Words is funny. The way we use
them. The way we think we know what they mean. The many times we don't. How
little difference it all makes.
Two examples. Sarah Palin recently
appeared at a conference in front of Iowa Republicans and her teleprompter
malfunctioned, so she didn't have the words in front of her in the exact order
they were supposed to be. Undeterred, forthright, and roguish person that she
is, she launched into an incoherent and rambling rant.
Conservative attendees called her
speech "coarse" and "bizarre." NationalReview.com, no
slouch in the conservative department itself, though apparently with a larger
vocabulary, said that Palin had collapsed into "self-parody" and
"ignominious pasquinade."
Harsh words indeed. I think. I,
like I'm sure many of the Review's reviewers, had no idea what pasquinade meant
until I looked it up. It means "public satire or lampoon" in case
you're interested.
Whatever. Sure sounds cool though.
Ignominious pasquinade. Kind of like a review for a wine. Or a delicacy in a
fine restaurant. Yes, I'll have the ignominious pasquinade, please. Medium rare
if you don't mind.
No matter, as a Harvard researcher
recently proved, most people believe whatever nonsense you put out there.
According to The Week magazine, he used a random text generator to write a
phony study and then had the gibberish accepted for publication by 17 medical
journals. You know, the ones they always use as reviewers in the phrase "a
journal reviewed study."
For some reason, even the study's
title didn't give it away: "Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs."
Hmmm. I wonder if the study was
accidentally placed in Sarah Palin's teleprompter and it didn't malfunction
after all.
When it comes to describing Sarah
Palin, I like Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs way better than ignominious pasquinade.
America, ya gotta love it.
No comments:
Post a Comment