Los Angeles Times - 02.10.2019

A12 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2019 WSCE LATIMES.COM

ing, ‘Maybe profanity, which

seems less scripted and

guarded, is something I

should try out,’ ” said Karrin

Vasby Anderson, an author

and political communica-

tions expert at Colorado

State University.

Indeed, GovPredict, a

public affairs software firm

that aggregates data for

trade groups and other cli-

ents, has found a notable

rise in foul-mouthed politi-

cal speech in the last five

years, and especially since

the presidential campaign

began in earnest this year.

Researchers scouring Twit-

ter found more than 2,

uses of profanity by state

and federal lawmakers so far

this year — “jackass” and

“crap” being the mildest of

the 13 expletives tallied —

compared with fewer than

850 in all of 2018.

The cussing has become

so contagious that ABC

warned participants in the

last Democratic debate

there would be no broadcast

delay, hence no time to bleep

four-letter words. “Candi-

dates should therefore avoid

cursing or expletives in ac-

cordance with federal law,”

the network urged. (Save for

the odd “damn” and “hell,”

the 10 spirited contestants

complied.)

Other broadcasters and

news organizations have

had to relax their standards

or find creative means of

quotation to avoid offending

their audiences.

It’s not as though politi-

cians are national arbiters of

good taste.

Columnist Judith Mar-

tin, who has spent decades

defending standards of de-

corum and politesse under

the pen name Miss Manners,

said no one should look to

elected officials to model up-

standing speech or good be-

havior.

“That would be pretty

pathetic,” she said, though

“not as bad as looking

to rock stars and movie

stars.”

Nor should the occa-

sional — or not so occasional

— curse word come as a sur-

prise. Politicians are people,

after all, and not plaster

saints. That said, the many

indelicate utterances of

President Nixon, famously

rendered as “expletive de-

leted” in transcripts of his

secret White House tapes,

still held the capacity to

shock when they were re-

vealed nearly half a century

ago.

Eyebrows arched in 2000

when George W. Bush, run-

ning for president, de-

scribed a New York Times

political writer as a “major

league asshole” and again in

2010 when Vice President

Joe Biden used an unprint-

able modifier — “this is a

big f—ing deal” — to express

his enthusiasm over the

signing of the Affordable

Care Act.

In each of those episodes,

however, the statements

were meant to be private.

Nixon appealed to the

Supreme Court to fight pub-

lic release of the raw tapes —

along with their evidence of

criminal wrongdoing — and

Bush and Biden were both

inadvertently caught speak-

ing on live microphones.

What’s different about to-

day’s cursing candidates is

the deliberate nature of their

unrefined language.

Trump, a virtuoso at

reading a crowd, cannot help

but note the frisson of excite-

ment at rallies when he em-

ploys “hell” for emphasis, as

in suggesting those in the

country illegally need to “get

the hell out” of the United

States. (It’s a word his pious

vice president, Mike Pence,

would never use.)

Trump’s use of the bovine

epithet to impugn the White

House investigation by spe-

cial counsel Robert S.

Mueller III went over so well

at a gathering of conserva-

tive activists that the presi-

dent repeated it days later

on the campaign trail; soon a

variant, #RidiculousBull,

surfaced on Twitter.

The White House de-

clined to comment on

Trump’s use of profanity.

John Murphy, an expert

on political rhetoric and its

evolution, sees a degree of

calculation in the cussing.

“It’s a way to say, ‘I’m so

passionate about this issue

it’s just bursting out of me,’”

said Murphy, a professor at

the University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign. “It’s a

sign of authenticity: ‘I’m

real.’ ”

O’Rourke suggested as

much when asked recently

about his not-infrequent

dropping of f-bombs. Earlier

this year, he forswore their

use after being confronted

by a concerned voter in Wis-

consin.

“We already have one vul-

gar in chief,” said the man at

a meet-and-greet in Madi-

son. “Do we need to replace

him with another?”

“Great point,” O’Rourke

responded. “And I don’t in-

tend to use the f-word going

forward.”

That changed in the

aftermath of August’s mass

shooting in his hometown of

El Paso, when the candidate

fell back on his old speech

pattern, offering four-letter

commentary on both Twit-

ter and national TV. In de-

fense, he said the normal pa-

rameters of debate are too

confining for these highly

contentious times.

“Our political rhetoric

and our language has really

been insufficient in describ-

ing just what is happening in

this country today and the

threat posed by Donald

Trump,” O’Rourke said af-

ter a heartrending tour of

Los Angeles’ skid row. “I

think the focus-group-driv-

en, poll-tested, triangulated,

careful language has kept us

from seeing things for what

they are, calling them by

their true name.

“And when something’s

f—ed up,” he said, “saying

it’s f—ed up is really impor-

tant.”

Kathryn Jones, who

heads the Collective Agency,

a digital media company for

progressive organizations,

offered the same crisis-

mode justification for her

provocative news release re-

ferring to the president as

“*^*%#%/!!!!!!!”

