Re: FW: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
G'day Jim, > I've lost your answer to the below, but if I remember my original > point, the idea of Caligula naming himself "Germanicus" isn't that different > from Reagan being dubbed "Granadicus," Bush "Panamacus," or Clinton > "Sudanicus." (They're a bunch of cusses, too.) If memory serves, Caligula was all that was left of the loinfruit of Germanicus Caesar (brilliant and popular general, serial kicker of Rhineland butt, son of Nero, and probably ultimately victim of Tiberius's chemists). Hence Caligula's full name (the Caligula bit - little boots - being a nickname attached to him in childhood, when he was given to swanning about in custom-made military footware). Mind you, the commander of eight legions in the Rhineland would have had a much harder time of it (the northerners were quite capable of exterminating the odd legion) than would Unca Sam's Commander-in-Chief with the likes of Granada, Panama and the Sudan ... Merry Xmas from a smoky NSW, Rob.
FW: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
I've lost Justin's e-mail address, but this message may be worthwhile to the list as a whole... I've lost your answer to the below, but if I remember my original point, the idea of Caligula naming himself "Germanicus" isn't that different from Reagan being dubbed "Granadicus," Bush "Panamacus," or Clinton "Sudanicus." (They're a bunch of cusses, too.) -Original Message- From: Devine, James To: 'Justin Schwartz ' Sent: 12/23/01 7:29 PM Subject: RE: [PEN-L:20888] Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom! Germanicus wasn't an emperor, just a general. He was the father of Caligula, though. if I remember correctly, Caligula called himself Germanicus, too. JD
Re: Re: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
Carrol says: > >I keep remembering Eisenhower's years, when everyone had a ball mocking >his clumsy rhetoric and suggesting he wasn't too bright. It was a hoax, >a rather deliberate one. It is particularly unwise to try to estimate >intelligence on the basis of someone's command of language: that can be >very deceptive. It is quite possible for highly intelligent people to be >consistent bumblers in their speaking and writing. > >Never underestimate an enemy. > Carrol's point is good. With Ike, though, there was a lot of evidence that he was no fool. He'd done a superb job as CiC of the Western allied forces in WWII, and was a tolerable prez of Columbia. Even his command of language wasn't so awful. He wrote Crusade in Europe, no doubt with some help, but it's readable. There is no evidence that theShrub has ever even read a book. Imagining him writing one is beyond my capacity. And there is a fair amount of evidence that he's been a failure at everything he has put his handto. However, and this is key, he's surrounded with very smart and dangerous people who seem, so far, to be able to submerge their differences enough to act in a fairly coherent manner. Moreover, as the examples of Reagan and indeed Lyndon Johnson or Harry Truman show, analytical intelligence is not necesasry for political success. Or, closer to home, Carrol, our own Richard M. Daley, Da Mayor (the dad of the current boss). Or, to range further afield, there is one Josip Dzuglishvili, aka Stalin, and there is Adolph Hitler. These were all superb politicians. None of them had anything like what one would consider to be the sort of brains foe which professors or lawyers are rewarded. It didn't matter. Now, the Shrub (so far) isn't in their league. But people can learn. Truman did. Before he had greatness thrust upon him, he was a low grade machine hack, picked for precisely that reason. He became the architect of the first cold war, and from his point of view, did a fabulous job. Who can tell about the Shrub? But he's off toa good start. We can't deny he's handled this situation very well. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
Justin Schwartz wrote: > > lots of people are sympathetic to the > Shrub precisely because he's unininterested, not too bright, and not very > well-informed--sort of like them. So making fun of him for being a moron, as > opposed to despising his politics, is probably a political mistake. > I keep remembering Eisenhower's years, when everyone had a ball mocking his clumsy rhetoric and suggesting he wasn't too bright. It was a hoax, a rather deliberate one. It is particularly unwise to try to estimate intelligence on the basis of someone's command of language: that can be very deceptive. It is quite possible for highly intelligent people to be consistent bumblers in their speaking and writing. Never underestimate an enemy. Carrol
Re: RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
following the >lead of ancient Roman emperors, US Presidents to add titles to their names >to indicate their victorie: Ronald Grenadacus Reagan, George Panamacus >Bush, >Bill Sudanicus Clinton, Dubya Afghanistanicus Bush... One problem is that >last on the list wouldn't be able to spell his own name. >JD I don't think the emperrors did this much; it was the victious generals of the Repubic, like Scipio Africanus, so honored for defeating the Carthaginians. It wouldn't be a middle name, anyway. ANd as for the Shrub, ignorance and illteracy have never held him back, maybe the opposite. I think, in fact, that it's a backlash--lots of people are sympathetic to the Shrub precisely because he's unininterested, not too bright, and not very well-informed--sort of like them. So making fun of him for being a moron, as opposed to despising his politics, is probably a political mistake. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: No recognition for Enduring Freedom!
>American representatives overwhelmed those of every other country at the inauguration ceremony. There was General Tommy Franks - who might have expected a victor ludorum after vanquishing the Taliban -< this reminds me of a proposal that I think still is relevant: following the lead of ancient Roman emperors, US Presidents to add titles to their names to indicate their victorie: Ronald Grenadacus Reagan, George Panamacus Bush, Bill Sudanicus Clinton, Dubya Afghanistanicus Bush... One problem is that last on the list wouldn't be able to spell his own name. JD
