan versus McClellan, the name of the general in Afghanistan.
ROBERTS: If she had said "Bosniak," everybody would be making a big deal of it, you know.
GOODWIN: Correct.
ROSE: Yeah, and some people took note of the fact that Senator Biden didn't correct at that point as a suggestion of his restraint during the entire debate.
Hey MSM, I have a suggestion...let's have the commentators and pundits be at least as smart as the people they comment about.
Well, as Johnny Carson would say, "I didn't know that..."
What then are Bosnians? I too thought Bosniaks sounded a little too much like Bosni-acs, which would make them wild aficionados of the place.
Of course, I don't get those big bucks like Cokie, either.
It's good to hear that that the ghost of the great Johnny C. still can evoke a cultural touchstone. Hyyyyyyy-ooooooooh.
Here's another question that no one seems to be asking: why did Palin have access to outside notes at her podium?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aj-bockelman/what-i-saw-inside-the-deb_b_131494.html
These have never been allowed at previous debates. Remember when the Right freaked out about accusations that Kerry was cheating with outside materials in 2004?
So how come no one is saying anything about this? Crib notes made her job 10,000 times easier. She used them at the Alaska debates, and no pundit anywhere seems to have noticed that stunt, either....
That's interesting. I kept thinking she looked like she was reading during her robotic talking point tirades. Apparently she was.
That explains her marginal adequacy.
I thought she came across as phony and overly programmed, with a little too much "aw shucks". Of course, I'm not biased or anything...
And the last thing we need is another elected official who pronounces NUCLEAR as NUCULAR... ;)
Palin is a phony. You could hear her voice cracking - and you could see that she was getting a bit flustered. Her speech would begin with an even tone, then as she progressed through her rants, her speech sped up to the point that if she were to try to talk any faster, she would have tripped over her words.
To be honest though, when Biden said 'bosniaks', I thought, "Oh G-d, another gaffe..." I'm glad to see that some research has been done and that Biden was actually correct. It will be interesting to see how the ignorant wingers spin this one...
I watched MSNBC post-debate. Buchanan could hardly contain himself over the sugar-coated, esoteric, robotic, and over-rehearsed performance from Palin. Same with the guy from Politico.com. How they can say she won the debate when she wouldn't answer the questions presented to her and she still remains nothing more than an unqualified candidate is not surprising, just disappointing. Maddow even said that ol' Pat preferred style and home-spun jargon to the truth.
Also, I love how Biden said a few times "and I repeat". That's what you have to do to get the truth through to some people.
They can say that she won the debate because they don't let pesky FACTS get in their way.
he repeated a total lie about the amount spent in iraq on combat to all the money spent in afghanistan. he was totally wrong about that, but he doesn't let facts get in the way.
I saw her looking down a lot, and very rarely did I see her using a pencil. I wasn't aware of that rule, but it makes sense now...
That would be nice, but at a minimum pundits should have the brains to Google something before snidely assuming that Biden made a error because he knows something that the media blowholes do not.
TV is called a medium because it is not well-done.
Good grief, Cokie! Palin got the name of the commander in Afghanstan wrong (not to mention that she completely got wrong what he said about the surge). Palin also talked about the Shia insurgents in Iraq. The insurgents are Sunni! How come I can catch this last gaffe (the first one I read about), but Cokie, who is paid big money to do this, cannot?
Kookie Mookie al Sadr is a Sunni?
Oscar wrote:
>>Kookie Mookie al Sadr is a Sunni?
No. You are correct. But the Shia insurency is a small part of the insurgency, made up of very poor Shias who have been left out and are afraid they will be left out. The Shias make up the majority of Iraqis and will rise to power, so they don't need an insurgency. The Sunnis were placed in power by Iraq and fear losing power, and hence they formed an insrugency.
Certainly, most of the insurgency comes from the Sunnis. For example, most of the violence comes from the Sunni triangle, an area of mostly Sunnis.
I just don't think it is correct to speak of the challenge to America as the Shia insurgency.