“The idea of being nice

and [politically correct] just

feels useless and old news,”

Jones said. “These past

three years have been taxing

on all of us, personally and

politically, and now is not the

time to be worried about

who we’re offending.”

There is, however, a risk

of backlash from voters ac-

customed to more dignified

language and comportment

from those who aspire to sit

in the Oval Office.

Judging from her 90-

year-old mother, for one,

Penn State’s Mary Stuckey

believes older voters are far

more likely to cringe than

thrill to the sound of a White

House contestant in unex-

purgated flight.

“She’s used to my potty

mouth. But she doesn’t want

to hear it from her presi-

dent,” said Stuckey, who

studies political communi-

cation and campaign rheto-

ric. “Many people would pre-

fer their professionals to be

professional.”

Other experts agreed.

“Right now ‘appropriate’

and ‘authentic’ are in a war,”

said Murphy, hoping his

preference for the former

doesn’t make him “sound

like an old fuddy-duddy.”

(He’s 59.)

But it seems as though

the generation gap, a cultur-

al touchstone of the 1960s, is

alive and well.

O’Rourke, 46, recalls be-

ing admonished during his

2018 Texas Senate campaign

by a woman who brought her

grandson to a campaign

stop in San Antonio and

asked the candidate to stop

swearing. “It really turns

people off,” she said.

As they were leaving, he

recounted, the young man

turned and offered his ad-

vice. “Keep it up,” he whis-

pered.

Times staff writer Michael

Finnegan contributed to

this report.

They’re kissing babies

with those mouths

[Cursing,from A1]

PRESIDENT TRUMPlargely set the tone for pro-

fanity-laced campaigning. Some supporters find his

often vulgar choice of words to be more authentic.

Alex BrandonAssociated Press

CORY BOOKER,like the president he would like a

chance to unseat, has been known to use a barnyard-

related expletive on more than one occasion.

John LocherAssociated Press

crime, creates good jobs and

increases tax revenue.”

The bill, which was tem-

porarily shelved amid oppo-

sition from cities, counties

and law enforcement, would

require one licensed canna-

bis store for every six restau-

rants and bars with liquor li-

censes, or one for every

15,000 residents, whichever

results in fewer pot shops in

an area.

Ting’s proposal would

have led to 1,195 more canna-

bis retailers opening up shop

in the 392 incorporated cities

and unincorporated county

areas that supported Pro-

position 64, according to a

study by private consultants

Applied Development Econ-

omics Inc.

The poll results have not

swayed the League of Cali-

fornia Cities, which noted

that Proposition 64 specif-

ically provided for local con-

trol, allowing cities and

counties to determine where

licenses are approved.

The league remains op-

posed to the Ting bill, said

Charles Harvey, its legisla-

tive representative, who said

the proposal “strips resi-

dents of their ability to de-

cide what is appropriate for

their community — a prem-

ise that directly contradicts

the framework understood

by the voters when approv-

ing Prop. 64.”

Ting said he remained

committed to advancing the

legislation “in order to shut

down the illicit businesses

that are currently hurting

our communities.”

The large majority of vot-

ers surveyed who think le-

galization has turned out to

be a “good thing” may also

give momentum to propo-

nents of legal cannabis in

states that have not legal-

ized the sale of marijuana for

recreational use. And as the

cannabis industry presses

Congress to legalize pot on

the national level, Califor-

nia’s experience in the push

and pull between local and

state powers could inform

decisions elsewhere in the

country.

The poll found that most

Democrats and voters from

all age groups say legaliza-

tion has been a good thing.

Most Republicans and evan-

gelical Christians say legal-

ization has been a bad thing.

The poll surveyed 4,

registered voters online in

English and Spanish from

Sept. 13 to 18. The overall

margin of error was plus or

minus 2 percentage points.

off on allowing pot shops and

watching how retailers are

functioning in cities that al-

low them, including Los An-

geles and San Francisco.

Some officials feel so

strongly about local control

that 24 cities took the issue

to court, filing a lawsuit in

April against the Newsom

administration to challenge

its rule allowing home deliv-

ery of marijuana in commu-

nities where bricks-and-

mortar pot shops have been

banned. That suit is still

pending.

At the same time, dozens

of cities have put the ques-

tion to voters in local elec-

tions. Although some com-

munities have opted to keep

pot shops out, voters in

other areas — including

Malibu, Pasadena and El

Dorado County — have ap-

proved cannabis businesses.

People may want canna-

bis shops in their communi-

ties, but might resist when

stores are proposed next

door, said Dale Gieringer, di-

rector of Cal NORML, a le-

galization advocacy group.

“Never underestimate

the influence of NIMBY re-

sisters over local govern-

ments,” Gieringer said.

Still, the survey findings

were encouraging to Assem-

blyman Phil Ting (D-San

Francisco), who viewed

them as validation for a bill

he introduced this year that

would require cannabis

stores to be approved in cit-

ies where a majority of voters

supported Proposition 64.

