| Author |
Message |
Pete
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: last straw |
|
|
From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet
Miers the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said,
"Holy cow - nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean? Does it means kind of like "last
chance". Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"?
Here in this article, she obviously isn't getting any more
opportunity.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lars Eighner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
In our last episode,
<13tam1lq5i4n3q29d81tvdn13i17ct3v10@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented Pete
broadcast on alt.usage.english:
| Quote: | From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet
Miers the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said,
"Holy cow - nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean?
|
It's the straw that broke the camel's back - the one additional
thing that made the whole unbearable.
| Quote: | Does it means kind of like "last
chance".
|
No. It's one past the "last chance."
| Quote: | Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"?
|
No.
| Quote: | Here in this article, she obviously isn't getting any more
opportunity.
|
That's right. It was the last straw. It broke the camel's
back. The Meirs nomination is a camel with a broken back.
--
Lars Eighner eighner@io.com http://www.larseighner.com/
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
and not drift, nor lie at anchor. --Oliver Wendell Holmes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:43:20 +0000, Pete wrote:
| Quote: | From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet Miers
the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said, "Holy cow
- nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean? Does it means kind of like "last chance".
Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"? Here in this
article, she obviously isn't getting any more opportunity.
|
I don't know the parable very well, but its about a camel carying a heavy
load. The owner kept putting on more and more until, finaly, the last
straw broke the camel's back.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:51:26 GMT, Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:43:20 +0000, Pete wrote:
From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet Miers
the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said, "Holy cow
- nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean? Does it means kind of like "last chance".
Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"? Here in this
article, she obviously isn't getting any more opportunity.
I don't know the parable very well, but its about a camel carying a heavy
load. The owner kept putting on more and more until, finaly, the last
straw broke the camel's back.
|
There's a saying relating to the way in which managers keep on giving you extra
little jobs to do, but not allowing any more time. I don't know where it came
from, although it sounds like a "Peter Principle". It goes :-
"n+1 trivial tasks take the same length of time as n trivial tasks until some
unknown value of n, at which point the time taken suddenly becomes infinite".
There's a last straw in there.
--
Jim
the polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:59 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
Jim Lawton wrote:
| Quote: |
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:51:26 GMT, Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:43:20 +0000, Pete wrote:
From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet Miers
the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said, "Holy cow
- nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean? Does it means kind of like "last chance".
Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"? Here in this
article, she obviously isn't getting any more opportunity.
I don't know the parable very well, but its about a camel carying a heavy
load. The owner kept putting on more and more until, finaly, the last
straw broke the camel's back.
There's a saying relating to the way in which managers keep on giving you extra
little jobs to do, but not allowing any more time. I don't know where it came
from, although it sounds like a "Peter Principle". It goes :-
"n+1 trivial tasks take the same length of time as n trivial tasks until some
unknown value of n, at which point the time taken suddenly becomes infinite".
|
That sounds like a corollary to Parkinson's Law, which holds that the
amount of effort devoted to a give task equals the time available.
See: <http://www.heretical.com/miscella/parkinsl.html>.
The Peter Principle holds that people will receive promotions until
they reach a job beyond their ability to perform, at which point they
will cease receiving promotions. This helps explain why so many
people are incompetent. In fact, it's not a bad explanation of the
Bush Administration. See <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html>.
--
Bob Lieblich
Living examplar of both |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R H Draney
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:03 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
Robert Lieblich filted:
| Quote: |
The Peter Principle holds that people will receive promotions until
they reach a job beyond their ability to perform, at which point they
will cease receiving promotions. This helps explain why so many
people are incompetent. In fact, it's not a bad explanation of the
Bush Administration. See <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html>.
|
Actually, it's a very poor explanation of the Bush Administration...Dubya was
already incompetent before they started promoting him....r |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
R H Draney wrote:
| Quote: |
Robert Lieblich filted:
The Peter Principle holds that people will receive promotions until
they reach a job beyond their ability to perform, at which point they
will cease receiving promotions. This helps explain why so many
people are incompetent. In fact, it's not a bad explanation of the
Bush Administration. See <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html>.
Actually, it's a very poor explanation of the Bush Administration...Dubya was
already incompetent before they started promoting him....r
|
Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that. He was also good at making money
by accepting gifts from his father's friends and backers. He was even
good at playing to people's prejudices (with lots of help, to be sure)
so he could get elected. He remains extremely good at letting Karl
Rove do his political strategizing. Sadly, he can't run a
government. We learned that the hard way.
