Categories
Uncategorized

Glory, Indeed!

From an HSBC ad at the Paris, France airport: “There are five times as many people learning English in China than there are people in England.”
 
 
In this season of Christmas, the foregoing observation brought consideration of the following passage, often sung during this time to some of the most magnificent music ever composed.

“Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned …. The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain: And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed…. The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shine. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 40: 1-5; 9:2, 6) 
These words from the King James Version of the Bible, set to music by George Frederick Handel in his great oratorio Messiah, have captured the imagination of countless believers and unbelievers since. Regardless of its theological authority or faithfulness to the original Biblical language, the KJV is a masterwork of the English language, and very nearly its apotheosis. It was translated and composed by a group of some forty scholars commissioned by James I of England between 1604 and 1611. Their story is recounted in God’s Secretaries by Adam Nicolson (2003) and The King James Bible: The Book That Changed the World, a made for TV film directed by Gillian Bancroft (BBC, available on DVD).
 
The English language, which originated on a small, not particularly hospitable island has essentially conquered the linguistic earth, and the words and sentences crafted by “God’s Secretaries” as well as Williams Shakespeare, William Faulkner, and all the speakers and writers between, are no small reason why. Other languages may be as expressive in their own sphere, but how many have the same inventiveness of expression let alone the sheer volume of words? We all get our quota of yuks from reading instructions that come with Japanese, for example, manufactured products. The diction is not odd because the writers are less than fluent in English; what is written usually is literally correct. It is because there are so many synonyms and different shades of meaning in English words and allusions that the foreign writers cannot possibly be familiar with all of them without having lived and used our language on a constant basis. Linguistic chauvinists such as the French, whence this word was derived, have seen their tongue slide from the international language of culture and diplomacy to more-or-less provincial status. English, on the other hand, has had no compunction about coining a word as well as borrowing one and then claiming the word as the language’s own. The expression of nuance and subtle difference is, according to linguists, unmatched in English in its universality.
There is no question that the British Empire was responsible for the propagation of English throughout the world, but that Empire has been gone for a half century. In an economic sense, if not in a political one, it was replaced by the United States, whose language is English. Another nation that is an upcoming economic power player is India, whose language is English. Yes, there are those who will take issue with this last statement. India has several “official” languages, but the only one that is widely understood and almost exclusively used by the educated and commercial populace in their occupations and professions is English. Without English, polyglot India would be ungovernable and would have fragmented long ago. It actually did upon independence, along religious lines, mainly, but also linguistic. Pakistan, essentially a bastard country, has been propped up by the United States for geopolitical reasons. I am not ignoring China, but the opening observation in this essay makes my case in that regard.

Speaking of language chauvinism, we have today in the United States those who fear that the immigration, much of it illegal, from Spanish speaking countries to our south somehow threatens our culture, which means our values, and threatens to Balkanize our nation. Comfort to ye my people, it is not going to happen. We have had polyglot immigration before. After the Constitution was drafted, and before ratification, Pennsylvania required that the proposed draft be published in German as well as English. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, immigrants came in droves from southern and eastern Europe, and many came from east Asia. All of these people brought their languages and formed their own communities, both rural and urban. Most adults clung to their native language, at least within those communities. But their children didn’t, and their grandchildren learned not a word of the “old country” language. Their great-grandchildren married descendants of other immigrant groups who had no language other than English. Furthermore, in my visits to Europe, I found that nearly everyone speaks English, except in France, where, I have heard, they can but won’t unless absolutely necessary. French linguistic chauvinism dies hard, I suppose. Except, perhaps at the Paris airport where the air traffic controllers speak English to pilots of Air France airplanes.
 
Which brings me to my final observation. Most of we Americans would not understand one or more of the following phrases, while there is little doubt that a native speaker in their own country would understand the English equivalent.
God Jul

Craciun fericit

Wesolych Swiat

Linksmu Kaledu

Hyvää Joulua

Sretan Božic

Veselé Vánoce

Frohelich Weihnachten

Buon Natale

Joueux Noel

¡Feliz Navidad (If you live in Texas and don’t know what this means, you reside in a cave.)

