>On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> > The word choice was the expression of a loser, of someone who has
> totally given up on politics, a loser, and is reduced to the childish
> practice of calling the victorious enemy names.
>
>But of course, "loser" is not a name.
>
>Doug
loser = someone who has given up on politics. He certainly is being rhetorically sly by drawing on the rhetorical power of the word, but I'm gonna guess that it's his point. Rhee's politics, policies, actions could have been called ugly using the same rhetorical tactic.
But when you call someone's appearance ugly, the audience latches on to the word, loser or ugly (or your buddy's word, "scum") and they audience is free and encourages to leave a discussion of Rhee's politics behind.
When your buddy called you "Scum" in his review of Wall St., you took it in stride and included it on your dust jacket. But that was exactly the point: the name caller was just laughable, his impotent inability to get up an argument against you was revealed in the name calling. He had no argument and he didn't treat you as having one worthy of understanding and critiquing either.