The Enduring Tradition of Weasel Words
Many of you may recall President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s ongoing Radio show, Fire Side Chats. Our 32nd president for a whomping four terms (1933-1945), FDR spoke to the nation, outlining policies, procedures, and calls to action on a regular basis. Most of you are probably familiar with The New Deal, the Good Neighbor policy, and his early conceptualizations for the United Nations. Others among you probably know that he promoted public art during the depression (e.g., Diego Rivera, for one). But were you aware that he coined the term, “weasel words”?
It’s not that they didn’t exist before. Au contraire. But I think that FDR was quite clever in this, if not other, rhetorical tactics.
What is a weasel word, you ask? The best place to start is with the answer to: what is a weasel? Their Latin name is “mustela nivalis” and the Greek is “mustelidae”. This family includes the polecat, the mink, the skunk, the ermine, the otter, the ferret, and others.
Did you know that for hundreds of years weasels were thought to possess magical powers! In the Middle ages it was believed that weasels could bring their dead young back to life. It was also thought that they could hypnotize their prey by dancing in front of it! (available at: http://www.uksafari.com/weasels.htm)
Methinks that current users of weasel words hope to do just that!
Ferrets are cute and cuddly, so I’m told, and make excellent pets. Weasels, however, continue to receive bad press for being associated with conniving, thieving, and otherwise dishonest and unethical behavior. They tend to be night-stalkers, who prey on cute little fuzzy mice. I wonder what the animal rights activists would say to all this?
Case in point, have you ever seen a children’s book with a weasel protagonist? They’re usually the antagonist, but I’ll keep searchingâÂ?¦
I discovered an unfamiliar (to me) Aesop’s Fable, “The Bat and the Weasels”, translated by George Fyler Townsend:
A BAT who fell upon the ground and was caught by a Weasel pleaded to be spared his life. The Weasel refused, saying that he was by nature the enemy of all birds. The Bat assured him that he was not a bird, but a mouse, and thus was set free. Shortly afterwards the Bat again fell to the ground and was caught by another Weasel, whom he likewise entreated not to eat him. The Weasel said that he had a special hostility to mice. The Bat assured him that he was not a mouse, but a bat, and thus a second time escaped.
It is wise to turn circumstances to good account. I’ll let you explore the possibilities of just who plays weasel, bat, bird, and mouse in the arena of current, global affairs. In the same way that weasels prey on cute little fuzzy mice, weasel words prey on unsuspecting, uninformed, trusting, and some might say, naÃ?¯ve thinkers, readers, and writers. Oh yes, and on audiences “in general”.
This news blurb made me pause:
In No Uncertain Terms, THE NEWSLETTER OF THE TERM LIMITS MOVEMENT, (Oct. 1999, Volume 7, Number 9), the first headline reads: “In 7-0 Decision, Florida Supreme Court Gives Thumbs Up to Term Limit Law; 40 Percent of Seats Up For Grabs in Next Election.” In this article, Governor Jeb Bush is cited as saying, “It’s good newsâÂ?¦The people’s will has been respected and it’s the right thing to do” (available at: http://www.termlimits.org/Press/No_Uncertain_Terms/1999/9910nut.html). Has the familiar adage, “the will of the people” and/or “the people’s will” become a weasel word/phrase for the will of the politicians, or another way of saying, “I got what I wanted; therefore, the people will have to live with it?”
Fast forward to January 16, 2003 (at 9:00am). CNN broadcast GW’S address, Medical Liability Reform, to Scranton, PA. A variety of issues were covered, which included the usual repetition of prior statements re the situation with Iraq. Once again, he said, “I will lead a coalition of the willing [emphasis mine] to disarm Saddam Hussein.”
Who are these “willing”? What exactly does “willing” mean? If there are repercussions for saying, “no, I’m not willing”, then who will GW be leading?
In “Rangel introduces bill to reinstate the draft: Rumsfeld says he sees no need for military draft”, Rangel states:
I truly believe that those who make the decision and those who support the United States going into war would feel more readily the pain that’s involved, the sacrifice that’s involved, if they thought that the fighting force would include the affluent and those who historically have avoided this great responsibilityâÂ?¦[Furthermore, that] [t]hose who love this country have a patriotic obligation to defend this countryâÂ?¦For those who say the poor fight better, I say give the rich a chance. (available at: http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft/index.html).
How many people would-or could-be drafted? According to Selective Service spokesman Pat Schuback: “As of October 31, 14.1 million men would be eligible for a draftâÂ?¦Twenty-year-olds would be called up first, followed by others – year by year. In the age group 20 to 26, 11 million would be eligible” (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft/index.html).
And yes, the article did mention what happened during the Viet Nam War era�
This does make for a sticky wicket since war heads were discovered in Iraq. In Showdown: Iraq, “U.N.: Inspectors find empty warheads in Iraq” Since UN inspectors did find “11 empty 122 mm chemical warheads and one warhead that requires further evaluation” (available at: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/16/sproject.irq.wrap/index.html)
On another, but related note, and this one really made me laugh, is that while all this money is being spent to “fight terrorism”, Bush says it’s not the governments money, but the people’s money. Furthermore, he said that in order to improve our economy, that Americans need more of “their own money”. (So which is it? Can we have it “both ways”?)
I also detected a slight against small businesses when he claimed that he wanted to make small businesses into big businesses. Doesn’t that mean “more corporations in America”? Wouldn’t that mean more “chains” (double entendre intended) like, hmm, Starbucks?
