Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe New Yorker's Endorsement
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2012/10/29/121029taco_talk_editorsComment
The Choice
by The Editors October 29, 2012
............
The choice is clear. The Romney-Ryan ticket represents a constricted and backward-looking vision of America: the privatization of the public good. In contrast, the sort of public investment championed by Obamaand exemplified by both the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care Acttakes to heart the old civil-rights motto Lifting as we climb. That effort cannot, by itself, reverse the rise of inequality that has been under way for at least three decades. But weve already seen the future that Romney represents, and it doesnt work.
The reëlection of Barack Obama is a matter of great urgency. Not only are we in broad agreement with his policy directions; we also see in him what is absent in Mitt Romneya first-rate political temperament and a deep sense of fairness and integrity. A two-term Obama Administration will leave an enduringly positive imprint on political life. It will bolster the ideal of good governance and a social vision that tempers individualism with a concern for community. Every Presidential election involves a contest over the idea of America. Obamas Americaone that progresses, however falteringly, toward social justice, tolerance, and equalityrepresents the future that this country deserves. ?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 1365 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (12)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The New Yorker's Endorsement (Original Post)
Coyotl
Oct 2012
OP
Thekaspervote
(32,803 posts)1. Thanks!! Great stuff
oldhippydude
(2,514 posts)2. fantastic!!!!! n/t
BrainGlutton23
(37 posts)3. Only The New Yorker . . .
. . . would spell "re-election" with an umlaut.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)4. Only a leftie would know what it is called. Welcome to DU.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)5. Since it isn't a German word, that's not an umlaut
It's actually a diaresis or diaresis mark. The diaresis only indicates that the second vowel in a vowel pairing marks the beginning of a new syllable, so it is different from an umlaut in that respect as well.
Just sayin', yo.
Cheers!
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)6. Don't both names refer to the same diacritical mark?
The two options are just names from different languages, not?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)7. The mark is the same, but the function is not
The use of a diaresis is actually quite different than the use of an umlaut. Indeed, here's the difference explained by the New Yorker itself!
Ha!
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/04/the-curse-of-the-diaeresis.html
Silent3
(15,293 posts)8. And a true New Yorker reader would call it a "dieresis"...
...not an "umlaut" when the mark is used to indicate a syllabic break.