Moo, Y’all

A group of British farmers claim that they have observed regional accents in cows when they moo, and now their claim is being supported by a professor of phonics at University College London. According to this professor, cows probably develop their accents in a way that is similar to the development of accents in humans - from the accents of other humans around them. In this case, the cows develop their accents from the farmers who spend time with them. For example, cows in the southwest of England moo with an ‘oo-arr’ accent. The farmers’ pitch and tone apparently have been picked up by the cows so that they moo with a distinctive Somerset twang.

As implausible as it may seem, one should not lightly dismiss the claim that cows moo with an accent. We have known for some time that roosters crow with various accents in different countries. Here are some examples:

- In English it’s: cock-a-doodle-doo
- In French it‘s: cocorico
- In Dutch it's: kukeleku
- In German it's: kikeriki
- In Spanish it’s - Quiquiriquíííííííí
- In Japanese it’s - (Kokekokkoo
- In Finland it’s Kuk-ko-kie-kuu
- In Portuguese it’s "cocorocó" or "cocoricó".
- In Italian it’s chicchirichi

Now here are some examples of the sounds that cows make in different countries:

English: moo
Spanish: muu
Finnish: ammuu
French: meuh
German: mmuuh
Hindi: mo:-mo:
Hungarian: bú
Icelandic: mu
Italian: muuuuuu
Japanese: moo
Korean: um-muuuu
Norwegian: mø
Polish: muuuuu
Portuguese: muuuu
Russian: muu
Slovene: muu-muu
Thai: maw maw

So does that mean Italian cows moo in Italian? French cows in French? Mexican cows in Spanish? Some wags have sworn that they have heard cows from these countries moo as follows:

France: Mooi
Japan: Moo-San
Germany: Mu
Poland: Mooski
Spain: amaaaaa

Questions:

1.For Southern bloggers: Do y’all’s cows moo with a Southern drawl?

2. For Northern bloggers: "You talkin' to me?" Yeah, I’m talkin’ to youse guys. Does a Jersey Cow moo with a Joisey accent?

3. Do you think all this has more to do with the farmers’ hearing than the cows’ accents?

4. Do you think the farmers’ claims are udder nonsense? In other words, do you think the farmers are full of bull?

5. Do you think that perhaps the farmers have been spending a little too much time in the silage stack?

Double Trouble

I have some good news and some bad news. The good news is that hunger has been eliminated in the United States; the bad news is that it has been replaced by “food insecurity." I have some bad news and some good news about the war in Iraq. The bad news is that the United States is going to “cut and run” in Iraq; the good news is that it is going to “redeploy” the heck out of there.

Do you remember a time when a travel agent was - well - a travel agent? Today he or she might be a “travel counselor’ or a “vacation specialist.” Remember when a salesperson was a salesperson? Recently, when my wife and I went shopping at a furniture store, we were introduced by the manager to a “decor consultant.”

The expressions listed above are examples of “Doublespeak,” a language that only pretends to say something; it’s a language that hides, disguises, distorts, evades, and deliberately misleads. Here are some further examples of Doublespeak as used by our government, military, and corporate institutions:

axis of evil: countries the United States feels free to invade.
biosolids: sewage
big government: those parts of our government not controlled by corporations
collateral damage: the killing of innocent bystanders, ecological destruction, and environmental contamination.
death taxes: formerly, taxes on the estates of extremely wealthy individuals. The result of eliminating the so-called “death tax” would be to grant huge tax breaks to those wealthy estates.

downsizing or reduction in force : the firing of employees.
enemy combatant: legal wording to get around the Geneva Conventions’ protective rights for those captured in combat.
ethnic cleansing: genocide
extraordinary rendition: the delivering of terror suspects to foreign intelligence services not burdened by following international law, and without extradition proceedings, for the purpose of torture.

freedom fighter: a terrorist furthering American interests.
irregularities: corporate accounting fraud; evidence of election fraud.
liberals: weird perverts; people who care about poor people; people who can’t make up their minds; people who hate business; people who hate America. (JUST KIDDING)
liberate: invade; destroy; steal.

negative patient care outcome: death
new and improved: smaller; more expensive and less useful.
pain compliance: torture
pre-owned: used; second hand

revenue enhancement: tax increase
terminate with extreme prejudice: kill
transfer tubes : formerly “body bags” in the Vietnam conflict.
vertically deployed anti-personnel devices: bombs

