Yard Signs

The state of Missouri is known as "The Show Me State". Amazingly, few Missourians know why. The nickname came about in the Civil War. Some states permitted slavery. Other states did not. Missouri was divided. When Missourians met a stranger, they never knew if the stranger was pro-slavery or anti-slavery. Before expressing an opinion, they sought a signal from their new acquaintance.

In today's election periods, we put yard signs in front of our homes to show which candidate we support. A yard sign shows your political choice and indicates you are not ashamed of  that choice.

Knowing yard signs receive only a fleeting glance from passersby, these signs rarely show more than the name of the candidate. I would like to display a different message for next November's presidential election. Perhaps I should make a sign that said "Due to the policies of President Obama, this home is worth 40% less than four years ago." or, maybe, "President Obama's policies wiped out my equity in this home".

Maybe I will.

Bonus Schmonus

The current outcry against bonuses for executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac proves that Barack Obama's efforts to create class warfare are succeeding. It is further evidence that our educational system still has not taught that labor is a commodity. Its price determined by market forces.

Commodity prices are governed by the rarity of the commodity and the demand for it. Gold and corn are both yellow. Ounce for ounce, gold is "worth" the most... unless one is starving on a desert island, in which case the demand for the corn would greatly exceed the demand for the gold.

I started two small businesses, both highly successful in terms of the product we provided. But I lacked the necessary management skills and both businesses failed. A lot of people lost their jobs. What would it have been worth to each of those companies to have found someone to do the job, and had the money to hire them away from their former position?

I have no idea whether the Fannie - Freddie officers now receiving the bonuses are capable of pulling those entities from the jaws of greater disaster. I have no idea how many dollars it will take to keep them on the job if they do. But, to simply say they should not be paid the required amount because taxpayers have money involved, is foolishness of the first order. (Or, perhaps, of the second order! Hope and Change supporters who elected Obama in the first place could hardly do anything more foolish!)

Occupy - the Liberal mindset

This weekend, the media has overflowed with stories of  filth, lawbreaking, illegal drugs, even murder amongst those in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Mayors and police in various cities are saying "enough" and evicting the rowdy, destructive crowds.

On Sunday morning, the Managing Editor of our local newspaper, a Liberal Democrat, wrote a lengthy column about the OWS movement. I did not read the entire column. When I reached this sentence, I quit reading:

"I support it completely and wish them well in the cold winter months ahead"

Sunday evening, 60 Minutes, the CBS TV news magazine carried a story about Congressman Brian Baird, from Washington, a Democrat, and his efforts to thwart unlawful inside stock trading by Congressmen. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Liberal Democrat, apparently the biggest offender.

And, I recall a recent statement by an old friend, a lifelong Democrat and once a close family friend of Harry Truman, saying the former president must be spinning in his grave over the conduct of the current Democrat Administration.

I have felt ill about Democrats for 75 years. As a small boy, I heard my father and his friends complain that Franklin Roosevelt was destroying their country.

Today I am easing a bit on the old-fashioned, labor favoring Democrats and placing the blame purely on the Progressive Liberal movement. Yes, I still believe that some Democrats will support any Democrat - think Bob Beckel! But it is only when Democrats fully adopt the Liberal ideology that they go completely whacko.

Unlike our local newspaper editor, I hope the scum "occupying" Wall Street, and other cities, freeze in the cold winter months ahead.

American Culture

What's that? I guess it depends on whom you ask. You've probably heard the story of the California school boys who got in a bit of trouble for wearing patriotic American T-shirts to school on Cinco de Mayo (Fifth of May). To some Americans, that was outrageous.

After the Mexicans gained independence from Spain, Napoleon III of France and a group of Mexican monarchists backed that clown Maximilian to become Emperor of Mexico. The Mexicans pretty well ended the adventure when their Army defeated a French force at Puebla, Mexico on May 5, 1862. In Puebla, the date is celebrated as the anniversary of The Battle of Puebla. Elsewhere in Mexico, the date is generally ignored.

In the U.S., it is fun to say "Cinco de Mayo" and the date has become an excuse to drink a lot of Tequila. Some Hispanic American kids - especially in California and other border states - celebrate the day out of some sort of ethnic pride. Okay? Then, why is it not also okay for non-Hispanic American kids to wear red, white and blue T-shirts?

