Suppose you are wrong about Rumsfeld. Suppose he is smart enough to know exactly what he did wrong.
Suppose further that his beliefs are (a) not to take on political water for those errors and (b) to work in earnest to correct them.
How does someone who isn't contributing to the solutions helpful? What is the benefit of publically discussing what is wrong, when you already know the challenge?
This suggests why, maybe, Aldeman had to be spoken over and why he needed to be removed.
No appeal to "absolute power" necessary.
Andrew must be getting almost as bad as I have become in my old age, dropping letters and worse.
Better rewrite:
sullylink
Suppose further that his beliefs are (a) not to take on political water for those errors and (b) to work in earnest to correct them.
How does someone who isn't contributing to the solutions helpful? What is the benefit of publically discussing what is wrong, when you already know the challenge?
This suggests why, maybe, Aldeman had to be spoken over and why he needed to be removed.
No appeal to "absolute power" necessary.
I've personally known both Donald Rumsfeld and Ken Adelman for a long time. My brutal criticism of Rumsfeld ended, as I knew it had to, our acquaintanceship, although it did not end my personal fondness for him and his family.
Andrew must be getting almost as bad as I have become in my old age, dropping letters and worse.
Better rewrite:
I've personally known both Donald Rumsfeld and Ken Adelman for a long time. My brutal criticism of Rumsfeld ended our acquaintanceship, as I knew it had to, although it did not end my personal fondness for him and his family.
sullylink
