FLAT TIRE ON THE STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS
Maverick or Conformist?
IT’S GOOD to have a truly honest discourse about those in our country who have positions of importance, or positions of authority, or positions of power.
To be perfectly reasonable, this isn’t the most important discussion we could be having in our world, but it’s close. In this governance thing that we’ve been trying to perfect for a couple hundred years now, it has surfaced that too many of our authority figures, once ensconced in office, need to be regulated from time to time. We elect them. Then they vote FOR their CONSTITUENTS, they will tell you. Yeah, right. It’s really remarkable how many times these people we elect vote against those who elected them, and vote for any business entity or special interest group that has the dollars to get their attention.
That activity has another name, as detailed at length in my posts on The Power of the Euphemism. The euphemism that legislators throw around with such impunity is “…Campaign Finance.” That translates as taking money from people.
Which brings us to John McCain. McCain really wants to be President. He really does.
Let’s examine Mr. McCain a bit. Hard-drinking playboy as a youth, athlete, friendly guy, son of an Admiral, grandson of an Admiral. So it was decided he would attend Annapolis.
There he continued his reckless ways, and was described by classmates as the ultimate party guy. He came precipitously close to flunking out on more than one occasion, according to Annapolis records, and just as close to being kicked out on another occasion. But the dauntless Naval warrior held on, and graduated: 5th from the bottom of all in his class.
When asked about that recently, McCain said he had only one regret. He said that President Eisenhower was a guest at the graduation that year. When the ceremony was about to wind up, Ike said “…One more thing. I’d like to shake hands and congratulate the anchor man.” Anchor man is the title given to the cadet who graduates dead last - at the very bottom of the class. McCain said in response to the interviewer’s question: “…the only thing I regret was that I couldn’t have graduated last so I could shake hands with President Eisenhower.” And then he grinned.
O-kay …
John McCain – “the Straight Talking Express” he calls his campaign. John McCain, the Maverick. John McCain always speaks the truth, and represents all of us. Well, those carefully crafted campaign lies and slogans soon started taking on water, as the McCain presidential ship started sinking. Let’s see: in the year 2000, the Republican machine was working 28 hours a day at putting a Republican in the White House. The RNC settled on the Governor of Texas because of his name (son of a former President). They desperately wanted to succeed a very successful Democratic President, who left a legacy of $ 4 trillion in Surplus, and the Longest economic boom in United States history (211 years at that point) for the incoming administration to enjoy.
So the RNC literally spared no expense or work to get the job done. The first item to surface in the 2000 campaign vis-à-vis McCain and GW Bush, right after McCain had won the New Hampshire primary, was the much-mentioned smear that the Bush people put out about McCain having fathered an illegitimate non-white child. Any other normal man would have been white hot, even punched Bush in the nose. (I would have.) But McCain took it when Bush lied to his face, and said he knew nothing about it, or where it came from, and soldiered on. Really noteworthy is how seven years later McCain was so willing to let bygones be bygones and embraced Bush with all the apparent affection in the world, as shown in the photo. Is the embrace because he believes in the Bush performance index, or the Bush agenda, or vision for America? Nah – it’s because McCain wants to be President so-o-o-o bad. He really wants to be President.
Notice how alike McCain and Bush became after that obvious smear in S Carolina. Both these guys are perfectly willing to let young people die or be maimed in a made-up war. Not surprising with Bush. He is an empty suit in all respects – has no respect for anyone or anything. But it did come as a surprise with McCain, who after all, knows first hand about the collective lunacy of war.
Next item: McCain said in interview after interview how he was against Bush’s arrogant Tax Cuts for the wealthy, saying that it is unprecedented to give Tax Cuts in wartime, for one thing. Now that a few years have passed, and McCain really wants to President, he wants to make the tax cuts permanent.
McCain had one brief skirmish with the law. He and four other Senators were apparently bribed by one Charles Keating, the event being memorialized as the Keating Five Scandal of the 1980s. But he survived it, was not charged. McCain had for years been an enthusiastic recipient of special interest and lobbyist money, but he suddenly made campaign finance reform one of his most pressing concerns. This concern, if that’s what it was, eventually led to the passing of the McCain-Feingold Act in 2002. McCain even partnered in this doomed effort with a prominent Democrat, Russell Feingold.
When a questioner asked him about US troops in Iraq, and said "President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years." McCain responded, "Make it a hundred. We've been in Japan for 60 years, we've been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That'd be fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That's fine with me.”
So – here’s John McCain, folks. He is for welfare reform. (Reform is a euphemism - what he is for is welfare eradication.) He is generally regarded as a hawk on foreign policy. He is for making tax giveaways to the wealthy permanent. He speaks of Iran and the Iranian people disparagingly, no doubt wouldn’t hesitate to start his own war with Iran, like his brain-damaged predecessor did with Iraq, and call it Regime Change. (Right: he would use the same phrase, having learned from the master.)
Oviously, the best way to end this one is to say to all voters in America in November 2008: If you liked George Bush and his lunatic presidency, you’ll love John McCain.”
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Bob
Friday, February 29, 2008
CONTROL by GATEKEEPER
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER:
How To Control Jobs/Prevent Access/And Get Rich
In the 1980s, as most people remember, a popular saying arose in opposition to the flood of foreign goods at the time. The saying was BUY AMERICA. This was the patriotic way to voice your opposition to the tide of goods that had been made by workers primarily in China, or Taiwan (same thing) or Mexico, or Japan, or you name it.
These workers all had about the same things in common: all fairly bright, able to take direction in the manufacturing process, and all willing to work for 3 Bucks a day! And, yeah – the obvious impact of this scenario and all these goods into America was two fold:
The “going price” for a pair of tennis shoes, for example, or a belt, or a shirt, or kitchen utensils was suddenly cut in half. Imagine the impact on American buyers when they experienced that. Everyone was saying “…Let’s have more of this.”
It doesn’t take Economics 101 – hell, PRE Economics will tell you that the end price of your gadget is determined by the cost of the material used to make it, and overhead, but primarily by LABOR. Labor is always the biggest element in the manufacturing process. Ask General Motors. In March 2008 – they just finished laying off 74,000 of their long time hourly workers. Bought them out by paying a large final paycheck. Couldn’t take the pressure any longer.
So American sellers jumped on this new development. Even after paying import fees, they could still sell the above-mentioned items at approximately half what they had to charge for American made goods of similar construction. The bigger sellers immediately bought a Congressman or Senator, and directed that stalwart to mount an attack on the import fees in Congress, in order to arrive at either new laws more favorable to them, or elimination of those laws altogether.
See, that’s how it’s done in America. Jesse James had to rob the trains, and broke the laws. Bush and company just change the laws. (Or write new ones that favor their business friends.) Bush went one step further. With regard to CHINA, the biggest thorn, by far, in America’s Economy, he named them to Most Favored Nation status. This designation grants to the receiving nation all kinds of trade advantages, such as low tariffs.
So where we found ourselves (American citizens, that is) after our brain-damaged President had worked this one, was, we had a flood of Chinese goods coming into the country. The goods were crafted with a labor index on the order of 10% of American rates. The quality of the goods used to manufacture the goods was probably on the order of 50% of American value. AND AS IF THAT WEREN’T ENOUGH, the geniuses in Washington provided either low or no tariffs to China. Anybody need me to tell them what all that caused?
The overwhelming impact on America was the obvious – jobs just magically disappeared, and not in small numbers. ALL – or 99% - of Mom & Pop stores, like hardware or 5 & Dime stores, just vanished. Chinese goods were SELLING for less than the Mom & Pops could BUY the same goods. Thus the rise of the super store – you know, the big barn of a store, no walls, no rooms, no sales people cause you just walk through that expanse and pick out your own purchase and take it to the cashier.
As mentioned above, the mantra of the 1980s was BUY AMERICA .- in the 00’s the new saying is HIRE AMERICAN. So, let’s see - how’s this for sticking together in America: In addition to the country’s trade laws skewing things so that Chinese manufacturers can sell their goods (made at labor costs 10% of ours) to American buyers, they EVEN grant Most Favored Nation status to eliminate any tariffs to China, et al !
Outrageous, huh? Oh, come on, you didn’t think this crowd would stop there, did you? Their next move was to make it favorable for companies in America to lower the labor cost of things that are manufactured right here, by a factor of 50%. But how can they do that? You can’t get a System Programmer who is used to $80 thousand a year to work for less. Sure you can. You just buy a Congressman or Senator, and ram through the new concept of Outsourcing. (They have a euphemism for everything, don’t they?)
So many Republican talking heads have praised the concept of Outsourcing I can’t even remember all of them. One of them, a female Congressperson, is memorable, however, because her statement was “…Outsourcing is good for America. It’s a new form of trade.”
ENTER THE GATEKEEPER
There are one or two impotent laws that are supposed to protect American workers. One states that jobs have to be advertised so that all job seekers have an equal opportunity to apply. (Kind of like competitive bidding for contracts, but we’ve seen how easily that concept was defeated, right?) The essence of that particular idea was that, Mr. Manufacturer won’t be able to hire a foreigner, at far less pay, unless he exhausts all the possible Americans looking for work.
