Some definitions
Jul. 19th, 2007 09:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumRuthless: adj.
Having no compassion or pity; merciless: ruthless cruelty; ruthless opportunism.
Clueless: adj.
Jonah Goldberg (KKB with Chicken Head)
Over at The Corner, he says what we need to do to win in Iraq is... wait for it, be more ruthless.
But this word, he keeps using it, but I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
But, what I mean by ruthlessness (the word is starting to sound funny, I've said it so many times), is a single-minded determination to win.
There you go, I was right. He thinks it means a way of thinking (as opposed to a way of acting).
It gets better.
I don't think we can win the counter-insurgency in Iraq unless we offer the Iraqis more hope for the future than the enemy offers.
Got that, ruthless = offering them something; hope.
Not actually giving them something better, just offering them hope of something better.
[ I also see, now, why he's opposed to Universal Health Care, collective bargaining, funding inspectors for the USDA, ect. It's too ruthless.]
On more serious note... this guy is paid money to spew drivel like this?
And people think he's "serious" and worth giving attention and consideration.
What the fuck? I mean I keep hearing that the schools are failing, but the level of critical thinking to realise that this is utter nonsense (We need to win. To win we need to be ruthless. To be ruthless we need to offer them hope for a better life than they have now) seems to be something we can teach fifth graders; so why is it the folks we choose to represent us (one would suppose them to be at least as smart as the average person, and hope they were a little better than that) would see this for what it is; an attempt to cover his butt, because he keeps saying the only thing we need to do to win is be more aggressive, i.e. ruthless [which he admits is starting to sound funny, the way he uses it so often] because he keeps saying it, without offering any examples of what he means.
But they don't. They see this (and the others who toe the same line) as offering real advice. Never mind that everything this school of thought on the war has said, so far, has been wrong; and when tried failed. Nope. Failure isn't an option, so failure is ignored.
The people who were right, well they said the pooch was going to get screwed, and that's what happened. Since screwing the pooch isn't to acceptable, they get to be ignored.
Ruthlessly.
Having no compassion or pity; merciless: ruthless cruelty; ruthless opportunism.
Clueless: adj.
Jonah Goldberg (KKB with Chicken Head)
Over at The Corner, he says what we need to do to win in Iraq is... wait for it, be more ruthless.
But this word, he keeps using it, but I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
But, what I mean by ruthlessness (the word is starting to sound funny, I've said it so many times), is a single-minded determination to win.
There you go, I was right. He thinks it means a way of thinking (as opposed to a way of acting).
It gets better.
I don't think we can win the counter-insurgency in Iraq unless we offer the Iraqis more hope for the future than the enemy offers.
Got that, ruthless = offering them something; hope.
Not actually giving them something better, just offering them hope of something better.
[ I also see, now, why he's opposed to Universal Health Care, collective bargaining, funding inspectors for the USDA, ect. It's too ruthless.]
On more serious note... this guy is paid money to spew drivel like this?
And people think he's "serious" and worth giving attention and consideration.
What the fuck? I mean I keep hearing that the schools are failing, but the level of critical thinking to realise that this is utter nonsense (We need to win. To win we need to be ruthless. To be ruthless we need to offer them hope for a better life than they have now) seems to be something we can teach fifth graders; so why is it the folks we choose to represent us (one would suppose them to be at least as smart as the average person, and hope they were a little better than that) would see this for what it is; an attempt to cover his butt, because he keeps saying the only thing we need to do to win is be more aggressive, i.e. ruthless [which he admits is starting to sound funny, the way he uses it so often] because he keeps saying it, without offering any examples of what he means.
But they don't. They see this (and the others who toe the same line) as offering real advice. Never mind that everything this school of thought on the war has said, so far, has been wrong; and when tried failed. Nope. Failure isn't an option, so failure is ignored.
The people who were right, well they said the pooch was going to get screwed, and that's what happened. Since screwing the pooch isn't to acceptable, they get to be ignored.
Ruthlessly.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-07-19 04:44 pm (UTC)Especially this one: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means
The more I hear from Jonah Goldberg, the more I believe he needs a job assembling water heaters or car doors, or possibly waiting tables or carrying baggage for hotel guests. He wouldn't do those jobs very well either, but at least he wouldn't embarrass himself in front of so many people.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-19 05:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-19 06:26 pm (UTC)Agreed
Date: 2007-07-20 06:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-20 12:04 am (UTC)Don't hold your breath.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-20 12:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-20 12:18 am (UTC)It's all about, "Will".
Right...
TK