This is topic The LA times and the California recall in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=019043

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
I’m not that informed on this situation, I’ve just watched the CNN report, but it sounds pretty weird. Word has come out that the LA Times had very “damning” information on Gray Davis before the vote and did not release. They consciously did not create a specific group of reporters to find out negative things on Gray Davis (a “swat team”). They did this for Shwarzneger. Apparently with the phrase “scour him clean” a major investigation was launched trying to find anything and everything wrong with him.

I don’t like it when a paper feels that freedom of the press means that everything they find out (or want to find out) needs to be reported. Nor do I think it’s the media’s job to go after every person they report on. Yet I realize that it is these types of reports that bring in readers and really up sales. So while I’m not happy with smearing, I can stand it.

If it was the LA Time’s decision that they wanted to stop scandalizing and hold back on this information I would’ve supported them (well I wouldn’t since I wouldn’t know.. ) but apparently they weren’t holding back because they thought it was not necessary news, but because they wanted Schwarzenegger to loose. They went after one when they knew nothing of a bad past and left is contender alone when they already had “damning” evidence.

Of course the LA Times can print what they want, but quite frankly this undermines all of its future publications in my mind, and really lowers my opinion of it and the media.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
 
The LA Times is one of California's most biased and worst papers there is.

It doesn't surprise me that they went back the muckraker techniques to swat Arnold.

But, if they really had anything meaningful to say about keeping Davis in office, I would say:

Davis lost us 30 billion dollars with his energy contract with PG&E. That's public record. The recall election cost us 58 million. That's a fraction of what Davis lost us.

--|-- to the LA times!

 

---

Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
 
muckraker. what an awesome work.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
lose = verb
loose = adjective

Hobbesy, it was driving me crazy.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Actually, 'loose' is a verb, too. It just has a different meaning.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
That isn't loosen?

*dictionaries*

Hmm.. guess not. How odd! I've never heard that! Maybe it's a regional thing.
 

---

Posted by Sweet William (Member # 5212) on :
 
Pop is more than correct. "Loose," when used as a verb means pretty much the same as "let loose" or "make loose."

As in:

quote:

---

Cry "Havoc!" And loose the dogs of war.

---

quote:

---

Main Entry: 2loose
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): loosed; loos·ing
Date: 13th century
transitive senses
1 a : to let loose : RELEASE b : to free from restraint
2 : to make loose : UNTIE <loose a knot>
3 : to cast loose : DETACH
4 : to let fly : DISCHARGE
5 : to make less rigid, tight, or strict : RELAX
intransitive senses : to let fly a missile (as an arrow) : FIRE

---

Look at the inflected forms. Have you ever heard loosed?

[ October 14, 2003, 11:21 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
 

---

Posted by Sweet William (Member # 5212) on :
 
You are absolutely correct. In fact, most people who quote that line from Shakespeare do it incorrectly and say "let loose the dogs of war" because it is such an uncommon usage.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Check it out. This is cool.

quote:

---

DOGS OF WAR (or war dogs). War dogs of the middle ages were especially fierce and trained to kill men, as in Shakespeare's phrase "Cry 'Havoc!' and loose the dogs of war." They were a varity of mastiff. Wardogs were brought over to the new world by the Spanish were especially devastating to the locals. They would use the dogs to execute natives as they saw fit, the natives not being Christian had no rights.

---

quote:

---

And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.

---

quote:

---

And hail to the Emperor, let me make a comment back on topic. I heard a Republican spokesperson on one of the news shows say that she had heard allegations that Gray Davis had been physically abusive to staff members in his office, men as well as women. Perhaps this is the story the LA Times has been sitting on.

---

Unfortunately, that republican spokesperson was not incorrect. His secretary quit after he put in the E.R. because he broke one of her bones.

Another thing: He made it a state requirement to have his picture on every state-government builing, such as DMV. EVERY BUILDING HAS HIS STUPID PICTURE ON IT.
 

---

Posted by Sweet William (Member # 5212) on :
 
Dang, maybe EVERYONE quotes this incorrectly.

Uncommon usage, indeed. How fun to learn something new.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Ron, not exactly.

"Loose" is a transitive verb. You perform the action on the dogs of war. They are recieving the action that you are performing.

"Let slip" is giving an opportunity or failing to prevent. Either way, it is the dogs of war that are performing the action, and the speaker is merely ceasing to stand in their way. It's less empowering to the speaker, and less valuable as a rhetorical tool for arousing support.

---

Will - oh, me too. I hadn't even heard of the word used as a verb at all.