On November 11, a number of TV personalities observed Veteran's Day by wearing little "Buddy Poppies" on their lapels. Buddy Poppies came on the scene some time after World War One. During that war, Army surgeon John McCrae wrote a poem titled "In Flander's Fields", in which he spoke of poppies growing in the military cemetery in France. In 1918 US professor Moina Michael, inspired by the poem,  vowed to always wear a red poppy as a symbol of remembrance for those who served in the war. Throughout my life, I remember the Disabled American Veterans organization selling little artificial poppies (on Armistice Day, which later became Veteran's Day) they called Buddy Poppies, to help fund their activities.

Yesterday, I was shocked when TV commentator Juan Williams, seemed to not know why people were wearing Buddy Poppies.

How is it that today, in America, more people seem to know about Cinco de Mayo, an almost insignificant event in Mexican history, than about Buddy Poppies which commemorate an event in which over 116,000 U.S. military personnel were killed?

Do events in our history need a more catchy name to survive in our culture?

I wish...

We all say that, throughout our lives. I often say it to myself when I think of my father. More than anyone I have ever known, he appreciated the good that has come from industry, technology. Born and raised in the era of the horse, I often heard him marvel at the convenience and comfort of travel by modern automobile, on modern "hard-surface roads", as he called them.

He once told me of driving an early automobile from Tulsa, OK to Oklahoma City. The existing dirt road had three deep ruts, two caused by teams of two horses and the wheels of the wagons they pulled. A center rut caused by a single horse pulling a buggy. Driving the car on the road often meant the ruts were deep enough that the car would "high center" and the wheels just spin. So, they drove alongside the road through pastures, cutting and mending fences as they went. The trip takes about two hours today. His trip took a couple of days.

He told another story of attending some sort of fair in which a telephone company had set up a display where people could stand on one side of the room and talk, by phone, to someone on the other side. One attendee remarked that "Some day they'll do it without the wires".

My father died years before cell phones or personal computers. Imagine the fun of demonstrating smart phones to him... or explaining the internet and all it offers. He may have a little trouble grasping the techniques of operating these new devices, but he would be impressed and appreciative. 

I wish... I could.

But, they paid a Settlement!

So, he must be guilty, right?

Republican presidential nominee hopeful Herman Cain, it is revealed, was accused of sexual harassment 12 years ago. His employer at the time, the National Restaurant Association, paid a settlement to the women who made the charges.

I hold that that fact tells us nothing.

If the public knew the truth about "settlements", I believe there would be a huge outcry against the kind of lawsuits clogging our courts.

In my career in advertising, I have witnessed events where a business is sued for some wrong-doing and said, "Bring it on", so certain were they of their innocence. Offered a chance of making a cash settlement in lieu of the lawsuit, they said "No Way!"

Then their lawyers tallied up the time it would take to successfully defend their case, and advised them to take the settlement.

Understand, please, that it costs money to practice law. Even the most rudimentary practice requires an office, utility bills, employees to answer phones, prepare complex legal documents, do research, etc. A lawyer cannot work for free and still pay his staff, his bills, etc., even if he wanted to donate his time.

So, if a lawyer computes that it will cost $10,000 to defend a case and the matter can be closed with a $5,000 settlement, the honest lawyer will so advise his client. That happens over and over and over in America. Doesn't matter if the charges are valid or just made up. Sad, but true.

But, let me speak to the fact of sexual harassment. There was a time when sexual harassment was rampant in the business world. A superior of some rank catches a secretary in the supply closet, closes the door and forces her against the wall, attempting to undress her. That was bad, really bad, and the perpetrators should be severely punished.

Some were. Some companies have paid big bucks when that sort of behavior was proven. And, quite naturally, some persons have seen charges of sexual harassment as an easy route to a big payday. Bring the charge, challenge the accused to a costly lawsuit - or in the alternative - a handsome cash settlement.

Happily for the women of the business world, the reality of harsh punishment for acts of sexual harassment has helped to minimize the practice.

No charge of sexual harassment should escape investigation. But, no charge of sexual harassment should be plastered across national news media unless and until substantiated. Especially not 12 years after the event, when the accusation can cause irreparable harm to the accused, even if never proven valid.