In other words, Merry Christmas (to all and to all a good night.)

P.S. By the way, Mr. Scott Cantrell, the music critic of our Dallas Morning News, informs us that “saith” is correctly pronounced “seth.” Who knew?

Categories
Uncategorized

No problem with income inequality.

From the Daily Kos:   (Authored by Shawn (sic) “Bottom Line: I’m a Liberal” Russell)
“[Presidential candidate] Rick Santorum said,
‘They talk about income inequality. I’m for income inequality. I think some people should make more than other people, because some people work harder and have better ideas and take more risk, and they should be rewarded for it. I have no problem with income inequality.’” 
Predictably, Shawn (sic) selectively quoted Santorum the full quote is
“The reason you see some sympathy among the American public for them is the grave concern — and it’s a legitimate one — that blue-collar workers, lower-income workers, are having a harder and harder time rising,” the former Pennsylvania senator said at a presidential campaign stop. “They talk about income inequality. I’m for income inequality. I think some people should make more than other people, because some people work harder and have better ideas and take more risk, and they should be rewarded for it. I have no problem with income inequality.
“President Obama is for income equality. That’s socialism. It’s worse yet, it’s Marxism,” Santorum said. “I’m not for income equality. I’m not for equality of result — I’m for equality of opportunity.”
“The key in America is that people can rise, that there are opportunities to move up. In that area, America is falling short now. We are not as income-mobile as even some western European countries, according to a lot of the data. So that is something that as Republicans we should be talking about and be concerned about.” DesMoines Register, 12/20/2011
Shawn (sic) goes on to say:
“If working hard meant an escape from poverty, then many American single mothers would’ve been millionaires by now. Had Santorum studied sociology he would’ve been introduced to a term called the feminization of poverty.”
(My Comment): Sociology ranks slightly above basket weaving as a college major that provides a marketable skill. The “feminization of poverty” to the extent it is exists, is a result of teenage children having children, too soon and too many, and is a direct result of dependancy on government.
“Furthermore, poor people work greater hours than their wealthier counterparts, often having multiple jobs. Yet they remain poor!”
(My Comment): The number of hours one works has little to do with productivity. Individuals get paid for the value they create and that is a function of what they know, not what they physically do. When I was in the locksmith business, I was called upon to open a safe that the shop-owner couldn’t. I asked him for the combination, dialed it, and whacked the door with a large plastic hammer I sued for such things The door opened. I cleaned and adjusted the lock, and put it back in. The whole process took me 15 minutes. I charged him $200. He complained saying that price was outrageous for 15 minutes work. I then itemized the bill: $10 for doing the work; $190 for knowing what to do. There are countless similar examples.
“If having better ideas was a guarantee to be richer than Antonio Meucci (the first inventor of the telephone) and Heinrich Goebel (the first inventor of the Light bulb) would’ve died rich. They died in poverty.”
(My Comment): Inventing a better mousetrap is only the start. You have to promote it and it has to be practically useful. It doesn’t matter how much you know unless others know you know it. The world is full of unrequited geniuses.
“Finally taking risks does not always translate into success and money. Many Americans have taken risks by investing all of their money on failed businesses, or buying a home only to have it foreclosed, or spending their money on college, only to be unemployed.”
(My Comment): That’s why its called “risk” – duh! Homes are usually only foreclosed upon if you don’t make the payments, and it’s worth less than you owe on it. Lesson is, don’t by a house unless you can put enough equity into it to begin with. Spending your money on college is a great investment if you major in engineering, or even liberal-arts that teach you to think, write, and communicate effectively. It’s not if you major in basket weaving – or sociology.
“Hence, all of the conditions Rick Santorum mentions, which separate the poor from the affluent, really are not sure guarantees of being affluent. Many Americans have done all the things Rick Santorum exalts and glorifies but with futile effort.”
(My Comment):  Bottom line: Work hard, but more importantly, work smart.
“So what happens when the American people fail by following Santorum’s guidelines? Will he compensate them for selling them an unrealized dream?”
(My Comment): No. He’s not selling them anything. He’s is describing reality.
Some who agree with Santorum (Alana Goodman in Commentary for example), believe “… he may have been better off framing this in more optimistic terms – like Jeb Bush? did with the ‘Right to Rise’ earlier this week – rather than supporting ‘income inequality,’ which has a distinctly negative connotation and cedes the language to the political left.”
When asked why she chose to use the emotion-loaded word “selfishness” to describe her anti-collectivist, ani-altruist philosophy rather than a more nuanced, explanatory phrase, Ayn Rand replied: “For the very reason you fear it.” Fifty years later Rand has the left wing in a tizzy, and her ideas are gaining more credence than ever. I am not a particular fan of Santorum, but he has it right, and maybe more plain-spoken rhetoric is just this thing our vapid, politically correct culture needs. The only downside is that I probably don’t have 50 years left to wait for a similar phenomenon.
Cheers!
Categories
Uncategorized

