The Former Confederacy & Modern American Politics, Part Twenty-Three

In what became a decisive and disastrous move, President Bill Clinton commissioned the putting together of a well intended plan, headed by First Lady Hillary Clinton, to expand the country's health care coverage. When released, the large and complex plan was highly popular for about a week or two, as Republicans and insurance companies picked the plan apart and successfully scared the hell out of Americans with a barrage of negative ads. The attacks on the plan were given a great deal of coverage by the media, which only fed into the narrative of the plan's opponents that there was just no consensus about reforming such a large sector of the American economy, which caused further erosion in support. The whole matter brought intense scrutiny to Hillary Clinton. Polls showed the plan's popularity fell like a rock, and eventually it couldn't make it through Congress, even though Democrats had majorities in both the House and Senate. The whole issue gave Republicans a boost in morale and energy going into the midterm election of 1994, whereas dispirited Democrats faced the coming election with mounting concern.  

Then came the North American Free Trade Agreement, better known by its initials, NAFTA, an idea for a free trade zone among North American countries, which was first given note by Ronald Reagan in his 1980 campaign for president. The agreement was highly complex, but it essentially made a trade bloc of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico by eliminating trade and investment barriers between those countries. On this issue, Clinton and all the living former presidents supported passage,* but the bill terribly divided Democrats, and it took free trade Republicans to provide the votes in Congress to pass it. It also brought Ross Perot to the fore again, as the former presidential candidate opposed the agreement. In a highly touted television debate with Vice President Al Gore, watched by millions of Americans, Perot made points, but he had difficulty explaining many things, especially where money was coming from to oppose the agreement and in refuting the charge by Gore that Perot stood to make financial gain from the defeat of the agreement. A congressional vote came in November 1993, and here is how members of the House of Representatives in former Confederate states voted, with the measure passing in the overall House vote by 234 to 200: Alabama: 2 Republicans for, 1 Republican against, 4 Democrats against; Arkansas: 2 Republicans for, 2 Democrats against; Florida: 7 Republicans for, 6 Democrats for, 6 Republicans against, 4 Democrats against; Georgia: 2 Republicans for, 4 Democrats for, 2 Republicans against, 3 Democrats against; Louisiana: 3 Republicans for, 2 Democrats for, 2 Democrats against; Mississippi: 3 Democrats for, 2 Democrats against; North Carolina: 3 Republicans for, 5 Democrats for, 1 Republican against, 3 Democrats against; South Carolina: 1 Democrat for, 3 Republicans against, 2 Democrats against; Tennessee: 3 Republicans for, 6 Democrats for; Texas: 9 Republicans for, 15 Democrats for, 6 Democrats against; Virginia: 4 Republicans for, 3 Democrats for, 4 Democrats against. In the Senate the overall vote was 61 for and 38 against, and in the former Confederate states the vote was: Alabama: 2 Democrats against; Arkansas: 2 Democrats for; Florida: 1 Republican for, 1 Democrat for; Georgia: 1 Republican for, 1 Democrat for; Louisiana: 2 Democrats for; Mississippi: 2 Republicans for; North Carolina: 2 Republicans against; South Carolina: 1 Republican against, 1 Democrat against; Tennessee: 1 Democrat for, 1 Democrat against; Texas: 2 Republicans for; Virginia: 1 Republican for, 1 Democrat for.   

A contentious social issue also heated up. President Clinton supported allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve in the military, provided they kept their sexual orientation secret, but the military could not ask about their orientation either. Clinton's stand satisfied few, but especially on the political right, where any attempt to allow gay people to legally serve in the military was opposed. The provisions came to be known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

* The living former presidents in 1993 were: Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush (Sr.).

WORD HISTORY:
Ask-This common word goes back to Indo European "ayesh," which had the notion "to search for, to seek." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "aiskojan," which meant "to ask for, demand, request," all with the notion of "seeking something by asking." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "ascian" (to ask for, inquire) and the variant "acsian" (to this day, some English speakers say "I want to aks ("ax") you something," so this basic pronunciation goes way back in English). "Ascian" then became "asken," before the modern version. The other Germanic languages have: German "heischen" (once also spelled without the "h," a word not highly common, but still in use for, "to ask for, request, demand"); West Frisan "easkje" ("demand"); Dutch "eisen" ("ask, demand"). Swedish "äska" ("demand, request") and Danish, "æske," seem to have been borrowed from Low German, which once had, "eschen," but no longer uses it. Apparently forms of the word generally endured only in West Germanic (English, German, Dutch, Frisian), as the North Germanic languages use other words to express this meaning.

The Former Confederacy & Modern American Politics, Part Twenty

Mid 1991 saw George H.W. Bush's nomination of Clarence Thomas for a seat on the Supreme Court. Thomas was a black conservative Republican judge chosen by Bush to replace retiring black progressive justice, Thurgood Marshall; thus, shifting the Supreme Court to the political right. Interest groups from both sides of the political spectrum mobilized over the Thomas nomination. The nomination hearings reached fever pitch, with millions of Americans tuned in, when Anita Hill, a lawyer who had worked with Thomas when he was her supervisor, testified that he had made inappropriate sexual remarks to her, perhaps constituting sexual harassment. President Bush, pressed by conservatives to stick with, and to fight for, the nomination, did so. The bitter process ended with Thomas winning confirmation by a narrow margin, as eleven Democrats voted for his confirmation, while only two Republicans opposed it. Senators from former Confederate states voted 14 to 8 in favor of Thomas's confirmation.

