« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Economist: Doan Dodge Confused Mood with Meaning
In the interest of absolute precision, here's The Economist's resident stickler on Lurita Doan's invocation of the "hortatory subjunctive."
Advertisement
« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
In the interest of absolute precision, here's The Economist's resident stickler on Lurita Doan's invocation of the "hortatory subjunctive."
Ms. Doan, who's major at Vassar was English, seems to demonstrate a lifelong pattern of getting poor value for money. Perhaps what she meant to say was that as a member of Team Shrub, she uses Orwellian techniques to abuse the language and Stalinist techniques to abuse ("rehabilitate") her too congressionally cooperative staff.
She also uses classic big business snark, claiming to competently run her agency in the best interests of its taxpayer "shareholders", while really running it in the exclusive interests of its managers.
BTW, the Economist link was only partially useful. Its intentionally mirthful characterization of the GSA as a buyer of pencils and computers is off the mark. The GSA is the principal buyer of all non-defense related purchases for the United States Government. Its tens of thousands of staff annually purchase tens of billions of dollars worth of goods and services.
Even small percentage errors, much less big percentage abuses, cost billions. More than enough to keep the Royals in corgies and kilts, or to pay for Bandar Bush's bribes, or reimburse Republican campaign contributors via lucrative no-bid contracts for "quality" goods and services.
June 14, 2007 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ms. Doan, who's major at Vassar was English, seems to demonstrate a lifelong pattern of getting poor value for money. Perhaps what she meant to say was that as a member of Team Shrub, she uses Orwellian techniques to abuse the language and Stalinist techniques to abuse ("rehabilitate") her too congressionally cooperative staff.
She also uses classic big business snark, claiming to competently run her agency in the best interests of its taxpayer "shareholders", while really running it in the exclusive interests of its managers.
BTW, the Economist link was only partially useful. Its intentionally mirthful characterization of the GSA as a buyer of pencils and computers is off the mark. The GSA is the principal buyer of all non-defense related purchases for the United States Government. Its tens of thousands of staff annually purchase tens of billions of dollars worth of goods and services.
Even small percentage errors, much less big percentage abuses, cost billions. More than enough to keep the Royals in corgies and kilts, or to pay for Bandar Bush's bribes, or reimburse Republican campaign contributors via lucrative no-bid contracts for "quality" goods and services.
June 14, 2007 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
She really thought that her brain was the strongest one in the whole building. I had to post on her use of the 'hortatory subjunctive' after reading about it here. Great stuff!
Here was my initial take on her second round of testimony:
http://deadissue.com/archives/2007/06/13/lurita-doan/
June 14, 2007 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink