_¿Bist du Zycher?_

Dear Dr. Bones,

A casual look at this latest Kiddie-Conner wannabe had me primed to go off about how the DFPj, Dark Forces of Pajamatarianism, scarcely need him, unless, of course, Her-Son-the-Millionaire [1] has decided to throw in the moneybag -- the one with ‘PJM’ stenciled on it in fiat currency by the white hand of Freelady Simon Pajama herself. Or so I have been told.

Be that as it ain’t, what we have here, I presume , is basically a literary question. Or ‘neoliterary’ for those who prefer an eleven-foot pole. Pontificatin’ at selfservative kiddies about the quack profession exclusively is not a product for which the demand is infinite, though perhaps pious supplysiders should not attend to so low an’ almost heretical a consideration.

But I have reconsidered, and would now maintain that Freelord Zycher is not only a different barrel of fish from Master $onn¥, but a species of fish better adapted to the kiddiecon market. The key to it is rather well hidden, however, so I did not at once perceive that the whole scribble revolves around the first sentences of the third paragraphette above the freelordly bottomline, namely,

Recent research from the Pacific Research Institute examined the likely effects of these CER implications for R&D investment in new and improved pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment. Using (_sic_) data from the National Science Foundation and other sources, R&D investment would be reduced by about $10 billion per year over the period 2014 through 2025, or about 10-12 percent.

Despite that (really heroically) dangled participle, I fear that his freelordship scribbles Americanoe prose against the grain in a way that Wally Wombschool an’ Cindy from Wasilla will find too off-puttin’ to make it all the way down to the paydirt, rememberin’ at every step of their descent that CER signifies "comparative effective review" an’ has nothin’ at all to do with the Quest for the Higgs Boson. An’ even if they do arrive, an’ sorta remember what his freelordship is natterin’ on an’ on ’bout, the kiddies might easily miss that _fabula de se narratur_.

In a way, the freelordly boo-boo (as I consider it) is just that business you can find in all the for-dummies booklets about avoiding the passive voice. ’Tis a fun case, though, this one, because only if one wanted to rub in the dangle with salt would one take the active formulation to be *Obamacare uses NSF data to reduce R&D investement. Actually, the issue here is not so much who is to be the grammatical subject as who is to be semantic topic. His freelordship leaves out the Prince of Denmark, as it were. Abandoning any attempt to echo the freelordly word choices, I think what it comes to (or should have) is more or less "¡Listen up, kiddies! If we don’t get rid of Obamacare, you will wake up some mornin’ soon to find that your prospects of gettin’ (or just stayin’) rich through specuvestment in the shares of secret-sector medical corporations have been reduced drastically." [2]

Even if Master Wally an’ Mizz Cindy don’t have a lot of spare _sh’qálîm_ lyin’ around in the crevices of their potatoe couches to specuvest just at the moment, as I would guess they probably do not, they should not be left out of such a sentence altogether.

Only at this point, Dr. Bones, did I ask the pet G@@Gle to track down _M. le Baron de Zycher_ a little, and what she came back with shocks me His freelordship ...

... is associated with Benjamin Zycher Economics Associates, Inc. and holds several roles such as President and President. and is located in Agoura Hills, CA.[3]

Well, I suppose one need not necessarily be shocked, for "economic associates" is a shingle that any weasel can hang out. One can still only guess what the weasels actually *do* with their unquality time. It would be outrageous, though, if my instinctive guess was correct an’ his freelordship mostly specuvests with other volks’ money. In that case, it would be inexcusable to elide Master Wally an’ Mizz Cindy an’ all other brokees, present an’ future, actual an’ potential, out of the R&D investment reduction picture.

If, however, BZEA be only yet another whight-wing Tank of Thought, possibly the Madhatter Institute reproducin’ Herself by fission like an amœba, I suppose it would be permissible to discuss medical sector R&D investment reduction in a completely impersonal way. In that case, however, publishin’ ones ideoresearches at Pajama Junction NJ is inappropriate borderin’ on dotty. I mean, ¿Why not Carr and Driver?

Meanwhile, back in the freelordly scribble, notice what comes immediately after the passage I have swiped already:

Based upon the scholarly literature on the benefits of medical innovation, this reduction in the advance of medical technology would impose an expected loss of about 5 million life-years annually, with a conservative economic value of $500 billion, an amount substantially greater than the entire U.S. market for pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment.

I get the impression from that that _M. le baron de Zycher_ does not associate much with the base an’ vile of his freelordship’s own Party. Wally an’ Cindy will probably assume that anybooby who cannot go a hundred words without brandishin’ "scholarly literature" at ’em must be some kind of Lieberal Demoncrat in disguise.

Quight a lot of bad (IMHO) whightist agitprop makes this mistake of supposin’ that Wally an’ Cindy either like bein’ clobbered over their dittopans with footnotes an’ all the Persian apparatus of Tert. Ed. or at least profoundly respect those Kiddiemasters who so clobber. As you know, my own theory is that your typical selfservative kiddie hated School when she had to attend it, an’ to this day still hates anythin’ that very strongly reminds her of that previous condition of serfitude. Any discussion carried on the way _M. le baron_ carries on this one can therefore only be counterproductive for Party an’ AEIdeology, though to be sure it is highly likely to be nothin’ at all, because few kiddicons will get past, say, "... a rigorous evaluation of the impact of different options ..." [3] before switchin’ channels in hopes of somethin’ a little punchier.

Happy days.
--JHM

__
[1] His freelordship’s d.b.a. was, as I recall, "Paul Hsieh," but I don’t think the pet g@@gle arrested quight the whight suspect over here. "A zillion monkeys" somehow lacks that solemn gravity an’ austere sobriety one has come to rever in the Daughters of Virtue & Sons of Wisdom, LLC.

In line with the main argument above, notice that the minions of Simon Pajama do not regard either their old medico or their new pseudo as worthy of mention under the rubric of http://pjmedia.com/columnists/ . I tentatively infer that in YaleoDra™a (Pat. Pend.) there exists a sort of class distinction between Action Persons (_actionis personæ_, members of the neonobility an’ superior neogentry) an’ mere no-’count trailer-trash also-rans like P. X. Hsieh or Benjamin, Freelord Zycher.

(( To digress about the Gang of Fifteen, I am only 50% satisfied with the Simon-Pajamatan discriminations: happy, that is, to see that Don Ricardito de Fernández y Podhòretz qualifies as an Upper, displeased that Th. X. Blumer, the Voice of Greater Cincinnati Pettybiz, did not make the august freelordly cut. As you know, these are my two pet favourite pajamaclads, of far greater interest than the rest of the pack. ))

=
[2] As you see, I deploy a passive verb myself, so obviously I do not condemn a whole Voice mindlessly out of hand. In fact, passivity often helps one get the topic whight by throwing the appropriate noun phrase to the beginning of the clause.

(( "Passivity often helps," by the way, might be sent off to the Active Only Society for an advisory opinion. ))

=
[3] His freelordship is not the only one vernacular-challenged, looks like. in Chicagoland when I was young, rôles were always ‘played’ and never ‘held’. I suppose it is more material than grammatical, though delicious on any terms, to find a Party neocomrade no more than "associated with" a wracket named after precisely himself. Though I suppose it may have been Benjy’s Daddy who founded BZEA. But then again, BZEA may have been founded three months ago, for it appears the _M. le baron_ is no longer with the Madhatterites. At any rate, here is a second _Almanach Neogothique_ in which his freelordship has not the honour to figure.

=
[4] Paragraphette 3, _ad fin._