With the economy in recession, Bush's popularity tumbled, giving Democrats hope of defeating the incumbent president. Hard line conservative Pat Buchanan entered the Republican nomination process and criticized Bush for working with Democrats and for breaking his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. Buchanan made a strong showing in New Hampshire, but Bush won and he continued on to a relatively easy renomination, but the attacks from Buchanan took a toll, as a part of the conservative base of the Republican Party remained unenthusiastic about George Bush. To placate conservatives, Bush gave Buchanan the keynote address spot at the Republican National Convention in Houston, Texas. In that speech, dripping with venom, Buchanan attacked the Democratic nominee, Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary, and Democrats in general, who, he said, were in a fight to take over the soul of the country by advocating abortion, gay rights, and a diverse society. Buchanan obviously forgot his own mixed background of Irish, Scottish and German.

Democrats nominated Bill Clinton of Arkansas and that state's governor. Clinton did well in all of the primaries in former Confederate states. He chose fellow Southerner Al Gore of Tennessee as his running mate, as the Democrats pitted a Southern ticket against the Republicans and Ross Perot, a billionaire businessman who entered the race and quickly became a favorite of many disgruntled Americans. The thing was, while Perot started off well, as with his own money, he didn't need big campaign contributions. Increasingly large sums of money in the political process was something that had become a growing concern among some Americans. Further, his use of charts and pointers about certain issues also played well with many voters, but he later began to display some erratic behavior, at one point even withdrawing from the race, only to later say he had dropped out because Republicans had planned dirty tricks to disrupt his daughters wedding. Further, Perot asserted that the CIA was involved in trying to destroy his campaign by tapping into his stock trading program to prevent him from financing his campaign, and there were other unsubstantiated charges of assassination plots, etc. The White House and the Bush campaign leaders called it all nonsense. Perot's poll numbers tumbled and Bill Clinton's rose, putting the Democrat ahead of the field. Later Perot decided to get back into the race. On top of the display of paranoia, Perot had selected retired, highly decorated Vice Admiral James Stockdale as his running mate. During the vice presidential debate, Stockdale, who had had little time to prepare for the debate, looked into the television cameras and asked, "Who am I? Why am I here?" Stockdale's apparent confusion and lack of focus throughout the debate produced a series of one liners from comedians and it further called into question the judgment, if not the very sanity, of Ross Perot. The thing was, Perot's paranoia and conspiracy theories played right into the minds of a number of Americans obsessed with such things, and to whom Republican tricks were assumed to be commonplace, no proof required.

Clinton and Gore put the South back into play for Democrats, and Bush seemed to be mired in low poll numbers. On election day, the voters had their say: Clinton/Gore received 43% of the popular vote and 370 electoral votes, including those of former Confederate states Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas and Tennessee. Bush carried the other states in the South, but he received only about 37 1/2% of the national popular vote. Perot won no states, but he received about 19% of the popular vote. In the U.S. Senate elections, Republicans gained a seat in a close election in Georgia, and defeated the Democratic incumbent in North Carolina, too. In elections for the House of Representatives, based upon redistricting from the 1990 Census, Republicans gained a seat in Alabama, making that delegation 4 Democrats and 3 Republicans; in Arkansas, Republicans gained a seat to make the delegation 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans; in Florida, a state which saw an increase in representation because of population growth, Republicans won 13 seats to 10 for Democrats; Georgia added one new seat and the new delegation was 7 Democrats and 4 Republicans; Louisiana added an additional seat and the new delegation was 4 Democrats and 3 Republicans; Mississippi's delegation remained totally Democratic, with 5 Democrats; North Carolina gained one seat and after the election the delegation was 8 Democrats and 4 Republicans; South Carolina saw Republicans gain a seat to make the delegation 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats; Tennessee remained steady at 6 Democrats and 3 Republicans; Texas added new seats, and after the election, the delegation was 21 Democrats and 9 Republicans; Virginia added one seat, and after the election the delegation was 7 Democrats and 4 Republicans. In elections for governors of former Confederate states, the only change was that Democrats won the governorship from Republicans in North Carolina.   

WORD HISTORY:
One-This word, closely related to original English words of Germanic derivation "only," and to the second part of "alone," ultimately goes back to Indo European "oinos." The Germanic branch of Indo European continued with "ainaz." This was passed down to Old English and Old Frisian as "an" (long "a" sound). There seems to have been a wide variety of pronunciations for the English word, and it later tended to have a long "o" sound for quite some time in many areas of England. The "w" sound, however, seems to have developed in western England, and it eventually was accepted as "standard," although not until the 1700s. The Indo European word was also passed along to other branches of its family, as Latin had "unus," for example, and that word further developed into French "un," and Italian and Spanish "uno." The other Germanic languages have: German "ein," Low German Saxon "een," Dutch "een," West Frisian "ien," Danish "en," Icelandic "einn," Norwegian "en," and Swedish "en" (Swedish also has "ett").

Just Who Is Trump Running Against?

