The reader known as Confused in the Great Midwest wrote a comment to my prior post on "Cronies." You can read the comment by going to the highlighted area at the end of that post. In the comment are two things: a question about the meaning of a comma--presence of one, or the lack of one--in the section of the Constitution that was being discussed; and, a reference to a very interesting article in Vanity Fair on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
With regard to the question asked about the comma, my answer is: I have no idea if there are any "rules of grammar" that might confer meaning on the presence or absence of a comma, but my personal opinion in this case is that it makes no difference.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Monday, January 9, 2012
Cronies here, cronies there, cronies everywhere
The "silly season" of politics begins with silliness, courtesy of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney was head-spinningly silly last week when he called President Obama a "crony capitalist." He made a silly statement within an interesting political context that is not well-described by daily news sound-bites. Which makes it worthwhile for discussion here.
If memory serves, for the last three years or more the prejudicial label applied to the President by the anti-Obama crowd has been "socialist." Now, it seems that the leading candidate from the other side is blaming Mr. Obama for being a capitalist.
Both labels cannot be accurate; it's either one or the other, or neither.
What is a "crony capitalist" anyway? Sitting next to me is a ponderous book called Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. It contains no entry for "crony capitalist," but it does define the word "crony" in this way: "a close friend or companion; chum. --Syn. pal, buddy." The same source defines the word "capitalist" with three meanings in this manner: "1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises. 2. an advocate of capitalism. 3. a very wealthy person."
A crony capitalist, then, is a capitalist who invests with, or does business with, friends, pals, buddies and chums.
I have friends, pals and buddies, so apparently I have cronies. And I call myself a capitalist, although am not able to aspire to Webster's definition #3 of that term.
Mr. Romney is a very wealthy person, and he probably considers himself a capitalist. He certainly fits the definitions. Years ago he founded the firm Bain Capital with a friend, or maybe it was with a pal or a buddy. In any case, it sounds like Mr. Romney is a "crony capitalist."
If memory serves, for the last three years or more the prejudicial label applied to the President by the anti-Obama crowd has been "socialist." Now, it seems that the leading candidate from the other side is blaming Mr. Obama for being a capitalist.
Both labels cannot be accurate; it's either one or the other, or neither.
What is a "crony capitalist" anyway? Sitting next to me is a ponderous book called Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. It contains no entry for "crony capitalist," but it does define the word "crony" in this way: "a close friend or companion; chum. --Syn. pal, buddy." The same source defines the word "capitalist" with three meanings in this manner: "1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises. 2. an advocate of capitalism. 3. a very wealthy person."
A crony capitalist, then, is a capitalist who invests with, or does business with, friends, pals, buddies and chums.
I have friends, pals and buddies, so apparently I have cronies. And I call myself a capitalist, although am not able to aspire to Webster's definition #3 of that term.
Mr. Romney is a very wealthy person, and he probably considers himself a capitalist. He certainly fits the definitions. Years ago he founded the firm Bain Capital with a friend, or maybe it was with a pal or a buddy. In any case, it sounds like Mr. Romney is a "crony capitalist."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)