Ah-h-h-h but, then there’s the Gatekeeper. What a smooth one this is. Who was it said, “…any law a man can craft, another man can defeat.” (Me, I guess.) All you have to do is advertise for your Systems Administrator, and stipulate that all resumes are to be sent to the Recruiting Company you have hired to do the actual recruiting. (Not the decision to hire, I said recruiting.) The recruiting company is given a list of the experience that all applicants must have, the educational requirements, etc. The Recruiting company then places the ads, and evaluates the resumes of applicants. Some of the resumes are inadequate in years of experience, or education, or whatever, and the recruiter rejects those.
Then those resumes that have everything asked for in the Job Order are forwarded to the Hiring manager. The hiring manager then proceeds to reject all of them for one reason or another, for whatever reasons. He doesn’t even tell the recruiter his reasons in most cases. Then the recruiting company either informs the applicant that his application was rejected (they call it “took a pass.’) or he arrogantly doesn’t even get back to the applicant, who reaches the conclusion he was rejected.
Oh- KAY. We’re having fun, now. Now the hiring manager for the big company says he is faced with the need to fill the position, but there’s no one available locally. Not to worry. He contacts his people in India, or wherever, and they fill the position in an hour.
Best of all – (you thought that was all of it, huh?) Best of all, in order to make it possible for the man from New Delhi to come to the US and take the job, there is the matter of a Visa. Not to worry. The same Congressman mentioned above, who was purchased to handle the Outsourcing caper, can handle the H1B visa matter.
Thus the Gatekeeper made it all work like clockwork. Nice, huh? So the end result is the big business sellers make tons of more profit by selling Chinese goods and American small companies are bankrupted. That’s big business 1, American people 0. Then other big business manufacturers are able to hire competent staff at 50c on the dollar, or less, than they would pay American staff. That’s big business 2, American people 0.
Finally, the big business hiring managers circumvent and make a mockery of American law crafted to protect the worker. That’s big business 3, American workers 0.
Three strikes and we’re out. Where is this kind of government headed?
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people
Bob
How To Control Jobs/Prevent Access/And Get Rich
In the 1980s, as most people remember, a popular saying arose in opposition to the flood of foreign goods at the time. The saying was BUY AMERICA. This was the patriotic way to voice your opposition to the tide of goods that had been made by workers primarily in China, or Taiwan (same thing) or Mexico, or Japan, or you name it.
These workers all had about the same things in common: all fairly bright, able to take direction in the manufacturing process, and all willing to work for 3 Bucks a day! And, yeah – the obvious impact of this scenario and all these goods into America was two fold:
The “going price” for a pair of tennis shoes, for example, or a belt, or a shirt, or kitchen utensils was suddenly cut in half. Imagine the impact on American buyers when they experienced that. Everyone was saying “…Let’s have more of this.”
It doesn’t take Economics 101 – hell, PRE Economics will tell you that the end price of your gadget is determined by the cost of the material used to make it, and overhead, but primarily by LABOR. Labor is always the biggest element in the manufacturing process. Ask General Motors. In March 2008 – they just finished laying off 74,000 of their long time hourly workers. Bought them out by paying a large final paycheck. Couldn’t take the pressure any longer.
So American sellers jumped on this new development. Even after paying import fees, they could still sell the above-mentioned items at approximately half what they had to charge for American made goods of similar construction. The bigger sellers immediately bought a Congressman or Senator, and directed that stalwart to mount an attack on the import fees in Congress, in order to arrive at either new laws more favorable to them, or elimination of those laws altogether.
See, that’s how it’s done in America. Jesse James had to rob the trains, and broke the laws. Bush and company just change the laws. (Or write new ones that favor their business friends.) Bush went one step further. With regard to CHINA, the biggest thorn, by far, in America’s Economy, he named them to Most Favored Nation status. This designation grants to the receiving nation all kinds of trade advantages, such as low tariffs.
So where we found ourselves (American citizens, that is) after our brain-damaged President had worked this one, was, we had a flood of Chinese goods coming into the country. The goods were crafted with a labor index on the order of 10% of American rates. The quality of the goods used to manufacture the goods was probably on the order of 50% of American value. AND AS IF THAT WEREN’T ENOUGH, the geniuses in Washington provided either low or no tariffs to China. Anybody need me to tell them what all that caused?
The overwhelming impact on America was the obvious – jobs just magically disappeared, and not in small numbers. ALL – or 99% - of Mom & Pop stores, like hardware or 5 & Dime stores, just vanished. Chinese goods were SELLING for less than the Mom & Pops could BUY the same goods. Thus the rise of the super store – you know, the big barn of a store, no walls, no rooms, no sales people cause you just walk through that expanse and pick out your own purchase and take it to the cashier.
As mentioned above, the mantra of the 1980s was BUY AMERICA .- in the 00’s the new saying is HIRE AMERICAN. So, let’s see - how’s this for sticking together in America: In addition to the country’s trade laws skewing things so that Chinese manufacturers can sell their goods (made at labor costs 10% of ours) to American buyers, they EVEN grant Most Favored Nation status to eliminate any tariffs to China, et al !
Outrageous, huh? Oh, come on, you didn’t think this crowd would stop there, did you? Their next move was to make it favorable for companies in America to lower the labor cost of things that are manufactured right here, by a factor of 50%. But how can they do that? You can’t get a System Programmer who is used to $80 thousand a year to work for less. Sure you can. You just buy a Congressman or Senator, and ram through the new concept of Outsourcing. (They have a euphemism for everything, don’t they?)
So many Republican talking heads have praised the concept of Outsourcing I can’t even remember all of them. One of them, a female Congressperson, is memorable, however, because her statement was “…Outsourcing is good for America. It’s a new form of trade.”
ENTER THE GATEKEEPER
There are one or two impotent laws that are supposed to protect American workers. One states that jobs have to be advertised so that all job seekers have an equal opportunity to apply. (Kind of like competitive bidding for contracts, but we’ve seen how easily that concept was defeated, right?) The essence of that particular idea was that, Mr. Manufacturer won’t be able to hire a foreigner, at far less pay, unless he exhausts all the possible Americans looking for work.
Ah-h-h-h but, then there’s the Gatekeeper. What a smooth one this is. Who was it said, “…any law a man can craft, another man can defeat.” (Me, I guess.) All you have to do is advertise for your Systems Administrator, and stipulate that all resumes are to be sent to the Recruiting Company you have hired to do the actual recruiting. (Not the decision to hire, I said recruiting.) The recruiting company is given a list of the experience that all applicants must have, the educational requirements, etc. The Recruiting company then places the ads, and evaluates the resumes of applicants. Some of the resumes are inadequate in years of experience, or education, or whatever, and the recruiter rejects those.
Then those resumes that have everything asked for in the Job Order are forwarded to the Hiring manager. The hiring manager then proceeds to reject all of them for one reason or another, for whatever reasons. He doesn’t even tell the recruiter his reasons in most cases. Then the recruiting company either informs the applicant that his application was rejected (they call it “took a pass.’) or he arrogantly doesn’t even get back to the applicant, who reaches the conclusion he was rejected.
Oh- KAY. We’re having fun, now. Now the hiring manager for the big company says he is faced with the need to fill the position, but there’s no one available locally. Not to worry. He contacts his people in India, or wherever, and they fill the position in an hour.
Best of all – (you thought that was all of it, huh?) Best of all, in order to make it possible for the man from New Delhi to come to the US and take the job, there is the matter of a Visa. Not to worry. The same Congressman mentioned above, who was purchased to handle the Outsourcing caper, can handle the H1B visa matter.
Thus the Gatekeeper made it all work like clockwork. Nice, huh? So the end result is the big business sellers make tons of more profit by selling Chinese goods and American small companies are bankrupted. That’s big business 1, American people 0. Then other big business manufacturers are able to hire competent staff at 50c on the dollar, or less, than they would pay American staff. That’s big business 2, American people 0.
Finally, the big business hiring managers circumvent and make a mockery of American law crafted to protect the worker. That’s big business 3, American workers 0.
Three strikes and we’re out. Where is this kind of government headed?
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people
Bob
Thursday, February 28, 2008
TERRORISM IN AMERICA
THE REAL TERRORISTS
Tyranny Already in America
This is an observation I’ve heard from a number of people, both from friends and perfect strangers. We keep hearing the incessant drumbeat from the present Administration talking heads that we have to “…go after the terrorists,” and “…hunt down and kill the terrorists where we find them,” etc. ad nauseam. Notice the phrases “go after” and hunt down,” and others of similar construction, all indicate that the terrorists are OUT THERE somewhere. Where? It doesn’t matter, they are not in America, but they want to be, they want to kill us. So we have to go after them, we are told.
