pundant?

[_Angus McAwesome]

Nice, so you found two jackasses that excuse poor spoken communications with anecdotes. Doesn't make it right or even remotely excusable, doesn't matter if other president have made the same mistake, they are still wrong.

New Rule for when I become Supreme Dictator of the World: If you can't pronounce it you aren't allowed to be in charge of it.

[_dartagnan]

You're missing the point. This has been a "thinko" for many decades even among those involved in nuclear weaponry. Tarski and Schmo are acting like this is a recent phenomenon in politics that should raise red flags about a politician's intelligence.

Were Clinton, Eisenhower and Carter not intelligent?

Why quibble over such stupid things as this when there are clearly more important thing sto be concerned about. It falls into the same category as the price of Palin's wardrobe.

Obama is going to be our next President and these gus are still attackingPalin!

I see denial. They don't want to accept the fact that Obama is our new leader which requires that we start thinking critically about him. That just might scare them.

Why is Obama's aunt living in a housing project?

Why is Obama's brother destitute in Kenya?

Obama is a multi-millionaire. Why isn't he sharing his own wealth?

[_dartagnan]

My sources were from Berkley and University of Pennsylvania....

Yeah, what ignorant jackasses.

Tarski, stick to Math.

Schmo, stick to the Simpsons.

Angus, stick to being a moron.

[_Some Schmo]

My sources were from Berkley and University of Pennsylvania....

Yeah, what ignorant jackasses.

Tarski, stick to Math.

Schmo, stick to the Simpsons.

Angus, stick to being a moron.

dart, stick to your weekly KKK gatherings.

[_Angus McAwesome]

You're missing the point.

Listen, you racist little asshole, the only point you have and will probably ever have is the one on top of your water filled head.

This has been a "thinko" for many decades even among those involved in nuclear weaponry. Tarski and Schmo are acting like this is a recent phenomenon in politics that should raise red flags about a politician's intelligence.

Ok, cite some actual evidence of either Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, or Dwight D. Eisenhower ever mispronouncing the word "nuclear" in a public address. Don't point to those two worthless anecdote laden pieces of crap you linked to, show me hard evidence, i.e. actual audio or video of any of those three men making the alleged verbal mistake. Otherwise I'm calling BS on you.

Were Clinton, Eisenhower and Carter not intelligent?

Compared to Bush and the latest generation of Republicans, those three men were certifiable geniuses. If Eisenhower were alive today to see the massive pile of crap his party has become he'd keel over dead from the sheer shame of having once been aligned with them shortly after voting Democrat.

Why quibble over such stupid things as this when there are clearly more important thing sto be concerned about. It falls into the same category as the price of Palin's wardrobe.

Yeah, why do that when we can listen to you're half-witted racist diatribes and laugh at your idea of "evidence".

Obama is going to be our next President and these gus are still attackingPalin!

Which has what to do with certain people being seemingly unable to pronounce simple English words? Oh, right, like most everything you post that had nothing at all to do with the topic either, you racist asshole.

My sources were from Berkley and University of Pennsylvania....

Wait a second here. You're the guy that keeps whining about the "EVIL LIBERALS" and you're going to use a source from US Berkley, quite possibly the single most left-wing learning institution in the United States? The Irony Fairy just crap herself...

[_Some Schmo]

EDIT: Quote deleted at poster's request.

Hey <poster who was never here>, how nice to see you! (EDIT: Wait... I didn't see you. You were never here. I imagined it, I tells ya! Imagined it!)

I wouldn't try to make the case that the way someone expresses themselves is a direct window into their intelligence, but it's hard to deny there's a relationship between the two (or, more accurately, presentation is affected by intelligence, and knowledge, for that matter, among other things).

A Canadian philosopher and teacher named Marshall McLuhan once coined the phrase, "The medium is the message." He was talking at the time about how communications media affected how information was received by an audience, but I think the truth of that sentiment extends farther than that. People are heavily influenced by the way people talk. I remember once hearing (can't remember the source) that the number one thing that influences one person's judgment of another's intelligence is the way they talk. Seems true to me. It may not be the best way to make that assessment, but given that it's our intrinsic habit to do so tells me that we all think there's something to it, at least at some level.

How we receive information is mostly unconscious anyway. There are all kinds of subtleties in the way we perceive things, and I'm convinced we don't know not only the majority of our biases, but the source of them as well.

And let me just say... Palin seems like a dumbass to me. It’s not just the way she talks, but the dumb things she says as well. I recognize that's based on limited information and whatever biases I carry, but it is what it is, and should be taken for what it's worth (that and $4 will get you a Starbucks coffee).

;)

[_Tarski]

You're missing the point. This has been a "thinko" for many decades even among those involved in nuclear weaponry. Tarski and Schmo are acting like this is a recent phenomenon in politics that should raise red flags about a politician's intelligence.

Pundint?

Look, I keep hearing how Biden is so dumb because he passingly once said that "jobs" is a 3 letter word. That's a funny slip if pedantry is funny but the root word is in fact 3 letters.
Palin says "pundint" every time. Turn about is fair play!

[_krose]

Palin says "pundint" every time. Turn about is fair play!

Wait, she says it? The one I heard say it was Grampy himself. I've pretty much stopped listening to her, and soon she'll be back in Alaska keeping an eye on the Russians for us, so I won't have to at all.

By the way, I've never heard either Clinton mispronounce 'nuclear,' and my ears always perk up at that one. I'm sure I would have noticed.

[_krose]

As anyone who has studied linguistics knows, languages evolve over time. One of the ways they evolve is that common mistakes are often eventually accepted as standard usage.

A couple of examples are "presently" and "hopefully." "Presently" has always meant "soon," while "hopefully" means "with hope." However, many people use these words to mean (respectively) "currently" and "it is to be hoped." After years of misuse, many dictionary writers have given in and now include the meanings that were previously considered incorrect as acceptable options.

(Some words, such as "comprise," even come to mean the opposite of their original meaning.)

If enough people misuse a word consistently for a long enough time, the language rules will expand to include the misuse. So it is plausible that a linguist, who is interested in how languages change, would be quite willing to expand a word's pronunciation to include a common mispronunciation as a variant.

However, an academic who is more interested in maintaining a language's 'integrity' would not be nearly so forgiving, and people who make a mistake before the mistake is widely accepted are likely to be seen as uneducated.