He intends to pursue the leg-

islation again in 2020.

“A majority of voters sup-

ported Prop. 64, so I’m not

surprised that a solid major-

ity of Californians also want

their cities to allow cannabis

retailers,” Ting said. “Pro-

viding safe access to canna-

bis products helps deter

on track to post $3.1 billion in
licensed cannabis sales this
year. But that remains
dwarfed by the black mar-
ket, and revenue has fallen
far short of expectations.
State officials originally
predicted up to $1 billion in
annual tax revenue from le-
gal sales, but received just
$465 million in the fiscal year
that ended in June. Though
California’s pot agency ini-
tially hoped to license as
many as 6,000 cannabis
shops in the first few years,
permits have been issued to
only 601 retail stores and 274
home-delivery businesses.
Industry officials put
part of the blame for Califor-
nia’s underperforming pot
market on complex licensing
rules and high state and lo-
cal taxes on the cultivation
and sale of cannabis that
they say add more than 45%
to the price of pot in legal
shops.
But cannabis businesses
also say cities have contrib-
uted to the problem by out-
lawing pot shops.
Proposition 64, which
was championed by Gavin
Newsom before he was
elected governor, gave mu-
nicipalities the power to ban
marijuana businesses.
Some three-fourths of cities
in the state have prohibited
stores that sell cannabis
products. The industry says
that has stunted the state’s
legal market.
But the poll found that
63% of California voters fa-
vored their cities giving per-
mits to cannabis stores, with
support in all areas of the
state, including 69% in L.A.
County. The lowest support
for pot shops was in the In-
land Empire, which includes
Riverside and San Bernar-
dino counties, at 54%.
The survey results could
ramp up pressure on city of-
ficials to consider opening
their borders to pot shops,
said Lindsay Robinson, exe-
cutive director of the Califor-
nia Cannabis Industry Assn.
“With this broad spec-
trum of support, it is critical
that California’s local mu-
nicipalities honor the will of
the voters, overturn their
bans, and give their constit-
uents access to tested and
regulated cannabis,” Rob-
inson said.
Mayors and council
members in many cities say
they are concerned that can-
nabis stores may attract
crime and are taking a wait-
and-see approach, holding

CUSTOMERS examine a sample at a legal pot store in Maywood. Three years
after voters approved legal marijuana sales, most cities don’t permit such shops.

Gary CoronadoLos Angeles Times

Poll finds statewide support

for opening more pot shops

[Pot shops,from A1]

‘A majority of

voters supported

Prop. 64, so I’m

not surprised that

a solid majority of

Californians also

want their cities

to allow cannabis

retailers.’

— Assemblyman

Phil Ting

THEGREAT$12, 000 ,000 STORECLOSING-RETIREMENTSALE!

SELLING OUT! NOTHING HELD BACK!

1595 Newport Blvd • Costa Mesa, CA 92627

(^4) 23649 Hawthorne Blvd • Torrance, CA 90505
GREAT
SALE DAYS!
Thursday 10-
Friday 10-
Saturday 10-
Sunday 12-
TERMS OF SALE

• ALL ITEMS SUBJECT TO PRIOR SALE.
  
  
  • NO REFUNDS OR EXCHANGES.
    
    
    • ALL SALES FINAL.
    
    
    
    
  
  
  
  


• EVERYTHING SOLD “AS IS.”


• CREDIT CARDS WELCOME.


• DELIVERY AVAILABLE.

BOTH STORES CLOSED WEDNESDAY TO MARK DOWN PRICES!

TAKE AN EXTRA

5% OFF

ALREADY LOW SALE PRICES ON

ALL DINING ROOM FURNITURE!*

STICKLEY SALE!

UP TO

50% OFF

ALL IN-STOCK ITEMS!

Excludes: Promotional items, Collector Edition, John Widdicomb, and Nichols & Stone.

SALE RESUMES THURSDAY AT 10 AM!

Permit# N/A *Excludes Italian Imports, American Leather, Canadel and Stickley Promotional items, prior sales, back orders and other offers. © Lynch Sales Company 2019

LOOK FOR NEW ARRIVALS ARRIVING WEEKLY FROM OUR WAREHOUSE!

SALE BEING HELD IN BOTH STORES!SELLING OUT$ 2 MILLION INVENTORY!

TAKE AN EXTRA

10% OFF

ALL HAND KNOTTED RUGS!*

+05+)*

+5#.9#;5106*'

+6+0'4#4;

č/iÝ«i`ˆÌˆœ˜Ã°Vœ“ÉiÝ«œÀi

iÌœÕÀÀi«œÀÌiÀÃ]i`ˆÌœÀÃ>˜`«…œÌœ}À>«…iÀÃ

Ì>ŽiޜÕœ˜>œÕÀ˜iÞœv`ˆÃVœÛiÀÞ°