Palin may not have made an error in talking about General McClellan. Since he had done such a poor job leading our troops during the Civil War and never got over being replaced by that Grant fellow.
The Republicans have resurrected the reputation of pariahs (Nixon) before. I'm sure that raising a dead Civil War General and placing him in command of our forces in Afghanistan would be much easier than making Nixon look good.
Palin must disagree with Lincoln on the general. But she may be right that he should be dispatched to Afghanistan as long as he doesn't command any troops. Same with tricky Dick:
DORIS KEARNS GOODWIN (presidential historian): I didn't really see any gaffes, nor were there many Tina Fey moments, or what might come on Saturday Night Live. The only one might be when she asked what might trigger a nuclear war...
Wrong. Goodwin's a corporate hack.
Palins's bigtime gaffe was claiming that the Constititution and those wonderful smart Founding Fathers says it's OK for the Vice-President to assert extra-administrative, quasi-legislative powers, like Dick Cheney.
Where did Goodwin go to school? She might want to get some of those TAs she uses to compile decent notes for her.
I tend to agree. It's possible that, as the dust settles, her Cheneyesque interpretation of the Constitution may be her biggest goof. The idea of Evangelical Nutbag Caribou Barbie filling Cheney's creepy shoes should scare the crap out of all thinking people.
That was a major error. It's especially damaging when taken along with the rest of her performance. "I've been at this five weeks...I'll have a lot of flexibility and maybe we can talk about giving me more power!"
I'm just waiting for Shoes to come on and tell us that accounts differ as to who won by citing an internal Republican National Committee poll.
I also disagree that Tina Fey won't have material here. Palin once *winked* at the audience. I would think that enforces here image as an intellectual lightweight who tries to get by on her good looks. Here's how the Saturday Night Live skit could run:
Moderator: Governor, how do you think the Shia and Sunni conflicts can be resolved in Iraq?
Palin: [Palin initially looks confused] Gosh darn it, Gwen, [Palin winking at audience], we up in Alaska, the coldest Artic state, the only artic state with snow--we have snow up there, you know, and we have polar bears, and you know, the job of we mavericks [winks again and waves at the audience] is to change Washington. We are mavericks, so we are going to clean up Washington [winks], that's what the people want. I think we should sovle the problem because unlike my traitor opponent, I think America is the greatest country on earth.
Moderator: But you didn't answer the question.
Palin: Oh, Gwen, I'm speaking directly to the people. I don't need one of those Eastern media elite filters. Gosh darn it, pig in a poke [does more winking and absurd flirting], I'm just one of you all.
And they'll poke fun at her "shout-out" to a bunch of third-graders as well.
brabanitio wrote:
>>And they'll poke fun at her "shout-out" to a bunch of third-graders as well.
Forgot about that!
SNL has a lot ot work with. Hard to say what they will do exactly, but I would think they will want to make Palin into a dumb cheerleader. Tina Fey just looks too much like Palin for SNL to resist doing something--or at least, that's what I would think.
I would like to see a VP Jeopardy battle with Will Ferrell as Alex Trebec. The questions could be about economic policy and world affairs. She could give answers that are unrelated to the questions. And dialog could spin off of that. Fey and Ferrell with Hammond as Biden would be good.
They weren't watching the same debate. They only judge performance art and ignore substance, except when they "fact check." Then they only do a superficial job at best and try to find dubious facts on both sides so they're being "fair."
When one side consistently talks around the questions and has no real substance at all, they never point that out. It's all about the show.
I don't know that they judge performance at all. I think that many of them decide how they will call the debate before it actually starts.
HEY MEDIA MATTERS WHAT BAD WORD DID I SAY!!! ARE YOU GETTING LIKE FOX? THE ONLY THING I SAID WAS THAT BLACK WOMEN. IS SHE NOT BLACK ? I CALL MY SELF A BLACK WOMEN AND PRIDE OF IT. AND I SAID THAT POOR WOMEN WAS THAT A BAD WORD ALSO.
right-winger: "I CALL MY SELF A BLACK WOMEN"
Ah, there's your problem. You have a split personality. That might explain your posts. You have my sympathies about your inflamed psychiatric condition, not that it makes up for the constant screaming, the egregiously poor writing, and the false self-approbation. Now I, and hopefully the rest of us, will get back to our regularly scheduled job of ignoring you altogether. Have a nice day.