Good riddance? Yes, but …

One is tempted to say “good riddance” upon hearing of the death of Kim Jong Il, the North Korean dictator. It is. On the other hand, personality cults tend to moderate as well as hold together otherwise rogue and unstable regimes. I recall when, as a second-grader among relatives who were politically informed and interested in foreign affairs, I thought it was time to cheer when hearing that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin had died, only to have an WWII veteran uncle remark that they would find someone just as bad or worse to take his place. So true. The Cold War got a lot worse before the Soviets finally imploded. Even if nuclear armed, North Korea is not the threat the USSR was, and probably does not have the same staying power, but it’s not yet time to cheer.

Categories
Uncategorized

The Hitchens Post

Christopher Hitchens, British American writer, has died at age 62. Hitchens was a regular columnist for Vanity Fair magazine, wrote for many periodicals, and published several non-fiction books. Known as a polemicist – a writer of screeds, to some of those who disagreed with his viewpoints – he had a superior command of the language and was always an interesting read. An outspoken leftist throughout his early and middle career, his later writings cut across the ideological spectrum on a number of issues. He was an admirer of George Orwell’s works and wrote a book-length biographical essay Why Orwell Matters in 2002. It seems that 9/11 was a defining moment in his life – probably somewhat akin to Orwell’s epiphany in the Spanish Civil War that Communism was not all it was cracked up to be. He saw militant Islam as a threat to humanity, and endorsed President Bush’s aggressive foreign policy and military action against al Qaeda, while expounding and promulgating his atheism in the 2007 book God is not Great.
Hitchens was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in June 2010, which was no doubt partially a result of his prodigious half-century of consumption of cigarettes and Scots whisky. His – apparently last – essay published in the January 2012 issue of Vanity Fair seeks to refute the Nietzschean (allegedly) adage that adversity that doesn’t kill us makes us stronger when describing the ordeals of the various treatments for his cancer. All the while, he maintained his atheism in the foxhole.  While militant atheists like Richard Dawkins tend to be even more obnoxious than televangelists, Hitchens was more amusing than insulting, except toward Islamists. He only bemoaned the prospect of leaving the party earlier than he had expected. I have never been sure why atheism implies there is no immortality of the soul or some kind of life after physical death, or why the existence of God necessarily implies there is. I suppose the former is irrelevant to nonbelievers. In any event, Mr. Hitchens now knows he was wrong, or doesn’t know anything at all.
Here are a few quotes from Hitchens:
On identity politics:
“People who think with their epidermis or their genitalia or their clan are the problem to begin with. One does not banish this specter by invoking it. If I would not vote against someone on the grounds of “race” or “gender” alone, then by the exact same token I would not cast a vote in his or her favor for the identical reason. Yet see how this obvious question makes fairly intelligent people say the most alarmingly stupid things.”
On the pleasures of the senses (which may have been his early undoing):
“I was met by immaculate specimens of young American womanhood, holding silver trays and flashing perfect dentition,” he wrote. “What would I like? I thought a gin and tonic would meet the case. ‘Sir, that would be inappropriate.’ In what respect? ‘At this altitude [a ski resort in the Rockies] gin would be very much more toxic than at ground level.’ In that case, I said, make it a double.”
On Howard Dean’s 2004 candidacy for President:
“I have now several times seen Mr. Dean saying that there is Islamic terrorism in Iraq now, but that there wasn’t any before last March. If this means anything, it means that the activities of the bin Ladenist mercenaries in that country are the fault of George Bush. You can, I suppose, believe that if you care to. But watching, I realized something even more depressing: It’s not just that Mr. Dean doesn’t know anything at all about Iraq, it’s that he doesn’t care. His bored shrug at, first, the overthrow and, second, the capture of Saddam Hussein was a shrug of indifference as well as ignorance. And how can a man who flirts with moral equivalence between Washington and bin Laden expect to be listened to when he talks about a “distraction” from the hunt for the latter? He clearly thinks that the main enemy is at home.”
Anyone with such a flair for prose, even if you disagree with their viewpoint some of all of the time, makes us all richer.
You can read much, much more at
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB107646066913926371-search.html and numerous other online news sites.
Categories
Uncategorized

