The Missouri #%&*#

Now for those of you who don't recall the Missouri Compromise (and don't feel bad if you don't; I had to go to WikiPedia and look it up to refresh my memory), it "was an agreement passed in 1820 between the pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in the United States Congress, involving primarily the regulation of slavery in the western territories."

An agreement.

My copy of the Webster's New World Dictionary Of The American Language (not to be confused with English, I suppose), gives the following definition of the word "compromise":

1) a settlement in which each side gives up some demands or makes concessions; or

2) an adjustment of opposing principles, systems, etc., in which part of each is given up.

There were other definitions as well, mostly dealing with "laying open to danger", but these didn't have any relevance to today's topic; indeed, the total length of the entry for the word "compromise" was almost two inches long in very small print.

And nowhere in that lengthy explanation of this very common word was there any indication that it could be, in certain usages, considered to be a smutty, dirty or in any way offensive or vulgar word.

(There is a scene in one of my all-time favorite movies, "To Kill A Mockingbird", where the character of Scout, the 6-year old daughter of the protagonist in the film, Atticus Finch, played to the winning of the Best Actor award in 1962 by Gregory Peck, is asked by Atticus if she knows what a "compromise" is; expressing a lack of knowledge, her father explains that it is an agreement by mutual consent, to which Scout basically responds with a look of, hey, I'm a 6-year old, do you really expect me to understand that?)

As your Pope (see top of page for the explanation of how I became Pope John The Tall of the All John All The Time World Church) I have always tried, in my short career as a "blogger", to avoid writing about politics; given how partisan we have become as a nation in our political expressions these days, the topic, for me anyway, is just too toxic. I feel more at home writing about other important issues, such as 900-pound tuna fish, my atomic-powered rocket ship, the Royal Unionship Kidding (or the RU Kidding, for short), giant statues of Marilyn Monroe and the '85 Chicago Bears.

I believe in having priorities.

But with the recent Presidential election still reverberating throughout the landscape of today's social media world, to say nothing of the "regular" media, and seeing that the debate is still ongoing between "them and us" (pick your side, it's comes out the same), and mostly influenced by a series of interesting, and quite enlightening, Facebook exchanges between myself and two "friends", I decided to throw my two cents worth of opinion into the ring (sorry, I badly mixed my metaphors there) and write about using dirty words in public forums.

Smut.

Apparently, at some juncture when I was otherwise preoccupied, the word "compromise" came to be equated with the s-word, the f-word, the fuysob phrase and other vulgar, inappropriate expressions of distaste, anger and disgust whose usage is commonly frowned upon in polite company. At least it was when I was growing up; nowadays, maybe not so much.

But the c-word, boy, now there's one you had better be very particular about where you speak or write it, because people will take immediate umbrage with you for your vulgarity.

Think I'm being facetious?

The following are quotes from my aforementioned two friends, and full disclaimer here, I make no comment as to the right/wrong of either of them. Both of these statements were made to me in response to my suggestion that, maybe, just maybe, its time for a, sorry, bad word here, compromise, a move to the center if you will:

From the "liberal":

"Obama compromised WAY too much last year; he almost gave away the store. The "left" felt (and was betrayed.) The problem is that our "center" has shifted WAY TOO FAR to the right over the last 10 years. Our center itself neeeds to shift left. And Obama has done well to stand firm; did you see what the GOP offered as a so-called "compromise?" Running the country on the backs of the poor and the middle class and they won't give an inch. Cutting services for those who truly need them.....but NOT willing to pay any more taxes themselves. When THEY're ready to compromise - TRULY compromise - maybe THEN we can talk."

From the "conservative":

"I would have to disagree with that John. I dont believe we need a Dem lite party. I believe at this point the Republicans should vote present like Obama did with the caveat that they totally disagree with the policies being promoted. I say let them Dems pass all the legislation they want as long as it can be un-done in the next cycle. Let them own it lock stock and barrel. Then when their policies fail they will not be able to blame anyone but themselves."

(FYI, as you can see, I have presented both these quotes just as they were written on Facebook, errors and all.)

I don't know, gee, shame on me for my presumptuousness, but maybe couldn't BOTH sides step back, take a big, cleansing breath, and give some consideration to what I believe is the damage that's being done to this country by their unyielding positions and complete unwillingness to, sorry, please excuse my language again, compromise.

This unbelievable partisanship is strangling any ability to reach an agreement on the matters that lie before us as a nation.

There was an interesting quote in today's edition of the L.A. Times, in an article on the various plans being put forth by the White House and the Republicans in Congress on the impending "fiscal cliff" from Erskine Bowles, the Democratic Co-chair of President Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform:

"Every offer put forward brings us closer to a deal, but to reach an agreement, it will be necessary for both sides to move beyond their opening positions."

In other words, sorry, smut time again, to compromise.

You see, folks, despite both sides screaming at the top of their lungs that they will NEVER give in, never sacrifice their principles, never agree with those Liberal/Conservative (choose your team) *#%(@'s, the only way America is ever going to move forward off the stall position we have been perched on for some time now is, well, you know.

Maybe we could harken back to the days of our Founding Fathers, a group of men who, in the words of historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, were "the most remarkable generation of public men in the history of the United States or perhaps of any other nation." Those guys did not view the word compromise as dirty or insulting to their principles; they got things done.

Can you imagine applying Schlessinger's words to our current crop of political leaders? No, me neither. (Schlesinger goes on to say that these men were also "convinced of man's power to improve his condition through the use of intelligence."

The irony was intentional.

In other words, my friends, let's return to the days of civil discourse, in the true meaning of the phrase, find a middle ground, get done what must be done and get on with our lives. Truly, our time on this Earth is short and better-used.

Despite what people seem to believe these days, "compromise" isn't dirty and doesn't mean to give up your beliefs; it just means to give a little and reach an agreement.

Words to, indeed, live by.

Love and "cusswords",

PJTT

copyright 2012 Krissongs Inc.