Those great disciples of truth, names like Cheney, Perle and Wolfowitz, tell us the terrorists are in Iraq, and maybe a smattering in Afghanistan, and more and more, lately, in Indonesia. Regardless of the geography, “they” are out there waiting to hurt us. So we need to be afraid, they tell us. Their admirers in the news media dutifully repeat this over and over and over.
I submit that we have terrorism in America already. I submit we have many more terrorists already here than there are threatening us in the al Qaeda community! That’s a valid position because at over 30,000 deaths by gunfire in America every year, (and growing!) it makes the death by Alqaeda numbers pale into insignificance. It seems like EVERY SINGLE WEEK there is another multiple shooting of persons at a University or School. Or a courtroom. Or a Post Office. My God, what is going on here? We have the deadly conjunction of mental instability/cruelty/uncontrollable anger coupled with an endless supply of handguns in America. Endless is used here not as a dramatic adjective – it is on the level. A piece recently in USA Today stated, with no apparent outrage, that there are currently in America two handguns for every living soul in the country. Does this make any sense at all to decent people?
This leading cause of death by a single source – gunfire - should alarm all of us. In fact, it should scare hell out of us. Your sister, your Mother, your precious child of 4 – any of them could be part of the grim statistics that accompany this carnage, any time of day or night. And anywhere. And all of this pain doesn’t even start to address the more than 100,000 every year who are shot and then suffer for years, without dying !!!
I have no comment on the founders’ meaning when they carefully drafted the second amendment to the Constitution. Nor do I have any appraisal or focus on its present-day application. Whether the right of keeping guns is for individual persons or military groups is debatable, and indeed has been the subject of billions of words of debate. I’m not the least bit interested in joining that debate. What I AM concerned about is the increasing number of guns in America. And, actually, of more concern is the increasing number of gun deaths in America. Something this enormous can’t continue to be ignored by the body politic, or the American people as a whole. Why is there no concentration of outrage at this subject? A blogger, like me, that’s one person. God, it occurs to me there should a torrent of outrage over this, and demands for a change. Am I missing something? I know a lot of people, and they are good, honest, decent human beings. I can’t believe they are so blasé over this subject matter. (But they are, alas.)
In other countries, like Sweden, for example, there are 12 deaths by gun per year. But in America, for the year 2003, there were 30,136 deaths by gunfire. Arguably, 99% or more were by handguns. (You don’t see very many murders by rifle fire.) That breaks down to 41.85 dead people by gunfire every HOUR in the United States.
AMERICANS ARE KILLING ALMOST 42 PEOPLE BY HANDGUNS EVERY HOUR?
A revealing note about Americans on this subject is that, in America there exists presently TWO GUNS FOR EVERY PERSON in the nation. (Can’t you just visualize an infant with two handguns!) Or, better, an 89-year-old Grandmother and Grandfather with their canes, and 4 handguns!
Somehow, some way, during its 200+ years of existence, the United States has become a gun society. I don’t believe there is evidence of a study on this subject as to why, and I rather doubt a study could reveal all the reasons behind it. Could some of it be because in 1814 those in position to do so chose a poem set to the music of an English Air as our national ID song? The words of the song dwelled on lethal cannon fire over Ft McHenry – “Rockets red glare, bombs bursting in air?”
Or is it all traceable to the Second Amendment? I doubt it. Celebrating your right to own a gun - if that’s what the 2nd gives you - doesn’t translate into shooting a dozen people in a Post Office.
No – it has to be the curious combination, doesn’t it? The deadly combination. The lethal combination of a lot of stressed out, worn out, hurt, mentally aberrated, defeated people who have a ready supply of handguns, no questions asked. It hasn’t been very many years since CBS made a test. They coached a staff member in acting, and then had him go into a Gun Store that was situated, believe it or not, three blocks from a mental institution. The buyer asked to see some handguns, and casually mentioned that he had just been released from the mental institution. No problem. The gun store owner gladly sold a handgun to a person who admitted he had just been released from a mental institution.
SO – what in the world can we try to do to arrest this outrage, and change America for the better? We can’t do anything about the gun makers. In this fiercely capitalist society they have every right to pursue a profit, regardless of who is killed. We can’t convince the gun sellers – they have the same right. The gun buyers are likewise a waste of time, for obvious reasons. There are no laws that could help us. Lawmakers are known to be helpless before their greed. So …..
It appears we have enough TERRORISTS in America already - that we should be paying more attention to than those “out there” we are told about.
What does that leave us? I admit I don’t know. Can anyone help? Can anyone offer any solution at all, to the ongoing societal habit, if you can call it that, of killing almost 42 human beings in America every hour with a handgun?
ONE THING is certain. Is unarguable. The boys at Columbine could only have attacked one person with a knife. Once that attack started, the others would have scattered. He might have even stabbed TWO to death, but the odds are huge that’s all he’d do. Or at the recent Virginia Tech University, or Northern Illinois University, the sick perpetrator of either event could only have stabbed one, maybe two persons to death.
Use that same reasoning on all the multiple gun deaths, and the number of actual fatalities comes way down. You’d never see a drive-by stabbing. Carjacking with a knife would be near impossible to do, as would holding large groups of people hostage, or a bank robbery.
Lacking a solution to this outrage, which we didn’t expect to accomplish anyway, at the very least we’ve hit on a method of greatly reducing the numbers. Any comments?
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Bob
Tyranny Already in America
This is an observation I’ve heard from a number of people, both from friends and perfect strangers. We keep hearing the incessant drumbeat from the present Administration talking heads that we have to “…go after the terrorists,” and “…hunt down and kill the terrorists where we find them,” etc. ad nauseam. Notice the phrases “go after” and hunt down,” and others of similar construction, all indicate that the terrorists are OUT THERE somewhere. Where? It doesn’t matter, they are not in America, but they want to be, they want to kill us. So we have to go after them, we are told.
Those great disciples of truth, names like Cheney, Perle and Wolfowitz, tell us the terrorists are in Iraq, and maybe a smattering in Afghanistan, and more and more, lately, in Indonesia. Regardless of the geography, “they” are out there waiting to hurt us. So we need to be afraid, they tell us. Their admirers in the news media dutifully repeat this over and over and over.
I submit that we have terrorism in America already. I submit we have many more terrorists already here than there are threatening us in the al Qaeda community! That’s a valid position because at over 30,000 deaths by gunfire in America every year, (and growing!) it makes the death by Alqaeda numbers pale into insignificance. It seems like EVERY SINGLE WEEK there is another multiple shooting of persons at a University or School. Or a courtroom. Or a Post Office. My God, what is going on here? We have the deadly conjunction of mental instability/cruelty/uncontrollable anger coupled with an endless supply of handguns in America. Endless is used here not as a dramatic adjective – it is on the level. A piece recently in USA Today stated, with no apparent outrage, that there are currently in America two handguns for every living soul in the country. Does this make any sense at all to decent people?
This leading cause of death by a single source – gunfire - should alarm all of us. In fact, it should scare hell out of us. Your sister, your Mother, your precious child of 4 – any of them could be part of the grim statistics that accompany this carnage, any time of day or night. And anywhere. And all of this pain doesn’t even start to address the more than 100,000 every year who are shot and then suffer for years, without dying !!!
I have no comment on the founders’ meaning when they carefully drafted the second amendment to the Constitution. Nor do I have any appraisal or focus on its present-day application. Whether the right of keeping guns is for individual persons or military groups is debatable, and indeed has been the subject of billions of words of debate. I’m not the least bit interested in joining that debate. What I AM concerned about is the increasing number of guns in America. And, actually, of more concern is the increasing number of gun deaths in America. Something this enormous can’t continue to be ignored by the body politic, or the American people as a whole. Why is there no concentration of outrage at this subject? A blogger, like me, that’s one person. God, it occurs to me there should a torrent of outrage over this, and demands for a change. Am I missing something? I know a lot of people, and they are good, honest, decent human beings. I can’t believe they are so blasé over this subject matter. (But they are, alas.)
In other countries, like Sweden, for example, there are 12 deaths by gun per year. But in America, for the year 2003, there were 30,136 deaths by gunfire. Arguably, 99% or more were by handguns. (You don’t see very many murders by rifle fire.) That breaks down to 41.85 dead people by gunfire every HOUR in the United States.
AMERICANS ARE KILLING ALMOST 42 PEOPLE BY HANDGUNS EVERY HOUR?
A revealing note about Americans on this subject is that, in America there exists presently TWO GUNS FOR EVERY PERSON in the nation. (Can’t you just visualize an infant with two handguns!) Or, better, an 89-year-old Grandmother and Grandfather with their canes, and 4 handguns!
Somehow, some way, during its 200+ years of existence, the United States has become a gun society. I don’t believe there is evidence of a study on this subject as to why, and I rather doubt a study could reveal all the reasons behind it. Could some of it be because in 1814 those in position to do so chose a poem set to the music of an English Air as our national ID song? The words of the song dwelled on lethal cannon fire over Ft McHenry – “Rockets red glare, bombs bursting in air?”
