Asking A Republican A Few Questions

This was first published in May 2013

"Hello folks! This is Dan Ratherbe, in Philadelphia. Today I have a Republican here who promises to speak out on the issues confronting the nation and his Republican Party, no holds barred. His name is George Owen Pappenstiel* and he's a strong supporter of the Tea Party. Welcome Mr. Pappenstiel.

GOP-Thank you Mr. Couldbe, or is it Mr. Shouldbe?

DR-It's Ratherbe, but my name isn't important here, you are. So here's the first question, and remember, no holds barred. Is The Republican Party still the "party of Lincoln?"

GOP-Oh no, that was just temporary insanity on the part o' people who weren't no real Republicans. Ol' John Wilkes Booth was just too late gettin' at that guy. See, that's why Americuns need guns, to stop this stuff. 'Sides, I'm not sure Lincoln could ever convince Donald Trump that he wuz a 'gitimate president with a valid birth certificate to prove it. Just like that Bomma guy, a Mooslim if ever there was one. From over there in one of them Africa places nobody knows the name of.

DR- Kenya?

GOP- Cun I what?

DR- The President's name is Obama, not Bomma.

GOP- See, can't even say his name right, 'cuz it ain't no Americun name.

DR-Who is your favorite president?

GOP-Jeff Davis!

DR- Sir, Jefferson Davis was not president of the United States.

GOP- Shows jist how dumb you liberals are. Ya never had a proper edjeecation. Jeff Davis is my answer and that's final. I'll bet Donald Trump wouldn't have no trouble with ol' Jeff. He wuz a real Americun like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. They don't go 'round hatin America like that Bomma guy. They don't see no bad things 'bout this great ol' country and they only tell people the plain and simple facts and the communists and socialists don't like the truth or facts, so theyz agin them.  Michele and Sarah, they just plain and simple, that's what they are.

DR- Okay, who besides Jefferson Davis?

GOP- You sure ere trying to make this tough. Let's see ... ah ... Strom Thurmond? Oh wait, he only ran and he didn't win; got cheated I believe. George Wallace almost made it, but they cheated him too. Well, I guess Ronald Reagan.

DR-Do you believe Ebenezer Scrooge gets a bum rap?

GOP-You better believe it. The liberal media has done made him a scapegoat and felt sorry for that lazy moocher who worked for him. I can't remember his name, but he had that good for nothing son who sang like a woman and had the long hair to go with it. Played a banjo or some such thing too. Maybe a ukelele.  What was his name? Hm ... Tiny Tim or some such crap. Used a crutch to make people feel sorry for him. Not me, I don't fall for that stuff; I don't feel sorry for nobody, exceptin' maybe ol' Ebenezer. He was just a honest business guy tryin' to make a livin'. He was a job creator too. That moochin' worker of his wouldn't o' had a job if'n it weren't for ol' Ebenezer.

DR-Do you think some Republicans secretly celebrate Hitler's and Mussolini's birthdays?

GOP-Oh that Muss-ah-lini was such a wimp, nobody'd be celebratin' his birthday. I dunno 'bout Hitler tho.

DR-You mean you don't know of anyone in your party who celebrates Hitler's birthday on April 12th?

GOP-No, no, not April 12th, 'cause his birthday is April 20th. A cuzin o' mine has an old armband, give to him by his pa from the war time in Germany. He likes to wear it 'round the house sometimes, but I'm not sure it's just on Hitler's birthday. 'Sides, he got a nice white sheet he like to wear too sometimes. Keeps it good 'n clean and has a good Christian cross with it.     

DR-What do you think of the growing Hispanic population in the U.S.

GOP- I think we should use the Army to secure the border and shoot first an' ask questions later, like that there guy done there in Florida. What's his name, Zimmerman? We gotta stop this stuff or soon we'll all be eatin' tacos and refried beans fer breakfast, lunch and dinner. They can't even speak good English like you an' me duz. An' those Pertoo Ricans, why you'd think they wuz real Americuns, the ways they act.

DR- Puerto Ricans are American citizens, sir.

GOP- Now quit joshin' me. Ain't no real Americuns if'n they don't look like you an' me. An' don't fergit my cuzin neither. Then too, real Americuns don't got names like Peedro or Jose. That Jose name only any good fer the national anthem, you know, 'Jose ... can you see, by the dawn's early light?' Jist thought I'd be throwin' in a little humor, but you ain't laughin'. Guess you don't git it.
 