Victory in Iraq - Afghanistan

I like the Japanese and I like the Germans. There is much to be admired about the people of both these great nations. Yet, I spent much of my youth nurturing an inflexible hatred for both the Japs and the Krauts. Why the change?

Because of my age, I, thankfully, entered the military too late to experience combat in World War Two, but I spent much time with combat veterans. From them I learned that war is a brutal business. From them I learned that marble monuments and marching bands are not an accurate depiction of war. One writer of the time suggested that to build a war memorial we should dig a huge pit into which every veteran could defecate and vomit until it rotted and stunk and offended everyone for miles around.

But, I also learned from the combat veterans that war is sometimes the only way to bring justice to oppressed peoples... in those instances where injustice is supported by huge and powerful armies. And, I learned the concept that, once in a war, the only acceptable conclusion is complete victory. That is what was achieved in World War Two.

Now, people are debating what we should consider to be success (it is politically incorrect to use the word victory) in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Ken Blackwell, in a column titled "Arab Spring and Islamist Fall" (available at http://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2011/10/30/arab_spring_islamist_fall), explains it well:

We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.

We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.

I see it as like police caught a man robbing a bank, took back the loot, and let the robber go. The paradigm of World War Two would be to mete out justice in a way that would both prevent further mischief on the part of this robber and scare the pants off anyone else thinking of robbing a bank.  

Accidentally effective commercials

For years, I've made a living producing broadcast (radio and TV) commercials.Sometimes you work very hard and come up with a failure. Sometimes you produce a great one by accident.

Years ago I was making TV commercials for a large, retail furniture dealer. Most of our advertising budget targeted the big sellers: living room, dining room and bedroom furniture.

My client also sold grandfather clocks. But, so few grandfather clocks were sold, we never wanted to spend money on a commercial to feature them. Then, in one commercial promoting living room furniture, we showed a picture of a living room which, coincidentally, included a grandfather clock. Most of the response was for the living room furniture. But to our surprise, we also received a number of inquiries about grandfather clocks.

In future commercials, we often included a picture of the featured furniture item, but with a grandfather clock in the background. We never mentioned grandfather clocks, never gave a price, but my client continued to do a small but steady business in grandfather clocks.

Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain has made an internet commercial which shows one of his staffers smoking a cigarette. Nothing is said for or against smoking, but the guy looks right into the camera and takes a drag. Guess what? Many cigarette smokers are now Cain supporters!

Smokers pay exorbitant taxes on their tobacco products. This tax revenue is used for many beneficial programs, including health care for children. Yet, smokers are almost universally vilified. Smoking is banned in more and more places. Some companies will not employ a smoker. Smokers feel they are treated unfairly.

Now comes an ad for Herman Cain. It says nothing directly, but seems to say that the Cain campaign does not agree with the barrage of anti-smoking propaganda. Many smokers now feel there is someone on their side.

Accidentally, or on purpose, that commercial is brilliant, because it is effective!

Will the real crook please stand up?

The First Amendment spells out our right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances". But, if, for example, you run a small business that operates in several Midwestern states, how do you do that?

If you have enough spare cash, you may employ one of the many professionals who know exactly how to do that. That would be a lobbyist. These professional petitioners use many tools to advance the petitions of their clients - including money. One of the uses of that money is making campaign contributions to politicians whose voting record generally favors their client's cause.

So far, so good. Nothing in the First Amendment prohibits that. Today, however, President Obama triumphantly declared that his re-election campaign would accept not a dime in contributions from lobbyists! Isn't that a violation of the First Amendment?

Obama and like-minded politicians want us to believe  they are above corruption. But it isn't the petitioner who is potentially corrupt... the corruption comes when the politician  makes policy decisions in direct repayment for the petitioner's constitutionally permitted political contribution.

In Defense of Herman Cain

Candidate Cain declared himself to be Pro Life, anti-abortion, no exceptions. Then he permitted some exceptions. Some are screaming.

Like most pro-lifers, I believe all abortions should be illegal. We suspect that most abortions are for someone's convenience! We say a woman has the (legally protected) right to refuse sex. The right to follow the so-called "rhythm method" to avoid pregnancy. The right to use a medical or a physical contraceptive. The right to demand her partner use a contraceptive. But we believe that if she bypasses all those "rights" and becomes pregnant, she does not have the right to kill the unborn child.