Or is it all traceable to the Second Amendment? I doubt it. Celebrating your right to own a gun - if that’s what the 2nd gives you - doesn’t translate into shooting a dozen people in a Post Office.
No – it has to be the curious combination, doesn’t it? The deadly combination. The lethal combination of a lot of stressed out, worn out, hurt, mentally aberrated, defeated people who have a ready supply of handguns, no questions asked. It hasn’t been very many years since CBS made a test. They coached a staff member in acting, and then had him go into a Gun Store that was situated, believe it or not, three blocks from a mental institution. The buyer asked to see some handguns, and casually mentioned that he had just been released from the mental institution. No problem. The gun store owner gladly sold a handgun to a person who admitted he had just been released from a mental institution.
SO – what in the world can we try to do to arrest this outrage, and change America for the better? We can’t do anything about the gun makers. In this fiercely capitalist society they have every right to pursue a profit, regardless of who is killed. We can’t convince the gun sellers – they have the same right. The gun buyers are likewise a waste of time, for obvious reasons. There are no laws that could help us. Lawmakers are known to be helpless before their greed. So …..
It appears we have enough TERRORISTS in America already - that we should be paying more attention to than those “out there” we are told about.
What does that leave us? I admit I don’t know. Can anyone help? Can anyone offer any solution at all, to the ongoing societal habit, if you can call it that, of killing almost 42 human beings in America every hour with a handgun?
ONE THING is certain. Is unarguable. The boys at Columbine could only have attacked one person with a knife. Once that attack started, the others would have scattered. He might have even stabbed TWO to death, but the odds are huge that’s all he’d do. Or at the recent Virginia Tech University, or Northern Illinois University, the sick perpetrator of either event could only have stabbed one, maybe two persons to death.
Use that same reasoning on all the multiple gun deaths, and the number of actual fatalities comes way down. You’d never see a drive-by stabbing. Carjacking with a knife would be near impossible to do, as would holding large groups of people hostage, or a bank robbery.
Lacking a solution to this outrage, which we didn’t expect to accomplish anyway, at the very least we’ve hit on a method of greatly reducing the numbers. Any comments?
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Bob
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
WORDS THAT MAKE WAR ACCEPTABLE II
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
How they report some things, and slaughter others
This is the 7th in my series on the unequaled, unrecognized power of the euphemism, and how it allows governments at all levels to hoodwink, manipulate, control, deceive and outmaneuver all potential opposition. See, they don’t have to lie (altho’ they do, constantly) about the obvious things in a war, or in a lousy economy, or with regard to a corrupt Administration. Nah – they just use a euphemism so they can swear they reported the truth.
( Euphemism: the substitution of an agreeable or less offensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant to the listener.)
I’m going to take a story in the news, and reprint it exactly as written, only after each euphemism I’ll insert the realism. You spot the euphemism. Here’s the newspaper story:
November 11 2007
Only a Mother’s Love
Shown in this photograph is Ms. Jean Maxfield, proud mother of Lance Cpl Billy Maxfield of B’ Company, 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force, who recently served in Defense of his country in Iraq. (Realism: he was 6000 miles from his country in a war his President started – doesn’t qualify as defense.”)
Ms Maxfield was demonstrating her Motherly love for her son who was honored today in the town square. Billy enlisted in the Marine Corps two years after he graduated from High School. Billy told his Mother he “…loved his country,” so he enlisted. (Realism: He tried for two years to get a job, and the Bush economy was so lousy he lost his job repairing trucks. Like so many of his peers, there was no work, and no monetary help from anywhere that would help him go to College or Trade School.) His Mom said she was so very proud of him. (Realism: She was scared stiff, having heard what a meat grinder he was going into.)
Billy signed up with his experience as a truck mechanic, and served in the Motor Pool at Headquarters Co. in the Green Zone for two weeks, when he was suddenly deployed on patrol as a rifleman. He wrote his Mom and told her not to worry, he was proud to serve his country. (Realism: He had no choice, and it made it easier to face this insanity if you talked this way.) Cpl Maxfield’s main job in Iraq was recovery of shot-up or damaged vehicles. Billy wrote back “…It’s not scary, being in Harm’s Way.” (Realism: - It was printed as “Harm’s Way,” but actually, Billy slipped on six feet of human intestines on the ground near the truck. When he got up and opened the truck door, his hands slipped off the steering wheel, which was covered in a fine pink spray, later identified as human grey matter.)
His sergeant told Billy, “…Snap it up, Maxfield. We need you in this lead truck because of your mechanic skills.” (Realism: The former driver of the lead truck had committed suicide that morning, and they needed a warm body to handle the lead truck. Billy wasn’t needed for mechanic skills, he was needed as a driver.)
Upon the playing of the National Anthem, and the 7 Rifleman from the State National Guard who all fired into the air celebrating Veteran’s Day, it was then that Billy became the proudest of his life. His Mother was recognized and was asked to come to the podium. There, with tears in her eyes, she accepted a folded-up US flag (realism: estimated cost $5.00) and choked back her sobs as the riflemen all fired three times, effectively giving Billy a 21-gun salute. (Realism: Another euphemism, this one by action, not words. People are supposed to be ‘honored’ if 21 guns are fired into the air over their dead bodies. ?? Am I missing something here?? Wouldn’t his being alive and well be a higher honor?)
At the completion of the ceremony Billy’s Mom and Dad and family all wondered what this ceremony was about. One by one they asked each other “…What in the world did Billy die for?” “…Nothing in Iraq has changed; nothing in America has changed, “what are we always doing this for?”
While the adults at the ceremony alternatively sobbed and comforted each other, Billy’s five-year-old nephew Glenny showed off his new plastic machine gun his Mother had bought him for his birthday. Altho’ his pronunciation wasn’t perfect, one could tell he was saying “…I’m a Ma-ween, like Billy.” And then he made the sound all kids can make perfectly, the sound of an automatic weapon firing.
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Bob
How they report some things, and slaughter others
This is the 7th in my series on the unequaled, unrecognized power of the euphemism, and how it allows governments at all levels to hoodwink, manipulate, control, deceive and outmaneuver all potential opposition. See, they don’t have to lie (altho’ they do, constantly) about the obvious things in a war, or in a lousy economy, or with regard to a corrupt Administration. Nah – they just use a euphemism so they can swear they reported the truth.
( Euphemism: the substitution of an agreeable or less offensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant to the listener.)
I’m going to take a story in the news, and reprint it exactly as written, only after each euphemism I’ll insert the realism. You spot the euphemism. Here’s the newspaper story:
November 11 2007
Only a Mother’s Love
Shown in this photograph is Ms. Jean Maxfield, proud mother of Lance Cpl Billy Maxfield of B’ Company, 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force, who recently served in Defense of his country in Iraq. (Realism: he was 6000 miles from his country in a war his President started – doesn’t qualify as defense.”)
Ms Maxfield was demonstrating her Motherly love for her son who was honored today in the town square. Billy enlisted in the Marine Corps two years after he graduated from High School. Billy told his Mother he “…loved his country,” so he enlisted. (Realism: He tried for two years to get a job, and the Bush economy was so lousy he lost his job repairing trucks. Like so many of his peers, there was no work, and no monetary help from anywhere that would help him go to College or Trade School.) His Mom said she was so very proud of him. (Realism: She was scared stiff, having heard what a meat grinder he was going into.)
Billy signed up with his experience as a truck mechanic, and served in the Motor Pool at Headquarters Co. in the Green Zone for two weeks, when he was suddenly deployed on patrol as a rifleman. He wrote his Mom and told her not to worry, he was proud to serve his country. (Realism: He had no choice, and it made it easier to face this insanity if you talked this way.) Cpl Maxfield’s main job in Iraq was recovery of shot-up or damaged vehicles. Billy wrote back “…It’s not scary, being in Harm’s Way.” (Realism: - It was printed as “Harm’s Way,” but actually, Billy slipped on six feet of human intestines on the ground near the truck. When he got up and opened the truck door, his hands slipped off the steering wheel, which was covered in a fine pink spray, later identified as human grey matter.)
His sergeant told Billy, “…Snap it up, Maxfield. We need you in this lead truck because of your mechanic skills.” (Realism: The former driver of the lead truck had committed suicide that morning, and they needed a warm body to handle the lead truck. Billy wasn’t needed for mechanic skills, he was needed as a driver.)
Upon the playing of the National Anthem, and the 7 Rifleman from the State National Guard who all fired into the air celebrating Veteran’s Day, it was then that Billy became the proudest of his life. His Mother was recognized and was asked to come to the podium. There, with tears in her eyes, she accepted a folded-up US flag (realism: estimated cost $5.00) and choked back her sobs as the riflemen all fired three times, effectively giving Billy a 21-gun salute. (Realism: Another euphemism, this one by action, not words. People are supposed to be ‘honored’ if 21 guns are fired into the air over their dead bodies. ?? Am I missing something here?? Wouldn’t his being alive and well be a higher honor?)
