Asheville Citizen-Times from Asheville, North Carolina • Page 19

OTHER VIEWS Sunday, Jan. 30, 1994 JAMES KILPATRICK ASHEVILLE CITIZEN-TIMES Page5B ROBERT NOVAK Critics reply on odd words GOP looks at abortion A couple of fortnights ago I wrote a column on the use of arcane and exotic words. My point was to this effect: We write in order to communicate. Communication fails if readers cannot understand what we are saying. WASHINGTON In a Republican National Committee meeting that was closed to press and public, Chairman Haley Barbour took a tentative first step toward distancing the party from the abortion issue.

Barbour revealed the preliminary results of a massive survey the RNC is conducting of some 800,000 Republican activ- tl'fJ There must be a common lan- ln I guage shared by writer and read- fl er: Let us not write in French for an PntrlioVi-anoQlnnor oilHl'pnpp My ill-considered suggestion LETTERS TO THE EDITOR ists. They put other issues well above the question of abortion, the chairman said, and would just as well avoid it That confirmed the fears of Virginia's pro-life Republican national committeeman, Morton Black-well (who missed the Saturday session because of illness). He opposed Barbour for chairman a year ago, predicting he would separate the GOP from anti-abortion forces. KING HUSSEIN'S NO Jordan's King Hussein sent a polite but very decided "no" to a secret invitation from President Clinton last month asking that he sign a peace treaty with Israel during his recent Washington stay following a checkup at the Mayo Clinic. Clinton wrote the king that he could promise to have Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin at the White House for the treaty signing.

Responding, Hussein explained that he could not sign a Jordan-Israel pact in advance of a deal between Israel and the PLO on the West Bank and an Israel-Syria agreement White House Mideast advisers had been warned that the king could not possibly sign a separate treaty. But Clinton, worried about his foreign policy record, wanted a new breakthrough with a ceremonial White House signing like the Israeli-PLO deal last September and unsuccessfully squeezed the king to get it PRESIDENT PENA? None of the highly favorable notices heaped on Clinton administration officials for their handling of the Los Angeles earthquake has matched Mayor Richard Riordan's praise of Transportation Secretary Federico Pena. Republican Riordan was so impressed by the work of Democrat Pena, a former mayor of Denver, in getting L.A. transportation moving again that he described him as "presidential material." A footnote: Riordan, who has lavished praise on Democrats including President Clinton and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, jokes about his being labeled a Republican in Name Only.

Nevertheless, Riordan probably will endorse fellow Republican Pete Wilson's campaign for re-election as governor of California. INTERVENING GOVERNOR South Carolina Gov. Carroll Campbell, a likely 1996 Republican candidate for president, is planning to break the usual tradition and campaign for incumbent GOP governors who face contested primaries. Specifically, Campbell will support Gov. Terry Branstad, who is challenged for nomination in Iowa by Rep.

Fred Grandy. As usual, Iowa will be the lead-off state in the battle for the presidential nomination. Campbell is also considering intervening in Oregon, though there is no GOP incumbent there. He may back his former House colleague, ex-Rep. Denny Smith, in a hot race for the nomination for governor.

Novak is a syndicated columnist was that writers should aim for a common vocabulary by which 98 percent of their readers will understand 98 percent of the words. Dianne Courtney of Rollingbay, protested. She wrote: "The exotic or seldom read word, like any spice, enlivens the text and gives the reader an opportunity to expand his knowledge. Even for the laziest reader who cannot be troubled to consult his dictionary, it is a rare sentence that cannot be understood with one unknown word. "After reading your column, I went back to the novel I was reading Banners' by Lloyd C.

Douglas). It had been written for a general audience with a high school education in 1940. Such words as katabasis, sanguine, persiflage, pedagogue and repartee were found in the next two pages, and I realized that had the writer succumbed to your craven Rule of 98, none of those words would have been used and the richness of thought would have been reduced to a thin, bland gruel" Russell Smith of Sequim, compared writers to teachers. If teachers give their pupils only familiar material, the teachers are feeding their pupils tasteless pap. By the same token, if a writer doesn't take the opportunity from time to time to introduce to his readers words a bit beyond the scope of his normal vocabulary offering, he is doing a disservice to them.