Serfdom Redux

As a result of the decennial 2010 census, the Republican controlled Texas Legislature drew new Congressional and State House and Senate districts. The Democrats objected, ostensibly because of racial discrimination – assuming that means discrimination against Democrats. A three judge federal court in San Antonio drew new district lines, supposedly “fairer” to Democrats – oops, they meant “minorities.” The Supreme Court stayed the lower court’s redistricting order and will hear arguments January 9, 2012.

Meanwhile, the redrawing and challenge left many candidates uncertain of what legislative or Congressional district they were in and eligible to run for. The primary elections were originally scheduled for March. In order to keep the original primary on schedule, but give time for the candidates in limbo find out where they stand and organize a campaign, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott suggested that the state hold two primaries: one for the Presidential candidates and local and statewide offices; the other for Congress and the Legislature. An attorney for one civil rights group protested saying, “when you have an unusual election day, minority voters are less likely to turn out.” See the story here. Assuming that she took minority to mean folks with darker complexions or whose, or the first language of their proximate or remote ancestors, was something other than English, isn’t that terribly insulting? Isn’t that saying that those persons are too stupid, too lazy, or too uninterested to find out when election day is? 

Of course, the condescending attitudes of the American left-wingers know no racial or ethnic boundaries. The so-called progressives are the ones who really want a return of the plantation economy and serfdom, a nicer word for slavery. They just know better than to call it that.

Categories
Uncategorized

To hear the Robin go tweet tweet tweet.

Apropos of my long time friend and follower (and former DPD colleague) Bob W. who calls me “Robin” (after the Hood, I suppose).
I have updated myself and joined Twitter  — @BobReagan13 — The “Tweets” seem to be a useful way to let those who follow know when I have posted.
Those of you who recognize the title reference are doubtless eligible for AARP membership.
Cheers!
Categories
Uncategorized

Up with which?

Headline in today’s Dallas Morning News; “43 Dallas ISD schools make Texas’ growing list of low-achieving campuses”

Yesterday, we received a newsletter from the Dallas Independent School District. It contained an article about the 100th anniversary of Ben Milam Elementary School. A special guest was a 98 year old former student who attended in 1920, whose photo with cutline appear in the story.
　

If the errors in gender and number are not readily apparent to you, then God bless. One might forgive the cutline writer, who may have acted in haste up against a deadline, but not the editor. Perhaps he/she is a product of one of the low achieving campuses. I feel sure that editor was not an alumnus of former pedagogue, and occasional commentator of these pages Gary B.