The foregoing is strictly my personal opinion, leavened with hyperbole
(in case anyone was wondering).
--
Bob Lieblich
Proud to have voted against Dubya in the last two national elections |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:13:56 -0500, Robert Lieblich
<robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Tony Cooper wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:53:18 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that.
Snipping the rest to isolate this from any connection to a particular
person....
I feel uncomfortable hearing a person referred to as a "drunk" or a
"druggie" when the person in question was a user of drink or drugs,
but neither an habitual user nor an addicted user.
A "drunk", to me, is an alcoholic. and a "druggie" is an addict. They
are not terms to be bandied about and used casually. Since there is
no such thing as a former alcoholic or a former addict, the terms
can't be waved off as references to youthful indiscretions.
I was using the casual terms precisely because I didn't want to be
clinical about it. I do not consider "drunk" and "alcoholic" exact
synonyms. Same for "addict" and "druggie." I won't challenge you if
you use them differently, Tony, but assuming that I use them as you do
can lead to misunderstandings. I hope my intent is now clearer.
|
If a drunk is not an alcoholic, then what is a drunk? "A drunk" is
someone who is always drunk, isn't it?
If a druggie is not an addict, then what is a druggie? Isn't it a
person who is always using drugs, and isn't that a description of an
addict?
| Quote: | That is, perhaps, enough of that.
|
Why? We've removed the person and the politics, and are now dealing
with words, word meaning, and connotation. Isn't that within the
purview of aue?
You've implied that you use "drunk" and "druggie" differently than I
do. How would you use either (as a noun) to describe a person who is
not an addicted user of alcohol or drugs?
Would you say "I was a drunk in college" with the non-clinical meaning
that you hoisted a few now and then? Would you say that without
concern that the hearer would think that you spent your college years
in an alcoholic haze?
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
Tony Cooper wrote:
| Quote: |
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:53:18 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that.
Snipping the rest to isolate this from any connection to a particular
person....
I feel uncomfortable hearing a person referred to as a "drunk" or a
"druggie" when the person in question was a user of drink or drugs,
but neither an habitual user nor an addicted user.
A "drunk", to me, is an alcoholic. and a "druggie" is an addict. They
are not terms to be bandied about and used casually. Since there is
no such thing as a former alcoholic or a former addict, the terms
can't be waved off as references to youthful indiscretions.
|
I was using the casual terms precisely because I didn't want to be
clinical about it. I do not consider "drunk" and "alcoholic" exact
synonyms. Same for "addict" and "druggie." I won't challenge you if
you use them differently, Tony, but assuming that I use them as you do
can lead to misunderstandings. I hope my intent is now clearer.
That is, perhaps, enough of that.
--
Bob Lieblich
Mahlerite |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:53:18 -0500, Robert Lieblich
<robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that.
|
Snipping the rest to isolate this from any connection to a particular
person....
I feel uncomfortable hearing a person referred to as a "drunk" or a
"druggie" when the person in question was a user of drink or drugs,
but neither an habitual user nor an addicted user.
A "drunk", to me, is an alcoholic. and a "druggie" is an addict. They
are not terms to be bandied about and used casually. Since there is
no such thing as a former alcoholic or a former addict, the terms
can't be waved off as references to youthful indiscretions.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:40 pm
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:59:08 -0500, Robert Lieblich
<robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Jim Lawton wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:51:26 GMT, Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:43:20 +0000, Pete wrote:
From NY Post:
'93 "Pro-abortion" speech last straw
For many people who were trying to give the president and Harriet Miers
the benefit of the doubt, this was the last straw. People said, "Holy cow
- nothing good comes out and now this,"
What does "last straw" mean? Does it means kind of like "last chance".
Do people normally use it for "having a last opportunity"? Here in this
article, she obviously isn't getting any more opportunity.
I don't know the parable very well, but its about a camel carying a heavy
load. The owner kept putting on more and more until, finaly, the last
straw broke the camel's back.
There's a saying relating to the way in which managers keep on giving you extra
little jobs to do, but not allowing any more time. I don't know where it came
from, although it sounds like a "Peter Principle". It goes :-
"n+1 trivial tasks take the same length of time as n trivial tasks until some
unknown value of n, at which point the time taken suddenly becomes infinite".
