On Unpleasant Language

  

Over the years I have made an attempt to eliminate the earthy language which has populated my speech. Although I have made some progress, (Ed. Not as much as some would like) I cannot claim fulfillment of my goal. In some cases, stronger verbiage seems necessary to get the point across. Actual blasphemy has nearly disappeared in concert with the desire not to offend my God. My goal is to reduce the usage to a point where it serves as actual punctuation, or better, exclamation, for emphasis of the seriousness of a point I’m trying to get across.

The greatest problem I have faced in overcoming this problem has been an inborn desire to flaunt political correctness in all its phony prissiness. In our complex world, it solves few problems to restate and describe unpleasant reality in sugar coated platitudes. Problem solving is difficult enough without adding confusing identification to the mix. The rush to find accommodation to salve every problem or situation with a false name is demeaning and non-instructive. To “call a spade a spade” has become inappropriate in finding solutions to ghetto problems. Thus a highly illustrative construction is dismissed in favor of less well-understood language.

This commentary was provoked this morning as I watched a YouTube video on Big Journalism. The principal players were Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Contessa Brewer and her sidekick Melissa Francis on MSNBC. In full “have you stopped beating your wife” mode, Brewer asked Gregg if he was willing to sacrifice “education” and other essential services for the sake of a balanced budget. Gregg wisely elected to address the bogus nature of the question and the result may be seen by going to the link. It’s a short (1:06 min.) but very instructive example of what conservative representatives face with those who would promote the reckless policies and actions of this administration.

As I read the comments, the summation of all their observations could easily be discerned from two extremely descriptive words—“bitch slap!” Every thing in their questioning and in the good Senator’s response was well said by that expression. The formation of the question, the accusatory nature, over-talking his response, and their general attitude (mainly the eye rolling) gave credence to the accuracy of the first word of the phrase. His well stated and even answer constituted the second.

It has been a personal joy in my life to have shared it with a bitch. My current companion, Maggie, is a Rottweiler/red bone mix who is the sweetest friend a man ever had. Her very natural role as a mother imbues her with protective instincts which are evident in her attitude toward intruders on our property. Any unwanted visitor, be they two or four legged, will find her most inhospitable. Once properly introduced, you would see her as delightful as our family does. Barring that introduction, she will immediately revert to her natural and very acceptable role as our protector. It is unfortunate that the pejorative use described previously is mistakenly taken from such a lovely and responsible creature. She is equipped however with sixty pounds of serious hurt.

The usage is extremely clear. The commenter, who used it, brought out the essential content of the senator’s response to the harridans who were attacking him without subtlety. The leftists who inhabit the media are ever on the attack and, unfortunately, are not often enough confronted by the quick wit which the senator displayed. His refusal to “take the bait” earned him a place of respect in my opinion. His reluctance to accept the question as stated demonstrated his clear understanding of the situation and his courage in facing what has proven to be an arch enemy.

For that well-delivered bitch slap, we all thank you.


In His abiding love,

Cecil Moon