Not to mention that it should seem obvious to even a second grader (don't need to apply the fifth grader standard here) that this is one of the liberal regulars in mufti, trying to pose as a "pathetic right winger". What happened? Did some of you get tired of validating yourselves under your existing liberal multiple identities? LOL
LOL! Hey Miss Dee, LOL! Yes, let's apply second grade standards and pretend that you can read the motivies of posters! LOL! ROTFL!
HEY MEDIA MATTERS NOW I SAID BLACK THIS TIME AND YOU DIDN'T TAKE IT DOWN SO IT MUST NOT HAVE BEEN THE BLACK WORD OR THE POOR WOMEN BECAUSE YOU PUT THAT UP THERE TOO. SO I WILL MAKE THAT STATMENT AGAIN THAT YOU SAID I SAID A BAD WORD AND I WILL SEE IF YOU WILL PUT MY STATEMENT UP THIS TIME . LIKE I SAID I LOVE IT DID YOU SEE ALL THOSE HAPPY FACES ON CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, NBC AND CBS? THE ATTACK DOGS WILL NOT BE OUT ON THAT BLACK REPORTER OR BIDEN NOW THAT PALIN DID A GOOD JOB LAST NIGHT. BUT MARK MY WORD IF PALIN HAD DID BAD LAST NIGHT THAT THE REPOTER AND BIDEN WAS GOING TO BE THE RIGHT-WING REASON WHY SHE WAS BAD. THEY ALREADY HAD THE TALKING POINTS READY LIKE THEY WERE DOING BEFORE THE DEBATE.THEY WOULD HAVE SAID THE REPOTER WAS FOR OBAMA AND BIDEN WAS PICKING ON A POOR WOMEN AND THE MEDIA WOULD BE ALL OVER THAT TALKING POINT ALSO. HEY MEDIA MATTERS WILL YOU PUT THIS STATEMENT UP?
First of all - STOP YELLING! Not only is it rude, but it's much harder to read your intemperate screed when it's in all caps. Secondly, if you think Barbie did a "good job" you must have been drunk or watching another debate. Even having cheated by having notes at her podium to refer to she was clueless and unable to say anything that didn't fit her prepared talking points. I particularly like how she completely dodged the question about McCain's health care plan and yammered on instead about oil drilling. The woman is so clueless she can't voice an original opinion and clearly can't think well enough on her feet to handle a rather compliant media. How in hell would this bozo deal with Congress or, God forbid, foreign leaders. If you think this was a "good job" by Palin, your standards are pitifully low.
her performance was acceptable. that is, if she was running for vice president of the junior class. it was simplistic, cliched, and anything but specific. her white flag of surrender remark was the same drivel that was said about vietnam. did the world end when we left there? the fact is that a lot of the violence in iraq has lessened because entire areas have been ethnically cleansed.
palin simply smiled and repeated her lines, which were well rehearsed. matt lauer asked this morning if biden was "rattled" by her. did anyone see him as rattled? so why ask that question? and i know palin wants to get out there today and start talking to the press, because of her claim that the media is censoring her. that has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever said in a campaign, since it is the mccain camp that has kept her away from the press.
Unless I misheard, Palin said that General Petraeus had said that Iraq was the true central front of the war on terror, but General Petraeus said that Afghanistan was! Did I miss hear what she said?
I agree. I would also point out that I don't want another politician in high office who can't pronounce the word "nuclear." She creamed it (nookyular) repeatedly, the same way that G.W. does.
Yes She had problems with that word. Maybe GWB trained her on some topics.
I'm sure the Troglodytes who love Caribou Barbie find that endearing. It makes her seem more like them.
CNN shows clips of people watching the debate. Whenever Palin uttered one of her folksy lines, the democrats groaned and the republicans cheered. When Biden said global warming was caused mainly by the acts of man, the republicans booed.