Even if she is denied all those rights and is impregnated by force, we civilized types tend to imagine every fetus (regardless of the context of the act that produced it) to be a viable infant who could possibly grow to become another Steve Jobs.. or, at minimum, a healthy, productive Mom or Dad. 

Realistic? Of course not.

Most allow for exceptions "for the mother's health", but often we envision that position as some abortion provider stretching facts. I am reminded of a story from Africa, wherein a very young girl was impregnated. When the fetus developed it was too large for her tiny body. Her internal organs were literally torn apart The unborn infant died but she could not deliver because of its size. Miraculously she made it to a clinic where her life was saved. She became an advocate for women's rights and worked in prenatal care for poor African women.

Okay, that is truly a case where abortion could have been declared "for the mother's health". But, what if all abortions were illegal? If that female child had aborted her fetus, should we have then thrown the little girl in jail?

There are always exceptions... not in principle... but in reality; except of course in politics, where, if statements are not artfully made they will be used to vilify you.

Illegal Immigration. My Take.

Growing up on farms in Missouri and Kansas, I loved the outdoors and wildlife. I especially liked doves. There, we had only mourning doves, named I suppose, for their mournful call. As a boy, I learned to imitate their call.

When I moved to the Southwest, I discovered three species of doves. The mourning dove; the white-winged dove which looks like a mourning dove but has snow white primary feathers on the edge of each wing (a stylish touch) and a call that sounds somewhat like a rooster crowing; also we have the Inca dove - about half the size of a mourning dove. Incas display a more reddish-brown color. We see at least one dove in our yard every day.

To our delight, an occasional covey of Gambel's quail also visited our yard. They are a wonderful bird, but like all quail, Gambels are easily spooked. In hope of attracting more quail and of making them less fearful, I bought some bird seed and spread it on the bare ground.

To my surprise, after spreading seed, the ground was soon covered with a mass of doves. All three species at times. Yes, quail would show up, but if they were a little late the seed would all have been devoured by the many doves.

I still like doves... but these doves were getting all the birdseed. Is that the dove's fault? And what should I do? Kill all the doves? (Against the law, for starters.) Put up a fence? (That would also keep the quail out.)

Then I discovered bird seed blocks... bird seed mixed with some kind of adhesive material (looks like a molasses mix) that enables the vendor to form seed into a solid cube, about ten inches on a side.

Interestingly, the quail seem to have a stronger beak and readily pick individual seeds from the bock. Doves find it more difficult to feed from the blocks. Problem solved. A bird seed block lasts for several weeks. Quail now feed several times a day. We still have doves, but only one or two at a time.

Yeah, an occasional feral cat also shows up and I grant them no quarter.

Living close to the Mexican border and a frequent visitor to Mexico, I find the Mexicans to be delightful people. But when they come to our country in numbers that overwhelm our hospitals and other social services, it is not so delightful. Who is at fault?

Just as my spreading an abundance of free birdseed to attract quail created an invasion of doves, the U.S. government's abundance of free services for the "needy" has attracted large numbers of illegal immigrants... mostly good people looking for some relief from grinding poverty.

Like feral cats, the criminal element must be dealt with. But for the vast majority of immigrants, it seems that cutting back on the free stuff would seem better than fences, and other punitive actions.

Just my opinion.

Home Grown

The press calls him "The American Cleric". While I have doubts about the veracity of the cleric part, there is no doubt that Anwar Al-Alawki was American... born here in my adopted home town of Las Cruces, NM - probably in the same hospital where my granddaughter was born.

No one in Las Cruces today was proud of Al-Awlaki... but there is more to the story that does make us a little proud

The Physical Science Laboratory at New Mexico State University, in cooperation with the U.S. Military at White Sands Missile Range here, develops and tests Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Their UAV Test Site is near our airport.

White Sands is the birthplace of America's missile program and is where the Hellfire Missile first delivered hell and fire to a target.

Down the road in El Paso, TX, my friends Jeff and Ruthie are proud parents of a drone pilot, who has been on assignment in Afghanistan flying drones to deliver Hellfires to Taliban bigwigs in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As you can see, his "Control room" is mobile. His current assignment is a secret, but a good guess would be somewhere within striking distance of Yemen.