At the completion of the ceremony Billy’s Mom and Dad and family all wondered what this ceremony was about. One by one they asked each other “…What in the world did Billy die for?” “…Nothing in Iraq has changed; nothing in America has changed, “what are we always doing this for?”
While the adults at the ceremony alternatively sobbed and comforted each other, Billy’s five-year-old nephew Glenny showed off his new plastic machine gun his Mother had bought him for his birthday. Altho’ his pronunciation wasn’t perfect, one could tell he was saying “…I’m a Ma-ween, like Billy.” And then he made the sound all kids can make perfectly, the sound of an automatic weapon firing.
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Bob
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
WAR BY EUPHEMISM
THE “WAR ON TERRORISM”
Terrorism: The Ultimate Euphemism?
Within minutes after the attack on 9/11 the term terrorism surfaced. It was probably crafted by Rove, since he was reported to have called the 911attack “This Great Opportunity,” or words to that effect.
Terrorism became the new word. Bush used it dozens of times in every uttering, (and still does, almost 7 years later) and used its other forms, terrorist and terrorists even more. “We have to fight terrorism wherever it occurs.” “We have to hunt down and kill the terrorists” … “Terrorists are planning new crimes against us as we speak” … and my favorite: “Win the war on terrorism.” The American Press, as we have witnessed, obediently picked up the word and uttered it as often as possible, in its 24/7 reporting.
Just think: “War on Terrorism.” With these three words – this concept - you have the PERFECT artifice, if your goal is to keep the country in a perpetual state of weapons production, with their platinum price tags; if you own the factors of production, and (my favorite) when the country’s in a “state of war” all laws and regulations that would otherwise restrict your activities are relaxed. As President, you can ask for, and get, the most outrageous of demands, whether it be more money, or outrageous laws, or the elimination of laws, such as Habeas Corpus. No problem. The Congress will give it to you, if the country is “At War.”
This ploy lets them enrich themselves beyond imagination, building weapons without a recognized opponent. The concept of At War implies, to the most simple minded, fighting it out with a recognized opponent.
And notice how strategic their thinking is: in a “war on terrorism” you’re always on defense. So there’s no chance the war will end. Cool, huh?
THUS: the Republican three-word Monte has achieved the following:
building multi-million dollar weapons to fight Arabs in caves
building more attack submarines when the enemy has no submarines to attack
building airplanes at a half-million bucks apiece, to fight the cave guys
extracting almost a million bucks a minute for skirmishes in the streets
relaxing any and all laws that might restrict their movements
guaranteeing re-election (in the beginning) by voting FOR it
etc. ad infinitum
The price tag to the people for this utter pretense?
In America, your standard “War on Terrorism” will run you about $4.17 million an hour. Sound about right? Sound like something you can afford? And I can get you a new one in Iran for just a little more, and you can use this one as your trade-in. How about it?
The Press will report it, in their best euphemistic terms, as 3 Billion a month, (notice they don’t use the word “dollars”) but that’s actually another euphemism. Let’s say it as it REALLY is:
That’s $3,000 million a month. Or $100 million a day.
Or a little over $4 million an hour. That’s dollars.
Just imagine the repair to America’s aging infrastructure that would buy. Or the great doctor care it would provide for the poor. Or the number of computers and computer instructors it would buy, so our young people could start to compete with the rest of the world. Footnote to this cost: don’t believe for one second that this figure is accurate. The real figure is probably twice that.
What exactly IS the “War on Terrorism?” To posit the idea that these few Arabs who are so agitated about so many things have a world organization, with the funds needed to fund such an enterprise, stretches the imagination of even the most gullible. DOESN’T IT?
If Osama bin Laden is the son of a billionaire contractor, he therefore has his share of his father’s wealth, but let’s remember, Osama has several brothers and sisters, for God’s sake! That reduces his “share” enormously. So let’s say he’s worth a billion – probably much less. That’s about a week of activity, or less, for a world wide organization, isn’t it?
The point of the whole thing is that “War on Terrorism” is absolutely perfect in its intended purpose. It allows perpetual conflict (one Republican lackey thinks we should expect to be at it for a hundred years) – it allows unlimited purchases of sky high weapons; it allows for more favorable odds of re-election for those in charge – after all, we don’t want to change the team in the middle of a war.
FINALLY. As the Republican marionette John Boehner said, “We need to do what it takes to WIN in Iraq.”
OK. Can anyone out there tell me what the definition is, of WINNING in Iraq? Is it when every last person in Iraq is dead? Is it when every last building in the Cradle of Civilization is flattened and burned? Is it when all the written record of this great original country is burned? Is it when every conceivable factor of the Iraqi oil production is owned and operated by Exxon Mobil ?
Bottom Line, everybody: The phrase “War on Terrorism” is the perfect pretense. They have created the perfect one. They have had enormous help from the media, and no resistance from the public like we enjoyed with their previous ploy, that exercise in Vietnam.
BUT IT’S NOT TOO LATE. I’m urging everyone to resist intimidation by language. These people aren’t that smart – they’re devious. They find words that invoke an image, and then absolutely hammer away with it. If we let them get away with something this dumb, we ought to be ashamed.
Watch for my next Post: I’m going to take a story in the news, and reprint it exactly as written, only with definitions included for all their euphemisms.
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
Terrorism: The Ultimate Euphemism?
Within minutes after the attack on 9/11 the term terrorism surfaced. It was probably crafted by Rove, since he was reported to have called the 911attack “This Great Opportunity,” or words to that effect.
Terrorism became the new word. Bush used it dozens of times in every uttering, (and still does, almost 7 years later) and used its other forms, terrorist and terrorists even more. “We have to fight terrorism wherever it occurs.” “We have to hunt down and kill the terrorists” … “Terrorists are planning new crimes against us as we speak” … and my favorite: “Win the war on terrorism.” The American Press, as we have witnessed, obediently picked up the word and uttered it as often as possible, in its 24/7 reporting.
Just think: “War on Terrorism.” With these three words – this concept - you have the PERFECT artifice, if your goal is to keep the country in a perpetual state of weapons production, with their platinum price tags; if you own the factors of production, and (my favorite) when the country’s in a “state of war” all laws and regulations that would otherwise restrict your activities are relaxed. As President, you can ask for, and get, the most outrageous of demands, whether it be more money, or outrageous laws, or the elimination of laws, such as Habeas Corpus. No problem. The Congress will give it to you, if the country is “At War.”
This ploy lets them enrich themselves beyond imagination, building weapons without a recognized opponent. The concept of At War implies, to the most simple minded, fighting it out with a recognized opponent.
And notice how strategic their thinking is: in a “war on terrorism” you’re always on defense. So there’s no chance the war will end. Cool, huh?
THUS: the Republican three-word Monte has achieved the following:
building multi-million dollar weapons to fight Arabs in caves
building more attack submarines when the enemy has no submarines to attack
building airplanes at a half-million bucks apiece, to fight the cave guys
extracting almost a million bucks a minute for skirmishes in the streets
relaxing any and all laws that might restrict their movements
guaranteeing re-election (in the beginning) by voting FOR it
etc. ad infinitum
The price tag to the people for this utter pretense?
In America, your standard “War on Terrorism” will run you about $4.17 million an hour. Sound about right? Sound like something you can afford? And I can get you a new one in Iran for just a little more, and you can use this one as your trade-in. How about it?
The Press will report it, in their best euphemistic terms, as 3 Billion a month, (notice they don’t use the word “dollars”) but that’s actually another euphemism. Let’s say it as it REALLY is:
That’s $3,000 million a month. Or $100 million a day.
Or a little over $4 million an hour. That’s dollars.
Just imagine the repair to America’s aging infrastructure that would buy. Or the great doctor care it would provide for the poor. Or the number of computers and computer instructors it would buy, so our young people could start to compete with the rest of the world. Footnote to this cost: don’t believe for one second that this figure is accurate. The real figure is probably twice that.
What exactly IS the “War on Terrorism?” To posit the idea that these few Arabs who are so agitated about so many things have a world organization, with the funds needed to fund such an enterprise, stretches the imagination of even the most gullible. DOESN’T IT?
If Osama bin Laden is the son of a billionaire contractor, he therefore has his share of his father’s wealth, but let’s remember, Osama has several brothers and sisters, for God’s sake! That reduces his “share” enormously. So let’s say he’s worth a billion – probably much less. That’s about a week of activity, or less, for a world wide organization, isn’t it?
The point of the whole thing is that “War on Terrorism” is absolutely perfect in its intended purpose. It allows perpetual conflict (one Republican lackey thinks we should expect to be at it for a hundred years) – it allows unlimited purchases of sky high weapons; it allows for more favorable odds of re-election for those in charge – after all, we don’t want to change the team in the middle of a war.
FINALLY. As the Republican marionette John Boehner said, “We need to do what it takes to WIN in Iraq.”
OK. Can anyone out there tell me what the definition is, of WINNING in Iraq? Is it when every last person in Iraq is dead? Is it when every last building in the Cradle of Civilization is flattened and burned? Is it when all the written record of this great original country is burned? Is it when every conceivable factor of the Iraqi oil production is owned and operated by Exxon Mobil ?
