The rhetoric of our discontent.

The recession rhetoric is coming to a head again. The Labor Department figures came out this past week that 159,000 jobs were lost in September and the unemployment rate is now at 6.1 percent.

I assume that there will be more jobs lost and that there will be more lead stories on newscasts about how bad things are. I assume that there will be a multitude of analysts with opinions about who is to blame.

In addition to all the hard luck stories about retailers hurting for sales and consumers suffering because they will not be able to afford Christmas, there will be a lot of depressing rhetoric stories that will not accomplish anything but fill airtime and irritate and depress people.

Republicans will blame Democrats. Democrats will blame Republicans. Third party candidates will blame the two-party system. The hope is that enough people will buy into someone's argument to vote.

I do not think that everything is Republican or Democrat. When it comes to who is at fault for the recession, the answer is: everyone, but does it really matter? A recession will come around in 2018 or 2019—the economy goes in cycles.

Nevertheless, politicians have a tendency to blame the other party for recessions. It is blame for a political purpose in the here and now.

As it seems to me, political rhetoric in our day and age serves political purposes such as good sound bytes, and zingers to embarrass the other party. I am struggling to recall when rhetoric actually did something good.

Nevertheless, it is the way it is. It is also the way it is that the news media will continue to cover it as a news substitute.

Rhetoric is timeless. It has been around forever. People have been making cheesy and stupid arguments forever.

Rhetoric is someone's argument for some purpose. While it sounds logical, I tend to turn it off. Rhetoric is a form of logic, but it is of little substance. I tend to be rather dismissive of such office conversations around political rhetoric.

Rhetoric is a substitute for real stuff happening. It is like the non-dairy cheese or the non-dairy coffee creamer. Staying in touch with the political rhetoric does not seem to mean actual political knowledge.

There is actually little to know about news events. Rhetoric seems to puff things up to larger than necessary size.

Rhetoric in our current day is usually shallow. It is attached to passion and emotion. Again, it is of little substance so the emotion has to be there to carry it and make it seem like there is something there.

Because of its passion and emotion and shallowness, it is also nebulous. Try to narrow a politician on what they will precisely do in response to the sky falling, and you will likely get them to verbalize an enigmatic and obscure answer about some governmental action that is imprecise and incomprehensible.

You will regret you even asked 99 percent of the time.

Rhetoric usually works best in large groups of people already of the same opinion. Otherwise, rhetoric rarely convinces the other side to go along.

Rhetoric may lead to a “tit for tat” response that gets plays out in news stories and media pundit shows at night. I call this political drama. Some call it “mudslinging” where you are attempting to make the opposition look dirty.

Political drama is essentially wrestling in that gussied up pig sty called the political area. Again, it is stressful to watch, listen to, and read.

Concretely, coping for me in this time means limiting my news intake. Yes, I am currently looking through a “Time” or “Newsweek” and then reading the paper daily.

I look at Drudge Report online at least once a day. I will also listen to the news on the radio.

I just cannot watch morning news shows such as “CNN morning” or “Fox and Friends.” They sit and continue to perpetuate political drama at this time.

One other thing that works is to remind me that rhetoric is just people's opinions. Some opinions are going to be significant and others are going to be insignificant.

For example in today's democratic response to the president's weekly radio message, Ohio Governor Strickland, a Democrat, blamed the Republicans for the economy. Big whoop. (The fairness doctrine gets abused way too much.)

When President Bush or some other nationally prominent Republican blames Republicans for the economy then it is news. Likewise, if a prominent Democrat blames the Democrats for something, then it too will be news that will get my attention.

I guess the other coping issue is “discernment” of rhetoric. I aim to be a person of substance. I aim to discern when something or someone is real.

When someone is using lots of emotion and little specificity in their criticisms or judgments of someone or something, it is rhetoric. Once I hear the nebulousness and the vagaries, I usually turn it off.

You and I will not be able to escape the rhetoric that will be coming in the months to come. It will be everywhere. My message to myself and others is to practice discernment and turn it off as soon as I assess that it no longer has any value.