DR- Do you think the Tea Party is at least partially in response to political correctness? If so, do you think they're really racist, or that they just think segregation wasn't a bad thing at all, and that in fact, slavery helped take care of slaves?

 GOP- Now ya got that last part right, an' no truer words was ever spoke. Let me tell ya, a little slavery never hurt nobody, at least not no white person, or Egyptian. Just think, no slavery, no pyramids. No slavery, no cotton industry. No child slavery, no Walmart. Hey, this ain't tough to figur out.

DR-  Why do you think many Americans believe the GOP, especially the Tea Party, is bigoted, if not outright racist?

GOP- I got no idea. I never met a Tea Party patriot who didn't believe colored people, or I guess I should say, Negroes, haven't performed a valuable service to this country; as I said, no slavery, no cotton. If people like John Brown and that bunch hadn't been messin' in, we'd still have a thrivin' cotton business and big plantations all over the South. An' see, I said Negroes. You probly thought I didn't know no better.

DR- What do you think of unions?

GOP- Oh that bunch of Commies. They just wanna keep stoppin' American business from growin'; after all, what's good fer business, is good fer America.

DR- So if unions were destroyed, the country AND workers would be better off? How would workers benefit?

GOP- The country's businesses would be better off, no question 'bout it, and they are the nation's job creators. They need more money to 'spand and invest so they can provide more jobs to Americans. We don't need no unions stickin' their Commie noses in to where they ain't wanted ner needed. Let one company outbid the others over workers with pay and any benefits.

DR- What do you think of Medicare?

GOP- Oh that sozialyzed med'cine started by Lyndon Johnson. Called hizself a Texan too. Baloney! He weren't no real Texan like George W. Bush and Rick Perry. Now thems Texans.

DR- Has your family always been Republican?

GOP- Oh no, no. My pappy and my grand pappy and his pappy were all Democrats, but that was 'fore the Democrats started stirrin' up the colored people tellin' 'em they was equal to us white folks. Can you imagine that? Then it all got worse, 'cause they done tole women they was equal too. Now they's sayin' men cun marry men and women cun marry women and that we should let more feruners become citizens. I'm tellin ya, Lady Liberty is ashamed o' this stuff and pretty soon we white, educated, sane people gonna be a minority in our own country.    

DR- Thanks for your time, sir. You've really answered the questions, no holds barred, just like you said you would. Only thing is, I'm feeling a bit sick to my stomach now.

GOP- I done tole you, you liberals don't like hearin' the truth.  

* Pappenstiel is used in the German expression "etwas für einen Pappenstiel kriegen;" that is, "get something cheaply/get something for chicken feed." It is pretty much pronounced like "poppin-steel."

WORD HISTORY:
Thwart-This word goes back to Indo European "twork/terkw," which had the notion of "turn, twist." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "t(h)werkhaz," which seems to have meant "crosswise, crooked," from the original notion of "twist, turn." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "thweorh," which likewise meant "crooked, bent," and from those ideas, also the figurative meaning "perverse" (the basic idea of such is still around today, as we say things like "the criminal had a twisted mind"), and also "angry." Along came Old Norse speakers to England, usually referred to as "Danes" back then, although not all came from what is now Denmark. Old Norse was the North Germanic offshoot of Old Germanic; thus making it a close relative of English. English is classified as West Germanic, along with its closest relatives: Frisian, Low German, Dutch, and standard German," but English has a number of influences from North Germanic, because of these "Danish" settlements in England, which were mainly in the northern and eastern parts of the England. Old Norse brought the word "thwert" to England, which had much the same basic meaning as the its Old English relative "thweorh;" that is, "across, crosswise." This form gradually worked its way into English by the 13th Century, seemingly blending with the original English word. Apparently from the notion of "crosswise sticks or logs" used to block an entrance/exit, came the idea in the mid 1200s of a verb form meaning "block, obstruct, hinder," which is still with us today. Originally both the English and Old Norse forms were adverbs/adjectives. Other forms in the Germanic languages: German has "quer" (originally spelled with a "tw" and a "dw," instead of a "q"), which means "across, crosswise; diagonally," Low German and Dutch "dwars," West Frisian "dwers," Swedish "tvär," Danish "tvaer," Norwegian "tvers," and Icelandic "thwert."