The issue he spent the most time discussing was the problems with Pennsylvania’s and our nation’s medical system. He provided very few specifics until the end, when he cited a few cases where “good, compassionate, well-trained” doctors needed to leave Pennsylvania because they couldn’t afford malpractice insurance (which can be as high as $200,000 per year). He also mentioned women leaving various states because they couldn’t find doctors to deliver their babies, seniors who couldn’t afford their prescriptions, and other scenarios.
What, according to GW, is the major reason for these problems?
Well, he thinks that the most costly aspect of the medical profession is found in the courtroom. Enter “junk lawsuits”.
Bush’s solution? (Yes, he actually proposed one. Nothing original, mind you, but he did applaud California for their success in this matter, and he appeared, why, almost pensive hereâÂ?¦) Caps. What type of caps? Not the jaunty caps worn on a Gatsyby-esque Southern Sunday drive, but those on non-economic and economically-based damages. He was all in favor of people with legitimate claims receiving compensation for lost wages, recovery, economic losses, and so forth, but with a “ceiling” (now there’s another malleable termâÂ?¦) of $250,000. He called for an end to “excessive jury awards”, and claimed that they hurt not only the medical profession, but America at large. I had to chuckle, because he made at least two references to these types of suits. At one point he says, “lawsuit after lawsuit, and the system looks like a giant lottery.” Later, he said that only one person usually wins the lottery.
He never did say to whom he was referring here. I wonder who it could be�
I’d like to hear what our local and national attorneys would say to this one-and our medical professionals as well. What if a doctor wanted to sue a colleague for legitimate reasons? What if a $250,000 settlement does not even begin to cover the costs of treatment and so forth? What if someone dies due to negligence?
It will no doubt surprise most of you when I say that I actually agree with BushâÂ?¦ on something. Our medical system is definitely not working as well as it could. But why just blame the lawyers? We “all” know that they’re not the only ones to blame. What about the people who lie in wait to sue (ok, I do like Bush’s lottery reference)? What about doctors who tell their patients that the problems are all in their mind, when in reality, something is really wrong? What of the doctors (and Bush mentioned this as well) who are so afraid of being sued, that they order unnecessary tests, or who are afraid to give advice, because it might be used against them late in a court of law?
Bush closed with a call for people to contact their state representations. He said, “When the people speak, Washington listens!”
That’s funny, I heard they just weigh our lettersâÂ?¦Ok, ok, I do know that the press secretaries and other congressional aids read and summarize them, and then present what they may deem important. (Hmmm, I believe I’m going to research this further and get back to you in my next column.)
After the show, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) stated that some of the specifics Bush gave regarding California’s program were unclear. Apparently, California’s MICRA is the program to which he was referring. The Greenwood Bill passed the House but stalled in the Senate. Feinstein stated that we have the lowest medical premiums here in California, and that she is planning to take the MICRA program to the national level.
We’ll be watching you, Ms. Feinstein.
In closing, let’s take a look at some synonyms to further fill our rhetorical attachÃ?© cases:
“Weasel”, the verb, is a synonym for “to confess”, “to evade”, “to dodge”, “to hedge”, and “to pussyfoot”. Other choice synonyms include: “to deny”, “to cover up”, “to conceal”, “to keep secret”, “to hide”, “to prevaricate”, “to *tergiversate” (*I’ve never heard this one beforeâÂ?¦), “to shuffle”, “to sidestep”, “to skulk”, and many, many more.
To “weasel out” is a synonym for “to disavow” or “to disengage”. Other synonyms include: “to dial back” (is this a reference to *69, or to Star himself?); “to liberate” (now here we have an oft heard phraseâÂ?¦); “to set free”; and “to withdraw”. (Here we also have a few references to current affairs. So, if we set Iraqi “hostages” free, withdraw troops from the Gulf and that sort of thing, are we then weaseling out? Didn’t weasel-like behavior start this whole affair?)
“Weasel”, the noun, is a synonym for “an informer”, or by definition, a “reporter”. Some of my favorite synonyms include: “adviser”, “announcer”, “deep throat”, “interviewer”, “journalist”, “messenger”, “newsman”, “preacher”, “propagandist”, and “source” (it’s good to have a laugh at one’s own expense now and againâÂ?¦).
(definitions are available at: http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=weasel).
Now go ferret out some weasel words! (I know, I know, but I couldn’t resistâÂ?¦) Be sure to let me know if I have mislead or deceived you through obfuscatory verbiage! Send your questions, comments, rants and raves to YT, The Mistress of Rhetoric, c/o The Espresso, and/or contact me at my new e-mail address: tlrelf@cox.net.
I promise not to sue�
Visit these sites to whet your appetite:
For a pithy resource, “How to Eschew Weasel WordsâÂ?¦and other offenses against the English language and logic: a manual for students”, by Ronald Waters and T.H. Kern, visit http://www.collegecampus.com/writing/eschew1.html
Visit Tom Mangan’s BANNED FOR LIFE. He opens by saying: “This page is devoted to those expressions so hackneyed and insufferable that they should be forever banned from the nation’s news.” http://tom.mangan.com/banned.htm
For an exceptional chapter on language usage, which includes a section on weasel words, be sure to read Dr. Richard A. Taflinger’s Mind at Work, Chapter Seven: “The Power of Words” (available at: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~taflinge/mindwork/words.html).
For more “official” information about the war on terrorism and other issues, visit: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2003/bud06.html
