Special Disinterests

Paul O'Neill (the former Treasury Secretary) was recently quoted as calling President Bush "disinterested and unengaged." In that context, the statement was universally interpreted as meaning that Bush was indifferent rather than unbiased.

Being an editor, I'd prefer the unambiguous use of the word "uninterested" in lieu of "disinterested."

However, checking Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, I learned the following:

Defintion 1: unbiased by personal interest or advantage; not influenced by selfish motive.

However...


Definition 2: not interested; indifferent.

Webster's goes onto say:

"'Disinterested' was originally used to mean 'not interested, indifferent'; 'uninterested' in its earliest use meant 'impartial.'"

Whoa! you learn something new every day.

Webster's continues:

"By various developmental twists, 'disinterested' is now used in both senses; 'uninterested' [is used] mainly in the sense of 'not interested; indifferent.'"

So 'disinterested' can be used either way? I guess I was wrong.

But wait a minute. Webster's goes on to say:

"Many object to the use of 'disinterested' to mean 'not interested; indifferent' and continue to reserve the word strictly for the sense, 'impartial:' A disinterested observer is the best judge of behavior.

Aha! Vindication. I'm so happy being right.

Regardless, I propose a new definition:

disinterested - describing a politician who isn't influenced by "special interests"

And finally, I'll coin a new term:

"Special Disinterest" - an appalling lack of concern for the American people whom you allegedly serve.

What do you think?