[ October 14, 2003, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
 

---

Posted by Sweet William (Member # 5212) on :
 
Here is a link to an Op ed by the original author regarding Davis' actions.

quote:

---

Since at least 1997, the Times has been sitting on information that Gov. Gray Davis is an "office batterer" who has attacked female members of his staff, thrown objects at subservients and launched into red-faced fits, screaming the f-word until staffers cower.

I published a lengthy article on Davis and his bizarre dual personality at the now-defunct New Times Los Angeles on Nov. 27, 1997, as well as several articles with similar information later on.

The Times was onto the story, too, and we crossed paths. My article, headlined "Closet Wacko Vs. Mega Fibber," detailed how Davis flew into a rage one day because female staffers had rearranged framed artwork on the walls of his office.

He so violently shoved his loyal, 62-year-old secretary out of a doorway that she suffered a breakdown and refused to ever work in the same room with him. She worked at home, in an arrangement with state officials, then worked in a separate area where she was promised Davis would not go. She finally transferred to another job, desperate to avoid him.

He left a message on her phone machine. Not an apology. Just a request that she resume work, with the comment, "You know how I am."

---

[ October 14, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Sweet William ]
 

---

Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
 
That's a great article.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Kat, how about Matthew 16:19 or Helaman 10:7? *smile*
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
*laugh* Evil, evil Papa Moose. *spreads open palms* I have no defense. I should have known this.
 

---

Posted by Sweet William (Member # 5212) on :
 
I am so going to use the word "loose" as a verb in some casual conversation today.

Oh look, it's lunch-time. Another loose-ing opportunity awaits.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Which is evil, Kat -- the post (for even the Devil can quote scripture), or my motivation (which you don't actually know) behind posting it? Do motivations matter? *smile again*
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
The post, of course, Pop. Pointing out my ignorance of something ancient in our culture that I should, as a literate person, know. I wouldn't presume a motivation. *hangs head in shame*

[ October 14, 2003, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
Woops

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by WmLambert (Member # 2509) on :
 
Can a derailment of a thread discussing Gray Davis' authenticated abuse of female workers not being covered by a liberal newspaper which launched on Schwarzenegger's unauthenticated abuse be considered akin to liberal media bias?

Have we let slip the wags of dour? Loosely, I mean.
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 


Hobbes
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Well Arnold can spruce up all the DMV's with a Terminator picture hanging in each one...

AJ
 

---

Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
 
Idle musings:

I wonder how much the collision insurance costs on Schwarzenegger's Hummer.

The first time Schwarzenegger visits the California legislature, he should wear a red contact lense in one eye.

If he hires T-1000's for traffic cops, no one would dare speed.

Schwarzenegger should show up in Gray Davis' office sometime before the latter officially vacates it, deliberately take one of Davis' pictures off the wall and drop it on the floor, then dare Davis to try to push him around like he did his 62-year-old secretary.

I wish I were a subscriber to the LA Times, just so I could cancel my subscription, like many others have done.

Maybe Schwarzenegger can get a law passed requiring that the LA Times can only be sold in supermarket checkout lanes and pet supply stores (next to the bird cages). It can be a rider to some kind of anti-pollution ordinance.

People talked about "Total Recall" during the election, but actually the Total Recall is yet to come--when the California voters recall the Democratic legislators too, the first time they give Governor Schwarzenegger any trouble. The anger of California voters wasn't just against Gray Davis. The Democratic-controlled legislature passed those horrendous laws, like the one that tripled the car registration fee.

[ October 14, 2003, 05:50 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
 

---

Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
 
The archers loosed their arrows at the advancing enemy.

The LA Times loosed its reporters on Schwarzenegger.

California voters loosed the governator on the Democrats.
 

---

Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
 
Lol! You peplle is with grammar obbsessed!
 

---

Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
 

quote:

---

Davis lost us 30 billion dollars with his energy contract with PG&E. That's public record. The recall election cost us 58 million. That's a fraction of what Davis lost us.

---

It wouldn't have cost you anything to not elect Davis to begin with.
 

---

Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
 
True, Dobbie, but it is better that those who foolishly voted for Democrats learn their lesson, than go on living in denial. Let's see how many of those bums in the California legislature get turned out of office in the next election.
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
"but it is better that those who foolishly voted for Democrats learn their lesson, than go on living in denial."

Hey, it's a partisan version of the Problem of Evil: "We need a two-party system, so that people who vote for the wrong party can learn the error of their ways!"
 

---

Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
 
They could have learned their lesson for free by listening to Rush.
 

---