19 October—The Sunday Republican (for non-local Monitor readers, that’s the Republican-American on guess what day) of 9 October ran a special section on voting. (Yes, that’s well over a week ago. I was late in catching up. But I’m a Republican, so it’s to be expected.)

One of the features was “What the candidates say.” The only candidates in this instance were incumbent Gov. Ned Lamont and hopeful candidate Bob Stefanowski, each of whom was asked the same three questions. It’s Ned’s and Bob’s answers to the first question that are most entertaining, if not enlightening. Their party affiliation doesn’t matter and you know it anyway.

Ned first: “Q. Would you add or eliminate any current mandates about the teaching of civics in public schools?

“We’ve got some of the best schools in the nation because we have the best teachers in the nation. They show up every day and work with parents to give our kids an education that prepares them to get in the game. We rolled out model curricula on math, financial literacy, and computer science to make sure they’ve got the basics down and they’ve got a handle on who we are and where we’re going as a society. When it comes to the budget, I hold the line on reckless spending to make sure schools are safe and able to keep up with kids’ curious and creative minds. During my term, we gave cities and towns an extra boost to do just that, with $525 million for increased Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes and Education Cost Sharing grants. All of our kids deserve the very best start in life, and we’re going to make sure they get it — no matter their background or ZIP code.”

You bet. But did Ned even try to answer the question? Of course not. He got no closer than a passing reference to “who we are and where we’re going as a society.” He spouted nothing but canned debate points and campaign platitudes.

Now for Bob: “Q. Would you add or eliminate any current mandates about the teaching of civics in public schools?

“We are so fortunate to be raising our children in the greatest country in the world and we should be proud to teach our children about its history, warts and all.

“We need our children to become the next generation of leaders that move us forward in the future. These lessons should be formulated in a non-partisan manner, welcoming to any and all political leanings. The recent news about the Greenwich administrator who injected his own political views into both hiring practices and the classroom is outrageous. This kind of bias should never be passed onto our students. My administration will not stand for discriminatory practices in the school system or anywhere in government.”

You bet. He came a smidge closer than Ned to answering the question, but he too had his own canned debate points and campaign platitudes to regurgitate instead.

So here’s how the anonymous reporter pressed both candidates to actually answer the question:

Editor’s note: That’s right. The question never got answered. Surprising for the Republican-American. And the Sunday Republican . . .

---

Erratum et corrigendum: Since we’re in italic mode, it’s been brought to our attention by nit pickers of both the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford, as well as the grand poobah of the English Renaissance Music Alliance, that the facts we presented about the musical accompaniment to the 17 October Monitor Morph, Dem Girls, were way off base.

It seems that the Latin “Spem in alium” doesn’t mean “Sperm in garlic” at all. In our senescent decrepitude, we’re becoming careless. For starters, we shouldn’t have read an extraneous “r” into “Spem”; it’s not “Sperm” at all; rather, “spem” is indeed the accusative singular of the fifth-declension noun “spes,” meaning “hope.”

And “alium” isn’t Latin for “garlic”; “allium” with that extra “l” is. “Alium” means another. It’s the start of the phrase “Spem in alium nunquam habui,” “Hope in another I have none” or “In no other is my hope.” Guess whom it alludes to.

That’s the subject of a magnificent motet by the Tudor (from Henry VIII through Elizabeth I) composer Thomas Tallis. A “tallis” is a Jewish prayer shawl, though these days it’s usually spelled with a lisp in English, “tallith.” Wouldn’t you assume that Thomas Tallis was a Jewish composer who simply wanted to be assimilated, so he changed his name to Prayer-Shawl?

Beautiful motet in all events.

Peccavimus et nostra minima culpa . . .