The use of Dialogue Tags and Descriptive Beats

In any good ‘how to write fiction’ book you’ll find at least one chapter if not two on the use and formatting of dialogue. Since dialogue can reveal a writer’s strengths or weaknesses, crafting good dialogue can be difficult. There are many pitfalls that writers can stumble into with dialogue.

There are skills you can develop to strengthen your dialogue. I would like to offer some insights into dialogue tags, descriptive beats in place of tags, and how to punctuate them. While these mechanics aren’t actually dialogue, they do draw attention to it and can influence how your readers will read a character’s dialogue and draw a reader into your story.

Definition.
Dialogue tag: A manner of speaking. Comes before or after dialogue.

Eg:
she said.
he shouted.

I find there are two common mistakes or misconception we all have with the use dialogue tags.

First: Being afraid to use said or asked.
Second: Believing said or asked becomes repetitive.

As a result, many writers have their characters constantly, stating, shouting, mumbling, murmuring, whispering, responding, commenting or commanding. When we feel the need to explain how a characters says something, then his or her dialogue isn’t strong enough. At the other end of the spectrum, if your dialogue is strong enough, then your tag only repeats to the reader what your character has just shown them.

There is a time and place for non said or asked dialogue tags. The excessive use of these tags is considered weak writing.

I've asked and heard the question asked, "Doesn’t the use of ‘said’ or ‘asked’ become repetitive and boring?"

The short answer is: No. As writers we are attuned to words. We pay attention to them. But if you’re doing you job right, the average reader is engrossed in the story and connected to the characters. A reader's eyes tends to pass over ‘said’ or ‘asked.’ If these tags stand out, it usually means your narrative isn’t being woven sufficiently into the dialogue.
Another mistake is over using the said or asked tags when there are only two characters in the scene. An occasional tag should be used in a long scene of dialogue to help the reader keep track of who is speaking. In scenes with more then two characters a combination of dialogue tags and descriptive beats will keep the story moving and the reader engrossed.
In his book ‘The Sixteenth Man" Thomas B. Sawyer’s entire manuscript is written without a single dialogue tag. Rather, Tom effectively uses descriptive beats for two person dialogue and for scenes with multiple character

Definition.
Descriptive beat: A sentence before, after, or breaking up dialogue that describes a character’s response or action.
Eg:
Janet finished brushing her hair. "I’m ready for my close up."

Len held out a steaming mug."Coffee, Mark?"
These examples are very basic. You can effectively eliminate all or most dialogue tags by weaving descriptive beats into your dialogue. However, any writer must be cautious about the use of descriptive beats. You need to pick quality descriptions, ones that reveal a character’s personality, motivation or adds to the setting and feel of the story. Having a characters make too many meaningful glances, or smiles, or nods will make your descriptions feel repetitive and unoriginal.

Another area easy to fix, that will strengthen your writing is punctuation.
Dialogue tag: "Hand me that book," he asked. (Comma inside the quotation marks)
Descriptive Beat: He pointed to the tome. "Hand me that book." (Period inside the quotations)
It’s as simple as paying attention to what you’re writing. Ask yourself this question. Is this a way of speaking? If yes, then punctuate with a comma. If no, use a period.
A final note, there are always gray areas. Groaned for example, is it a way of speaking or a noise made?
"Oh no," he groaned.
"Oh no." He groaned.
This is where you, the writer, has ultimate control of your story, by determining the best way to use the rules of the craft to tell your tale.

Please sign up on the blog page to follow me.
Send comments or questions to richard@mesatyree.com

Smashwords

E-Books are a great way to build a large inexpensive collection of books. For the reader it’s simple, find a book you like and download it right away. You carry your  entire library on your e-book reader, cell phone apps, tablet, iPad, or laptop

For the publisher it’s a dream. Format a title, make it available and sell it. No printing expenses, large inventories to maintain. Find and error after publication, a quick fix, upload the  new version, and it’s ready for the readers to enjoy.

E-Books come in a variety of formats. Most people have the Amazon Kindle using the .mobi file format. Some readers like the Barnes & Noble Nook.

As a. author I suggest readers download from Smashwords rather than Amazon. The second I say Smashwords, I either get looks like I’m speaking in tongues or they tell me they have a Kindle so they have to go to Amazon. Not so. Smashwords handles all formats including the .mobi file for Kindle. It’s also available in PDF, Word.doc, etc..