Recently billionaire Donald Trump announced a bid for the Republican nomination for the presidency. He said a lot of things, some basically true, some "iffy," some absolute nonsense, in my opinion, but one of the things that caught my attention was how he seems to have taken up the mantle of Ross Perot, who ran for president as an independent (at first), in 1992, when there was an incumbent Republican president, George H.W. Bush, who I usually refer to as "Bush, Sr." When Perot, actually a Republican, ran, we had had nearly twelve years of Republican presidential rule; eight years under Ronald Reagan, and going on four years under Bush, Sr. Perot clearly touched a nerve in the country, as for a time, he led in many of the polls taken in the spring and summer of 1992. One of Perot's most potent issues was his opposition to trade agreements that would send many American jobs, especially in manufacturing, out of the country. The thing was, while the two major political parties of that time were somewhat different from what they are today, Republican support for such agreements was strong, while Democratic support was far less, with a good many Democrats fervently against such agreements. It was during Reagan's time as president that the U.S. began experiencing balance-of-trade deficits with China.* So was Perot admitting he had made a mistake supporting Reagan and then Bush? Is Trump, who preached about China's economic power, admitting he made a mistake supporting Republicans who generally favored free trade laws?

Perot also touched another nerve over the national debt, a number which had soared on the Reagan and Bush watch. He made fun of "voodoo economics," an expression used by Bush, Sr. to describe Ronald Reagan's economic plan, when the two ran against each other in the 1980 Republican primaries. Reagan's plan essentially called for huge tax cuts, big increases in military spending, and (mostly) unspecified budget cuts, but that the tax cuts would "pay for themselves," by stimulating the economy, and they would not cause deficits. While most segments of the taxpaying public saw some money from the tax cuts, the biggest beneficiaries were the wealthy. The economy boomed, but so did deficits. Perot mentioned the "voodoo economics," followed by "we're now in deep voodoo," a play on "doo doo," for those unaware.** So was Perot admitting he had made a mistake supporting Reagan and Bush?

Anyway, Trump emphasized he would bring back American jobs from overseas, but he didn't say exactly how he would do so. Many politicians have railed against the loss of jobs to other countries, but there really hasn't been anyone, Republican or Democrat, who really has presented a firm plan, that has public support, to do so. Since I do a lot about words, let me do some translation here. American businesses often moved plants and jobs overseas for one reason, and only one reason .... to make MONEY! Capitalism is about one thing and only one thing ... making MONEY! It is NOT about you or your family, or educating your children, or providing you with affordable medical care, or providing for you in your old age, or providing for you in your younger age, for that matter. No, it is about investors making money! Big business and its investors saw foreign labor markets where workers made a fraction of what American workers made, and they made the conscious decision to move work to other countries, especially once American tariffs were reduced or abolished, thus making it cheaper to send the produced goods from these low wage nations to this country. The so called "free traders," often more from the conservative side of the political spectrum, didn't scream about patriotism or traitorous behavior or any such other things. This was about making MONEY!

So does Donald Trump propose to make American wages and benefits even lower to bring back jobs from overseas? Does he propose to raise taxes on companies who send jobs overseas? Just what does he propose to do? Over time, wages in some countries have risen, making some American companies consider moving some jobs back to America, and from what I understand, that has been actually happening to some degree, but I'm not exactly sure how much of this has been happening.

Trump also talked about workers who can't get jobs, and he more or less promised to see that everyone has a job, because that will make those people have more self respect, although I just forget his exact words. The thing is, if wages and benefits are reduced enough, just about anyone could have a job, BUT will they be able to live on the pay? Will they be able to save for their future? Will they be able to raise a family? Will they be able to get good educations for their children? Will they be able to afford health care for themselves and their families? Or will they be worked for long hours for little pay and few if any benefits, just to make sure people like Donald Trump make billions? What is your answer to that question, Donald Trump? And just which party are you actually running against?***

* See: http://www.iie.com/content/?ID=27

** "Doo doo" is a nice way of saying "shit," and Perot played on the expression, "We're in deep shit."

*** Trump also told supporters how the U.S. has spent two trillion dollars in Iraq, with the implication being that it was wrong to do so, but the funny thing is, it was the Republican Bush-Cheney administration that sent the troops there in the first place. So is this an admission by Trump that he supported the wrong political party?
       
WORD HISTORY:
Weave-This word, related to "web," goes back to Indo European "webh," which meant "to weave." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "weban(an)," with the same meaning. This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wefan," also with the same meaning, and this then became "weven/weaven," before the modern version. The noun was derived from the verb. The other Germanic languages have: German "weben," ^ Low German and Dutch "weven," West Frisian "weve" (little used?), Danish "væve," Icelandic "vefa," Norwegian "veve," and Swedish "väva."

^ The common German name "Weber" is simply "Weaver" in English.

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Thirty-One

This was originally published in December 2012


"The Contentious Election of 2000" Part One

The election in 2000 was the most controversial in recent times. In a "relatively rare" event in American history, the losing candidate, Al Gore, won the popular vote over George W. Bush, but lost the electoral vote, which is the vote that really counts in American presidential elections.

Al Gore, then Vice President, was the consensus candidate of the Democratic Party and he easily won the party's nomination. The Republican nomination proved to be far more contested, as Senator John McCain of Arizona mounted a serious challenge for a time to Governor George W. Bush of Texas, who was the front runner for the GOP nomination. McCain stunned Bush in the New Hampshire primary, winning by a large margin there. McCain attracted moderate Republicans and independents, as New Hampshire permits independent voters to choose either the Democratic or Republican ballot in primaries. Bush needed a big win in South Carolina, and he got it, although his campaign left McCain embittered by allegations that the Bush campaign had used race and lies to clinch the primary vote in the conservative southern state, by implying that McCain had fathered a child with an African-American woman. How much this influenced the vote, if any, was unclear, but it clearly pointed to how much racial politics had become a part of the GOP.* McCain bounced back, winning a couple of primaries, but Bush won a decisive victory on so called "Super Tuesday" in March, by winning several key states. Generally speaking, McCain tended to do well in states where independents, or even Democrats, could choose the Republican primary ballot, and in states with more moderate Republican voters, and Bush did well in states with large numbers of conservative Republican voters. McCain decided to drop out of the race, leaving Bush with a clear path to the GOP nomination.