Bottom Line, everybody: The phrase “War on Terrorism” is the perfect pretense. They have created the perfect one. They have had enormous help from the media, and no resistance from the public like we enjoyed with their previous ploy, that exercise in Vietnam.
BUT IT’S NOT TOO LATE. I’m urging everyone to resist intimidation by language. These people aren’t that smart – they’re devious. They find words that invoke an image, and then absolutely hammer away with it. If we let them get away with something this dumb, we ought to be ashamed.
Watch for my next Post: I’m going to take a story in the news, and reprint it exactly as written, only with definitions included for all their euphemisms.
Faithfully, in the interest of the American people.
THEFT BY CONTROL OF THE MEDIA
THEFT BY CONTROL OF THE MEDIA
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The Great American Press Vanishing Act
In the present experiment we’re doing – Democracy – we’re in it now a tad over 200 years – there are several crucially important elements that make it work. Those geniuses who created the Constitution wisely realized they had to amendment it somewhat once it was written, to lay out exactly what rights the people should have. They called that group the Bill of Rights. One could argue that the most important of the Bill of Rights is the first Amendment, universally referred to as “Freedom of Speech.” (The founders must have thought it most important, they listed it first.)
The official language of the First Amendment with reference to speech and Press is “…Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”
That one observance alone, from 1789 to the late 20th Century, worked like a charm. It allowed citizens to criticize the hell out of the Government if it was deserved, and to redress to change it. Brilliant. No other kind of government had done that. From 1789 to the late 1960s it was pure gold. At that point, president Nixon took it upon himself to restrict freedom of the Press, he being in a firestorm of trouble over his war, and his dishonesty. President Ford honored it again during his brief stint, as did Jimmy Carter. But the real butchery of the First Amendment occurred immediately upon the arrival of G W Bush. He started his war, and immediately clamped down on trivialities like freedom of the Press, lest that tell the people the whole story of his activities. Consider:
he banned pictures of caskets of military dead at Dover Delaware
he refused to call on those reporters who asked real questions
he practically eliminated the Presidential Press Conference
he “embedded´reporters with the troops. (Reason: when you live with,
eat with, and face danger with the troops, you’ll report favorably.)
anyone who dared criticize him was smeared as unpatriotic
he smeared the wife of an agent who reported an unfavorable truth
he turned the Justice Department into a Political lackey
his mentally unstable VP intimidated the CIA
he promoted wiretapping of Americans and ignored FISA
he alone in the WORLD stiff-armed Kyoto (the Global Warming agreement)
and on and on and on …
AND LOOK WHAT MEMBERS OF THE PRESS DID AT THIS JUNCTURE:
They collectively laid down and died. They completely capitulated. They abdicated their national responsibility to report facts about the government. What had been our national report card on Washington - questions from the Media - suddenly and dramatically just ceased. Reporters who had shown a spark of courage and imagination before, suddenly asked the President how his dog was doing !
We saw David Gregory practically humiliate himself. Before GWB, he asked good strong questions. After a year or so of intimidation, Gregory made a fool of himself dancing on a stage with the 2-legged viper, Rove. Only Keith Olbermann remains verbally virile and intellectually pure. Everybody in AMERICA (indeed the world) knows George bush is a liar, a charlatan, and all the other adjectives that describe his ilk, but ONLY Keith says it to his face. In his Special Comments sections, about Bush and the White House, Keith says exactly those things – when Bush is caught in a lie, Olbermann says so, in plain words.
We’ve learned something, everybody. We’ve learned that a Democratic style government, as fragile as it is, and as robust as it is, is nothing without a FREE PRESS. The privilege to criticize, and in the process, investigate and improve, is the life blood of democracy. The very word is made up of two Greek words: ‘demos’ (people) and ‘cratique’ (rule). So if the people are going to make the thing work (‘rule’) it’s academic that they can’t do it if they are smeared just for questioning.
Isn’t it?
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The Great American Press Vanishing Act
In the present experiment we’re doing – Democracy – we’re in it now a tad over 200 years – there are several crucially important elements that make it work. Those geniuses who created the Constitution wisely realized they had to amendment it somewhat once it was written, to lay out exactly what rights the people should have. They called that group the Bill of Rights. One could argue that the most important of the Bill of Rights is the first Amendment, universally referred to as “Freedom of Speech.” (The founders must have thought it most important, they listed it first.)
The official language of the First Amendment with reference to speech and Press is “…Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”
That one observance alone, from 1789 to the late 20th Century, worked like a charm. It allowed citizens to criticize the hell out of the Government if it was deserved, and to redress to change it. Brilliant. No other kind of government had done that. From 1789 to the late 1960s it was pure gold. At that point, president Nixon took it upon himself to restrict freedom of the Press, he being in a firestorm of trouble over his war, and his dishonesty. President Ford honored it again during his brief stint, as did Jimmy Carter. But the real butchery of the First Amendment occurred immediately upon the arrival of G W Bush. He started his war, and immediately clamped down on trivialities like freedom of the Press, lest that tell the people the whole story of his activities. Consider:
he banned pictures of caskets of military dead at Dover Delaware
he refused to call on those reporters who asked real questions
he practically eliminated the Presidential Press Conference
he “embedded´reporters with the troops. (Reason: when you live with,
eat with, and face danger with the troops, you’ll report favorably.)
anyone who dared criticize him was smeared as unpatriotic
he smeared the wife of an agent who reported an unfavorable truth
he turned the Justice Department into a Political lackey
his mentally unstable VP intimidated the CIA
he promoted wiretapping of Americans and ignored FISA
he alone in the WORLD stiff-armed Kyoto (the Global Warming agreement)
and on and on and on …
AND LOOK WHAT MEMBERS OF THE PRESS DID AT THIS JUNCTURE:
They collectively laid down and died. They completely capitulated. They abdicated their national responsibility to report facts about the government. What had been our national report card on Washington - questions from the Media - suddenly and dramatically just ceased. Reporters who had shown a spark of courage and imagination before, suddenly asked the President how his dog was doing !
We saw David Gregory practically humiliate himself. Before GWB, he asked good strong questions. After a year or so of intimidation, Gregory made a fool of himself dancing on a stage with the 2-legged viper, Rove. Only Keith Olbermann remains verbally virile and intellectually pure. Everybody in AMERICA (indeed the world) knows George bush is a liar, a charlatan, and all the other adjectives that describe his ilk, but ONLY Keith says it to his face. In his Special Comments sections, about Bush and the White House, Keith says exactly those things – when Bush is caught in a lie, Olbermann says so, in plain words.
We’ve learned something, everybody. We’ve learned that a Democratic style government, as fragile as it is, and as robust as it is, is nothing without a FREE PRESS. The privilege to criticize, and in the process, investigate and improve, is the life blood of democracy. The very word is made up of two Greek words: ‘demos’ (people) and ‘cratique’ (rule). So if the people are going to make the thing work (‘rule’) it’s academic that they can’t do it if they are smeared just for questioning.
Isn’t it?
WORDS THAT MAKE WAR ACCEPTABLE
THEFT BY LANGUAGE
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The Words that Make War Acceptable
It appears that all governments in the past have learned how to prepare the young men – and young women nowadays – to go to war willingly. THEY PREPARE THEM VERBALLY. The preparation contains elements of intimidation, bullying, persuasion, and loyalty to country. Old, white men have a Real Estate disagreement, or a natural mineral inequity (yes, Oil) so they organize the young to settle the argument with force. The youngsters, who have not sufficiently matured to recognize subterfuge when they hear it, thus believe what they are told, and are swept up in the atmosphere of being part of the (military) team. The nonsense that is drilled into the heads of youngsters in war is that they are there “to protect their buddy.” And the buddy is there to protect me.”
Rubbish!
Power of the EUPHEMISM
The main artifice that is used to verbally prepare youngsters is we’re “Defending our Country.” “It’s everyone’s DUTY to defend America.” But even a childish examination of the facts shows this to be more subterfuge, more pretense, more lies. WHEN YOU TRAVEL 6000 MILES AND BOMB THE HELL OUT OF ANOTHER COUNTRY, AND THEN SEND YOUR TROOPS 6000 MILES TO FINISH THE JOB, KILLING ANYONE STILL STANDING, YOU CANNOT CALL THAT DEFENSE. IF THAT ISN’T OFFENSE, WHAT IS?
Let’s add Euphemism IV: “Collateral Damage.”
In modern warfare, the use of high explosives is 99% of the effort. These military guys can make big explosions, but they can’t control them. So when they create their huge explosions to kill as many people on the ground as they can, the explosions inevitably kill some bystanders, even if by “bystanding” is meant cowering in a closet inside their house. Inevitably, 3 year-olds, 89 year-old grandmothers, pregnant women, young girls and boys, every conceivable age and social group is sought out relentlessly by the phenomenon of Dr Nobel’s invention: dynamite. When this occurs – and it does, with EVERY explosion the warriors create – the euphemism the Press uses for that maiming and death activity is “Collateral Damage.” True, the Press learned that phrase from the military, but they didn’t show the spine of a cockroach. They simply accepted the obscene phrase and have used it ever since.