Smashwords is the world's largest distributor of indie e-books. They make it fast, free and easy for any author or publisher, anywhere in the world, to publish and distribute ebooks to the major retailers and thousands of libraries.

Accounts are free to setup and maintain. You’ll find thousands of book there, titles and writers you didn’t know existed. You can read a portion of any book before you purchase to make sure it interests you. When formatted to Smashwords standards, books are available word wide, and through them in many other online bookstores. Apple Books, Barnes & Noble, etc.

Authors who’s books downloaded from Smashwords receive greater percentage of the royalties (85%) than from Amazon (35%), so you’re helping an indie author or publisher get paid for their work. You don’t have to jump through to leave a review for a book like Amazon for author who deserves your support. Check out Smashwords at the links below.

www.smashwords.com

https://www.smashwords.com/about

Inmates Running the Asylum

California

LARGEST INSANE ASYLUM IN THE WORLD

Interesting that the LA Times did this. All the others are staying away from it.  Whether you are a Democrat or Republican, this should be of great interest to you!

Just One State - be sure and read the last part... try for 3 times.

If this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will!

From the LA. Times: 

1.    40% of all workers in LA County (10.2 million people) are working for cash; and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card.   (Donald Trump was right)

2 95 %of 
warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.

3.   75%  of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.

4.  Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were totally paid for by taxpayers.

5.  Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals; they are here illegally.

6.  Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7.  The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.

8.  Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal

9.  21 radio stations in LA are Spanish-speaking.

10. In LA County,  5.1 million people   speak English; 3.9 million, speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people, in LA County.

(All 10 of the above facts were published in the Los Angeles Times) 

Less than 2%   of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but over 29% are on welfare.

Over 70% of the United States' annual population growth, ( and over 90%   of California, Florida, and New York), results from immigration.

Also, 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.

We are fools for letting this continue.

HOW CAN YOU HELP?

Send copies of this letter, to at least two other people. To 100, would be even better.

This is only one State... If this doesn't open your eyes  nothing 

will, and you wonder why Nancy Pelosi wants them to become voters! 

IF YOU DON'T AGREE, JUST DELETE -- IF YOU DO PASS IT ON!

WHERE DO WE GET THESE MORONS? 

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income   ... 

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people "you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you."

 Nancy Pelosi  wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income.   In other words, tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement.  This woman is a nut case!   You aren't going to believe this.

Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds)! 

Alas, it is true - all to help the 22 Million   (only 22 million?)   

Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! 


This woman is frightening.   She quotes...   'We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income,  (didn't Marx say something like this?) in our country; and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest. (I'm not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:

We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities.  For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who  need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities.

Stock market windfall profits taxes   could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as Americans.

(Read that quote again and again and let it sink in) 'Lower your retirement; give it to others who have not worked, as you have for your money.

This woman is out of her mind!!! --

The "Green thing"

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment.   

The woman apologized to the young girl and explained, "We didn't have this 'green thing' back in my earlier days."

The young clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations."

The older lady said that she was right -- our generation didn't have the "green thing" in its day. The older lady went on to explain:

Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over.  So they really were recycled. But we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day.

Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags that we reused for numerous things. Most memorable besides household garbage bags was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books. This was to ensure that public property (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribbling. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags. But, too bad we didn't do the "green thing" back then.

We walked up stairs because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

But you're right. We didn't have the "green thing" in our day.

Back then we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts. Wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. 

But that young lady is right; we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day. 

Back then we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief, not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But you're right; we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blade in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service in the family's $45,000 SUV or van, which cost what a whole house did before the"green thing." We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the "green thing" back then?

We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off... Especially from a tattooed, multiple pierced smart-ass who can't make change without the cash register telling them how much.

The MacKenna Saga

As I said in my last post my five book series is completed. Book three is with my editor and as is book four. Book five is with my beta readers. From all reports it's a fantastic conclusion to the saga.

With its completion I came to the end of a twenty year task. Please don't misunderstand, it didn't take 20 to write. I started the story in 1990 and published the first version under the title The Adam Eradication in 2009. The book, to be polite, I'll just say was terrible. I pulled it from the market. In 2010 I started attending a critique group, and learned just how bad my writing was. At that point I had two choice, dump the whole project or do a complete rewrite. I chose the ladder and in 2014 I published book one of the series.

