December 03, 2003

More Word Games

I'm with Jackie and Natalie: say what you want about Donald Rumsfeld, his statement about "known unknowns" is quite plain, and perfectly comprehensible. What's confusing is how an organization that calls itself the Plain English Campaign can have failed to recognize it.

(By the way, I took a bit of time off there, so I failed to note that Jackie's au currant has a new url.)

Posted by Dr. Frank at December 3, 2003 06:02 PM | TrackBack
Comments

for the most part, i agree that it makes sense. however, there are certain parts of the entire article that are definitely contradicting other parts and come off as a bit silly.

Posted by: Amy 80 at December 3, 2003 06:08 PM

One problem is that, when written down (and therefore stripped of inflection) it looks much sillier than it sounded at first. I remember seeing that the first time and thinking "that makes more sense than it should, considering that he used the word 'unknown' about 50 times."

Plus, it's fun & easly to mock the "dumb Americans."

Posted by: Steve Gigl at December 3, 2003 06:26 PM

I'm sure there are about a thousand quotes that Donald Rumsfeld has made over the past year that he would like to take back. Somebody had to call him on it. This one just looks the funniest in print because of all the repeated phrasing. The quote itself makes sense if you want it to and doesn't if you don't. It's funny for fans and critics alike.

Posted by: Tim at December 3, 2003 07:30 PM

If you get this soon, I'm the one who's putting on a benefit concert in the mcclatchy high school auditorium. I don't know if your band members passed on the word, but there it is. I need to know right away if you guys can play or not so that we can book other bands if necessary and start making flyers, and so we can tell the Bee writer who's playing because they're doing a feature on the show. So, even if you're declining, I'd like to hear back. Thanks.
-Elisa Hough
916 456-7911

Posted by: Elisa Hough at December 4, 2003 07:38 AM

Okay, now the Iraqis/Al Queda/Saddam's Royal Guard have attempted to assisinate Mr. Rumsfeld. Now the liberals and the liberal media doesn't have to any more. Are you happy?

Posted by: Channon at December 4, 2003 11:54 PM

Why would Saddam try to assasinate his business partner?

Posted by: Keith at December 5, 2003 04:10 AM

I know *I'd* never try to kill anyone whose hand I'd ever shaken, especially if someone photographed the handshake. That shit'll come back to haunt you, fer sure, and then nothing else you or the other guy ever do will matter, because somebody has a photo of you shaking hands with him.

*groan* C'mon man, what is this, the frickin' movies? Sure, a picture's worth a thousand words, but in this case 997 of the words are just "fluh" or equally empty variations thereof.

Posted by: geoff at December 5, 2003 05:02 PM

He could have used a better choice of words, but it still makes sense. I don't understand how people who devote their lives to words and word usage don't get this concept.

Posted by: Davey at December 5, 2003 07:41 PM

Geoff, it's more precisely like seeing an early episode of a long-running show, then tuning out till the networks run ads for a cliffhanger season-ender.

Posted by: JB at December 6, 2003 03:28 PM

His statement, while coherent, is obviously not "plain".

Posted by: wrapper at December 6, 2003 04:36 PM

here's something that's probably not fitting that well, but here we go anyways...how many epiphone coronets in what colors do you have? you mentioned you had bunch of very interesting ones a while back...

Posted by: michael at December 11, 2003 12:18 AM