This, from nationally syndicated columnist Georgie Anne Geyer, who revealed not long ago that she had considered Donald Rumsfeld a friend--until the Iraq war. (Chicago Tribune, July 9, 2004).

"When this unusual Republican administration was struggling to come to power four years ago, one of the major pluses for the electorate, surely for me, was that this group had more Washington and international experience than virtually any new administration in history: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell. Among them and others, they supposedly knew the world like the back of their hands and would deal with it with expertise, sophistication and elan.

As it turned out, none of these men could even read a page in the Encyclopaedia Brittanica that might have alerted them to how Iraqis have behaved throughout history; they couldn't figure out where those much touted weapons of mass destruction were, or weren't, and their vast 'experience,' undiluted by modesty and inflamed with hubris, did not lend them any parlor manners with other governments in the world nor facility in husbanding the nation's resources in order to lead the world."

Already, the Republicans are questioning John Edwards experience, or lack thereof.

Geyer's thoughts might be a good point of departure for a discussion on the value of experience.

Joe B.

Shallow definition of friendship.

The author confuses friendship with friendly acquaintenceship. Or she has shallow relationships with others and has never had true friends. True in the complete sense of the word. In either case, fidelity and courage are not her strongest attribute, for a friend.

Bot

Posted by Botnst: The author confuses friendship with friendly acquaintenceship. Or she has shallow relationships with others and has never had true friends. True in the complete sense of the word. In either case, fidelity and courage are not her strongest attribute, for a friend.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I think it was Rummy who dumped her as a friend, after something negative she had written about the Iraq war. At least, that's the impression I got after reading the column in which she mentioned this. So all that bad stuff you said about her sense of friendship probably applies to the Rum Man. So I think it is that fidelity and courage are not HIS strongest attributes, for a friend.

Joe B.

I realize in my original post that I may not have made that clear.

Joe B.

Neither of us is certain, now.

Bot

Posted by Botnst: Neither of us is certain, now.

Bot

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True. And unless we have Rummy's and Georgie's phone numbers, and can arrange a conference call, we can't be sure. But I read her column, and I have expressed the impression it gave me.

Joe B.

And we have learned,...what?

Posted by Botnst: And we have learned,...what?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The issue of the Rummy/Geyer friendship was only a sidebar to my original post, as I think you must know.

I was far more interested in seeing people's reactions to what she said--that is, her assessment of how experience does, or does not, really matter.

I only mentioned the friendship thing to give the forum an idea that this woman was, at one time, a friend of Rumsfeld's, a relationship that might demonstrate that she was not, nor is now, any sort of ideological zealot, so folks might be able to judge where she was coming from--at least to some degree.

Joe B.

I understand your post and believe you to be honestly portraying it.

What I learned from it was that she either was a false friend and thus, betrayal of her friendship meant little to her.

Or she was never more than a friendly acquaintance and abuses us, her readers, with a false pretense of true friendship.

In either case, her opinion suffers to the degree that she claims any friendship with somebody whom she then disparages.

Bot

Posted by Botnst: What I learned from it was that she either was a false friend and thus, betrayal of her friendship meant little to her.

Or she was never more than a friendly acquaintance and abuses us, her readers, with a false pretense of true friendship.

In either case, her opinion suffers to the degree that she claims any friendship with somebody whom she then disparages.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another false either/or. As a professional, she has every right to call em as she sees em. If Rumsfeld cannot handle her criticism of how he conducts his office, then he isn't much of a friend. It's the old love the sinner, hate his sin idea.

From my point of view, friends ought to be able to disagree, and still be friends. My circle of friends includes a pretty wide range, and I do not detect a reluctance to express disagreement among them. Sounds like it's much different with you.

Joe B.

Posted by Botnst: In either case, her opinion suffers to the degree that she claims any friendship with somebody whom she then disparages.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She didn't disparage him, just what he did.

Joe B.

Posted by Botnst: Good point and makes a difference, but does not change my opinion of her, nor the degree to which I discount the opinion of a false pretense used as a tool of argumentation.

Bot

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, because she has revealed to her readers (in a previous column), that she once considered Rumsfeld a friend, but that the friendship did not survive her comments about the Iraq war, you find her opinions less worthy?

I just don't see it. In my mind, her opinions ought to be just as worthy of scrutiny as anyone else's. They stand, or do not stand, on the merits.

Most curious is how Rumsfeld escapes your judgment entirely. The fact that he let her stated negative opinions about something he did get in the way of friendship does not result in the same judgment you gave her.

Joe B.

To use friendship with a third party as a device to make an argument, It cheapens and demeans both the relationship and the writer.

Ever read the scandal when V.P. Thomas Jefferson demeaned President Washington to his correspondents? Recall at that time the Prez and Veep were the first and second vote getter, not a paired-ticket. The Veep disagreed with the Prez and impugned Washington's mental abilities. What was gained by Jefferson that could not be gained by honorable means and reasoned argument? If honor and reason are inadequate, why pursue a goal for which these attributes are insufficient.

In the end, Washington got a personal denial from Jefferson that any such letter existed (not knowing that Washington had it) and further, that he (Jefferson did not believe that. Washington accepted that and never revealed the letter or its source to Jefferson.

Joe,

Maybe if you delete the entire thread and start over without the reference to friendship, you can get the discussion going on the subject you intended.

I am actually in awe of Bush calling out Edwards on experience. It is like the argument over Kerry's Vietnam experience and Bush being AWOL for his National Guard Duty, and having anyone do anything but laugh at it.

If Cheney called him out on experience the discussion might seem less ludicrous. But Bush? And the response that Cheney could be President. Was that a Freudian slip? Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

Based on the title of the thread, neither was it the intended topic of discussion. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)