In other developments, the "Reform Party," founded by Ross Perot, nominated Pat Buchanan as its presidential nominee, in spite of Perot's personal disapproval of the nominee.** Further, in what may have decided the final outcome of the 2000 election, the Green Party chose Ralph Nader as its candidate. 

Next, in Part Two, "It All Comes Down To A Few Hundred Votes In Florida"

* In fairness, such racial politics had once been part of the Democratic Party, when the South was solidly Democratic, as I mentioned in some previous parts in this series.

** Buchanan's selection showed how Ross Perot had lost control of the movement he generally had started and how it became a coalition which attracted right wing elements. Perot originally had put emphasis on the budget deficits, blaming both parties for deficit spending, including the "voodoo economics" of the Reagan administration, and also criticizing trade deals which sent jobs and investments overseas. Perot had been much more libertarian on social issues, steering clear of them as much as possible, but Buchanan was well known for his tough stance, and rough talk, about many such issues (he was anti-abortion and anti gay rights, in particular). This further added to the Reform Party's coalition.  

WORD HISTORY:
Stub-This word goes back to Indo European "steupb," which had the notion of "hit, beat, knock, push." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "stubjaz," which had the same meanings, but also developed meanings for things from the result of being "hit or pushed." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "stybb," meaning a "tree stump;" that is, the remnant of a tree after been hit or knocked by humans, wind, lightning. This later became "stubb(e)," before the modern version, and it also broadened in meaning to short, fat objects, as does the derived adjective "stubby." The verb developed from the noun, with the idea of making something "stubby" or leaving a "stub" after pulling, cutting, or hitting (plants, hair/whiskers, tickets), and of course, the OUCH part of hitting your toe or finger against something ("I stubbed my toe!"). Other Germanic languages have: Danish and Norwegian "stubben, Swedish "stubbe," all generally still meaning "tree stump." Dutch had "stubbe" and Frisian once had "steb/stib." West Frisian has a couple of compounds containing "stub," but whether these are survivors of its previous form or borrowings, I'm not sure.

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Twenty-Seven

"The Government Shuts Down and Clinton Runs Again"

Republicans were able to bring back elements of the Reagan coalition to overwhelm Democrats in the 1994 election, as many Americans were upset with congressional scandals, trade agreements, and the National Rifle Association implied that Democrats (with some exceptions) would take guns away from law-abiding citizens, thus mobilizing some of the anti-government sentiment so cultivated by conservatives during Reagan's time. Republican strategists, led by Congressman Newt Gingrich of Georgia, put out a a list of issues called "The Contract With America," which featured proposals that polled well with Americans, like making congressional representatives live by the same laws passed by Congress. The GOP also had specific measures they said they would introduce if given the majority, like welfare reform. The election was a Republican congressional landslide, as the GOP was voted into the majority in both houses of Congress.

The new GOP majorities took office in early 1995, but by late 1995, the Republicans and President Clinton were on a showdown course over the 1996 federal budget. Republicans were able to get measures through both houses, but the President vetoed the bill, as it essentially contained too many cuts he did not favor. Both sides agreed in principle to balancing the budget, but it was the means of doing that that brought confrontation, as Republicans wanted changes in Medicare and Social Security.* After negotiations between the two sides failed to produce a deal, a part of the government shut down, which ended a few days later due to a temporary agreement to extend government funding as negotiations continued. When these negotiations too failed, the government shutdown, part two, went into effect. This shutdown lasted about three weeks, with parts of the economy and the public feeling the affects. Then Speaker Gingrich announced that part of the reason he had let the government shut down was because President Clinton had made him sit in the back of the plane during a trip to Israel. Democrats pounced and the story took on a life of its own, as Gingrich was indicated to be a cry baby who threw a tantrum, which costs millions of Americans money and inconvenienced millions more. Eventually the Republicans and Clinton came to an agreement similar to one proposed weeks before, prior to the painful shutdown.

The Republican Senate leader was Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, who was a top tier candidate for the GOP presidential nomination in 1996. Arch conservative commentator Pat Buchanan entered the fray as he had in 1992. After a stunning victory by Buchanan in New Hampshire, Republican strategists pushed for endorsements and money for the campaign of Dole, who was able to defeat Buchanan in several key primaries, thus ensuring his nomination. Dole chose Jack Kemp to be his running mate. While not especially close with Gingrich, once nominated, Democrats made sure people believed Dole and Gingrich were best friends. If I remember correctly, Dole later joked that Democratic ads made he and Gingrich sound like they were one and the same person, as the ads continually mentioned "Dole/Gingrich" in one breath. Dole's age was something of an issue (he was in his early 70s), especially when contrasted with the middle age Clinton (who was 50). Ross Perot also entered as a third party candidate, but there was no surge for Perot this time, at least not on the order of 1992.

