If words matter, then why do top officials use them so poorly?
I confess that I make occasional grammatical errors, both when writing and when speaking. In my defense, I have known many people, more intelligent than me, who do that. Along with incorrect grammar, we all may use the wrong word at times. However, what is excusable for the ordinary man, is not for, say, a professor of English, or a professional writer, such as a journalist. Neither is it for the people who make our laws, or execute national policies based on those laws.
Having twice voted for President Trump, I am perplexed by his sometimes clumsy use of language, although, in his defense, it at least has a charm that resonates with "the forgotten man" — those who constitute the productive backbone of our nation. Effectiveness is his "trump" card.
One cannot say the same of many who presently wield official power. In that regard, my nomination for quote of the day goes to Stephen Kruiser (PJ Media), who wrote:
One of the more annoying and disturbing aspects of the Biden puppet presidency thus far is the complete inability of so many of the people at the top to use their words well. When they're not mouth-barfing them into an incoherent jumble, they're forming them into understandable sentences that say stupid things.
Kamala Harris is the poster child of "word salads" and the heir apparent to Mrs. Malaprop, the fictional character who described another as the "very pineapple [pinnacle] of politeness."
Linguistic ineptitude such as Harris's should not be taken lightly. It reveals more than merely slips of the tongue. It is the consequence of profoundly inept thinking and, if I may conjecture, dishonesty, at least insofar as the pretense of expertise and compassion. Her being poised a mere heartbeat from the presidency makes what might in other circumstances be mildly amusing deeply concerning.
Kamala's verbal blunders are only incrementally worse than Joe Biden's, which are clearly due to his cognitive deficiency, worsening over time. His brief interludes of lucidity are plausibly attributed by some observers to the possible doses of isotropic drugs administered at precise times before his public utterances so that they take effect at the right moment and "wear off" only after he steps away from the podium.
The political comedy show, hosted unintentionally by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is genuinely amusing, the more so as her influence wanes, but Janet Yellen of the Treasury Department is a more serious matter. One need not make sense when giving evasive political answers to technical questions about the economy, as the linked video from Tucker Carlson shows. Worse yet, she is increasingly making her decisions as head of the treasury based on woke absurdities, resulting in her non-answers to specific questions.
The final act of modern-day malapropism is that even publishers of dictionaries are struggling to keep up with the ever-changing whims of Orwellian "Newspeak." The standard for declaring a recession has long been "two consecutive quarters of negative gross domestic product." Now that we have had those two quarters, and are clearly in economic distress for most wage-earners, it has become politically expedient for the Democrat administration to change the definition. Merriam-Webster obligingly says, "A recession is a downtrend in the economy that can affect production and employment, and produce lower household income and spending." No mention is made of two consecutive quarters.
In other words, ignore the nine-percent increase in your cost of living — itself understated — and just believe the man behind the curtain. We are not in a recession, but rather, a "transition," a word recently more associated with puberty-blockers than with economic downturns.
As Mrs. Malaprop might have said, the Biden administration policies are "exasperating" (exacerbating) our economic problems.
Image via Max Pixel.