In an effort to be as straight forward as possible, I will admit at the beginning of this essay that the George Bush administration made it known to all Americans that enhancement had taken on a more sinister meaning.  When the Bushies talked about enhanced interrogation, they were really talking about torture.  This essay has no torturous prospects but it might strain the belief system.
Let’s begin at the beginning.  These days when I “read” a book, it means that I am listening to it.  Very fortunately, American book publishers have finally come to realize that those of us who are without sight are a potential audience.  I have always been a reader of books for my entire life.  I wish that the information contained in books would come to me through my eyesight but given the circumstances I am reduced to “reading” a book totally by hearing and it is reasonably satisfactory.
Let us go back a year or so.  You may recall that a person named Stanley McChrystal, a four-star general, was in charge of our operations in Afghanistan.  McChrystal lived like a king.  From all indications, he was supported by a significant number of people on his staff.  When he traveled, he might take as many as 20 or 30 people with him.  McChrystal’s downfall came when he invited a freelance writer named Michael Hastings to go along with McChrystal and his staff during a trip to Paris and Berlin.
At this point, you might logically ask, “If McChrystal was in charge of operations in Afghanistan, what in the world was he doing in Paris and Berlin?”   The answer is that I am at a loss to tell you why McChrystal thought it was worthwhile to take a staff of 20 or 25 people to Paris and to Berlin.  I listened quite carefully to the book by Michael Hastings and I cannot tell you how a European trip fits into our fighting a war in Afghanistan.   The best I can tell you is that when a four-star general says that we are going to Paris and Berlin, no one asks any questions.  They simply put on their traveling clothes and wait for the general’s aircraft to arrive.
It could be that Michael Hastings neglected to tell McChrystal that he intended to sell his writings to the Rolling Stone Magazine.  But anyone who knew of Michael Hastings’ work would know that he had published on more than one occasion in the Rolling Stone Magazine.  Again, to be as straightforward as I can be, I will admit that during my lifetime, I have never ever bought a copy of the Rolling Stone Magazine. 
If I understand things correctly, the performers called the Rolling Stones are more than anything else a rock-and-roll band.  Over the years they seem to have taken on an identity of their own.  But rock-and-roll music is not the sort of music that attracts me.  Fundamentally it repels me.
In any case, we have McChrystal’s staff by itself in Paris and in Berlin along with the writer Michael Hastings.  All indications are that McChrystal’s staff had a very low opinion of their Commander-in-Chief, Mr. Obama and of the Vice President of the United States Joe Biden.
From all indications they were quick to point out what they considered the “stupidities” of the directions coming from Washington.  To make a long story shorter, finally a piece was published in the Rolling Stone Magazine that caused a considerable uproar.
As a consequence General McChrystal with his four stars shining outwardly from his uniform was called back to Washington and was fired.  There was no such thing as a transfer for him to another assignment.  McChrystal’s conduct and that of his staff left no alternative for Obama but to fire him.  Had I been in the position of the President, I would not have had the courtesy to invite McChrystal back to Washington.  I would have separated him from the service, which is called firing, by telephone.  As a matter of interest, his successor was General Petraeus who, I am sure you will remember, became embroiled in a romantic interlude.  He resigned after a promotion to the CIA job.
What I was also interested in was the conduct of the McChrystal staff.  I am not a counter of vulgarities, but I suspect that the vulgarities occurred so regularly that they would be hard to count.  The f word was used so regularly that it took on no meaning.  Now look, I am an elderly fellow who has served sometime in the American Army.  In my long career as a business man, I encountered the full range of vulgarities.  On one occasion when the American Army was hesitating to finally discharge me, I said to the sergeant around 6:45 in the evening, “F… you, Sergeant, I came here to get a discharge, and that’s what I mean to get.”  These words are not unknown to me, but I tend to use them judiciously.