Or is my gripe pedantic nonsense up with which we should not put?

Categories
Uncategorized

Postal Going

____________________________________________
“Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds” — Herodotus, Histories.
At the corner of Bryan and Ervay Streets in downtown Dallas, there is a five-story, gray stone building occupying the entire northeast block. On three sides, above the second -floor bank of windows the inscription “United States Post Office and Court House” is carved into the stone. This edifice was completed in 1930 to house the regional postal center and main post office for Dallas, as well as the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and various other federal government agencies. It remained the principal locus of the federal government’s presence in the city until 1971, when a new 16 story behemoth opened at 1100 Commerce Street to reflect the humongous growth of the government and its presence in the everyday lives of citizens in the intervening forty years. Of course, in 1971 we had not seen anything yet.
For the first century and a half of our nation, the Post Office was the only federal agency that average citizen came into frequent contact with. Of the enumerated powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the establishment of post offices and designation of post roads is the only one that empowers the lawmakers to provide a direct service to individual citizens. All others powers have been implied – most of the time in Procrustean fashion – by Congress, the Executive, and the Judiciary in the inexorable centralization of power. The Post Office was by far the largest federal civilian activity and employer for most of our history. In major cities, the main post office was where one went if they had any business with our national government.
The inclusion of postal service in the Constitution as an enumerated power seems to have been a national security consideration as well as a means for raising revenue. The debates in the first Congress on the establishment of the Post Office and the office of Postmaster General as well as correspondence between Founders such as John Jay, Washington, and Franklin indicate that was the case. There seems to have been little discussion of the merits during the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
It made sense that the national government should have the facility to provide for the mail at the time. In the late 18th Century, as it had been from time memorial, communication between persons out of sight or hearing had to have been by delivery of writing by couriers of some kind. The Herodotus quote above recognizes the intrepid communication facility of the ancient Persian army as a reason for its success in defeating enemies. Communication among the colonies through Committees of Correspondence, who used the post facilities of the day, was essential for the success of the Revolution.
The post was to become and remain for the principal method of communication for the next two centuries. The electric telegraph in the 1840s was the first development in communication that did not require the communicating parties to be in sight or sound of one another. The telephone, radio, and television, were improvements. But written, or at least durable, communications were desirable and even essential for many purposes. Teletype, FAX, and now the internet, made the that possible, and to the detriment of the postal service.
Now, the United States Postal Service, the quasi-public corporation that succeeded the Post Office Department in 1972 may be facing bankruptcy, and the validity of its continuing existence is seriously questioned. Long time Washington Post pundit Charles Krauthammer on national television last week said categorically that it should be abolished and private entities like UPS and FedEx should take over delivery of the mail. Krauthammer is hardly alone.
The USPS is now mainly a conduit for direct advertising, sending and paying bills, and some business correspondence. When was the last time any of us received a personal letter, other than a birthday, Christmas, or other holiday card?
The United States Postal Service has now become a dinosaur, and an expensive, high-maintenance on at that. It is time to consider privatization, as many other countries have done.
Categories
Uncategorized

Dew in Dallas

Scotland, that is. Also known as “Little D”  Back during the 1970s, North Sea oil boom, Dallas (Texas) Morning News columnist and chili guru Frank X. Tolbert visited the little village in the far reaches of northern Scotland.  I recently can across this photo (which was published in D&W half-tone in the newspaper then).  Frank noted, among other things, the local distillery produces a Scot’s Whisky known as “Dew of Dallas” which he sampled with approval.

Located at 57 33’N 3 28′ W

Categories
Uncategorized

Fat of the Land; Salt of the Earth

In my continuing effort to demonstrate that the main problem with our economy is government regulation, I offer George Will’s column last week in the Washington Post. Will offers the 70 year experience of the founder of Carl’s Jr, fast food restaurants, and his successors.

“In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.

