posted
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.
posted
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! Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
I wonder how often it is used in contemporary times? Antony used it resoundingly, but are there any more modern examples?
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?
posted
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. Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
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.
Dang, maybe EVERYONE quotes this incorrectly.
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.
posted
I did an internet search on "loose the dogs of war," and came up with over 1,800 hits, and most of them are attributed to Shakespeare. Looks like everyone misremembers this line. It's clearly taken on a life of its own.
I thought maybe it was the fault of Star Trek VI, The Undiscovered Country, where the rogue Klingon Captain Chang quotes this line--but I just reviewed the movie, and Christopher Plummer recited it correctly: "...let slip the dogs of war."
Apparently many of us are unconsciously improving upon Shakespeare. "Loose the dogs of war" sounds more thrilling as action than "Let slip the dogs of war."
[ October 14, 2003, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like the thought behind "let slip the dogs of war" though. Loose implies control - I can set them off, and I can call them back. Let slip is like a letting the lead to a raging bull out of your hands - you can't get it back.
Did Shakespeare do that on purpose? Maybe the alteration in the quotation has taken hold because the idea of the dogs of war, once let go, being out of control is not empowering enough to those who wish to rouse public opinion.
Can you imagine Bush? "Let me unhook the dam." versus the "Give me the power to flood the village."
posted
Cute, Dan. That perfectly illustrates the point.
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.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Katharina, to your mind "loose" must connote "loosen," which is something that can be done in degrees. But to my mind, "loose" is a synonym to "launch." Once you loose them, they're on their way beyond recall.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
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. Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
"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.
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 ]
Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
*laugh* Evil, evil Papa Moose. *spreads open palms* I have no defense. I should have known this.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
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*
Posts: 6213 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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*
posted
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.
Posts: 836 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
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 ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1794 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"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!" Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) 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.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
Hobbesy, it was driving me crazy. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