“Collateral Damage?” WE have allowed our Press and military spokesmen to inflict that verbal outrage on us, and have never whimpered a word in protest. Talk about LAMBS ! – God, I think even lambs show more courage than that!
Per my usual, please – (please?) learn to resist coercion by language. If you’re not sure of the meaning of a word, or if you do know, but the word doesn’t appear to be used in its highest sense, it should arouse your suspicion
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The Words that Make War Acceptable
It appears that all governments in the past have learned how to prepare the young men – and young women nowadays – to go to war willingly. THEY PREPARE THEM VERBALLY. The preparation contains elements of intimidation, bullying, persuasion, and loyalty to country. Old, white men have a Real Estate disagreement, or a natural mineral inequity (yes, Oil) so they organize the young to settle the argument with force. The youngsters, who have not sufficiently matured to recognize subterfuge when they hear it, thus believe what they are told, and are swept up in the atmosphere of being part of the (military) team. The nonsense that is drilled into the heads of youngsters in war is that they are there “to protect their buddy.” And the buddy is there to protect me.”
Rubbish!
Power of the EUPHEMISM
The main artifice that is used to verbally prepare youngsters is we’re “Defending our Country.” “It’s everyone’s DUTY to defend America.” But even a childish examination of the facts shows this to be more subterfuge, more pretense, more lies. WHEN YOU TRAVEL 6000 MILES AND BOMB THE HELL OUT OF ANOTHER COUNTRY, AND THEN SEND YOUR TROOPS 6000 MILES TO FINISH THE JOB, KILLING ANYONE STILL STANDING, YOU CANNOT CALL THAT DEFENSE. IF THAT ISN’T OFFENSE, WHAT IS?
Let’s add Euphemism IV: “Collateral Damage.”
In modern warfare, the use of high explosives is 99% of the effort. These military guys can make big explosions, but they can’t control them. So when they create their huge explosions to kill as many people on the ground as they can, the explosions inevitably kill some bystanders, even if by “bystanding” is meant cowering in a closet inside their house. Inevitably, 3 year-olds, 89 year-old grandmothers, pregnant women, young girls and boys, every conceivable age and social group is sought out relentlessly by the phenomenon of Dr Nobel’s invention: dynamite. When this occurs – and it does, with EVERY explosion the warriors create – the euphemism the Press uses for that maiming and death activity is “Collateral Damage.” True, the Press learned that phrase from the military, but they didn’t show the spine of a cockroach. They simply accepted the obscene phrase and have used it ever since.
“Collateral Damage?” WE have allowed our Press and military spokesmen to inflict that verbal outrage on us, and have never whimpered a word in protest. Talk about LAMBS ! – God, I think even lambs show more courage than that!
Per my usual, please – (please?) learn to resist coercion by language. If you’re not sure of the meaning of a word, or if you do know, but the word doesn’t appear to be used in its highest sense, it should arouse your suspicion
Monday, February 25, 2008
THEFT BY EUPHEMISM II.
Lambs to the Slaughter:
The Ripoff Cost of American Medicine
EUPHEMISM #3: “Socialized Medicine.”
This Euphemism is always used as a crossover into the negative. Whereas the others are just downright lies (“Campaign Finance” isn’t just for campaigns, and money is NOT just “Free Speech.”) this one takes an ordinary two word phrase and transforms it into a smear idea bordering on crime. Or evil, as we will see.
When you hear “Socialized Medicine” it is always spoken with the same feeling the speaker would use if saying “baby killer,” or Grandmother rapist.”
See, this is the same device this crowd has used since Nixon used it, [remember the ‘Cambodian incursion?] then Reagan (his was Tax Reform – [’86] remember?) then GHW Bush and now the present valedictorian of incompetence, W.
These big-business stooges are all smearing the idea of a universal health care for Americans because they have to do their part to maintain the obscene cost of pharmaceuticals in this country. Have to? Of course, they have to. If you take thousands of dollars to use any way you choose from a pharmaceutical company, you aren’t fool enough to vote against the pharmaceutical companies, are you? So they send out the ubiquitous message: “Socialized medicine is bad.” Why? It just is, fool!
From there, it’s a simple matter to reinforce that thought just by the inflection in your voice when you utter the phrase. A writer I know made an absolute nincompoop out of a young, brain-washed College student, when the youngster uttered the phrase “Socialized Medicine” with the same treatment he would give the subject of infant rape. The student railed against a new idea for universal healthcare, and, no doubt acting on the mindset of his parents, declared it “government evil.” The writer, who was nearby, quietly asked him if he thought the Government should take care of soldiers and marines when they were wounded, or just needed medicine. The lad said of course. The writer asked him if he thought the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives should be taken care of when they got sick. Of course, said the lad, otherwise the Congress might not function. How about the Supreme Court? Of course, said the lad.
The writer calmly informed the guy that, “…Well, you would have all those persons immediately denied healthcare, because you wouldn’t want them to be involved in Government Evil, right? When the lad was totally unready for this exercise in plain facts and couldn’t speak, the writer added “…So we already have Socialized medicine, don’t we? But just for the very, very few, not for you and me, right?”
Euphemism #3 – “Socialized Medicine.” We have it going strong, and have had since 1789. But those in big businesses who can reap enormous financial windfalls by charging the great unsophisticated masses of us for what they get FREE themselves, naturally had to come up with one of their best weapons, the EUPHEMISM to counter any exercise in facts, or any challenge of their dictum.
Thus, we lambs have agreed to struggle, silently and obediently, against another of their weapons, the smear tactic. Those in office nowadays create a phrase that smears an otherwise normal noun, or adjective, and then repeat it millions of times. Sooner or later, the lambs will capitulate, and accept the smear as the gospel. Right?
God, I hope not.
The Ripoff Cost of American Medicine
EUPHEMISM #3: “Socialized Medicine.”
This Euphemism is always used as a crossover into the negative. Whereas the others are just downright lies (“Campaign Finance” isn’t just for campaigns, and money is NOT just “Free Speech.”) this one takes an ordinary two word phrase and transforms it into a smear idea bordering on crime. Or evil, as we will see.
When you hear “Socialized Medicine” it is always spoken with the same feeling the speaker would use if saying “baby killer,” or Grandmother rapist.”
See, this is the same device this crowd has used since Nixon used it, [remember the ‘Cambodian incursion?] then Reagan (his was Tax Reform – [’86] remember?) then GHW Bush and now the present valedictorian of incompetence, W.
These big-business stooges are all smearing the idea of a universal health care for Americans because they have to do their part to maintain the obscene cost of pharmaceuticals in this country. Have to? Of course, they have to. If you take thousands of dollars to use any way you choose from a pharmaceutical company, you aren’t fool enough to vote against the pharmaceutical companies, are you? So they send out the ubiquitous message: “Socialized medicine is bad.” Why? It just is, fool!
From there, it’s a simple matter to reinforce that thought just by the inflection in your voice when you utter the phrase. A writer I know made an absolute nincompoop out of a young, brain-washed College student, when the youngster uttered the phrase “Socialized Medicine” with the same treatment he would give the subject of infant rape. The student railed against a new idea for universal healthcare, and, no doubt acting on the mindset of his parents, declared it “government evil.” The writer, who was nearby, quietly asked him if he thought the Government should take care of soldiers and marines when they were wounded, or just needed medicine. The lad said of course. The writer asked him if he thought the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives should be taken care of when they got sick. Of course, said the lad, otherwise the Congress might not function. How about the Supreme Court? Of course, said the lad.
The writer calmly informed the guy that, “…Well, you would have all those persons immediately denied healthcare, because you wouldn’t want them to be involved in Government Evil, right? When the lad was totally unready for this exercise in plain facts and couldn’t speak, the writer added “…So we already have Socialized medicine, don’t we? But just for the very, very few, not for you and me, right?”
Euphemism #3 – “Socialized Medicine.” We have it going strong, and have had since 1789. But those in big businesses who can reap enormous financial windfalls by charging the great unsophisticated masses of us for what they get FREE themselves, naturally had to come up with one of their best weapons, the EUPHEMISM to counter any exercise in facts, or any challenge of their dictum.
Thus, we lambs have agreed to struggle, silently and obediently, against another of their weapons, the smear tactic. Those in office nowadays create a phrase that smears an otherwise normal noun, or adjective, and then repeat it millions of times. Sooner or later, the lambs will capitulate, and accept the smear as the gospel. Right?
God, I hope not.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
THEFT by EUPHEMISM
THEFT BY EUPHEMISM
I.
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER:
The great Utility Price Theft
Can you handle a provocative question? Why are we a nation of such lambs when it comes to our government and its actions? This 200-year-old experiment we’re currently in calls for the people to run the thing, and to do it by sending their representative to Washington to speak – and vote - for them. OK. But where that breaks down is that a check for $1000 speaks to your representative a lot louder and more urgently than a thousand voices back home. You know that – everybody knows that. So you can imagine how well a check for $10,000 works.
