Archive for the ‘Word Press’ Category

Our View: Regulation not always a dirty word

In this year of endless political campaigning, youve heard more than your share of rhetoric about those pesky, bureaucratic, business-constipating, job-killing government regulations.

You can probably recite the pitch: Its time to cut through the red tape and stop the madness for the good of our economy.

Were not a big fan of regulation for the sake of regulation. As a business, we know very well how regulation can add to the cost of doing business.

But lets not be nave or foolish.

The folks in Adams County have a pretty good understanding of why regulation is important to health and safety. So do the folks in Marshall, Mich.

The link between the two?

An oil spill involving Enbridge Energy.

Last week, a federal agency told Enbridge that it must submit a plan and receive approval before restarting operation of a 470-mile oil pipeline that ruptured in Adams County, spilling 1,200 barrels of oil into a field, according to a report in the Wisconsin State Journal, a sister publication.

Two homeowners were displaced and a section of road was closed during repair work, which is expected to cost at least $2 million. Crews were testing for groundwater contamination.

As Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said: Pipelines operate safely across the country every single day. Thats why accidents, like the one in Wisconsin, are absolutely unacceptable.

Continued here:
Our View: Regulation not always a dirty word

Geoffrey Nunberg's 'Ascent of the A-Word' looks at the slur heard round the world

When Mitt Romney's aide Rick Gorka became upset with the press corps last month for shouting questions at the candidate as he left the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Poland, he famously shouted at them: "Kiss my a - -. This is a holy site for the Polish people!"

Ascent of the A-Word

By Geoffrey Nunberg

Public Affairs, 251 pp., $25.99

The joke wasn't the word itself, but the fact that Gorka flung gutter language at a place he described as holy. Linguist Geoffrey Nunberg, author of the thought-provoking -- and occasionally just provoking -- "Ascent of the A-Word," was probably as amused as anyone else by this tension and the question it raises: Which is worse, to shout questions at a candidate about his earlier gaffes immediately after a solemn wreath-laying, or to react by directing those questioners' lips to their nether regions?

As Nunberg points out, late in his book, "the charge of incivility has become a standard weapon in political discourse, a way of delegitimating a person or group and denying their right to participate in a debate . . . And [it] can also be a pretext for engaging in incivility oneself."

Name-calling has no doubt been around since language was invented. It's probably a primary reason that language was invented. Taunts -- even nasty ones -- can be viewed as the civil alternative to punching someone in the face. Or killing him. So in some ways, name-calling is a giant step up the evolutionary ladder.

Nonetheless, most people are offended by it, especially when words like "a - - - - - -," or worse, are invoked. But as Nunberg points out, substituting other words -- "lout" or "jerk" -- just isn't the same:

"Likening someone to an anus suggests that he is small, foul, noisome, and low, as we conventionally view that anatomical feature . . . whenever we use it, we're flouting the norms of propriety . . . You can't pronounce a - - - - - - without evoking the people who disapprove of it . . . and placing yourself, at least symbolically, outside the circle of polite conversation."

Much of this book -- too much, in fact -- is concerned with defining the titular noun, its types and its degrees. Meriting this slur, Nunberg writes, is determined "by the breadth of [this individual's] self-delusion, the discrepancy between his perceptions and the reality before his eyes, the energy of his denials and rationalizations. The greater the gulf, the more of an a - - - - - - he is."

Go here to see the original:
Geoffrey Nunberg's 'Ascent of the A-Word' looks at the slur heard round the world

The Last Word: Beware the Great Big Olympics Lie

Now I can't be too long over this, because I have to go and shoot Bambi in a minute. But I am so unnerved by the past fortnight that I must risk affronting friends, family and colleagues by identifying a slick of dishonesty upon the great tide of gladness sweeping through these islands.

It would be churlish to deny that the Olympics, overall, have been a gratifying triumph. I can even accept that the prodigious expense of the stage has been vindicated by priceless inspiration from the performers. How delightful to see so many children so enthused. Perhaps some will even pursue a holiday fad rather longer than did those Australian youngsters judging from their returns this summer who were presumed "legatees" of Sydney 2000.

No event on this scale can register top marks across all indices. So it would be silly to waste too much vexation on, say, the monstrous priapic deformities somehow chosen as logo and mascots. Or the ghastly branding infecting daily vernacular, to the point where perfectly sensible people routinely immolate their dignity by talking about "Team GB" or "Games Makers".

Society showed ample vigilance, moreover, about the most obviously sinister challenges from the Games. Plenty were angered, for instance, that venues should be "proud only to take Visa". Or that the private sector be given a bet-to-nothing, as when a security firm trousered a huge contract, screwed up, and could rely on the army to make good the risked shortfall. In turn, I'm sure, they feel disquiet that the Olympics made it acceptable for British police to wander through crowds toting sub-machine guns.

No one, however, seems to have a problem with the docility and hysteria uniting millions of ordinary people in a Great Big Lie. For their obedient infatuation with the Games, at the behest of the mass media, has become a chilling exercise in the fragility of democracy.

