SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (36168)8/25/2010 8:36:44 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) of 103300
 
No way!

I say that if you leave your normal workplace and go stay at your own private home that's a 'vacation'.

(But that's MY definition....)

You are certainly free to DEFINE 'vacation' anyway that you want to but before you can have an intelligent conversation with anyone about Presidential vacations you are going to have to lay-out exactly what is and isn't defined as a 'vacation' in your rulebook.

Because if *your* personal definition of the term is not the same as the definition that the guy you are trying to talk to about the matter is using then there is no way to have a useful conversation... because all you two would be doing is talking past each other, or preaching to the wind. (Not a very productive use of time.)

White House correspondent Mark Knoller, (unofficial keeper of all kinds of presidential statistics, and the guy most of the media turns to for information about such matters), of course has his own simple definition for what constitutes a 'Presidential vacation' --- and he applies it UNIFORMLY across-the-board.

He records *all* the President's using that exact same yardstick! No favorites.

So, I imagine that if you wanted to come up with some different definition for what constitutes a Presidential 'vacation' and what trip doesn't count as a vacation --- you could certainly use his very detailed statistics and go through the items one-by-one and come up with a new listing.

Just SO LONG as you applied your new definition UNIFORMLY, re-rating *all of the Presidents* by the same yardstick I doubt anyone would have any objections.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News