Bob Dole Hits A Homer!

Former Republican presidential candidate and long time member of Congress, Senator Bob Dole, told it bluntly in a television interview that today's GOP is negative and that it needs to develop a positive agenda. Where I might have to add more is, when Senator Dole says Ronald Reagan could not be in today's GOP, that's because the people who took over your party were invited in by REAGAN, the cheerleader in chief of the anti government and the 'hate government' theme that has been preached like religion by the right wing fanatics who have captured your party, Senator Dole. I like you and respect you and you had many friends across the Senate aisle like Senator Byrd, Senator Kennedy and your recently deceased fellow World War Two veteran, Senator Inouye. I remember the day you resigned from the Senate to campaign for president in 1996 and all Senate Democrats were there; that's how much respect they had for you. Good that you're speaking out, it's a start, but the root problem is there, preached by Limbaugh, Beck, Bachmann and other haters. I've got to believe if you look closely at Lincoln in his memorial, there are some tears to be seen, as he realizes that "the party of Lincoln," has become dominated by a bunch of intolerant, bigoted, and even racist, fanatics. You know, like the ones Lincoln so opposed.  

WORD HISTORY:
Agenda-The word traces back to Indo European "aeg," which had the idea of "move, drive forth." This gave its Latin offspring the verb "agere," which meant "to do." This then produced the Latin noun "agendus," which meant "something to be done," and its plural "agenda." English borrowed the word from Latin in the mid 1600s, seemingly from religious writings, with many English speaking people first using the Anglicized form "agend" for the singular and "agends" for the plural, but the more modern Latin forms, "agendum" and the plural "agenda," prevailed in high speaking society. Most people, however, use only the plural form "agenda," even when meaning the singular. 

Simple Grilling Recipe, Cornish Hens

Updated June 3, 2017


If they haven't already done so, many folks break out the grill and start grilling this time of year. I'm not going to give all of the specifics for this recipe, but rather give you the ingredients, which you then can adjust to your own tastes and for the amounts you fix. I've had this recipe for nearly 20 years, but I don't know where I got it, and I likely changed the original anyway, something I'm wont to do.

This is for some good spicy grilled Cornish hens, or chicken. Now, if you don't like spicy, don't stop reading, just adjust the heat level. The best way to grill the Cornish hen or chicken is to cut it in half or butterfly it. Combine the following in a bowl for each hen or chicken:

4 tablespoons thick ketchup
1/4 teaspoon cayenne pepper or to taste
1 teaspoon diced fresh hot peppers of your choice and to taste (some like milder types, some like in between Serrano peppers, some like to go for it and use habanero peppers)
a sprinkle of chili powder (whatever type you like)
1 small clove of garlic, minced

Mix it all together and use it to cover the bird halves or butterflied bird. Cover and put in the refrigerator, preferably overnight, but for a couple of hours, at least. Take the bird out of the refrigerator about a half hour or so before you grill it. Scrape as much of the coating off of the chicken as you can, but keep the sauce to baste it during grilling. Place the bird skin side up on the grill and don't go mow the lawn, or it's apt to burn. After about 15 minutes turn the bird over to the other side. Eventually you want to get the skin side back up and baste it with the sauce mixture. Heat the remaining sauce to serve on the side. Remember, any sauce you used on the raw bird must be cooked sufficiently to kill any bacteria. I don't want the "salmonella police" grilling you over unsafe food handling practices. Cooking the sauce will also soften the peppers and garlic and give the sauce a better taste.

I used a butterflied Cornish hen

WORD HISTORY:
Hen-This goes back to Indo European "k(h)an," which meant "to sing." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "hanjo," which meant "hen, female bird," but the idea behind the word was "singing bird." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "henn." By the way, the same source also gave Old English "hana," which meant "male singing bird." While this male form died out in English, it is still alive in close cousin German, which has "Hahn." Old English "henn" then became "henne,'' before the modern version. The other Germanic languages have: German "Henne," Low German Saxon "Henn," Dutch "hen," West Frisian "hin," Danish "høne," Norwegian "høna," Icelandic "haena," and Swedish "höna."