Here is the bald truth suppressed at the heart of our present euphoria. In most cases you could stage exactly the same events as "world championships", last year or next, and hardly anyone would cross the road to watch. Very few, in fact, would bother to shift a thumb on the television remote. Jessica Ennis herself completed her Olympics warm-up before 300 paying customers.

Now clearly the Games mean more than a world championship to many of the participants themselves, albeit not in mainstream sports such as football or tennis. And that warrants respect. But only up to a point. Because it's blatantly dishonest to dismiss all these people as nobodies one day, and acclaim them as "icons" the next; to exalt, overnight, minority pastimes you have long considered dull or ludicrous; to deny that many of them, contested by so few people, must almost certainly set the Olympic bar pretty low.

Which is presumably why so much Lottery revenue was given to sports with a financially intimidating infrastructure. Sure enough, one of our rowing gold medallists had never sat in a boat until picked out by a Lottery-funded scheme barely four years ago. I certainly wouldn't disparage her endeavours or achievements since.

She is, demonstrably, extremely talented and, like almost all the athletes I encountered at Eton Dorney, an impressive role model for young compatriots. Certainly, if the world is deceived that all Britons are as accomplished and engaging as Anna Watkins and Katherine Grainger, then the flattery contrived by these Games will have been worth every penny.

So I would hardly equate the syndrome with the Nuremberg rallies. What's the harm, after all, in people getting a little overexcited about something as wholesome as sport, of any kind? Over the last 14 days, we have duly come to respect the dedication required by champions of any discipline; and found their emotions agreeably infectious. But their crass apotheosis, by a free press that would have disgraced Pravda under Brezhnev, frightens the life out of me.

View original post here:
The Last Word: Beware the Great Big Olympics Lie

Toronto mayor feeling better, no word on release

CTV Toronto Published Thursday, Aug. 9, 2012 9:24AM EDT Last Updated Thursday, Aug. 9, 2012 6:39PM EDT

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford was released from hospital Thursday afternoon after an infection triggered his asthma, leading to a two-day hospitalization.

Speaking to TSN radio after his release, Ford said he was ready to be back at city hall again Friday.

It was just an allergic reaction to something in my esophagus and I couldnt breath, so it freaked me out for a bit, but Im back in fighting form and Ill be at work tomorrow, Ford told the sports radio station.

Ford admitted himself to Humber River Hospital late Tuesday night.

A release issued by the mayors press secretary Wednesday said Ford has suffered an adverse reaction to food, which irritated his throat and stomach and triggered his asthma.

Fords mother, Dianne Ford, spoke to reporters Thursday before her son was released. She thanked citizens for their support.

On behalf of the Ford family, we really, truly appreciate all the phone calls weve got, the concerns, the support, really, really has been wonderful and we sincerely appreciate it, she said.

Fords brother, Coun. Doug Ford, also spoke to reporters earlier in the day, saying that his brother was making a speedy recovery.

The doctor said he should be released today and everything seems to be all right, he said. The doctor said hes strong, strong heart, he feels good. He has an infection in his throat, but hes good to go. Hes sitting there, returning phone calls and asking for the Toronto Sun for his football picks.

See the rest here:
Toronto mayor feeling better, no word on release

Word on lawn signs causes disagreement between candidates

The use of the word "Republican" on campaign lawn signs promoting State Senate District 47 incumbent candidate Julianne Ortman has prompted supporters of her primary election opponent, Bruce Schwichtenberg, to file a complaint with the State of Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH).

On Aug. 1, members of Schwichtenberg for Senate filed a complaint with the OAH alleging that the signs violate state statute because they falsely imply that Ortman has the Republican Party endorsement. Neither candidate has the party's endorsement because neither received the necessary 60 percent of votes after five rounds of balloting during the party's district endorsement convention held earlier this year.

In material sent to the OAH, two different signs were presented as evidence. One sign reads "Vote August 14, Julianne Ortman, Republican for Minnesota Senate" and another says "Julianne Ortman, Republican for State Senate."

In an email to the newspaper, Schwichtenberg said the signs undermine the voice of the grassroots, activists, delegates and alternates and citizens of Carver County.

"There was no endorsement and her actions to this point may already have cause irreparable harm to our campaign," he said. "Many people have given their time, money and support to our campaign and to have their efforts thwarted by illegal and unethical actions is inexcusable."

Ortman argued that there was no misuse of the word "Republican" on the signs.

"My opponent and I are both members of the Republican Party and running in the Republican Primary Aug. 14; the sample ballots identify us both as Republicans," she wrote in an email to the newspaper.

"We both filed an Affidavit of Candidacy with the Secretary of State, which inquired, under penalty of perjury, to declare a party affiliation. We both declared ourselves to be Republicans," Ortman continued. "I am optimistic that the OAH will uphold our ability to communicate this information to voters, and our right of free speech contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution."

A probable cause hearing was to be held by the OAH on Tuesday, Aug. 7. At that time, the OAH was to decide whether or not it would dismiss the case or plan an evidentiary hearing. The OAH's ruling was not available when this edition went to press.

The primary election will be held on Tuesday, Aug. 14.

More here:
Word on lawn signs causes disagreement between candidates