gingrich - 'legitimate insurgency in CT'

[imind]

There is nothing violent implied by Newt's remark. In fact, he went beyond what was called for when he specifically labelled the voters as a legitimate insurgency - they did nothing immoral or illegal, since they acted well within accepted practices.

i think he used 'legitimate' only to imply that these people are true insurgents (a legitimate threat to america), and i also think motivez correct in his suggestion that the word, before used to describe an enemy entity in iraq, has meanings well beyond what the dictionary currently lists.

please elaborate on this 'trap', and i still await an answer regarding the hate.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Phantom

the we agree, except you think it was underhanded, and I think it was clever.

I'm curious who is going to be the first to come out and publicly attack him for this. It obviously a trap, and someone always falls for this stuff.

Of course it was underhanded. He meant it a certain way. It might have been clever, but cleverly underhanded.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by imind

i think he used 'legitimate' only to imply that these people are true insurgents (a legitimate threat to america), and i also think motivez correct in his suggestion that the word, before used to describe an enemy entity in iraq, has meanings well beyond what the dictionary currently lists.

please elaborate on this 'trap', and i still await an answer regarding the hate.

legitimate:

le·git·i·mate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (l-jt-mt)
adj.
Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practices.

He used legitimate to describe the process as lawful, within acceptable practices - by far the most common meaning of the word.

The trap is some fool is going to complain about his word choice, but his words are a super-precise description of what actually happened. Whoever decides to attack Newt is going to look foolish because it will suggest the attacker does not have a firm grasp of the meaning of the words used for which Newt is being attacked.

[motivez]

I don't think so

They might know the definition is "accurate", but can attack the use of the word because of how it's used currently in the popular mindset of Americans

[imind]

The trap is some fool is going to complain about his word choice, but his words are a super-precise description of what actually happened. Whoever decides to attack Newt is going to look foolish because it will suggest the attacker does not have a firm grasp of the meaning of the words used for which Newt is being attacked.

if i heard of another complaining about newts choice of words i would never have thought, 'my, this person doesn't quite have a firm grasp on the english language. as we all know, and as i've already pointed out, words can take on meanings beyond what webster lists.

clever? pretty friggin dumb if you ask me.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by imind

if i heard of another complaining about newts choice of words i would never have thought, 'my, this person doesn't quite have a firm grasp on the english language. as we all know, and as i've already pointed out, words can take on meanings beyond what webster lists.

clever? pretty friggin dumb if you ask me.

dumb? Was that word choice a joke? Either way

Should we just praise ignorance of the English language, maybe teach ebonics as well since "words can take on meanings..."

It's only "dumb" if you don't understand the language.

[IminWonderland]

I'll jump in as the resident English major...

That dictionary definition of legitimate, is correct.

But I think the more common use of legitimate is to imply that something is to be reckoned with. I think it has less to do with lawfulness, and more to do with being something to be recognized.

Like, if I were to say, "There is a legitimate war against terror", it doesn't necessarily mean that it's "lawful" it could also imply that it's the reality of a situation that makes it something to be recognized.

For him to say "legitimate insurgency" he is using a coined term that the American public knows. We know as Americans, that an insurgent is someone who is not part of a government sanctioned military, that is fighting against occupiers. For him to use that phrase is to imply that CT is getting hijacked by people who we have to recognize as taking something over or changing something.

It's a clever word choice. But I think it's obvious why he said it. And it's not an issue of talking over people's heads. He is using words we know, but in a way that if it came back at him, he could turn it in his favor.

[imind]

Should we just praise ignorance of the English language, maybe teach ebonics as well since "words can take on meanings..."

fucking spare me. the english language is far too elastic for this to be argued intelligently, and your strawman/slippery slope is simply boring.

when someone says 'iraqi insurgent', what comes to mind is/are the people killing our soldiers in iraq, and not...

in·sur·gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.

to deny context has any bearing on the 'meaning' of a word is absurd.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by imind

fucking spare me. the english language is far too elastic for this to be argued intelligently, and your strawman/slippery slope is simply boring.

when someone says 'iraqi insurgent', what comes to mind is/are the people killing our soldiers in iraq, and not...



to deny context has any bearing on the 'meaning' of a word is absurd.

I agree. Context is far more defining than a dictionary definition.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by Phantom

The word choice was awesome.

the word "insurgent" perfectly describes what happened in Conn. Maybe you guys need to take another look at the definition. From dictionary.com:



This is exactly what happened. The (legitimate) voters rebelled against the leadership of a political party. The fact that our press today labels our enemies in war with the same term is just what makes this interesting.

this word choice was brilliant IMO and anyone who attacks it publicly is going to look like a fool.

No, who looks like a fool is anyone who tries to act act like like denotation, and not connotation, was all that went into Newt's word choice. To claim Newt wasn't aware of the obvious terrorist connotation of the word is to say he's an idiot, which sort of conflicts with your calling his choice "brilliant."