If the Hastings book is reasonably correct, and I believe that it is, McChrystal’s staff used the f word indiscriminately.  Sometimes the f word was used incorrectly.  According to Hastings, the f word and other vulgarities were used with such abandon that I am of the belief that if the f word and other vulgarities were taken out of the book, it would be reduced by at least 50%.
Let me give you an example of how I would suppose that McChrystal’s staff would recite the poem of “Mary Had a Little Lamb.”  After reading the Hastings book, I believe it would be fair to say, “Mary had an effing lamb, whose Goddamned fleece was as white as effing snow.  Every effing where this effing Mary went, the Goddamned effing lamb was sure to go.”
I make no claim that I am much of a poet but this will give you an example of how McChrystal and his staff talked in front of Michael Hastings, the reporter.  And Hastings dutifully wrote all of this manner of speech down.  It was included in the article he submitted to the Rolling Stone Magazine and in the book. 
Now two or three years ago I read a comment by Levi Johnston, the young man who impregnated Bristol Palin, the daughter of the governor of Alaska.  In his Facebook entry, he included some vulgarities but wound up saying, “No one should f with me.”  Levi Johnston enjoyed a short career on the talk show circuit.  As far as is known at the moment, he is unemployed.
In a conversation with one of my daughters, I remarked upon Levi Johnston using the f word.  My daughter, who has three boys of her own, said, “That’s only the beginning.”  She attempted to reassure her father that that [sic] is the way people speak these days.  The fact is that I was not raised in a convent but to hear such liberal use of the f word is astounding even to these ears.
When American troops were first introduced into the North African theater, we served along with Australian troops.  The Aussies were the champion cussers of the whole world.  That has been my belief since 1942.  They took their vulgarities back to Australia and I have been largely unaware of the prevalence of the f word in today’s conversations.
There are two other thoughts here.  The book by Michael Hastings is called “The Operators” and the subtitle is “The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America’s War in Afghanistan.”  In his epilogue, Michael Hastings turned out to be a pretty good writer.  The fact of the matter is that he needs none of the vulgarities that he included in the magazine piece or in the book.
It seems to me that when one picks up a book, these days it is incumbent upon the writer to include some f words.  If that is the way that Americans converse these days, I am glad to be unaware of it.
Now, the second thought has to do with the derivation of the f word.  According to my research, it first appeared in the English language about the year 500AD or in the Common Era.  There are two sources that confirm the meaning of the f word is an acronym.  These two sources contend that the acronym is “Fornication Under Consent of the King.”  Apparently when the word was invented, the word fornication did not have the slightly gamey meaning that it has today.  So there you have the acronym which explains it all.  I would contend that the furnishing of this information is the function of a full-service agency.
So there you have it.  If you wish to read more about Michael Hastings, go to the book called “The Operators” and I am certain that Hastings would welcome your attention.  For myself, the adventure with McChrystal and Michael Hastings was a revelatory experience.  I did not know that soldiers, for example, on McChrystal’s staff talked using the f word instead of punctuation.  But if Hastings says that is the way the English language is used these days, I will observe it, not to encourage it.  And so the title of “Enhanced Vulgarities” may be in order.  I simply hope that Hastings’ account of the speech of American soldiers was exaggerated.  But from what I am told, that is not the case.  Perhaps someday we will return to an un-enhanced version of the English language.  I will be the first in line to enjoy the outcome.
 
E. E. CARR
December 14, 2012
Essay 722
~~~
Kevin’s commentary:
I have no fucking idea what this goddamn essay is on about. Honestly the fucker acts like we’re all supposed to speak like motherfucking angels all the fucking time but Jesus Christ that sounds tedious to me. If we couldn’t use the fucking “f word” all the time we’d –God for-fucking-bid — have to use other shitty words to express our bitchy little thoughts and seriously, who the hell has time for that?
I’ll agree on both counts: excessive use cheapens the word, and that I’m just about as guilty as the rest of my generation. We’ll work on it.