One of the central insights of George Orwell's classic novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” concerned the manipulative use of language, which he called "newspeak" and "doublethink," and which we now call "Doublespeak" and "Orwellian." Orwell was alarmed by government propaganda and the seemingly rampant use of euphemisms and half-truths -- and he conveyed his discomfort with such tactics to generations of readers by using vivid examples in his novel. Despite our general awareness of the tactic, government officials routinely use Doublespeak to expand, or at least maintain, their power. You might recall the bleak world depicted by Orwell in which
the Ministry of Truth publishes lies, the Ministry of Love tortures people and the Ministry of Peace wages perpetual war. The Bush administration has excelled at using language to say one thing and mean its opposite. The "Healthy Forests" program, for example, allows increased logging of protected wilderness. The "Clear Skies" initiative permits greater industrial air pollution.

Orwell must be turning over in his grave.

Question:

Can you list some other examples of government, military, and corporate Doublespeak in circulation today?

Swearing on the Koran

Last November 7th, Keith Ellison, a Democrat, was elected to serve in Congress from Minnesota. Next January 4th, he will be sworn in as our nation’s first Muslim elected to Congress. He has requested that he be permitted to have a Koran at the swearing-in ceremony.

Meanwhile, Dennis Prager, a radio host very popular with right-wing conservatives, had this to say in a web column:

“Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath of office to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don’t serve in Congress.”

Mr. Prager is either grossly ignorant of world history as well as the history of our own nation and the principles upon which it was established, or he is disregarding that knowledge to cater to the prejudices of his radio constituency. In addition, he should know that members of Congress do not swear on a Bible in the ceremony. The swearing-in ceremony for the House of Representatives never includes a religious book; it consists only of the members raising their right hands and swearing to uphold the Constitution. Neither the Christian Bible, nor any other religious text, has ever been used in an official capacity during the ceremony. (Occasionally, members pose for symbolic photo-ops with their hand on a Bible.)

To refresh the knowledge of Prager and ourselves regarding our history and those principles regarding religion contained in the Constitution, let us have a brief review.

The Divine Right of Kings is an European political and religious doctrine of political absolutism. Such doctrines are largely, though not exclusively, associated with the mediæval and Ancien Régime eras. It states that a monarch owes his rule to the will of God, not to the will of his subjects, parliament, the aristocracy or any other competing authority. This doctrine continued with the claim that any attempt to depose a monarch or to restrict his powers ran contrary to the will of God.

John Locke was a 17th century English philosopher who is considered to be one of the first philosophers of the Enlightenment and the father of classical liberalism. In his major work “Two Treatises of Government,” Locke rejects the idea of the divine right of kings, supports the idea of natural rights (especially of property), and argues for a limited constitutional government which would protect individual rights.

One of those individual rights was in regard to religion. In the 18th century, James Madison, when speaking of the method and manner of the election of the members of the Congress, noted that even "Religion itself may become a motive to persecution and oppression," telegraphing his own desire for no religious test for government service. He had been a prime mover in the efforts of some Virginia lawmakers to ensure that no preference be given to any religion in that state, and that a proposed tax to aid religious efforts be defeated.

On June 8, 1789 Representative James Madison rose and gave a speech in the House where he introduced a series of articles of amendment. One concerned religious freedom:

“The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.”

Through the debates in the House, Senate, and conference committees, the wording of all of these proposals was whittled down to the religion clauses of what is our First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

In the end, the First Amendment not only prevents the establishment of a national religion, but it also prohibits government aid to any religion, even on an non-preferential basis, as well as protecting the right of the individual to choose to worship, or not, as he or she sees fit.

When the North Carolina Convention was debating the adoption of the Federal Constitution. James Iredell stated the following:

"...It is objected that the people of America may, perhaps, choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that Pagans and Mahometans may be admitted into offices. But how is it possible to exclude any set of men, without taking away that principle of religious freedom which we ourselves so warmly contend for?" (“Mahometans” is an outdated term, now considered derogatory, for Muslims).

The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: “Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.” (Everson v Board (330 US 1 [1947])

Religion makes only one direct and obvious appearance in the original Constitution that seems to point to a desire for some degree of religious freedom. That appearance is in Article 6, at the end of the third clause:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, "We, the people," and contains no mention of "God" or "Christianity." Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust" (Art. VI), and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (First Amendment). The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution, does not contain the phrase "so help me God" or any requirement to swear on a Bible (Art. II, Sec. 1, Clause 8). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn't our Constitution say so?