As I worked on the rewrite, the story improved and grew in size to over 190,000 words. I divided the story into two books, 
Dream and Deceptions 











and Plots and Prophecies, 







both available at:
Mystic Publishers Inc  or in ebook format at Smashwords or at Amazon and Kindle

The third book titled The Open Circle is with my editor and we're about a third of the way through the first pass. The fourth book, working title, Filling the Circle, will be with my editor by the Friday and the fifth book Closing the Circle as I said at the beginning is with my beta readers. One beta reader has already finished I will post her comments later. 

At this point I am pouring over the journals (See my website to learn about the journals) to uncover more of the back story so I can write Kalen history and how this all came to be. The series is titled Lives of Futures' Past  
Book One Tyree and Marisol: Reawakening.

The book is a combination of Kalen's continuing story while he reads to his children the account of their ancestors struggle to restore Asperia to its rightful government.

Never Never Land

After many false starts, The MacKenna Saga is wrapped up. I would beg your indulgence as I complete the entire story by going back to the beginning and relating how it all started. My thanks Mayla and Kalen for their meticulous journals. Also my deep appreciation goes out to my benefactor for allowing me access to copies of the records and books, extolling the lives of these extraordinary people, so their story could be told and maybe lessons learned. Not to be forgotten are my family and friends who have put up with a lot while I struggled getting these stories from my head onto paper.

“Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning. ”

― J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan

Neverland is a real place. As children, whether sleeping or awake, we instinctively know the way and go there whenever it suits us. The portal to that marvelous world is available every day, through the pictures we love, games we play, the stories we read, or are read to us, and the tales we tell one another.
That gateway never really closes, but life dictates we grow up. As we do, we lose the ability to see the way back, or seeing it, tragically most refuse to reenter that blessed realm. Fortunate for the world, there are those who stand with one foot on each side of the rift, bridging the way for all.
For all those who wish to return, one has but to listen to the good songs of the minstrels, hear the rhyming words of the poet, study the lives of champions past or present, or read the flights of fancy from those minds and hearts who still dwell in Neverland.
If you still find your way barred, there is another gate, a back door so-to-speak. You unlock it through the pure imagination of children, be they your own, your nieces and nephews, or grandchildren and so on. Open your heart, tamper not with their innocence, and they can, for brief moments, transport you there, and fill your soul with wonder.

Richard R Draude

Stick to said.

I started to write an article on dialogue, but in research, I found this article on the Reader's Digest site and I could never say it better than Ms. Trupkiewicz. This is a copy of her article on dialogue. The link to the article is:http://www.writersdigest.com/editor-blogs/there-are-no-rules/keep-it-simple-keys-to-realistic-dialogue-part-ii

The following is the second in a two-part, guest blog post from Eleanore D. Trupkiewicz, whose short story, “Poetry by Keats,” took home the grand prize in WD’s 14th Annual Short Short Story Competition. You can read more about Trupkiewicz in the July/August 2014 issue of Writer’s Digest and in an exclusive extended interview with her online. In this post, Trupkiewicz follows up on her discussion of dialogue with an impassioned plea: stick to said. 

Welcome back! Part I of this two-part post talked about two key aspects of writing dialogue. First, the dialogue isn’t usually the place to use complete sentences because most people in everyday conversations speak in phrases and single words. Second, effective dialogue takes correct punctuation so the reader doesn’t get yanked out of the story by a poorly punctuated exchange.

Remember, the goal in writing fiction is to keep the reader engaged in the story. But don’t give up on writing to spend the rest of your life doing something easier, like finding the Holy Grail, just yet. There’s one more key aspect that makes dialogue effective for fiction writers.

Problem: The Great He Said/She Opined Debate

In Part I, I mentioned learning from my grade school English teacher about complete sentences. Another subject she covered in that class was the importance of using synonyms and avoiding repetition.

To this day, that discussion drives me absolutely crazy.

Thousands of budding writers all over the world heard those words and deduced that they would be penalized if they repeated the word said in any work of fiction they ever wrote. So they dutifully found thesauruses and started looking up other words to use.

I’d like to submit that thousands of budding writers have been misled. Here’s my take:

Stop!

Do not touch your thesaurus to find another word that means said.

The attribution said is fine. In fact, when readers are skimming along through a novel at warp speed, the word said is just like a punctuation mark—it doesn’t even register in readers’ minds (unless used incorrectly, and it would be hard to do that).

But if you draw attention to the mechanics of your story with dialogue like this, you’re guaranteed to lose your reader in total frustration:

“Luke,” she opined, “I need you.”

“Raina,” he implored, “I know you think you do, but—”

“No!” she wailed. “Please!”

Luke shouted, “You don’t know what you’re talking about!”