The economy had picked up, and Republicans were left saying they could do even better, which often tends to be a losing argument, and it was in 1996 too. By election day Clinton won easily with just over 49% of the vote, but with 379 electoral votes; while Dole garnered less than 41% of the vote and 159 electoral votes. Perot received more than 8% of the vote, and no electoral votes. Again Clinton carried several southern states, depriving Republicans of their stranglehold on the region. So the Democrats had a two term president, but he failed to receive at least 50% of the vote either time. Still, was this the beginning of a more firm Democratic coalition? After all, Clinton may not have gotten 50% in either election, but Republicans didn't even get 40% the first time, and just over that amount in 1996. Perot's candidacy, especially in 1992, certainly had an impact, probably to the negative side for Republicans.

* I've mentioned in other articles here over the years that my father was a staunch Republican who had had something of a fixation with Social Security (and Medicare somewhat), as many Republicans had and still do have. After my father retired though, he saw things differently, and he was angry that Republicans would go after Social Security, saying that privatization plans by the GOP catered to greedy business people who "couldn't wait to get their hands on that (Social Security) money."  

WORD HISTORY:
Sail-It appears that "sail" goes back to Indo European "sek," which had the idea "to cut." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "seglom/seglam," with the meaning "a piece of cut cloth used to propel a ship or boat;  a sail," apparently a meaning developed only in Germanic, but borrowed by some Celtic dialects. This then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "segel/segl," meaning a "sail." The "g" sound eventually disappeared as a separate sound, blending with a long "e" sound to produce a long "a" sound, a process that happened similarly with other English words once having a "g" sound (the "g" also disappeared in some other Germanic languages, see below), like "rain," which once was "regn" (standard German still retains the "g" as "Regen," but when you hear some German speakers pronounce it, the "g" is barely audible, and I wouldn't be surprised if, like in English, the "g" is no longer present in some German dialects); "say" was "secgan" (standard German still has "sagen, although again, not always audible);  and "day" was once "daeg" (German has "Tag," with the ending "g" pronounced as "k" [the "a" is pronounced like the "a" in father, but when used for "daily," German too uses a long "a" sound in the related "täglich]). Old English also had the verb form "seglan/seglian." Common in the other Germanic languages: German has "Segel," Low German Saxon has "Sail" and "Segel," Dutch has "zeil," West Frisian and Norwegian have "seil," Danish has "sejl," Icelandic has "segl," and Swedish has "segel." These are all noun forms, but there are verb forms too.

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Twenty-Five

"The Democrats Return To the White House: Bill Clinton"

Bill Clinton took the oath of office in January 1993. To deal with the Federal deficit, Clinton decided to increase revenues; that is, taxes, mainly on the highest incomes in the land. This went totally against the conservative Republican idea of supply side economics that had been pushed since Ronald Reagan had taken office. Republicans predicted the end of the world to be near, but President Clinton stuck to his general plan. By the summer of 1993 the plan had passed and been signed into law, all without the vote of even one Republican in either house of Congress. Politically folks, this is very risky business, for if the end of the world scenario developed, Republicans could all say, "We told you so," but on the other hand, if no such demise appeared on the horizon, and if the deficit shrank and the economy picked up,* Republicans could not claim to have had anything to do with it, El Zilcho.

The plan passed and signed into law raised taxes on the top 1.2%, added about four cents to the gasoline tax, while cutting taxes for millions of lower income Americans and small businesses. President Clinton had difficulty holding enough Democratic votes to get the measure passed, as some Democrats defected, but pass it did, by just two votes in the House and by one vote in the Senate, that margin provided by Vice President Al Gore, who was permitted by the Constitution to break a tie vote in the Senate. Wealthy Republicans undoubtedly awaited the end of the world scenario by thinking along the lines of Thurston Howell III, of "Gilligan's Island" fame, who, when faced with what he believed was their imminent demise, implored his wife to help him figure out a way to take their tremendous wealth with them. More on the economy later.

Then Clinton took on another contentious issue, health care. Hillary Clinton headed a committee to put together a plan to provide national health care to Americans. The large and complex plan was highly popular for about a week or two, as Republicans and insurance companies picked the plan apart and successfully scared the hell out of Americans, and the whole matter brought even more scrutiny to Hillary Clinton. Polls showed the plan's popularity fell like a rock, and eventually it couldn't make it through Congress, even though Democrats had majorities in both the House and Senate. Politically, the lasting effects of the failure, plus scandal charges against the Clintons, hurt Democrats in the upcoming midterm election. (I'll cover the scandals in the next part.)

Gun control was also a hot topic and Congress passed the "Brady Bill," which required background checks on gun purchases. The bill was named for Ronald Reagan's press secretary, who was seriously wounded during the assassination attempt on Reagan in 1981. The former president wrote an editorial supporting passage of the bill, although the National Rifle Association strongly opposed it. So Ronald Reagan supported some gun control.

Then the North American Free Trade Agreement, better known by its initials, NAFTA, became the next heated discussion. The agreement was highly complex, but it essentially made a trade bloc of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico by eliminating trade and investment barriers between those countries. On this issue, Clinton and all the living former presidents supported passage, but the bill terribly divided Democrats, and it took free trade Republicans to provide the votes in Congress to pass.** It also brought Ross Perot to the fore again, as the former presidential candidate opposed the agreement. In a highly touted television debate with Vice President Al Gore, watched by millions of Americans, Perot made points, but he had difficulty explaining many things, especially where money was coming from to oppose the agreement and in refuting the charge by Gore that Perot stood to make financial gain from the defeat of the agreement.