Why 2010 Was Such An Important Election

First published in May 2013

Republicans have lost the last two presidential elections by fairly large margins, but in between they won a major victory by taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010, an election which also saw the GOP whittle down the Democratic majority in the Senate. Not only that, Republicans won several key governorships and took control of many more state legislative chambers, giving Republicans the most seats they've held in state legislatures since the 1920s!* This was immensely important, because it gave Republicans control of many states for the all important redistricting for the House of Representatives and state legislative districts based upon the 2010 census.With Republicans redrawing boundaries, they were able to cement some Republican leaning districts into strong or stronger Republican districts, tilt some highly competitive districts Republican, and weaken some Democratic leaning districts.** This favorable redrawing of boundaries is called "gerrymandering," and it is not just a Republican device, as Democrats use it too,*** and it is highly effective, even though on occasion the "non favored" party candidate may win in a gerrymandered district, that person will have to carefully watch his/her votes on key issues, lest they antagonize the voters of their district, the majority of whom usually favor the opposite party. George Voinovich, a Republican, was elected to the Ohio House of Representatives and Mayor of Cleveland in overwhelmingly Democratic territory, but he was not an extremist and he was more than willing to work with Democrats. As mayor, Voinovich relied upon the president of city council, George Forbes, a staunch Democrat, to help achieve much of his agenda. In the case of both men, they worked for what they thought would benefit the city, not their respective political parties.

Of course strong one party control of districts, or even of states in the case of senators or presidents, can allow the favored party officeholder to adamantly oppose the other party. After Republicans took a beating in congressional elections in 2006 and 2008, the remaining senators and representatives were often in pretty safe states or districts, allowing them much latitude in their criticism of President Obama, and Democrats in general, and as we've seen, they even refused to negotiate with Democrats, preferring to block as much legislation as possible. For many of these Republicans there is no downside to this, at least at the moment.

In the 2012 election, Democrats scored heavily, even garnering nearly a million and a half more votes in House races than the Republican majority. Still Republicans retained control of the House of Representatives, although by a narrower majority. In the House, legislation only requires a majority, unlike in the Senate, where by its own rules, legislation (with some exceptions) needs a minimum of 60 votes (the Senate has 100 members, the House 435 members). At this time in the Senate, Democrats hold 53 seats, independents hold two seats, both of whom caucus with the Democrats, and Republicans hold 45 seats. In the House, Republicans hold 233 seats, Democrats hold 201 seats, and there is one vacant seat in Missouri (vacated by a Republican) scheduled to be filled in a special election, with the Republican candidate heavily favored.

While all elections are important, elections held in the year of a census and then two years later (after new district boundaries are drawn) are critical to how the House of Representatives will likely set up for a decade. This also is true for legislative seats in state legislatures. While Democrats scored a major victory in 2012 and they drew far more votes in House races (collectively), they still could not overturn the Republican House majority, mainly because of redistricting.

Going back decades, Republicans "tend" to be more in accord over major issues, although they have marched from being just conservative a few decades ago, to very conservative now. Democrats have always been more divided, although they too are more similar in many views today than they were in the past. Part of this is because the once "solidly Democratic South," a generally conservative area, has switched to become much more Republican,**** leaving Democrats with much more of a progressive side. Further, liberal/progressive Republicans are virtually unheard of today, whereas they once formed a major part of the GOP. Some of these people became Democrats (see note ****), others became independents. For Democrats to win control of the House, they will need to win in many more conservative tilting or outright conservative districts. That means they will need right-leaning candidates to win in these areas, something "true believing" progressive Democrats may have a problem with. With more conservative districts on the election map now, Republicans, on the other hand, don't have to worry much about unseating Democrats in progressive-leaning districts with what the "true believing" Republicans contemptuously call "RINO" candidates; that is, "R(epublican) I(n) N(ame) O(nly)." So, barring some major event that shakes up the electorate, Republicans will be very difficult to dislodge from control of the House of Representatives. That's why 2010 was so important. 

* Democrats took five governorships away from Republican control, but Republicans took eleven governorships from Democratic control. In addition, Republican turned independent Lincoln Chafee took the governorship of Rhode Island from Republican control. Chafee, while an independent, has leaned toward Democratic and progressive ideas. In a sense, Republicans also retained control of the statehouse in Florida, where Charlie Crist had been elected as a Republican, only to become an independent (he has since become a Democrat). If my numbers are correct, Republicans went from controlling 36 state legislative chambers prior to the election to 57 after the votes were counted. There are 99 state legislative chambers, with 49 states having two chambers, a house and a senate, and Nebraska having only one chamber. Nebraska, a pretty solidly Republican state, has a non-partisan legislature; that is, candidates do not technically run under a party designation, but I'd have to believe a majority of delegates there are Republicans or Republican leaning. 

