Detailed Programmatic Specificity
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by overloaded » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:31 pm
Does anyone know WTF "Detailed Programmatic Specificty" is???
therealROSSCO wrote:Now listen to this loud and clear.....
I have not been approached to coach at the WFC this year, next year or any year. I have not approached the WFC to coach this year, next year or any year. This is an unconditional statement.
- overloaded
- 2009 Punting Comp Winner
-
- Posts: 6909
- Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:48 am
- Location: far queue
- Has liked: 0 time
- Been liked: 0 time
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by mick » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:38 pm
Sounds like a Ruddism to me.
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by overloaded » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:59 pm
I guess we will find out what it means in due season
therealROSSCO wrote:Now listen to this loud and clear.....
I have not been approached to coach at the WFC this year, next year or any year. I have not approached the WFC to coach this year, next year or any year. This is an unconditional statement.
- overloaded
- 2009 Punting Comp Winner
-
- Posts: 6909
- Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:48 am
- Location: far queue
- Has liked: 0 time
- Been liked: 0 time
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by Squawk » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:39 pm
It is a Ruddism. It's meant to mean that nothing tangible is going to arise.
Detailed - as is.
Programmatic - another version of "program" , in this case, the Climate Change proposals.
Specificity - a concrete target or objective.
Basically, I think he was saying that the MEF forum he was at was only at a point of agreeing on principles, and was at a point where the detail of any specific outcomes could be agreed.
Detailed - as is.
Programmatic - another version of "program" , in this case, the Climate Change proposals.
Specificity - a concrete target or objective.
Basically, I think he was saying that the MEF forum he was at was only at a point of agreeing on principles, and was at a point where the detail of any specific outcomes could be agreed.
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by dedja » Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:50 pm
Rudd just said it to help out the Chaser boys ...
Dunno, I’m just an idiot.
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by Jimmy_041 » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:38 am
dedja wrote:Rudd just said it to help out the Chaser boys ...
dedja: Dunno, I’m just an idiot.
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by overloaded » Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:41 am
Squawk wrote:Basically, I think he was saying that the MEF forum he was at was only at a point of agreeing on principles, and was at a point where the detail of any specific outcomes could be agreed.
Are you serious or taking the p1ss?
therealROSSCO wrote:Now listen to this loud and clear.....
I have not been approached to coach at the WFC this year, next year or any year. I have not approached the WFC to coach this year, next year or any year. This is an unconditional statement.
- overloaded
- 2009 Punting Comp Winner
-
- Posts: 6909
- Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:48 am
- Location: far queue
- Has liked: 0 time
- Been liked: 0 time
Re: Detailed Programmatic Specificity
by Squawk » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:42 pm
overloaded wrote:Squawk wrote:Basically, I think he was saying that the MEF forum he was at was only at a point of agreeing on principles, and was at a point where the detail of any specific outcomes could be agreed.
Are you serious or taking the p1ss?
Yes - except I left out the word "not"!
So, should have said "Basically, I think he was saying that the MEF forum he was at was only at a point of agreeing on principles, and was NOT at a point where the detail of any specific outcomes could be agreed."
The way these things usually work is that everything is agreed in principle before big meetings take place. Even the communiques are pre-written so they can just walk out with their announcements in hand. In this case, Rudd seems to have taken a proposal to the forum. Because nothing else could be found to come out of the meeting that constituted what you might call "progress", the leaders latched on to his proposal and lauded it as something they were looking in to themselves. That's why there were no details that could be given....
So yes, I was serious!
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
General Talk Politics
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Advertisements by Advertisement Management