Democrats choose reality over rhetoric. The republicans obviously prefer feel-good talking points and home-spun shout-outs.
She creamed it (nookyular)
Must be the way Six Pack Joe and Hockey Moms say it.
Is she saying Joe is an alcoholic? Is that one six pack a night?
Speaking of "sexism", I think Caribou Barbie pretty much nullified that argument by winking and using her beauty pageant voice so often, obviously trying to charm her way through the debate. If anybody was being sexist last night, it was her.
It seemed all she did was "wink" and say "aww shucks"
Prince , i wonder if Professor Rove had a video conference with Governor Gee Whiz?
Agreed!
Was it me or did anyone else notice that her answers were entirely way to smooth?
Biden is no slouch when it comes to debating and he had several small and/or minor verbal errors, from skipping a syllable and backtracking to speak the word again to a half second hesitation to gather his thoughts on a particular string of words....
Where as Palin was smooth in every word she spoke, she used little details if any at all, but spoke a nearly flawless debate.....
One might think that she somehow knew the questions ahead of time and was able to practice the rightwing talking point filled answers that went with them??
No, she just answered her own questions.
What's with this "Maverick" stuff. It's goofy and overused. They're trying to brand themselves like a car. As far as exceeding low expectations. It was easy to exceed any expectations simply because they were so low. She would have had to have forgotten her name to go below anyones expectations.
It's useful to note that 64% thought Biden exceeded expectations as well.
Someone pointed out that the reason she came off better than expected is that there were no follow-up questions, which is where she would break down in the Couric interviews. Ifill just let her ramble off whatever talking points she had, no matter how irrelevant they were to the question at hand. If she was put under any actual pressure to give a reasoned and fitting answer, she would have collapsed.
It should also be noted that Steve is being sarcastic with the "maverick" label.
brabantio wrote:
>>It should also be noted that Steve is being sarcastic with the "maverick" label.
I don't thinks so. Either Steve is consistently playing a Rush robot, or he is one. His posts have been consitently reactionary and stupid, and I don't see enough in them to get the sense he is being sarcastic.
He's talked about the "maverick" thing before. I don't know about other points, but he's been pretty consistent about the absurdity of that label from what I've seen.
Then Steve is a troll, because the last few days he has posted as if he were some type of stupd reacationary. He either is a stupid reactionary, or he has nothing better to do than to try to get a reaction out of others by playing one.
No damage??? Were you awake when Palin sidestepped every opportunity to give us an example of where her ticket's economic and foregin policies differ from the Bush administration policies?
Thom wrote:
>>if anything, will help Maverick
Biden did a good job according to the pundits (for what they are worth) of destroying McCain's image as a "maverick." According to snap polls, vieweres thought Biden won the debate, and in the CNN poll only 40% thought Palin was ready to be President, whereas over 80% thought Biden ready. I don't think Palin did enough to show she's ready.
I think it is also funny, and that it shows there is some cosmic justice, considering how far Palin has fallen. Three weeks ago she was the darling of the media, and a real problem for the Democrats. She dominated the news cycle. Basically she was considered a super star because she could read from a tele prompter and make some mean jokes. (One commentator noted her acceptance speech could have been written by Rush Limbaugh.) For weeks she went around the country blatantly lying about her bridge to nowhere.
Now, three weeks later, she a huge liability. Every time she opens her mouth Republicans (I mean, the smart ones who aren't mere cheerleaders), must clench their fists hoping she doesn't say something stupid. They shot Palin into the stratosphere, and now they are afraid she will crash to earth like a bad satelite, falling on the Repubs hope.
She still drives the news cycle (though not as much), but in a way that hurts the Republicans.
Palin didn't do any damage last night to the campaign.
Well, probably not right away. People's first impressions tend to be about what they saw, and Gov. Palin came across as likable, knowledgable, and confident. However, the next couple of days could tell a different story, as the analysis of what was said becomes clearer. Only then will most people realize how much she avoided answering questions and sticking with already-rebutted talking points.
The debate was a wash, not that they mean much anyway.