** That's not to say all of this happened in a vacuum, as I'm sure states under Democratic control saw Democrats do similar.  

*** "Gerrymandering" comes from the early 1800s, when then Governor Gerry of Massachusetts supported and signed redrawn districts to gain advantage for his own Democratic-Republican Party. One district supposedly had the shape of a salamander, thus the Governor's name was coupled with the second part of salamander to give us, "Gerrymander."

**** Just for example, Richard Shelby, a senator from Alabama, was once a Democrat, as was Governor Rick Perry of Texas. On the other hand, former Florida governor, Charlie Crist was elected as a Republican, then declared himself an independent, then registered as a Democrat. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island was a liberal/progressive Republican, but then became an independent.

WORD HISTORY:
Peace-This word, closely related to "pact," goes back to Indo European "pak," which had the notion of "fasten, fix in place." This gave its Latin offspring "pax," which meant "peace," with the idea being "a fixed condition of harmony;" that is, an agreement (a pact). Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited a form of the word as "pais," which then was carried to England by the Normans as "pes." It was borrowed by English as "pece" during the 1100s. It then displaced English words used to express "peace," one of which was "freod," whose relatives in the other Germanic languages live on as: German "Friede(n)," Low German Saxon "Freden," West Frisian "frede," Dutch "vrede," Danish, Swedish and Norwegian "fred," Icelandic "friður" (the 'ð'= 'th'). 

Don't Just Blame Bush, It's The Philosophy

In spite of the opening of George W. Bush's presidential library and recent attempts by some of his supporters to put a positive spin on his presidency,* George W. Bush will likely go down in history as one of our worst presidents, "perhaps" THE worst. The American public can have a short memory, maybe even shorter in this era of "breaking news" and social media stories that can change the subject faster than Congress can pass legislation ...ah, okay, so that's a terrible comparison. Franklin D. Roosevelt has been widely seen as one of America's greatest presidents for decades, as he tried to combat the most severe economic downturn in the nation's history AND he led the country through all but the last months of World War Two. FDR was hated by the few, but he was revered by a large segment of the American public, which transcended party lines. The haters then were of the same type we have today; the greediest and most ruthless in American society, always looking out only for themselves and their immense egos, and hating anyone who dares to help others, but at least even THEY didn't have the nerve to call themselves "the job creators," as some of today's ruthless and greedy haters have done.

On the other hand, George W. Bush will always face historical criticism for the exact opposite reasons that secured Roosevelt's place in history. Bush chose to fight a war in Iraq that became immensely unpopular. The build-up to that war had the Bush administration indicating that Americans could be in grave peril from Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, who was deemed to have "weapons of mass destruction," generally meaning biological and chemical weapons, and possibly an active nuclear program. The idea was put out that Hussein had been in contact with Al Qaeda and that he could provide them with these weapons. The invasion of Iraq and the fall of Hussein produced no such weapons nor any nuclear program, and when many of the captured Iraqi political and military leaders were interrogated, including Hussein himself, none indicated that such weapons had been available to them. Searches of buildings and the unearthing of possible sites proved fruitless. Bush and his administration then tried to change the focus of the war to the successful removal of Saddam Hussein and the chance to bring democracy to Iraq, but while the public shed no tears for Saddam, it also never really bought his removal, nor any attempts at establishing democracy in Iraq as truly valid reasons for the war. Insurrection by elements of the Iraqi population against foreign occupation and outright civil war between religious factions there had American and coalition troops caught in a horrible situation with mounting casualties. No one knows where Iraq is really heading a decade after Hussein fell. No amount of spin can change these facts, including the highly unlikely event, in my opinion, of Iraq becoming a model democracy in the volatile Middle East.

