http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031201/pl_nm/odd_rumsfeld_dc_2
It should have been mine! I had no idea that there was an award about that.
Can we just sticky a thread where we can bash Bush instead of having all these threads proving he’s a moron.
Originally posted by ahkeeyuu
Can we just sticky a thread where we can bash Bush instead of having all these threads proving he’s a moron.
Umm, this didn’t have all that much to do with Bush, you know…
He looks like he’s signalling out to his homies or something in that picture.
Originally posted by Valkyrie Esker
Sorry to be off topic then, but it is a good idea.
Reports that say something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know
What teh hell is he talking about?
I dunno. I kinda like Rumsfeld. I mean when he doesn’t want to answer a question that will defame the Bush administration he calls the person an idiot somehow. Or he avoids the question. That is the proper way to conduct an interview.
Rumsfeld is too occupied with theories to see the actual facts.
I like Goverbor “polished walnut”'s comment at the end of that article :hahaha; although I’m not too familiar with US politics, I never knew the capacity to talk utter bollocks was a favoured skill… 
“Reports that say something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know,”
No wonder Americans are always confused about politics.
Other note: Foot in Mouth Disease is a good cd.
Originally posted by ahkeeyuu
[b][QUOTE]Reports that say something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know
What teh hell is he talking about? [/b][/QUOTE]
It’s not complete bull, he just used irritatingly redudant wording. It might be have been more intelligible had he said “we are aware that we know”, but alas, he decided to be a doofus. I remember one of my English teachers once began explaining different degrees of knowledge, or some such. I forget the actual terms, but the progression was such.
You are not aware that you don’t know. For instance, someone who has never encountered a computer doesn’t realize they don’t know how to use one.
You are aware that you don’t know. Continuing the example, someone who knows what a computer is but can’t properly use a mouse.
You are aware that you know. A little more difficult to explain; like writing a computer program or something where you need to concentrate on what you are doing.
You are not aware that you know. Something you can do without thinking about it. Possibly tieing your shoes; I know I can do that without paying attention at all to what my hands are doing.
It really makes more sense than one might think first looking at it. Or maybe I’m just giving him more credit than he deserves.
“Known unknowns”? I don’t think he’s fully aware of what he’s saying. 
As much bull shit as it is, I love the way he said it.
I don’t really find what he said to be confusing. I understood it back then, and I understand it now. Demigod’s explanation actually helps if it can be confusing. Sometimes, you just have to think of adjectives as nouns.
However, my brain works in weird ways. I understand strange phrasings such as Rumsfeld. That may be partly why I was able to understand Darl’s half a page long rambling speech about his dead mother being was rather than is in Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying. Here’s a good example of what I mean:
“I haven’t got ere one,” Darl said. “Because if I had one, it is was. And if it was, it cant be is. Can it?”
Now, Rumsfeld phrased it akwardly, agreed. However, I think I remember seeing that bit on TV. He delivered it in a half-way joking manner. Known knowns (noun) would be something like “this is where Afghanistan is.” Known unknowns (noun again) would be something like “we know bin Laden’s hiding somewhere, we just don’t really know where.” Unknown unknowns (noun for a third time!) could be something like “Canada is planning to become a terrorist group bent on the destruction of the government in South Africa.” Now, obviously unknown unknowns won’t be quite so wacky, but I had to think up something like that since other examples would fall under known unknowns.
Anyway, yeah, he delivered it in a weird fashion, but it still makes sense if a little bit of thought and reanalyzation of the function of words in the noun/adjective/verb sense.
Now, how can is be when be is was, or should be?
To be, be has to have been and to have been, be was what could and thus potentially should have been and has become.
Frankly, I’m just living in the hope that one day, a politician will just say “fuck this, I’m off home”. It’ll probably be the most sensible thing he’s said in his whole career. :thud:
Then again, I live in the hope that one day, a politician will be caught on camera saying “fuck” in any context. :hahaha;
EDIT: Whoops, forgot about John Prescott :ah-ha!: :mwahaha:
Never forget that John also punched a man in the face after being hit with a pie or something.
And no-one who saw that episode of have I Got News For You can forget Boris Johnson.
British politcians rock. ^^
He looks like he doing the vulcan sign… you know ster trek and the weird finger thing?
Yeah.
“I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman,” the new California governor said.
they misunderstand what it means to “know” something, if you know something you know it… that’s just the way ti is, meaning that “knowing that you know something” means aexcactly the same as “knowing” something…