True to a point. Frankly, the debates should mean much more, which is why they should be done in an entirely different way. Instead of rapid-fire two minute responses, we need to have each being given an opening statement, a rebuttal period or two, cross examination, and closing statements. The moderator shouldn't be asking questions at all, but actually moderating, i.e., making sure that the contestants stick to the rules. In this kind of format (which is the norm for theological debates), you get real information and not just sound bites.
No matter what spin the liberal media puts on it, (particularly the misogynist trash at msnbc, i.e. KO),
Do you really want to go down that road? What of the spin the conservative media puts on it, compliments of Fox, CNN, ABC, the folks at MSNBC who aren't KO, not to mention the whole host of talk radio announcers? For any conservative to pre-emtively complain about 'spin' is very hollow.
Palin far exceeded the low expectations set by the liberal elites,
Well, "liberal elites" is a contradiction to begin with, but the real point is that the bar was set by the conservatives, not the liberals. The conservatives were looking early on for excuses to use in case she faltered badly.
and her performance, if anything, will help Maverick
Maybe. I can't help but wonder what the conservatives' reactions were when she talked about 'energetic' and 'reform' and stuff like that, knowing that McCain is the #1 person on the ticket. I certainly got a chuckle out of the irony. And frankly, I think Biden put the "Maverick" nomenclature to rest brilliantly (by the way, how many times did Palin use the word--fifteen or so?).
Frankly, the debates should mean much more, which is why they should be done in an entirely different way. Instead of rapid-fire two minute responses, we need to have each being given an opening statement, a rebuttal period or two, cross examination, and closing statements. The moderator shouldn't be asking questions at all, but actually moderating, i.e., making sure that the contestants stick to the rules. In this kind of format (which is the norm for theological debates), you get real information and not just sound bites.
I agree with you entirely, which is why the debates, as currently undertaken, are hardly worth watching. In the present format, I believe all the candidates look programmed. They only have enough time to spew their talking points. Admittedly the format was to Palin's advantage last night, but that goes to what I was saying about how "it was a wash." She performed better than in her interviews with Couric, so I don't think last night will be remembered for anything come October . . ..
(by the way, how many times did Palin use the word--fifteen or so?)
Not half as many times as she used the word "also."
Having grown up on the streets of your fair city and educated by the songs of Woody Guthrie, I was under the impression that Philadelphia Lawyers were the elitists.
WK,
You always struck me as a fair-minded, and highly intelligent and witty individual. Thus I figured you were from Philly. You're right though, there are way too many elitist lawyers in this fair city. And, as you know, Philly is run by the democratic party machine, and you'd be hard-pressed to find many powerful repubs here in town
We seem to be able to count on you to remind us of just how inept you are 9098.
1) The media is not liberal. The vast majority of the media is owned by corporate owners that give big dollars to Republicans.
2) KO as opposed to BO (or any of the many FoxNoise makers)? Puh-leez!
3) Why in the name of all that makes sense would a 'liberal' press want to set the bar that low for Palin? The fact that the media did lower the bar so damn low is proof enough that the media is rightwing leaning and assuredly not liberal!
4) Her performance was no more important than that of a highschool debate captain trying to lead her team to the district finals... so if this helps the so-called 'Maverick'.... that is very telling about our country and the kind of media we have!
5) Nice try though trying to project rightwing conservsative ideology onto a non-existing liberal media!
6) Next!
We must view the media through different lenses, and KO is trash. It's obvious that it was the media's patronizing tone and dismissiveness of Palin's qualifications, together with her poor interviews, which led to the media setting the bar so low for Palin. It was no rightwing agenda. That's absurd.
On point 4, I agree with you. The debate generally was meaningless. It will have no effect on the outcome of this election. However, the consensus seemed to be that Palin would perform so poorly that the Straight-Talker's campaign would suffer. That did not happen, so I see that as a plus on the Maverick's side.
Last, it's not conservative ideology to acknowledge that the media, by and large, leans left.
You keep mentioning that KO is trash. Pray tell, how is he trash? Or is your name-calling just partisan?