“You’re being so mean to me,” Raina wept.

With an exchange like that one, you might as well run screaming out of the book straight at the reader, waving a neon sign that says: HEY, DON’T FORGET THAT THIS IS ONLY A WORK OF FICTION AND THESE CHARACTERS AREN’T REAL!!!

Why would you nail yourself into your own proverbial coffin like that?

Here’s my advice. Don’t reach for the thesaurus this time. Leave it right where it is on your shelf. You might never need it again.

Instead, if you need the attribution, us said. If you must use something different for the occasional question, you could throw in “asked” for variety, but not too often.

An even better way to use attributions in dialogue is to use a beat of action instead, like this:

“I just don’t know anymore.” Mary folded her arms. “I think I’m afraid of you.”

Harry sighed. “I’m sorry.” He shook his head. “I’m not very good at this.”

That way, you know who’s talking, and you’ve even worked action and character traits into the conversation. It makes for a seamless read.

Two final thoughts:

First, dialogue cannot be smiled, laughed, giggled, or sighed. Therefore, this example is incorrect:

“Don’t tickle me!” she giggled.

You can’t giggle spoken words. You can’t laugh them or sigh them or smile them, either. (I dare you to try it. If it works for you, write me and let me know. We could be on to something.)

Of course, if you’re using said exclusively, then that won’t be a problem.

Second, let’s talk about adverbs. If a writer can be convinced to use said instead of other synonyms, then he or she becomes really tempted to reach for an adverb to tell how the character said something, like this:

“I don’t want to see you again,” Lily said tonelessly.

“You don’t mean that,” Jack said desperately.

“You’re an idiot,” Lily said angrily.

The problem with using adverbs is that they’re always telling to your reader. (Remember that old maxim, “Show, don’t tell”?)

An occasional adverb won’t kill your work, but adverbs all over the place mean weak writing, or that you don’t trust your dialogue to stand without a qualifier. It’s like you’re stopping the movie (the story playing through the reader’s mind) for a second to say, “Oh, but wait, you need to know that Lily said that last phrase angrily. That’s important. Okay, roll tape.”

Why rely on a telling adverb when you could find a better way to show the reader what’s going on in the scene or inside the characters? Try something like this:

Lily turned away and crossed her arms. “I don’t want to see you again.”

“You don’t mean that.” Jack pushed to his feet in a rush.

She glared at him. “You’re an idiot.”

Beats of action reveal character emotions and set the stage far more effectively than an overdose of adverbs ever will.

Conclusion

While a challenge to write, dialogue doesn’t have to be something you dread every time you sit down to your work-in-progress (or WIP). The most effective dialogue is the conversations that readers can imagine your characters speaking, without all the clutter and distractions of synonymous attributions, overused adverbs, and incorrect punctuation.

When in doubt, cut and paste only the dialogue out of your WIP and create one script for each character. Then invite some friends (ones who don’t already think you’re crazy because you walk around mumbling to yourself about your WIP if you still have any of those) over for dessert or appetizers sometime. Hand out the scripts, assign each person a part, and then sit back and listen. Was a line of dialogue so complicated it made the reader stumble? Do you hear places where the conversation sounds stilted and too formal, or where it sounds too informal for the scene? Does an exchange sound sappy when spoken aloud? Are there words you can cut out to tighten the flow?

And don’t give up your writing to search for the Holy Grail. While the search would be less frustrating sometimes, writing dialogue no longer has to look demonic to you. You know what to do!

Questions

In your current WIP, what sticking points and challenges do you find about writing dialogue? Is a character’s voice giving you trouble? Do you worry you’re overusing an attribution? Do you have a totally opposite opinion about adverbs? The rule about writing fiction is that there really aren’t many hard-and-fast rules, so don’t hesitate to share!

*     *     *     *     *

Eleanore D. Trupkiewicz is an author, poet, blogger, book reviewer, and freelance editor and proofreader. She writes full-length thrillers as well as short stories, flash fiction, poetry, and creative nonfiction. Her blogs are Engraved: All About Writing (http://eleanoretrupkiewicz.blogspot.com) and Daily Poetry Prompts (http://dailypoetryprompts.blogspot.com) and you can find her on one of her websites at www.eleanoretrupkiewicz.com or Refiner’s Fire Editing (www.refinersfireediting.com). Follow her on Twitter: @ETrupkiewicz. She lives and writes in Colorado with cats, chocolate, and assorted houseplants in various stages of demise.

