OK, I'm back but I don't know for how long.

We’ve all heard the expression “The pen is mightier than the sword.” But this doesn’t mean just the pens of famous authors and journalists. As the Bible points out, words are two edged swords, they can build up or destroy. Many people have risen to power based on their words, and others have had their fame and fortune destroyed by them.

Given their seriousness, does it not make sense to use words wisely, and to listen judiciously? Why is it then that in today’s society the pendulum seems to swing further in the opposite direction daily? Why do we take so readily to the “truth” of those in power, the “truth” of those who want to be in power, even the “truth” of the majority?

I would like to say that it’s because we have such a hunger for the truth, but, sadly, I believe otherwise. It is our own opinion we seek to justify and end up in a feeding frenzy of feed-back, seeking out and trusting those who agree with us, denying those who don’t with vehemence.

I’d like to look at two aspects that influence us and which we should beware, assumptions and hyperbole. Both must be seen for what they are, stripped away and understood in order to find the truth. All too often we embrace rather than questioning them.

These two play a major role in our opinions and how we express them. And if it seems they are more prevalent today than in the past, it is simply because of the vast media network which we have to disseminate them. How much easier it is today for those “not in the know” to express their opinions in front of millions of others and be taken as “authorities.”

Assumptions and truth. Assumptions and truth. How much of what we believe we know is really assumption? How accurate are our impressions of the world? Who do we trust to know the truth, and why? I believe that we have entered a time period when our opinions are formed more from media "stories" than known facts, when political considerations are more important that reality.

I don't count this as good. And yet, I am sure I am guilty as any in this acceptance. But I feel I must do as much as I can to improve myself, to know the truth, and to speak it as much as I can. I find this critical because I have found that this tactic of using assumption to fill in areas of darkness gradually changes one's "level of acceptance."

I define "level of acceptance" as that point where one accepts something as truth. In particular, I've seen people accepting things as truth more and more based strictly upon the impact or number of people screaming this "truth." I see them putting little rational thought or research into its acceptance.

And, as people become less and less willing to take responsibility for distinguishing assumption from fact, more and more "weasel" words are used. These words are intended to make an opinion seem more like real truth, while giving one an “out” later if the opinion is found wrong.

It happens so often, those listening begin ignoring those “weasel” words. If they agree with the speaker, the person forgets those words and considers the statement fact. If they don’t agree and the statement turns out wrong, then the speaker “lied.”

You see, as "weasel" words are used by some to avoid responsibility for one's opinions, so hyperbole is used by others to assign undeserved responsibility. To give a real-world example of this, I'm going to use a political situation we're all familiar with. I won't get into an argument over it (really), so no use in replying in response to it.

If the President says they "believe there are WMD's in Iraq," he means that they don't know for sure, but that his best advisors believe it to be true, and he assumes it’s true. You may be sure that if he had proof he would not have used the word “believe” in his statement. But he did use it because he has very skilled wordsmiths around him to make sure that word is there.

Now, he wants to make it seem that they are more sure than they really are, throwing in words to fall back on if this opinion turns out wrong. However, in attempting to convince the public that he knew the truth when it was really an opinion, an assumption, he gave fuel to his critics. They say he "lied" about the WMD's, which is hyperbole and more assumption.

On the other hand, before we’re ready to lynch our government officials, remember that it doesn’t matter who it is, they all follow the same rules. And those rules are not any different than the ones the rest of us follow. How much of what we say is merely assumption? How many “truths” do we really “know?”

You know, there's an old saying that it's easier to get forgiveness than permission. It applies to the logic of children and it applies with politicians. Politicians live in another world from the rest of us and you have to listen closely to their words to hear what they're really saying. And we have to learn that sometimes it is our own opinions which might influence what we hear.

The funny thing is, there are many who read these words with the opinion that I, myself, should be more open-minded, should listen to their words. To those I say, “Perhaps you’re right. But, express them without assumptions, without hyperbole, and I’m more likely to listen.”

You see, there a second effect here. First is the effect of the media or politicians unduly influencing our opinions with assumptions and/or hyperbole. And the second is having our preconceived opinions "pick-and-choose" from what limited and presumed truths are presented us.

All I'm asking is that when we express our opinions we behave better than those we condemn so readily. If it's your opinion, not truth that you know from a "reliable" source, then say so. If you have it from somewhere else, tell us where. If it's from experience, state the extent of that experience. If it’s an opinion, tell us that and what you base it on.

Don't make exaggerated statements without some explanation. If you "hate" the war, why? Is it war itself? Is it because it was preemptive? Because you don't trust Bush? Because you're a Democrat? Because you have a son there? Where does the hate come from?

Of course, the fact that I want people to behave this way will not make it happen. Any more than my words will influence the politicians to change being what they are. But I think we could get to the truth better if we were more judicious in our speaking and hearing.

My opinion. Based on 61 years of human observation.