Throughout his presidency, Bush and his administration touted "free markets" as the solution to just about anything and everything economic. Free trade with low wage countries was pushed, with many thousands of American jobs sent overseas by those super patriotic bastions of greed and ruthlessness of American business, many of whom would sell their own mothers for the right price. If their mother is deceased, they'll sell her remains, casket and all. Regulation of business was downplayed, if not often dismantled. Market speculation in oil drove prices through the roof and helped to cripple the economy, which was then laid waste by unscrupulous bankers with highly complex securities backed by bad mortgages. The Bush administration and Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan proved to be wrong about business being able to regulate itself, and the free market philosophy cost millions their jobs and their homes. A new Fed chairman and the prospect of the imminent collapse of the financial system had Bush reverse the free market nonsense to bailout the heavily indebted banks and provide some money to strapped auto companies. The crisis secured the election of Barack Obama who took the reins of the presidency with the economy in virtual free fall.

Democrats love to mention George W. Bush and watch Republicans blush, cringe or try to hide under their seats. Republicans, on the other hand, including the so called "Tea Party," have tried to act as if the world came into being on January 20, 2009, the day Barack Obama took the oath of office. For a bunch who are always telling others to take personal responsibility, I don't believe I've ever heard them take responsibility for the failures of the philosophy they have touted so much, but which as produced so much misery. To me, what Bush did or didn't do is important, but not as important as the philosophy which led him, most Republicans, and so many misguided Americans down this road to economic destruction.

* Karen Hughes started working for Bush before he was elected governor in Texas and she is a close personal friend of the former president. She was on some of the news programs during the opening of the new library, and while I understand the friendship and loyalty, her recounting of the Bush presidency had to have been told with the fingers of both hands crossed behind her back. It was actually painful to watch and hear her tell how Bush will be so positively evaluated by history on the wars and on his overall administration. She also touted the Medicare drug benefit, a positive accomplishment of Bush's administration, but she failed to note that it wasn't paid for. Like Reagan's philosophy of "We'll cut taxes, especially for the upper incomes, increase military expenditures and give people popular programs, but we'll still balance the budget." As Bush's father said in 1980, that's voodoo economics, and that description certainly applied during his son's time in office. Reagan and George W. Bush both ran huge budget deficits, both such deficits then bequeathed to their respective successors.     

WORD HISTORY:
Rank-This is the noun form. This word appears to go back to Indo European "krengh," which meant "to turn or to bend." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "khrengaz," meaning "that which is curved, bent object." This gave Frankish, a Germanic dialect, "hring" ("ring"), which was then borrowed into Old French as "reng," which then became "ranc." At this time it took on the meaning "row, line," but exactly why this meaning developed is unclear. It came to be used in military terminology, with the notion of "row" coming to mean "in succession of authority;" thus, "rank." It was borrowed by English from French as "rank," apparently in the early 1500s or late 1400s. Close English relative German also borrowed the word as "Rang" ("rank") from the modern French version "rang."

The Super Wealthy and The Rest Of Us

The super obsession with money has deep roots in this country, so much so, that the wealthy interests have always sought to keep Americans divided and to profit, literally, from those divisions. For more than three decades the gap between the wealthiest Americans and the rest of us has been growing. This didn't just happen, WE helped them rape us! The big money interests convinced millions of less than super wealthy Americans to support laws to benefit their interests. Wealthy business interests hate unions. They got states to pass so called "right to work" laws, many in the South, weakening unions. They are still pushing such laws today. Of course the "claim" was how they were just being democratic (small "d"). Once they had a number of states with such laws, they began moving plants and jobs to those states. For you folks in so called "right to work" states, don't complain when these same people move jobs from your states overseas. This is what YOU helped them do to states with labor unions, now they have turned their sites on you.

Then they got laws passed opening the flood gates to cheaper foreign products. As American companies struggled to compete against the far cheaper foreign goods, jobs were lost in this country, but businesses then started shipping plants and jobs overseas to cheaper labor nations. I shouldn't have to explain this to any American, but some just don't get it. We won't have to dig up Einstein to tell us that if American workers make $30 an hour in a plant and workers in certain foreign countries make $30 a WEEK, guess which plant can afford to sell its products cheaper? On top of that, there aren't as many product safety regulations in low wage countries, so we've had scares over foods, toys and other products. When we were competing against more developed nations, there was not as much imbalance in prices and regulations. As wages and benefits for many Americans fell, some had little or no choice but to buy cheaper foreign made goods, something the big money people knew would happen. Others got jobs in some way involved in importing or distributing such foreign goods, forming a constituency for cheaper goods. Play one American off against the other = big bucks for the monied interests. The concept is not hard to understand. Remember, purist capitalism is NOT about patriotism, or doing the right thing for workers and their families, it is only about making money, and more money, and more money.