Smith continued: "If the writer has a commission of any kind, that commission is the responsibility of informing the reader. That includes offering new words. If the reader chooses not to turn to a dictionary for a precise definition, more's the pity. Still, though, he can get the meaning from context and inference." I cannot disagree with a word my critics say. I was probably wrong in suggesting a guideline of 98 percent comprehension.

Some lesser percentage of instant familiarity would be better. I surely would oppose any mechanistic rule of percentages anyhow. Writers must be informed by their own editorial judgment Smith said we should introduce our readers to unfamiliar words "from time to time." Other critics have used the words "often" and "frequently Very well. How often is often? How fnxment is frequently? From time to time (about twice a year), I rail against the use of foreign words and phrases. Yes, appropriately employed for a well-educated readership, an apt foreign phrase can add a touch of oreg-ano to the sauce.

The device fails when we cry "Voi-la!" and spell it "Viola!" Nothing is wrong with an occasional foreign phrase, but how occasional is occasional? There is no real disagreement between me and my critics. Of course a writer should seek to be clearly, or at least generally, understood. And of course a writer should seek the exact word instead of its inexact second cousin. Yes, now and then we should throw a brushback pitch, high and tight and inside, just to let the reader know who's boss. All I am urging is that we constantly ask ourselves, how now is now and how then is then? This is Kilpatrick's weekly column "The Writer's Art," which he publishes in addition to his regular syndicated columns.

The exception is the inner cities. There is where we need to concentrate our efforts, on prevention instead of incarceration. Otherwise, we will continue to breed generations of young men whose common denominator is prison experience and all the negative things learned within the walls. Each of the suggestions, national and in North Carolina, do little to address the real problems. If we continue to create this imbalance between prison and prevention, we and our children are doomed to live in fear for generations to come.

Eleanor S.Zitin Asheville "I Why tell poachers about deer decoys? Editor, the Citizen-Times: The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission is to be commended for its efforts in enforcing the wildlife laws and regulations enacted to conserve and protect our wildlife. The enforcement of wildlife law3 is hampered by many negative forces and opinions. Traditionally, mountain people do not report or testify in many legal actions against poachers or trespassers, whether for an implied threat or some direct threat to their person or property. Wildlife enforcement is generally the enterprising effort of locally based wildlife officers.

To publish the use of decoy animals seriously hampers their effort because it exposes their means of catching poachers. The professional poacher who can always get around the law isn't going to be fooled by decoys, especially now that a decoy deer's picture appeared in the paper. The Wildlife Resources Commission through the media is educating the serious poacher and wasting our enforcement officers' efforts in combating a major wildlife protection effort by advertising its meager means of using a decoy, when the decoy will fool only the "drive-by" hunter, not the professional poacher. Our wildlife law enforcement officers have a rough enough job just catching poachers. The Wildlife Commission, in supplying the media with this information, is making a difficult job impossible for our wildlife law enforcement officers.

Who was behind this asinine, uncalled-for publicity? Jensine Crossman Franklin Laws help criminals as much as citizens Editor, the Citizen-Times: Citizens should have the right to take whatever action necessary to protect their property without fear of prosecution. Any criminal wounded or injured while committing a felony should never have the right to sue or to receive compensation of any kind. Crime certainly deserves a special session of the Legislature. Solutions are sought when legislatures, federal and state, are responsible for much of the problem. Because legislatures have so many members who are attorneys, laws are written catering to criminals, thereby perpetuat-' ing work for lawyers.

The courts, adhering to law, exacerbate the problem. We need laws protecting citizens and victims. Laws should be straight to the point A life sentence should mean just that Other sentences should be for their full term, with no early paroles. Why don't states go after closed military bases and stockades to house non-violent prisoners, except for drug dealers? For those condemned to death, why should it take 10 years to go through endless appeals at a cost to taxpayers of $2 million? An expedited process of appeals through state and federal courts could be accomplished within two years or less. Hank Meywes Fairview Proposed crime measures miss the real problem Editor, the Citizen-Times: According to The Nation, which seems to be less sensational than most of the news media, the crime rate is not escalating.

