….nice place you’ve got here…

…seems you’re all having a linguistic discussion at this point….I’ll steer us back…

It’s not defacement given the fact that it is a resource that is submission-based, but it is a severe misuse (because it was conscious, fraudelent submission, and not a confused contributor with incorrect information).

In light of the LPC’s national campaign to date, it’s a fitting image, but the outrage from the right if the CPC image was replaced would have been far more palpable.

It’s not “brilliant” in any way, and Harris was an idiot far before his approval was noted.

I considered that possibility. It just isn’t there, at least not in the sense you’re offering. Candace was having a bit of fun over people getting to that age where reading glasses are needed. If there was anything remotely similar to double entendre, it was Candace’s mock denial that she has any personal knowledge of things like bifocal contacts.

A double entendre is a figure of speech similar to the pun, in which a spoken phrase can be understood in either of two ways. The first, literal meaning is an innocent one, while the second meaning is often ironic or risqué and requires the hearer to have some additional knowledge. (wikipedia)

But it would be best if Candace replied to the intent of her comment.

Why, Bill? I’ll summarize for you:

I said:

“”You’re absolutely right, SL. Let this go down as a tipping point for me; a tipping point for setting aside my stubbornness and finally giving in to the need to wear my reading glasses.”

Then SL said :

“As someone who only recently admitted that he needed to wear his reading glasses for more things than just the menu in dim resturant lighting I feel your pain ”

To which Candace replied:

“sort of but not really off-topic, you can get bifocal contacts. Of course, I just HEARD that, I don’t actually HAVE them *cough*” ;

causing you to conclude that ” Candace made a good point whether or not people have been to wikipedia they have HEARD of it.”

Bill, this is silly, you’re silly, and while we’re at it, I’m silly, for bothering to try to explain this to you. I can’t decide whether you were just looking to pick a fight, or you truly don’t understand what Candace was trying to say. Both, I suspect.

Anyway, I’m glad you had your “laugh for the day.” Judging by our exchange, I’d say the giggles come early and often, every day.

Isn’t that precisely the mental image Paul Martin is trying to create? What’s pitiful Mike is how Fiberals get so outraged when someone uses the same tactics as they. Kind of like a bully you know, can dish it out but can’t take it.

If not ask yourself, why would Candace be talking about bifocals in the middle of this post? (-: *cough*

Either way Thanks for my laugh for the day….

Changing an image on wikipedia is not the same as what is commonly referred to as website “defacement,” where somone cracks into a site illegally, to change content.

Wikipedia allows for the change of content.

Bill, Candace was talking about glasses and contacts, not Wikipedia.