In the midst of all of these hot-button issues came another, a social issue. Clinton supported allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve in the military, provided they kept their sexual orientation secret, but the military could not ask about their orientation either. Clinton's stand satisfied few, but especially on the political right, where any attempt to allow gay people to legally serve in the military was opposed. The provisions came to be known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." 

Next, "Republicans Come Roaring Back"

* The recession of 1990-91 may have officially ended in 1991, but the recovery was painfully slow, with layoffs continuing for quite some time. The slow growth and relatively high unemployment contributed greatly to George Bush's defeat in 1992 at the hands of Bill Clinton, who was more than happy to remind voters of such with one of his campaign slogans, "It's the economy, stupid," 

** The living former presidents at the time were: Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush (Sr.). The complexity of the measure would require an article of its own just to begin to explain it. In the vote in both houses of Congress, more Republicans voted in favor than Democrats, many of whom were correctly (in my opinion) concerned about the impact on American manufacturing jobs. Unions generally strongly opposed the agreement. 

WORD HISTORY:
Cloud-This is another word closely related to recently covered "clod, clot, clout, cloth, clothes, clothe," and also to "clad," by the way, which I didn't cover separately, but which was the past tense and participle form of "clothe," although it is still used today as in, "The lady was well clad in a brand new dress," and often in combination with "scantily," as in "The scantily clad sunbathers shocked some people."  Like its relatives listed above, "cloud" goes back to Indo European "gleuh," which had the notion of "stick together, adhere," with the further sense, "form into a ball." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "klaut," with the same general meanings.The sense "form into a ball or mass" helped give Old English "clud," which then meant "mass of rock/stone." By the 1200s the word was beginning to overtake the English word for "cloud," which was "wolcen" (German still has "Wolke," Low German Saxon has "Wulk," Dutch and West Frisian have "wolk," and English has the archaic "welkin"), as the English saw the resemblance of rock formations to be like "clouds," and to my knowledge, English is the only Germanic language to have that meaning. Old English "clud" then became "cloude, clude," before the modern version.

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Twenty-Four

"The 1992 Campaign and Election" Part Two

Bill Clinton, the Democratic governor of Arkansas, won the Democratic presidential nomination and he chose Senator Al Gore of Tennessee as his vice presidential running mate; the two men were both in their mid 40s, which was perhaps a plus to some younger voters. Clinton's reputation for word play began in earnest when he admitted to having tried marijuana, but "I didn't inhale." Then he caused some Republicans to have a stroke when he told voters, "Vote for one, but get two," in reference to his activist wife, Hillary. This brought scrutiny to Hillary's life too, especially her business dealings and legal representations (she was an attorney), something that would continue for years. Questions of Bill Clinton's infidelity became rather common, but he went on national television to deny such. This too was an issue that would continue to haunt Clinton and the country in the coming years.

Meanwhile, the talk of the nation still centered around Ross Perot, who still was riding high in the polls, although a bit less so as spring turned into summer. Perot appeared to be thin skinned as the media checked into his life, and by July, Perot announced he would not run, citing the potential for the election to be so split in the Electoral College, that it would have to be decided by the House of Representatives.* Later Perot said he had dropped out as Republicans had planned dirty tricks to disrupt his daughters wedding. Later, Perot asserted that the CIA was involved in trying to destroy his campaign by tapping into his stock trading program to prevent him from financing his campaign, and there were other unsubstantiated charges of assassination plots, etc. The White House and the Bush campaign leaders called it all nonsense. Perot's poll numbers tumbled and Bill Clinton's rose, putting the Democrat ahead of the field. Later Perot decided to get back into the race. On top of the display of paranoia, Perot had selected retired, highly decorated Vice Admiral James Stockdale as his running mate. During the vice presidential debate, Stockdale, who had had little time to prepare for the debate, looked into the television cameras and asked, "Who am I? Why am I here?" Stockdale's apparent confusion and lack of focus throughout the debate produced a series of one liners from comedians and it further called into question the judgment, if not the very sanity, of Ross Perot. The thing was, Perot's paranoia and conspiracy theories played right into the minds of a number of Americans obsessed with such things, and to whom Republican tricks were assumed to be commonplace, no proof required.   

President Bush struggled throughout the campaign and his poll numbers remained in the upper 30s. The economy weighed on Bush, and his numerous public appearances after the Gulf War may have taken the edge off of having a presidential visit, as some Bush rallies were sparsely attended, and the campaign took to using celebrities, and up and coming conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh to draw people in. By the time election day arrived, the Republican coalition had melted to a great degree, as so called "Reagan Democrats" often returned to the Democratic fold, and even some southern states returned to the Democratic column after a substantial absence.** In the end Bill Clinton won 43% of the vote, but a large margin of 370 electoral votes, while George Bush received only 37 1/2% of the popular vote and 168 electoral votes. While Perot did not carry a single state, he got nearly 19% of the national vote, and he received more than 20% of the vote in some states. The Republicans had controlled the White House for 20 of the past 24 years at that point (only Jimmy Carter's four years broke the chain). The question now was, could Clinton put together a new Democratic coalition to gain 50% or more of the vote?

* Just to be clear, the process of getting Perot onto the ballot in all states was still in the process, although it was becoming pretty much of a certainty. 