Is everybody out there as sick and tired of the enormous bills we’re now paying for electricity and gas for homes? As of July 14, 2005, thanks to large amounts of money to Congresspersons and Senators, the marvelous system of providing electricity for homes that was the envy of the entire world, was shattered, on the altar of greed. See, we’ve been here before. FDR handled this identical theft perfectly in 1935, thus beginning a 70-year run of unparalleled calm, fairness and honesty in the electrical utility world. Here’s how it happened.
IN 1935 Samuel Insull of Chicago Edison began gouging electric customers to the point that the President had a law passed, the Public Utility Holding Company Act. The law:
· required electricity producers to keep the power coming, regardless
· rates were computed to cover salaries and all maintenance expenses
· barred "trading" electricity (FOR PROFIT) and, most importantly
· banned money donations by power giants to politicians
Bottom line: Insull was indicted soon after for crimes against the stockholders, and fled the country to Greece. He was extradited back to the United States by Turkey to face federal prosecution on mail fraud and antitrust charges. So yeah, we’ve been here before.
Euphemism #1: A few years ago, when the word started to get out about money in politics; money influencing bills that would become law, and money donations to Congress to influence laws, the good old boys in Washington trotted out two absolutely clean euphemisms. First they called all this money “Campaign Contributions.” They endlessly pushed this pretense, saying that, without money given to them, they couldn’t campaign, and the voters wouldn’t know who to vote for.
Euphemism #2: When that, too, came under very mild examination by a former generation of lambs, the Good Old Boys in Washington tied the practice of money influence firmly to the Constitution, declaring it “Free Speech.” That one became the gold standard, because no one would have the nerve to go against the Constitution, right?
What all this has to do with the obscene price of electricity and gas now is that this money given to lawmakers results in laws favorable to electric producers, which favoritism ultimately manifested in de-regulation of electric rates. The drumbeat cry of those pushing de-regulation was that if electricity were de-regulated, a lot of competition would spring up, and of course competition would bring the cost of electricity to the consumer down sharply.
TWO THINGS WRONG with that reasoning:
1> De-regulation created a lot of other competition, like they said, and prices dropped – for about a month or so. Then the biggest providers before de-regulation quickly bought out the new competing companies, and we were back to one provider, only now that one provider was DE-REGULATED, and could charge whatever he wanted. (And boy, did he !!!)
2> The proof is in the pudding, isn’t it? I personally paid $12-14 a month for YEARS until July 14, 2005, and since then have paid $300 on several occasions, and NEVER under $125 a month.
What I would like every reader to do is seek out euphemisms. They are the device being used to control us, and rob us. Someone once said: “…You can steal a lot more with a briefcase than you can with a gun.”
I.
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER:
The great Utility Price Theft
Can you handle a provocative question? Why are we a nation of such lambs when it comes to our government and its actions? This 200-year-old experiment we’re currently in calls for the people to run the thing, and to do it by sending their representative to Washington to speak – and vote - for them. OK. But where that breaks down is that a check for $1000 speaks to your representative a lot louder and more urgently than a thousand voices back home. You know that – everybody knows that. So you can imagine how well a check for $10,000 works.
Is everybody out there as sick and tired of the enormous bills we’re now paying for electricity and gas for homes? As of July 14, 2005, thanks to large amounts of money to Congresspersons and Senators, the marvelous system of providing electricity for homes that was the envy of the entire world, was shattered, on the altar of greed. See, we’ve been here before. FDR handled this identical theft perfectly in 1935, thus beginning a 70-year run of unparalleled calm, fairness and honesty in the electrical utility world. Here’s how it happened.
IN 1935 Samuel Insull of Chicago Edison began gouging electric customers to the point that the President had a law passed, the Public Utility Holding Company Act. The law:
· required electricity producers to keep the power coming, regardless
· rates were computed to cover salaries and all maintenance expenses
· barred "trading" electricity (FOR PROFIT) and, most importantly
· banned money donations by power giants to politicians
Bottom line: Insull was indicted soon after for crimes against the stockholders, and fled the country to Greece. He was extradited back to the United States by Turkey to face federal prosecution on mail fraud and antitrust charges. So yeah, we’ve been here before.
Euphemism #1: A few years ago, when the word started to get out about money in politics; money influencing bills that would become law, and money donations to Congress to influence laws, the good old boys in Washington trotted out two absolutely clean euphemisms. First they called all this money “Campaign Contributions.” They endlessly pushed this pretense, saying that, without money given to them, they couldn’t campaign, and the voters wouldn’t know who to vote for.
Euphemism #2: When that, too, came under very mild examination by a former generation of lambs, the Good Old Boys in Washington tied the practice of money influence firmly to the Constitution, declaring it “Free Speech.” That one became the gold standard, because no one would have the nerve to go against the Constitution, right?
What all this has to do with the obscene price of electricity and gas now is that this money given to lawmakers results in laws favorable to electric producers, which favoritism ultimately manifested in de-regulation of electric rates. The drumbeat cry of those pushing de-regulation was that if electricity were de-regulated, a lot of competition would spring up, and of course competition would bring the cost of electricity to the consumer down sharply.
TWO THINGS WRONG with that reasoning:
1> De-regulation created a lot of other competition, like they said, and prices dropped – for about a month or so. Then the biggest providers before de-regulation quickly bought out the new competing companies, and we were back to one provider, only now that one provider was DE-REGULATED, and could charge whatever he wanted. (And boy, did he !!!)
2> The proof is in the pudding, isn’t it? I personally paid $12-14 a month for YEARS until July 14, 2005, and since then have paid $300 on several occasions, and NEVER under $125 a month.
What I would like every reader to do is seek out euphemisms. They are the device being used to control us, and rob us. Someone once said: “…You can steal a lot more with a briefcase than you can with a gun.”
Thursday, February 21, 2008
What's In a Name?
Inegales - French for "Unequal." Thus, the way notes are played in Jazz, is that they are "swung" instead of just plain time consuming quarter notes. Four quarter notes consume 4 beats, but notes two and four can be less than quarter notes, followed by a rest, and the measure still gets 4 beats. Confused? Thus the name Swungnotes.
The same artifice holds true, I notice, in the written languages, particularly English that I know of, and I suspect in other tongues as well. I'll be exploring that aspect of News posts, and news utterances on TV to show how vested interests tend to denigrate those of an opposite persuasion just by using the language. My father taught me as a youngster to revere the language, and one of his quotes I remember well is "... There are those who can steal a lot more with a briefcase than with a gun." His meaning, obviously, was subtlety, thus using the language to confuse and rob the uneducated is much more efficient than violence. (And most of theime, not a crime.) Several graphic instances of this verbal theft of late have been "Weapons of Mass Destruction;" "Flip-Flopper;" "National Security;" and my personal favorite "Nuclear Weapons."
So words have enormous value in any language. They enable the greatest communication vehicle, but simultaneously the greatest theft devices. How I'd love to see kids get a better education in their native language than they're getting - but that would mean more money for education, and less for high explosives, wouldn't it? Not gonna happen, probably.
The same artifice holds true, I notice, in the written languages, particularly English that I know of, and I suspect in other tongues as well. I'll be exploring that aspect of News posts, and news utterances on TV to show how vested interests tend to denigrate those of an opposite persuasion just by using the language. My father taught me as a youngster to revere the language, and one of his quotes I remember well is "... There are those who can steal a lot more with a briefcase than with a gun." His meaning, obviously, was subtlety, thus using the language to confuse and rob the uneducated is much more efficient than violence. (And most of theime, not a crime.) Several graphic instances of this verbal theft of late have been "Weapons of Mass Destruction;" "Flip-Flopper;" "National Security;" and my personal favorite "Nuclear Weapons."
So words have enormous value in any language. They enable the greatest communication vehicle, but simultaneously the greatest theft devices. How I'd love to see kids get a better education in their native language than they're getting - but that would mean more money for education, and less for high explosives, wouldn't it? Not gonna happen, probably.
"This will be SO easy!"
Like everything worth doing in life, making a blog is just a snap, once you know how.
R-r-r-right.
Hello, at last..."I want to thank the members of the Academy for"...oh, no, wait, I'm getting ahead of myself (and the Oscars aren't even on tonight).
I am not claiming to have perpretrated the next cutting-edge American blog here, which should qualify me for study, since I have observed a lack of modesty online that would make Alexander and Napoleon blush.
That squishing sound you hear is my foot in the pool water, testing the "virtual" temperature...!
R-r-r-right.
Hello, at last..."I want to thank the members of the Academy for"...oh, no, wait, I'm getting ahead of myself (and the Oscars aren't even on tonight).
I am not claiming to have perpretrated the next cutting-edge American blog here, which should qualify me for study, since I have observed a lack of modesty online that would make Alexander and Napoleon blush.
That squishing sound you hear is my foot in the pool water, testing the "virtual" temperature...!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)