The "trash" is petty name-calling, I admit. It's the same sort that KO routinely does. That KO's left-wing or partisan, or progressive, or whatever, is not at all my problem with his show.
What I don't like is that he spends an hour lambasting all things republican, and people he doesn't like, without ever having anyone on his show to defend themselves. It's cheap to do that on national televsion
It's interesting that you would call Olbermann out on not having anyone to defend themselves against Olbermann's "lambasting all things Republican". Evidently, you've not spent enough time watching Olbermann. He might not have the defenders of the faith on his program, but at least he deals with reality, facts and quotes, versus your favorite "news channel", Fox which can't deal with reality, facts and quotes - and then tries to appear non-partisan (as in, "We Report, You Decide", which should really be, "We distort, You believe"). At least Olbermann admits he's partisan. And at least when Olbermann has something to say about the POTUS, he comes out and says it, no bones about it. Where else do you see that? You sure don't see it on Fox News. Partisan, probably. Truth, definitely.
When you have your own show, you can do what you want, but calling Olbermann trash because he consistently debunks the bullsh!t that comes from the right-wing is just childish - and just goes to show that you don't have the intellectual capacity to at least consider another point of view.
When you have your own show, you can do what you want, but calling Olbermann trash because he consistently debunks the bullsh!t that comes from the right-wing is just childish - and just goes to show that you don't have the intellectual capacity to at least consider another point of view.
Apparently you lack the intellectual capacity to recognize when you're being a hypocrite. Of course KO's reasoning and arguments prevail on his show over those of his opponents, and therefore supposedly "debunks" the views of his foes. Again, he doesn't allow his opposition to have any say. It is he, and apparently you, who lack the intellectual capacity to consider other points of views.
If he deals purely in facts and reality, then why not confront the evil republicans with those facts and "reality"? It is he, and his acolytes (apparently you), who don't want to be confronted with opposing views. That my friend, is what's childish.
And good argument. Point to the journalistic failings of Fox to rationalize those of KO. Straw man anyone? I wouldn't watch Fox news for 'fair and balanced" reporting anymore than I'd watch Countdown for an honest assessment of the political landscape. I don't see where Fox has any relevance to KO's inability to argue, in person, against his opponents.
Actually, if you want to be honest about it, you would admit that KO has invited these right-wing slimeballs you call Republicans to his show, but they refuse.
How is that KO's fault?
Steve wrote:
>>It's obvious that it was the media's patronizing tone and dismissiveness of Palin's qualifications
What patronizing tone? When were they dismissive of her qualifications?
First, I was astounded at the kudo's that each and every "analyst" gave Palin. Although biased, I could not get by the "act" she put on. She should have a pair of coveralls on, a piece of straw in her teeth and rocked back and forth with her hands in her pocket. We thought we were listening to a 10th grade cheerleader trying to B.S. her way out an esay question she didin't have the answer for.
I also was amazed to watch the Ohio viewer response graph as she spoke. Men seemed to react positively no matter how she responded. I hope these guys don't vote with their "weenies"
for the record, before you all decide to jump all over what I said, just because it's me saying it- my father was a displaced person as a kid from Poland and came to the US after WW2. so, "golly gee", I grew up with the language and a lot of its idiosynchracies, formally learning it as a cultural exploration later on in school.
In Austrian German, "Bosniak" is a pastry. I could have bought some at the bakery this afternoon. Language is fun!
Liebe Grüße,
globalRower.
"One might make a case that historically the application of the term is derisive. Conventional wisdom should say that when in doubt, you high priests of political correctness should probably chide him for not saying Bosnian." - MissDee
As someone who holds a Ph.D. in Linguistics, this is right up my alley: Bosnian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Macedonian, Serbian and Slovenian are indeed Slavic (and therefore Proto Indo-European Satem Languages) but of the Southern Slavic dialect group. Czech, Polish, Sorbian (yes, SORBIAN) and Slovak are also Slavic Languages and part of the Proto Indo-Eurpoean Satem Languages, but are actually of the West Slavic dialect group. You cannot accurately compare the nuances of the Polish language your father speaks with the nuances of the Bosnian language. As you said, Biden was correct, but let's be fair about the nuances of languages in the same language family, but of different language groups.