So, perhaps the world will forgive us for birthing a terrorist-to-be, when they learn that we also birthed at least part of the technology that has put the drones in the air; and we first tested the Hellfires that arm the drones.

Now, how cool is it that one of our locals may have been flying the drone over Yemen that delivered the Hellfire (and damnation) to Anwar Al-Alawki?

What a country!

The Great Depression

Every day or so I hear another statistic which someone says is the highest or the lowest or the worst since the Great Depression. Each time I hear some such "truth", I am reminded of the famous, if not accurately attributed quotation, "Lies, damned lies and statistics."

Then I remember President Ronald Reagan's quote about the definition of recession, depression and recovery. "The Gipper" said, "If your brother-in-law loses his job it is a recession; if you lose your job it is a depression; if Jimmy Carter loses his job it is a recovery." In other words, President Reagan understood that statistics never describe reality.

I once had a friend who invented statistics, just for fun. Usually ridiculous numbers. I was always amazed at how many people accepted his numbers as truth. Today I am amazed at how people react to statistics from The Great Depression. Also, I am amazed that so many people who were not born until decades after the depression ended, are now telling us these "facts" about the 1930s depression.

Respectfully (always) I submit that if you are younger than 75 years of age, you cannot possibly understand the Depression. Those statistics the youngsters quote may as well be labeled damned lies. They are meaningless.

Consider unemployment numbers. Today, "unemployment" means you do not have a "good" job, paying a high salary, while providing health insurance, unemployment insurance, guaranteed vacations, sick leave, etc., etc., etc.

Flipping hamburgers? That is not a "real" job.

In the 1930s, "unemployment" meant you had nothing to feed your family this day. It meant you could not find even an hour's work, of any description. A job flipping burgers? What a blessing... you might fill your stomach with a few scraps and earn a couple of dollars to purchase a sack of beans to feed your family..

Imagine living in a house with no electricity, no running water, no kitchen sink, no indoor bathroom. Imagine eating only beans, or greens, or some other persons leftover food, and being thankful that you are not hungry. Now, in that scenario, imagine someone trying to describe your life with  statistics. What a waste of breath.

Elect Me President.

I'll solve the nation's problems. Fast. Guaranteed!

Ever since humans first developed a written language and invented the tools for writing: clay tablets, papyrus, paper; chisels, quill pens, word processors, people have observed and recorded events of their lives. So much so that there are tens of thousands of libraries with millions of books. Books that sit on shelves, collecting dust, unread, while governments make the same mistakes over and over.

Forget partisan politics. I wouldn't care who carried water for the elephant, hay for the donkey. My administration would be packed with people who didn't give a damn about politics, but were passionate about history.

In the relatively short two and one-third centuries of our government's existence, we've seen it all. Boom and bust, recession, depression, inflation, war and peace. Civil unrest and periods of tranquility. Natural disasters. Katrina, yes, but how about the Chicago fire, the San Francisco earthquake, the Johnstown flood, the dust bowl. The administrations of our 44 presidents have faced these events in different ways. Sometimes with spectacular success. Often with painful failure.

My administration would study, learn from and follow those successes while avoiding repeat of the failures.

We already have an example of such a form of administration, It is the United states military. At West Point, Annapolis and Colorado Springs, the military academies don't dwell on social welfare BS or on PC fantasies, they teach the facts - the facts of history.

What happened at the battle of Waterloo? How did Washington's rag tag army of volunteers defeat the highly trained, well organized British? Why did Rommel lose in North Africa? Lee at Gettysburg?

The result? The most successful, most powerful military in the history of the world.

All the events have occurred. All the solutions have been tried. It is all written... the big picture "The Rise And Fall Of The Roman Empire", "The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich"...the minute details of every Parliament, every Congress, every dictator. All we have to do is read it.

Sadly, we are governed by politicians, theorists who imagine that their idea is the big one.

I would change that. You like Marxism? How has it worked in the past? You are a fan on Keynesian economics? How has it played out? Big on environmentalism? How many humans have suffered for the welfare of the brown pelican or the spotted owl. How many die annually for an imaginary theory that DDT was wiping out all birds?

I don't need a donation. Just your vote!