** There's no question that having Clinton and Gore, two Southerners, on the Democratic ticket helped in the South, but still the election showed how much the South had changed politically, as Bush carried most southern states, even with the two Southerners running against him.

WORD HISTORY:
Clothe-Like its close relatives covered here recently (cloth, clothes, clout, clod, and clot), this verb, meaning "to put on clothing, to dress, to put clothes on someone," goes back to Indo European "gleuh," which had the notion of "stick together, adhere." This then gave its Old Germanic offspring "klaut," and then "klutaz," which meant "piece of material," and also, "material used to cover something." and the derived variant "klaithan," with the meaning "material used to cover something," thus "clothing, garments." This gave Old Germanic a verb form, presumed by some to be something like "klaithonan," meaning "to clothe, to put on clothing, to dress." This gave Old English "geclathian," meaning "to clothe, put on clothes." This later dropped the prefix and became "clothen," before the modern version. German has "kleiden," Low German Saxon and Dutch have "kleden," West Frisian has "klean" (notice the "d," "t" or "th" sound is gone), Danish has "klaede," Icelandic has "klaetha," Norwegian has "kle" (notice the absence of an ending present in the other Germanic languages), Swedish has "kläda."

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Twenty-Three

"The 1992 Campaign and Election" Part One

The 1992 nominating process brought hard line conservative Pat Buchanan into the Republican primaries against President George Bush. He challenged Bush about breaking his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge and about the President making deals with Democrats, with Buchanan "essentially saying" the country didn't need two liberal parties, thus moving elements of the Republican coalition to advocate standing firm in beliefs, and making compromise seem like weakness. Buchanan made a strong showing in New Hampshire, but Bush won and he continued on to a relatively easy renomination, but the attacks from Buchanan took a toll, as a part of the conservative base of the Republican Party remained unenthusiastic about George Bush. Buchanan's challenge and his standing with many conservatives led Bush to give Buchanan the keynote address spot at the Republican Convention. Buchanan's address was a full throttle assault on the Democratic candidate Bill Clinton, his wife Hillary, and Democrats in general, who, he said, were in a fight to take over the soul of the country by advocating abortion, gay rights, and a diverse society. The speech energized conservatives to some degree, but the venom dripping words undoubtedly shocked many truly independent voters.

Meanwhile, Texas businessman Ross Perot had entered the national spotlight by focusing on the federal budget deficit, an issue on the minds of many Americans, regardless of party affiliation, although especially so for fiscal conservatives. Like Buchanan, he indicated that the existing politicians were not truly responsive to the public. Unlike Buchanan, Perot was not wedded to many of the socially conservative ideas laid out by Buchanan and some elements of the Religious Right, and he was more libertarian on many issues. A large number of Americans flocked to Perot, who seemed to fill a niche at that time, and he said he would run for president, "if" enough people showed interest in his candidacy by getting his name placed on the ballots in all fifty states, a condition which was fulfilled. A billionaire, Perot didn't have to rely on donations from special interest groups, with such money raising being another growing concern among Americans. In the spring of 1992 Perot led in many national polls, which only increased his appeal to Americans tired of party politics. For George Bush, Perot's candidacy was a plague, as the President had tackled the deficit issue, even breaking his no tax pledge to do so, and by working across party lines, now only to have Perot say not enough had been done to deal with the national debt and that deals between members of the two parties were sort of tainted. So Bush had hard line conservatives furious with him for tax increases to reduce the deficit AND Perot angry with him for not having done enough to deal with the debt. No good deed goes unpunished and Bush's accomplishment ended up being largely negated. Again, many of the people who claimed to be so concerned about the deficit and tax increases under George Bush never held Ronald Reagan to the same standard, although deficits under Reagan were horrible and Reagan increased taxes in several ways, but Bush was not a showman or a "great communicator," and he suffered accordingly. The '92 election also showed how many Americans disregarded facts in favor of showmanship. Hey, we're the country of Hollywood and slick ads telling us why dish detergent "A" is better than dish detergents "B" and "C," even though they're all essentially the same thing.

Next, in "The 1992 Campaign and Election, Part Two," Perot implodes, Clinton surges, and the Republican coalition melts down.

WORD HISTORY:
Cloth-Like its close relatives "clot," "clod" and "clout," this word goes back to Indo European "gleuh," which had the notion of "stick together, adhere." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "klaut," with the same general meanings.This then produced Old Germanic "klutaz," which had the notion of  "piece of material," and also, "material used to cover something." This then gave Old Germanic the variant "klaithan," with the "material used to cover something," meaning; thus "cloth," and by extension "garment," which then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "clath," likely with a long "a" sound, and this later became "cloth." Old English "clath" also had the additional meaning "sail," obviously from the notion of the material used for such, but it was not the primary word for "sail," which indeed was the ancestor of the modern word "sail" (I'll cover 'sail' soon). The original Old English plural form was "clathas," which became "clothes," "wearing apparel, clothing." The other Germanic languages have forms all having meanings to do with "clothes" or "cloth": standard German "Kleid" (garment, dress), Low German Saxon "kleed" (clothing, garment), West Frisian "kleed" (piece of clothing, garment), Dutch "kleed" (garment, carpet), Danish has "klaede" (cloth) and "klaeder" (clothes), Icelandic has "klaethi" (clothes), Norwegian has "klut(en)" (cloth), and Swedish has "kläder" (clothes) and "kläde" (cloth).