The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. Nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any Supreme Being. The U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.

Questions:

1. After reviewing these principles, as applied to religion, upon which our nation was founded, do you think Mr. Ellison, if he so desires, has a Constitutional right to have the Koran at his swearing-in ceremony?

2. If Mr. Ellison wants to pose for a symbolic photo-op with his hand on a Koran, does he have that right under the Constitution?

3. If you were to meet Dennis Prager in person, what would you say to him?

(Please note: The intention of this post is not to disrespect any religion, but rather to promote thought and discussion about our rights as citizens under the Constitution.)

Favorite Christmas Songs

If you had to limit yourself to ten of these sixty-five Christmas songs, what would they be? If you were asked to choose one of these songs as your all-time favorite, what would it be, and why? Usually, a favorite song evokes some kind of memory associated with it. What is yours? If you have a favorite Christmas song that is not on the list, feel free to add it and tell us why it is your favorite.

A

* All I Want for Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth
* All I Want for Christmas Is You
* Another Rock N' Roll Christmas

B

* Back Door Santa

C

* The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)
* Christmas All over the World
* Christmas At Ground Zero
* The Christmas Shoes
* The Christmas Song
* Christmas Time
* Christmas Time Is Here Again
* Christmas Wrapping
* Christmas in New York
* Christmas, Why Can't I Find You?

D

* Deck the Hall
* Do They Know It's Christmas?
* Do You Hear What I Hear?

F

* Fairytale of New York
* Feliz Navidad (Iran Castillo song)
* Feliz Navidad
* Frosty the Snowman (song)

G

* Give Love on Christmas Day
* Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer

H

* The Happy Elf (song)
* Happy New Year (song)
* Happy Xmas (War Is Over)
* Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas

I

* I Come With Love
* I Pray On Christmas
* I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus
* I'll Be Home for Christmas
* It Must Have Been Love
* It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Christmas

J

* Jingle Bell Rock
* Jingle Bells
* Jingle Bells parodies

L

* Let It Snow
* Light of the Stable (song)
* The Lights and Buzz

M

* Mary, Did You Know?
* Mele Kalikimaka
* Merry Merry Merry Frickin' Christmas
* Merry Xmas Everybody
* My Only Wish (This Year)

N

* The Night Santa Went Crazy
* Nu tändas tusen juleljus

P

* Peace on Earth (song)

R

* River (song)
* Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer
* Run Rudolph Run

S

* Santa Baby
* Santa Claus Is Coming to Town
* Save Your Love (Renée and Renato song)
* Silver Bells (song)
* Sleigh Ride
* Step Into Christmas

T

* This Christmas

W

* Walking in the Air
* What Christmas Means to Me
* When It's Lamp Lighting Time in the Valley
* When You Wish upon a Star
* White Christmas (song)
* Winter Wonderland

Y

* You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch

Best and Worst

Definition Of “Best”:

best -- (the supreme effort one can make; ``they did their best'' )
best, topper -- (the person who is most outstanding or excellent; someone who tops all others; ``he could beat the best of them'' )
adventurer, venturer -- (a person who enjoys taking risks)
anomaly, unusual person -- (a person who is unusual)
changer, modifier -- (a person who changes something; ``an inveterate changer of the menu'' )
communicator -- (a person who communicates with others)
creator -- (a person who grows or makes or invents things)
entertainer -- (a person who tries to please or amuse)
experimenter -- (a person who enjoys testing innovative ideas; ``she was an experimenter in new forms of poetry'' )
expert -- (a person with special knowledge or ability who performs skillfully)
individualist -- (a person who pursues independent thought or action)
intellectual, intellect -- (a person who uses the mind creatively)
leader -- (a person who rules or guides or inspires others)

Definition of “Worst”:

worst -- (the weakest effort or poorest achievement one is capable of; ``it was the worst he had ever done on a test'' )
bottom -- (the lowest rank; ``bottom member of the class'')
last, last-place, lowest -- (lowest in rank or importance)
having undesirable or negative qualities
atrocious, abominable, awful, dreadful, painful, terrible, unspeakable -- (exceptionally bad or displeasing)
icky, crappy, lousy, rotten, shitty, stinking, stinky -
incompetent, unskilled
mediocre -- poor to middling in quality
negative -- (having the quality of something harmful or unpleasant)
most wanting in quality or value or condition

Question:

In all your endeavors, if you were limited to one choice, would you rather be the best of the worst, or the worst of the best, and why?