Let's make it a bit easier: look at the nuances between British English and American English (and even further, Black English Vernacular, a/k/a Ebonics) and the English spoken in the Southern parts of the United States. Certain things in certain parts of the country, spoken by certain language groups don't always mean the same thing across the English language for all groups. Common sense tells you that.
LOL. Did you really refer to everybody else as "know-it-alls" before delivering your unsolicited lecture about something that wasn't really in question? LOL.
only proving that you folks don't hold the market on irrelevent,but seemingly involved information that can become a mountain of emotional effect, Colonel Kluck, and to point out your own bias to give a pass to what you would manage to find to be offensive in anyone who wasn't on your kool-aid ingredients list.
Miss Dee wrote:
>>only proving that you folks don't hold the market on irrelevent,but seemingly involved information that can become a mountain of emotional effect, Colonel Kluck, and to point out your own bias to give a pass to what you would manage to find to be offensive in anyone who wasn't on your kool-aid ingredients list.
Rant.
I don't know if that was coherent enough to qualify as a rant. It was closer to a Palin response to a debate question. The babbling of a mind probably destroyed by years of heavy drug use is my guess.I wish you well, MissDee.
MissDee wrote:
>>As an aside, again for all you overtly self agrandizing intellectual know it alls here, who obviously know nothing about slavic languages
Is this some type of self paraody? And you might want to take a course in basic linguists before you throw around your knowledge of Slavic languages. (Hint: why don't we pronounce words the way they were pnonounced in Latin and Greek?)
Bosniak was not used in place of Bosnian. All 3 groups are Bosnian.
Will Cokie apologize or even acknowledge her mistake? All signs point to No.
Shaggles,
My bet is no. Most of these msm talking heads remain silent when they are found to be wrong or a liar.
Mrs. Roberts would have done better if she simply didn't comment on subjects she knows nothing about.
Well, Bosniaks is the official name for Bosnian Muslims, and Sen. Biden -- unlike Sarah Palin whom Mrs. Roberts, for some strange reason, is here defending from unfair media scrutiny -- was correct in his use of the term Bosniaks. God save us all from the Sarah Palins of this world, and even more, from know-it-all "analysts".
I said it once, I'll say it again, Sarah Pallin is McCains "Harriette Myers"
Bidden was correct but he should have gone on to note the Serbiak, Croatiak and Otheriak populations, as well. Let's hope he didn't offend the Serbiaks and Croatiaks so they don't attackiak the Bosnianks as majority Herzegovinaiaks out of jealousiak.
PS Hey (may I call you) Joe, move the overgrown hair plugs from your eyebrows to the scalp where they are needed.
This is so typical of the mindless proudconservatives. Inject a pointless, meaningless personal smear into a conversation instead of talking about policies, experience and other relevant factors. Those people are just incapable of sustaining a debate on substance.
This morning I was listening to the Diane Rehm show on Miami PBS station WLRN, and a caller was all irate that Palin said something about Maliki and then about "the Talibani," and went on to rave that "the Talibani" are our enemy since 9/11. The panel on the show apparenlty didn't know that the President of Iraq is named Talibani (he's a Kurd) and no one challenged the premise of the caller's complaint. I emailed the show that Talibani was the president, but too late -- the program ended. Early in the second hour Diane reported the problem and appeared to be reading my email, though she said they had many calls about it.
This kind of stuff must happen all the time as panels, no matter now knowledgeable, will miss a detail or mis-hear a mumble. The crappy thing about McCain not being willing to meet the leader of Spain originates with a mumbled question by a medium-strong-accepted Hispanic interviewing McCain by phone. Such things should be dismissed from serious comment rather than being elevated to repeated talking point.
All this in reference to "Bosniak," which roused puzzled comment from severeal of the dozen news people I watched the debate with. If you wonder about these things, pop a question into Google and you will find out.