That sounds like a corollary to Parkinson's Law, which holds that the
amount of effort devoted to a give task equals the time available.
See: <http://www.heretical.com/miscella/parkinsl.html>.
The Peter Principle holds that people will receive promotions until
they reach a job beyond their ability to perform, at which point they
will cease receiving promotions. This helps explain why so many
people are incompetent. In fact, it's not a bad explanation of the
Bush Administration. See <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html>.
|
You are right of course; I muddled my Peters and Parkies.
--
Jim
the polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:54 pm
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 04:50:12 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:13:56 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Tony Cooper wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:53:18 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that.
Snipping the rest to isolate this from any connection to a particular
person....
I feel uncomfortable hearing a person referred to as a "drunk" or a
"druggie" when the person in question was a user of drink or drugs,
but neither an habitual user nor an addicted user.
A "drunk", to me, is an alcoholic. and a "druggie" is an addict. They
are not terms to be bandied about and used casually. Since there is
no such thing as a former alcoholic or a former addict, the terms
can't be waved off as references to youthful indiscretions.
I was using the casual terms precisely because I didn't want to be
clinical about it. I do not consider "drunk" and "alcoholic" exact
synonyms. Same for "addict" and "druggie." I won't challenge you if
you use them differently, Tony, but assuming that I use them as you do
can lead to misunderstandings. I hope my intent is now clearer.
If a drunk is not an alcoholic, then what is a drunk? "A drunk" is
someone who is always drunk, isn't it?
|
At some point in his life, anyway. I've known some drunks in college
who weren't alcoholics. It could be they often got drunk because it
seemed to be the thing to do when socializing, or because this was
their first experience at not being under the constraints of parents,
or because there is a great deal of peer pressure on people of college
age and younger.
I knew a pot head at UVa who was much the same. He seriously abused
grass, but he left it alone once he left school. An alcoholic is
someone who will always have a problem drinking normally, should he
continue. He's not able to become a social drinker. Similarly with
drug addicts, not that I consider an habitual user of marijuana to be
one.
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ross Howard
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:34 pm
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 04:50:12 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrought:
| Quote: | On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:13:56 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Tony Cooper wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:53:18 -0500, Robert Lieblich
robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
Hey, he started out as good ol' college boy and moved on to drunk and
druggie. He was very good at that.
Snipping the rest to isolate this from any connection to a particular
person....
I feel uncomfortable hearing a person referred to as a "drunk" or a
"druggie" when the person in question was a user of drink or drugs,
but neither an habitual user nor an addicted user.
A "drunk", to me, is an alcoholic. and a "druggie" is an addict. They
are not terms to be bandied about and used casually. Since there is
no such thing as a former alcoholic or a former addict, the terms
can't be waved off as references to youthful indiscretions.
I was using the casual terms precisely because I didn't want to be
clinical about it. I do not consider "drunk" and "alcoholic" exact
synonyms. Same for "addict" and "druggie." I won't challenge you if
you use them differently, Tony, but assuming that I use them as you do
can lead to misunderstandings. I hope my intent is now clearer.
If a drunk is not an alcoholic, then what is a drunk? "A drunk" is
someone who is always drunk, isn't it?
If a druggie is not an addict, then what is a druggie? Isn't it a
person who is always using drugs, and isn't that a description of an
addict?
|
No.
--
Ross Howard |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weatherlawyer
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:20 pm
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
R H Draney wrote:
| Quote: | Robert Lieblich filted:
The Peter Principle holds that people will receive promotions until
they reach a job beyond their ability to perform, at which point they
will cease receiving promotions. This helps explain why so many
people are incompetent. In fact, it's not a bad explanation of the
Bush Administration. See <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html>.
Actually, it's a very poor explanation of the Bush Administration...Dubya was
already incompetent before they started promoting him....r
Perhaps they considered the adage that that which governs least governs |
beast.
And what better beast than Banana Man?
Having seen in Iraq (among other places) what can happen when a
government collapses precipitously, I wonder if any of the tossers set
to replace him will be able to function in such a derelict country as
the USA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dawkins
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:18 am
Post subject: Re: last straw |
|
|
In article <1130844042.425369.52240@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | And what better beast than Banana Man?
|
The Banana Man could stow an amazing assortment of stuff in his pockets
and elsewhere on his person. And no one made a better exit.
--
J. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in