In fact, although violent crime rose by 3.5 percent between 1983 and 1992, the number of people in prison has doubled in that same period. Over the past 20 years the overall crime rate has modestly declined. Ergo, it would seem we have a "prison epidemic rather than a crime epidemic." Also, half of all murders in 1992 were committed by acquaintances, many within households. It would seem that for these domestic crimes, there would be little protection afforded by more police, more prisons, or more barbed wire. MIKE ROYKO Jackson can be thankful: He got off the hook cheaply It was a few years ago, and I don't remember the names or the specifics.

But there was this man in the Deep South who had many of that region's values. His young son had been sexually molested. The cops were bringing the suspected molester Konlr tn tha ototo tn utonH trial. yf I The father did some drinking TdT I and brooding. Then he drove to the 'J I i un.

nate stiffs who made the obits that day. So Jackson writes a check $10 million is what the more reliable media say and it is over. He can now get on with his life. Maybe now he will have him-self dyed purple. But what about this father? The man whose adolescent son said he was sexually used by Jackson? The father is a dentist But not an ordinary molar puller.

He peers into the mouths of the Hollywood stars. Because choppers mean a lot to movie stars, he makes a decent buck. The word is that he has a fine house, a flashy car and the maitre d's in the better restaurants slobber a bit when he appears. The California dream. But it Isn't enough.

You drill one tooth, you've drilled them alL So Jackson wrote the check, and he took it The money made up for whatever sexual crimes Jackson may have done to his son. The Hollywood dentist made a lot of money. Jackson, who is enormously wealthy, paid a few million but got off cheap. Good thing for Jackson it wasn't one of my kids. He'd never stop looking over his shoulder.

Royko is a syndicated columnist who writes for the Chicago Tribune. Who am someone might ask, to decide what is a suitable punishment? In personal matters, I'm in a much better position to make that decision than a jury of strangers, eager to hurry a verdict so they can get home, or a bored judge. Which leads me to what appears to be the end of the Michael Jackson molestation case. It appears that the father of the 14-year-old who accused Jackson of using him sexually has decided to drop his lawsuit Jackson and the father have cut a deaL Depending on what paper or TV show-biz report you follow, Jackson will write a check for $5 million or $10 million or $20 million. Whatever the amount, it's serious money.

Even with the minimal estimate of $5 million, put that in tax-free municipal bonds and youll have an income of about $250,000 a year. And that should be the end of the sordid affair. The boy will not testify about the creepy things he says Jackson did to him, so there will be no trial. As Jackson's lawyer said: "Michael can get on with his life." That's what they do in California get on with their lives. You dump your wife and kids, you get on with your life.

You murder your parents, you get on with your life. Just about everyone in California is getting on with their lives, except those unfortu But we have a problem in this nation, of laws. Many of our laws are screwed up. Our enforcement of the laws is erratic. Our politicians from the president on down babble about crime but do little but squander our money.

I happen to live in a city where judicial corruption is considered a local sport Judges take cash to fix murder cases, drunken-driving deaths and just about anything else worth the price of a luxury cruise. And I've covered enough trials to know that relying on a jury for justice is like expecting financial stability from a slot machine. Consider the Reginald Denny case in California. You crush a man's head like an egg, but say you weren't trying to kill him? A jury, dominated by a bombastic woman, bought this ridiculous defense. Somebody should have slapped that jury forewoman with a brick to the side of the head, then asked her to give it further thought So I couldn't help admiring that guy in the South and the woman in California for detouring the justice system and punishing a couple of scum bags who deserved it If someone sexually attacked a member of my family child or adult and I had an opportunity to kill that attacker, I wouldn't hesitate.

Before or after, it doesn't matter. Before, it would be an act of defense. After, it would be a suitable punishment and the suspected molester walked by, the father turned, aimed his gun and put a fatal bullet through the man's head. Then there was the woman in California. Her son had been sexually molested, allegedly by someone she knew and trusted.

The man was arrested and was put on trial. But the woman didn't trust the Justice system. So she waited in the courtroom, and when the opportunity presented itself, she shot the guy dead. What that man in the airport and the woman in California did was legally wrong. They took the law into their hands.

They became judge, jury and executioner. In this nation of laws, we don't approve of such behavior..