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Eleven

"The Reagan Coalition and the Rise of the American Political Right" Part Three

With Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy opposing President Jimmy Carter for the 1980 Democratic nomination, Carter's weaknesses were magnified. Many labor people, a significant element of the Democratic coalition, went with Kennedy, and many liberal Democrats saw Carter as too conservative. However, just as had happened with Gerald Ford in 1976, when Ronald Reagan challenged him for the Republican nomination, enough Democrats stuck with President Carter to eventually ward off Kennedy's strong challenge.* While Carter has often appeared to be exceedingly idealistic, both then and now, he came to the presidency in 1977 (the election was in November 1976) in the aftermath of the Watergate scandals. Carter slyly would remind voters of Watergate, a Republican scandal, while seeming to be above playing hard nose politics, by often telling reporters, "I'm not here to answer questions about Watergate." He did much the same in 1980 against Kennedy, as Kennedy had been involved in an auto accident in 1969 which claimed the life of a young woman passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, as his car veered off a bridge and into the water. The accident, on Chappaquiddick Island (Massachusetts), saw Kennedy save himself, but leave the scene, only to report the accident many hours later. The deadly accident spawned many a conspiracy theory, and even a number of Democrats were skeptical of Kennedy's story. Senator Kennedy's 1980 run for president brought the issue, which had never completely died out, back to the front pages throughout the country. Carter would steadfastly and repeatedly announce that he didn't want to talk about "Chappaquiddick," which was a way of talking about it. Comedian Bob Hope had a great quip which summed up the whole thing. Carter had a young daughter, Amy, and Hope said something to the effect that while Carter said he didn't want to talk about Kennedy's auto accident, he spent each night teaching Amy how to spell "Chappaquiddick." In the end, Carter won the nomination. Meanwhile, on the Republican side...

Ronald Reagan and his conservative supporters moved quickly to secure the Republican nomination from the Republican moderate wing, then basically led by George Bush (Senior). Bush's campaign was unable to halt the Reagan juggernaut, but he gave Reagan's opponents a highly quotable comment about Reagan's economic proposals of tax cuts and large defense spending increases, calling them "voodoo economics." ** Voodoo or not, Reagan easily captured the Republican nomination and he tagged Bush to be his vice presidential running mate, which caused Bush to use some voodoo of his own to distance himself from his previous remark. John Anderson, a long time moderate Republican congressman from Illinois, chose to run as an independent in an effort to attract moderate Republicans and disaffected Democrats. So the race for the presidency was set.

* For those unaware, Ted Kennedy was the brother of President John F. Kennedy (also known by his initials "JFK"), who was assassinated in November 1963, and Robert Kennedy, a former Attorney General of the United States, assassinated in 1968 as he campaigned for the Democratic nomination. John Kennedy was the first, and thus far only, Roman Catholic to be elected president. Even by 1980, the lingering divisiveness over religion played a role in the primary, as some staunch Democratic acquaintances of mine, who were Protestant, chose Carter, solely based upon the fact that Kennedy was Catholic. Carter was a Baptist and a Sunday school teacher.

**  In 1992 when Ross Perot was running for president as an independent, he recounted how Reagan's policies led to huge deficits and he repeated the "voodoo economics" label, then saying "we are now in deep voodoo." 

WORD HISTORY:
Bring-This word traces back to Indo European "bhrengkh," which generally meant "carry, bring," and also by extension, "worry" ("carry concerns with you"). This gave Old Germanic "bringanan," which meant "to bring, to carry." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "bringan," with the same general meaning, and by extension, "to produce," from the notion "bring forth." This then became "bringen," before the modern version.^  Common in the other West Germanic languages: German and Low German Saxon have "bringen," Dutch has "brengen," and West Frisian has "bringe." The North Germanic languages did not use forms of the word until later, although I "assume" other forms replaced it during the Old Norse period,^^ but Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish all borrowed forms from Low German: Norwegian and Danish have "bringe" and Swedish has "bringa." Icelandic never borrowed a form of the word, as it was already established in Iceland by the time the other North Germanic languages borrowed forms of the word. In some Germanic languages, forms of "bring" can also mean "take," depending upon context.

^ In modern everyday English we have to use two words to represent the infinitive form of a verb; as in, "to bring." In the past however, English, like its Germanic cousins, used just one word, the main word + an ending, typically of "an" or "en," to mean the same thing. This ending then changed according to how the verb was used in a sentence (these changes are called "inflections," see below). Some quaint dialects and non modernized texts, like some Bibles and hymnals, still use the old forms; thus you still see things like "hast" ("have," German still uses "hast"), "cometh" (German uses "kommt"), "sayeth" (German has "sagt"). The other Germanic languages have generally retained some form of this grammar, with lots of inflections, into modern times; thus, in German for example, "bringen" means "to bring" (also "to take," not in the sense "accept," but rather "to take something or someone from one place to another"). English simplified its verbs, thus when "to bring" is conjugated, it is: I bring; you bring; he/she/it brings; we/they bring, so there are only two grammatical forms needed to express ourselves, "bring" and "brings." German, on the other hand, is still like the English of several hundred years ago: infinitive "bringen:" ich bringe; du bringst; er/sie/es bringt; wir/sie bringen, so there are four forms needed.  

^^ Old Norse is the ancestor of the North Germanic languages: Norwegian, Icelandic, Danish and Swedish (actually also Faroese, from the Faroe Islands), having come from Old Germanic, and generally dates from about 700 A.D. until about 1200/1300.