A different type of speed reading

[Tigermike 3,055]

A different type of speed reading

Have you ever been reading something and hit a line or a phrase that so stuns your sensibilities, that you aren't sure you really read it right? And then, of course, you reread it. You find you were right the first time. But somehow your brain just couldn't accept as credible what this author had said and so made you think you must have misread it.

Here's an example of that. An article entitled "Bill Clinton may be campaign's biggest loser", caught my eye. I was interested to see how the author was going to attempt to make that case.

But before he ever got to Bill, he talked about Hillary. He feels that she still has a future if she isn't the nominee. And it was while talking about her future he made a comparison that just stopped me in my tracks:

"In time she will have fresh opportunities; perhaps a Senate leadership role, or she may emulate Edward M. Kennedy as a truly great lawmaker, or, if Obama loses, make another run for the White House with lessons learned."

*blink*

Did he really say that?

[reread]

Oh my. Edward Kennedy as a "truly great lawmaker?" That's a bit like claiming John Kerry was a truly great naval officer. Or Jimmy Carter was a truly great president.

*click*

Website closed - no remaining desire whatsoever to read this guy's opinion on anything else (and yes, I know I'm setting myself up for someone to say "that's mostly what I do with your stuff" - but of course, he or she will have already read to this point in order to make that claim, so I'll live with it). Interestingly enough, I'm finding more and more of these examples as I prowl the net.

Oh, and the fact that this guy was the Washington executive editor for Bloomberg, didn't come as a particularly shocking surprise.

H/T Q and O

Click here if you want to check out more.

[WinCrimson 61]

"Well accomplished and seasoned" is what he was implying. Love him or hate him, Ted Kennedy's been on the scene for quite a while now.

I just don't know if she'll choose the same path after her defeat. I could see her becoming the Senate's most vocal member, or choosing to fade off into the abyss of irrelevance at home in Westchester, NY. Something about her tells me she won't go down quietly.

[Tigermike 3,055]

For some reason I don't see her fading off into the sunset. Nor do I see her becoming as irrelevant as John Kerry.

For some reason I think when he said "or she may emulate Edward M. Kennedy as a truly great lawmaker," he was really thinking that Edward M. Kennedy was a truly great lawmaker.