Ronald Reagan Said It:

Government IS the problem!

Hasn't that always been true? True of any people, of any era?

Think about the Russian people. Have you ever heard of any reason to fear or to hate a Russian? But the governments there - from the Czars to Stalin to Putin, are another story.

The German people. A highly advanced people in every way. World leaders and innovators. Then there came
Bismarck, Kaiser, Hitler. Bad memories.

Japanese. Remarkable people with much to be admired. Except when Tojo held influence.

Venezuela. Cuba. What's not to love about these beautiful, tropical nations on the Caribbean? Can you say  Hugo Chavez? Fidel Castro?

The vast majority of the world's people want the same thing, a happy, peaceful life. Perhaps because they are concentrated on this goal, evil people muscle there way into power.

The United States has one advantage over other nations. Constitutionally mandated elections. Every two years we have the choice to throw out a Congressman. Every four years, the president. Every six years, a senator.

Happily, in the case of the president, the choice is made for us at the end of eight years. Now, if we can just add term limits to members of Congress, we will have created Utopia!

Worst President

Lately many are saying Jimmy Carter was our worst president, but that Barack Obama is about to steal that title. I disagree.

Forty four men have been President of the United States. Twenty eight served before I was born. I can't honestly speak about those 28. All I know of them is what the history books say, and I do not totally trust the history books. So let's just talk about some presidents who have served in my lifetime.

Jimmy Carter was a bumbling fool. He gave us The Department of Energy, to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. That department has been an abject failure, yet we continue to spend some $27 billion annually to sustain it.

Jimmy also gave us the Department of Education which now costs between $64 and $77 billion annually, but by every accepted yardstick, our schools have just gotten worse.

Pretty bad performance! But nothing compared to F.D.R. Here is the product of his first term:


Agricultural Adjustment Act    AAA  
Civil Works Administration    CWA  
Civilian Conservation Corps    CCC  
Federal Emergency Relief Act    FERA  
Glass-Steagall Act        FDIC  
National Industrial Recovery Act    NIRA  
National Youth Administration    NYA  
Public Works Administration    PWA  
Rural Electrification Administration    REA  
Securities and Exchange Commission    SEC  
Social Security Act        FICA
Tennessee Valley Authority    TVA  
Wagner Act            NLRB  
Works Progress Administration    WPA
  
Granted, some of these programs were discontinued, but some have lived on to bleed America for over 75 years.

Franklin Roosevelt was the worst president. But he ground on until he died in his fourth term. Obama cannot overtake Roosevelt, but he will surely occupy second place. Jimmy Carter should rank number three.

Good Language

Essentially all birds and all mammals communicate with some sort of sound. A shrill cry of alarm to warn of imminent danger; a signal to scare off a competitor; a signal to declare a territory; a call to attract a mate. Each of these events, in numerous species, has been documented by researchers.

Humans, with their ability to utter a wide variety of sounds, developed language. These languages often consist of thousands of words. Steven Pinker, in his book The Language Instinct, suggests that speaking a language is done instinctively. He counts up the number of words understood and used by the average college age student and feels it would be impossible to learn and remember that many words in their short lifetime... so people must have an instinct to speak a language.While some academics disagree with Pinker's conclusions, his arguments are persuasive.

Early European explorers, who first visited remote regions of the earth, were surprised to find that inhabitants there spoke well-developed languages. Pinker even found that in many languages, common items, such as milk, were often referenced by similar sounding words.

The ancient Romans developed a marvelous language we call Latin. Over distance and time, that language nuanced into what we today know as Italian, Spanish, French and Portuguese. Some native speakers, notably the French, try to maintain the "purity" of the language by discouraging the "bastardization" of traditional French words. The Spanish language, spoken by native speakers in America, is rife with such variations. While the Spanish word for truck may more properly be camion, many American Latinos prefer to use trucka.

English speakers, on the other hand, show no such tendencies toward purity. If another language has a word that fits well, English speakers will happily adopt it.

A French journalist was quoted as having said he wished he wrote for an English language publication because he could then express himself more precisely. But, could he? Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, one of the world's best speakers of the English language, once had a problem explaining her anger at some government for acting unilaterally. She simply dropped the use of unilateral and started saying their behavior was "one-sided". Everyone understood.