“So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern California’s contribution to American cuisine — fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carl’s Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives”.

Sort of. While CKE is still making hamburgers, hot dogs, or whatever (I’ve never eaten at one), it appears to be still in business, selling lots of food, and coincidentally, employing workers at 3,200 restaurants. Now I know that there are those who scorn the “hamburger flipper” industry is being déclassé at best, but it is in fact an industry that employs a lot of entry-level workers particularly teenagers looking for part-time job, as well as those who may be marginally employable elsewhere. It can certainly be a way station for those unemployed in “their field” while they are looking elsewhere. Aside: I have tried very hard to avoid referring to those who deride certain industries and jobs as “underemployment”, as idiots, but I can no longer help myself. They are.

One of CKE’s current problems which will cause it to at least downsize is Obamacare.

“Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties,” CKE says “would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in the next year.” It appears hard to say where in that spread the costs might land. Earlier this year, when In discussing the future of medical costs in a public forum sponsored by the National Center for Policy Analysis, Parkland Hospital and Health Systems CEO Dr. Ron Anderson, said that the scariest words in the Obamacare act are “the Secretary [of the Department of Health and Human Services] shall” leaving open an incredible amount of power in the rule making process. Who knows what the current Secretary Kathleen Sibelius, who has no aversion to making regulations, or one of her successors, might prescribe. Whatever those regulations may require, we can be certain that they will be so incredibly detailed, arcane, and obscure that it will be impossible for anyone to be in compliance at any given time. (See my essay on the difficulty budding child entrepreneurs have in purveying lemonade published last Saturday 12/3/11.)  There is more.

“Rising health-care costs are, [CKE’s Andy Puzder] says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like ‘card check’ in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.” The prospect of unionized fast food employees sort of boggles the mind, but maybe that’s all part of our nannies’ plan to read us of the plague of burgers and fries.

Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman tends to corroborate that last notion. It his recent column http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-1201-chapman-20111201,0,419567  he writes of the government’s Institute of Medicine urging the FDA to “gradually step down the maximum amount of salt that can be added to foods, beverages and meals.” war on salt. Chapman quotes Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, who says that “we must treat sodium reduction as a critical public health priority.”

Is it? We have been hearing about the ill-effects of too much salt for decades. Almost every proponent of a healthy diet includes limitation on sodium intake in their advice. It has become an article of faith among nutritionists and dietitians, and even, it appears most physicians.

According to an article in the July 2011 issue of Scientific American, a respected periodicals dealing with science issues and developments (it has been in publication for over 166 years), researchers “reported that the less sodium that study subjects excreted in their urine—an excellent measure of prior consumption—the greater their risk was of dying from heart disease. These findings call into question the common wisdom that excess salt is bad for you, but the evidence linking salt to heart disease has always been tenuous.” See “It’s Time to End the War on Salt”  This article also cited additional studies that compared sodium intake with blood pressure in subjects from 52 international research centers and found no relationship between sodium intake and the prevalence of hypertension. In fact, the population that ate the most salt, about 14 grams a day, had a lower median blood pressure than the population that ate the least, about 7.2 grams a day.

It seems that Mr. Chapman has a point. But even if the average consumption of salt by Americans might be harmful to their health, he asks what business is it of our federal government. Federal regulators have no grounds to dictate how much our food may contain, Chapman asserts. Any consumers who want less sodium are free to spurn restaurant meals and grocery items laden with heavy doses. Food companies don’t use salt because they like it but because their customers do.

Exactly.

Raising the hue and cry against salt, even if too much of it is a bad thing, reduction in intake by trying to make a public health crisis out of it is counterproductive to such a goal. Chapman maintains that it “mutilates a useful concept. Air pollution West Nile virus and E. coli are matters of public health because they inflict harm on broad groups of people against their will and often without their knowledge.” No one eats too much sodium other than by choice.

Leave it to the nannies, nags, and busybodies. A brave new world may be upon us.