Blotto definition:  “Extremely drunk.”  dictionary.com.  Everyone knows that meaning, but may not know how it came about.  At least one source claims that the term blotto originated in British military slang during WWI, and said to be derived from the word blot, meaning that the tipster had been soaking up booze like blotting paper.  wordhistories.net.  

Literature is full of descriptive terms for a drunken person, who can take on different personalities:  A happy drunk shares laughs; a belligerent drunk threatens violence.  Both act in a way that is much different from their sober self.   

One of the earliest American studies had been undertaken in 1737 by no other than Benjamin Franklin, an occasional tipster himself.  He compiled 228 terms for drunkenness.  Not to be undone,  the Dictionary of American Slang listed 353 terms; and The American Thesaurus of Slang noted close to 900 items.  See The Vocabulary of Drunkenness by Harry Gene Devine, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Vol 42, Number 11, page 1038 (1981)

With such an outpouring of terms and phrases for drunkenness, a detailed selection proves too much for a short post, so I will limit my list to a manageable collection of twenty favorites:

— besotted, bombed, crocked, hammered, intoxicated, 

— inebriated, loaded, looped, plastered, pickled,

— polluted, potted, sloshed, smashed, soused, 

— stewed, snockered, stoned, wasted, zonked.

Obviously, I left out a few clever terms like squiffy, tipsy, crapulent; as well as phrases like:  

— Three sheets to the wind,  Pie eyed, 

— Feeling no pain, Higher than a kite, 

— In your cups, Drunk as a skunk

— Under the influence.

In conclusion, I must provide a warning:  all this writing about over-imbibing in alcoholic beverages may lead a person to drink.

As a rule, I avoid writing about political issues, particularly during the contentious Trump presidency, when the salient facts on many issues seem to take a back seat to support the desired result, whatever that may be.  In other words, “the ends justifies the means,” — not a new phenomenon!  

The practice goes back to ancient times, and may have been first expressed by the poet Ovid in his poem “Heroides,” as “existus acta probat,” meaning “the outcome justifies the actions”  (idioms.thefreedictionary.com)  In Ancient Greece that concept was known as “Consequentialism;” i.e., “the moral words of an action is determined by its potential consequence, not by whether it follows a set of written edicts or laws.” Said a different way:  “Morally wrong actions sometimes become necessary to achieve morally right results.”  (Wikipedia, Consequentialism.)  Sound familiar?

With our modern day 24/7 news cycle on Cable and Social Media, many stories go viral without first checking the underlying facts, which often prove to be incomplete or wrong.  Our culture is hopelessly split on many issues, so when a person reads or hears a report that satisfies their political views, they pass it on to others irrespective of its factual correctness.  In today’s world, many people have become “ethics challenged,” as they select a preferred result, and then fudge the facts to support it; rather than marshal the facts first, and then use them to reach a proper conclusion.  Two pointed quotes:

— “The principal that ‘the end justifies the means’ is and remains the only rule of political ethics; anything else is just a vague chatter and melts away between one’s fingers.  Arthur Koestler (1905—1983), a Hungarian born author, opponent to Communism, who became a British citizen.

— “You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!”  Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1927—2003), US senator from New York. 

As per Koestler, politicians may not be able to help themselves; but as per Moynihan, journalists should at least unearth true facts and hold the politicians accountable.  

The polarization in our congress and country adopts the game plan: “If you are not with us, you are against us,” with few, if any, remaining in the center to broker compromise, as each side hunkers down into their ideology and unsupported facts.   

This polarization extends to college campuses.  Universities must include “safe spaces” for students, who do not wish to hear opposing views.  Apparently, free speech has been expanded to exclude unwanted speech, thus failing the time honored practice of discussing issues to expanding one’s understanding of the differences, which understanding could lead to some reasonable resolution.