If you are writing for a scientific journal about a discipline that employs very specific language, you may require complex, even foreign words to make your point. But if you are making a speech to a general audience, remember that they cannot turn back the page and re-read your last comments. In that setting, it is wise to avoid using words or terms that require even a moment of careful thought to absorb your meaning.

Again paraphrasing Steven Pinker, If I orally express a thought and a listener fully understands my thought, that is good language!

Insults Reversed

Years ago, in southern New Mexico, there was a State Senator named Burton Roach. Sen. Roach was a robust man with a huge paunch. In one campaign, an opponent said the last thing needed in the State Senate was another "pot-bellied politician". Everyone, including Roach, recognized this as an insult to Roach. But, Roach was the smarter politician. He turned the insult around had a large button made with the letters PBP emblazoned, and as if to brag about his big belly, wore the button everywhere he went.

I have no recollection of Roach's ideology, but his general good humor and refusal to engage in name calling appealed to voters, and he was re-elected.

Andrew Jackson so infuriated his opposition that one speaker openly called him a jackass. Jackson apparently liked the comparison to a hard headed donkey and adopted the nickname. The donkey - jackass, if you will - remains the symbol of the Democratic Party to this day.

Margaret Thatcher angered Communists worldwide. Even before she became Great Britains Prime Minister, one called her an "iron lady"... meaning a stubborn, uncompromising person. But Maggie Thatcher liked the label and today, if anyone mentions The Iron Lady, everyone knows they mean former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher!

Politicians and political consultants should think before they write campaign commercials insulting their opponents... you may just be creating a buzz word certain to get him, not you, elected!

What do they mean?

When I was an announcer I was taught the importance of correct pronunciation in the interest of clear communications. We were cautioned against the perils of placing the em-FOSS-us on the wrong syl-LOBB-uhl.

Today, when I hear a spokesman read copy on a well crafted TV commercial while seemingly placing emphasis on the wrong syllable - or word - I wonder if it is on purpose or just a mistake.

On a commercial for Legal Zoom, an outfit that provides self-help for preparing legal documents, the spokesman promises "We put the law on your side", without emphasis on any word, or syllable. Okay, no one wants the law on their back... but, why on your side? Shouldn't he be saying "We put the law on YOUR side"?

Maybe there is a reason. Amazingly, there are all sorts of legal requirements placed on advertising. You have heard an announcer identified as  "a non-attorney spokesman". Really? Who cares if the spokesman is a non-attorney? Or, you have seen commercials for some medical product labeled as a "dramatization". Is that so we won't think someone with a hidden camera is filming in a doctor's office? Only a lawyer would dream up a need for those disclaimers.

I once wrote a commercial in which I said something could be completed in "a few short weeks". I was forced to re-write it by a regulator who demanded "What is a short week?".

Is there a reason why Legal Zoom cannot say "We put the law on YOUR side"? Or is that spokesman, who is a well-known attorney and NOT a well-trained-non-attorney-announcer, just doing a poor job of reading his copy?

Don't face the IRS Alone!

If, that is,  you are a tax cheat!

An outfit called Tax Masters is running a TV commercial in which spokesman Patrick Cox warns, "The IRS will pursue you relentlessly...", to which I say, "They damned well better!" Pursuing tax cheats is what they are paid to do and I find it refreshing that someone in the Federal Government is doing their job... relentlessly, no less!

As politicians are wont to say... let me be perfectly clear:  I deplore the 16th amendment to the Constitution, I hate income tax. But as long as it is the law and millions of us law-abiding citizens are forced to obey, I want everyone to pay up just as we do.

As for the IRS being in relentless pursuit, I will share my personal experience. Having been self-employed most of my adult life, I have paid estimated taxes. There have been a couple of instances when we underestimated and suddenly found we owed more income tax than we could immediately pay. We asked the IRS for help. They worked with us to develop a payment plan we could handle. We followed the plan, paid our taxes and that was that.

And again, I have seen a couple of instances where an individual IRS agent appeared to be a bit unreasonable but, by and large, my IRS experience has been okay.

Repeal the 16th amendment. But until you do, enforce the law evenly and pursue tax cheats, law breakers, relentlessly.

My opinion is that you can save money and time by working directly with the IRS. Let Mr. Cox make his money off someone else.