As I mentioned above, the interests are still pushing laws to break up unions, a disaster for all of us just waiting to happen if they succeed. Don't listen to their absolute nonsense rhetoric, THINK!  What this all comes down to is, they aren't going through all of this to pay you more, they want to cut your wages/benefits and get more profit and tax cuts for themselves, the wealthiest Americans. They have so much, they don't know what to do with all of their $$$, except make more. Don't forget, they got right to work in many states. Why? More money for themselves. They sent jobs overseas, why? More money for themselves! Only united opposition can stop such nonsense. They fear government and Americans looking out for other Americans, why? Do bugs like Raid? Hell no! If you want to know why they've been so successful, you only need to go look in the mirror for one of the culprits, and that includes me. We not only let them get away with this, we gave them a helping hand.

WORD HISTORY:
Cut-The ultimate origins of this word are unclear. It goes back to North Germanic "kuttjana," which meant "to cut," but why North Germanic had the word and not the other Germanic languages is not known (English, by the way, is West Germanic),^ although forms in the other Germanic languages could have died out. It could have been a North Germanic "invention" too, or it could have been borrowed by North Germanic from one of the ancient languages it came into contact with. Danish raiders and settlers in England spoke Old Norse, a form of North Germanic from a thousand and more years ago. They brought the word "kuti" with them, which was borrowed into English as "cyttan/kyttan," a word assumed to have existed. This borrowing is assumed to have taken place well before the Normans invaded England in 1066 A.D., but the word sort of remained in the shadows, as English already had other words for "cut," represented in their modern forms by "carve," "snide," "hew" and "shear." Old English "cyttan/kyttan" then became "cutten," before the modern form. The noun form was derived from the verb circa 1500. Swedish dialect still has "kåta," a noun for "a cut."        
^ The basic principles here are, Old Germanic was an offshoot of Indo European. Old Germanic then divided into strong regional dialects now called North, West and East Germanic, which then divided into numerous dialects, some of which then eventually formed somewhat "standard forms" to become modern languages, albeit with a variety of dialects of those languages. East Germanic died out, but its most prominent representatives were Gothic, Burgundian (it is from the Germanic tribe the Burgundians that the region of France known as "Burgundy" got its name), and Vandalic (it is from the Germanic tribe the Vandals that we have the words "vandal" and "vandalize." North Germanic's most prominent modern languages are Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Icelandic. West Germanic is most represented in modern times by English, German, Low German, Dutch and Frisian.   

Maligning Americans

This was first published May 1, 2013

The mother of the two Boston bombers has blamed the United States for everything about her sons. She has said the events were staged to frame her boys. Now I know mothers can be in denial about the actions of their kids, but the Tsarnaev family was taken into this country from Russia a decade ago and according to the latest reports, they received housing, food and educational assistance, seemingly totaling into the tens of thousands of dollars. The youngest son became an American citizen just last year and initial reports indicated he was given a hefty college scholarship amount. Now I'll admit, all of this is pretty hostile treatment at the hands of us Americans and many people, I'm sure, would love to be treated so harshly. In the last couple of years the mother seems to have gone from a westernized lifestyle, including clothing, to more traditional Muslim apparel, an act that is certainly not against the law, but which "might" suggest a turn toward fundamentalist religion, especially if reports about telephone conversations recorded by the Russian government between the older son and his mother are correct. The reports say there was much talk about religion and even jihad, a term used by extremist elements for "holy war." Again, discussing religion is not against the law, but all of this will have to be put into context over time, as more and more information comes to light. 
    
WORD HISTORY:
Should- This word, the past form of "shall," goes back to Indo European "skel," which had the notion of "be obliged to do something, owe." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "skulan," which meant "to owe, be obligated;" thus also, "have guilt;" that is, "owe a debt for an illegal act." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "sellan/sculan" (the "sc" pronounced like "sh"), with many of the same meanings, the present tense of which became "shall." The past tense was "scolde," which then later became "should." While "shall" lost much of its connection to the meanings "owe" and "obligation," as it came to be used for future tense, "should" has retained the notion of  "ought to, obliged to do." The meaning of "owe, guilty;" that is, "be indebted for a crime," was once prominent English, as the closely related English word "scyld" meant "guilt, debt, liability" and German still has the closely related "Schuld" for "debt, guilt."