Like and As

Which of these sentences are correct?

1. Winston tastes good like a cigarette should. (This is a famous ad jingle?)
2. He spends money like a drunken sailor.
3. He lied on the witness stand, like one would expect a guilty person to do.
4. My cousin looks like Greta Garbo.
5. Robert likes to run his company as though he were a dictator.

Only sentences 3, 4 and 5 correctly employ the word "like."

Remember these two rules when considering the use of "like":
Rule 1: "Like" can be either a verb or a preposition but not a conjunction. Thus, we should not use it before a subject-verb combination (a clause).

In sentences 1, 2, and 3, we should use the conjunction "as" or "as if" in place of the word "like" because in each case "like" is followed by a clause. In these corrected sentences, we have bracketed the clauses and capitalized the subjects and verbs to highlight the grammatical structure:

1. Winston tastes good [as a CIGARETTE SHOULD].
3. He lied on the witness stand, [as ONE WOULD EXPECT a guilty person to do].

Rule 2: We should use "like" either as a preposition to demonstrate a resemblance between two things or as a verb to express a preference.

In sentence 2 the comparison of spending money .  In Setence 4, "like Greta Garbo" is a prepositional phrase. In sentence 5, "like" is the verb in the main clause, and "as though" is the conjunction launching the subordinate (dependent) clause.

Of course, in casual correspondence or in conversations we have more flexibility, and many idiomatic expressions using "like" are perfectly acceptable even though they do not follow these rules.  Consider also the expression "It looks like rain," which employs a perfectly acceptable idiom for the highly formal statement "It looks as though it is going to rain."

The bottom line: in formal contexts, we use "like" only as a verb or a preposition and never when we mean "as," "as if," or "as though."

Do any of these sentences correctly use the word "like"?

1. Like a man walking a tightrope, he teetered on the brink of financial ruin.
2. It looks like Arthur could become the next unit director.
3. He acts like he owns the world.
4. He carried an umbrella, like everyone should do on a rainy morning.

ANSWERS:

1. Like a man walking a tightrope, he teetered on the brink of financial ruin. [Correct because we are making a comparison.]
2. It looks as though [or as if] Arthur will become the next unit director.
3. He acts as if [or as though] he owns the world.
4. He carried an umbrella, as everyone should do on a rainy morning.

Worth Noting

Sometimes, it is worthwhile to recognize these amazing achievements:

During the 3-1/2 years of World War 2 that started with the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 1941 and ended with the Surrender of Germany and Japan in 1945, the U..S. produced:


147 aircraft carriers, 8 battleships, 40+ cruisers, 750+ destroyers, 1,102 convoy escorts/destroyer escorts, 400+ submarines, 34 million tons of merchant ships,

 212,000 fighter aircraft, 153,615 bombers, 43,045 transport aircraft, 93.578 training aircraft,

227,235 tanks and self-propelled guns,  914,683 artillery pieces,  657,318 mortars, 
4,744,484 machine guns, and 3,060,354 military trucks, and about 10,000,000 tons of concrete for runways. We put 16.1 million men in uniform in the various armed services.

Invaded Africa,

Invaded Sicily and Italy,

Won the battle for the Atlantic,

Planned and executed D-Day,

Marched across the Pacific and Europe,

Developed the atomic bomb and

Ultimately conquered Japan and Germany.


It's also worth noting that during the almost exact amount of time, the Obama administration couldn't build a functioning website.

Conundrum

Free people are not equal. Equal people are not free. (Think this one over and over and it makes sense!)

The definition of the word Conundrum: Something that is puzzling or confusing.

Here are six Conundrums of socialism in the United States of America :

1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is subsidized.

2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are victims.

3. They think they are victims -yet their representatives run the government.

4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting poorer.

5. The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.

6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want America to be more like those other countries.

Think about it!  And that, my friends, pretty much sums up the USA in the 21st Century.

Makes you wonder who is doing the math.

These three, short sentences tell you a lot about the direction of our government for the past 7 + years and cultural environment it has created:
 

1.  We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.  Funny how that works.  And here's another one worth considering.

2.  Seems we constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money.  But we never hear about welfare or food stamps running out of money!  What's interesting is the first group "worked for" their money, but the second did not! Think about it ... and last, but not least;

3.  Why were we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our Army, Navy, Air Force & Coast Guard to a level lower than before WWII  but we were not stopping any of the payments or benefits to illegal aliens.

Are you among the few who are not missing something?

"If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools.�  ~Plato