Thursday, December 12, 2013

A Day In The Life: Comparison and Contrast, Now and Then December 6 2013/1913

Sort of an interesting exercise, to compare daily activities now as compared to some earlier time.   In this case, let's look at December 6, 2013 vs December 6, 1913, just to see how things are different.

 Tucumcari, New Mexico 1913

December 2

0500  Got up to the sound of my son going out to plug in the 1/2 ton truck. Temperature -20F.

Turned heat up a bit as it was cold in the house.

0505  Made coffee with coffee maker, poured a bowl of cereal for breakfast (Cheerios) and read the Casper Star Tribune.

0530  Shaved

0545  Ironed a shirt.

0600  Turned on computer, checked email, etc.

0710  Fired up pickup.

0730  Took daughter to school and drove to work.

0800  Arrived at work, fired up work computer, checked work emails and started int.

0900  Participate in telephone conference call hosted in Houston.

1000  Resumed working on pleadings.

1210 Took a break for lunch.

1300  Resumed working on pleadings, different case.

1530  Remembered the office was doing the firm tree with accompanying small party when secretary and paralegal reminded me.

1600  Finished up pleadings and joined party late.

1730  Came home.

1800  Ate dinner with family.

1900  Watched movie (The Memphis Belle) on television.

Okay, so what would have happened in 1913, under similar circumstances?

Well, probably something like this:

0500 Get up.  Probably the only one up.

0505  Do something furnace wise, not quite sure what.  It'd be really cold inside the house, however.

0510. Put some wood in the kitchen stove and light it.

0520  Put a coffee pot on the kitchen stove and start boiling coffee.  Probably put a pan of water on the stove also to start boiling water for oatmeal.

0530  Coffee probably done.  Oatmeal probably not quite.

0535  Oatmeal probably done, take off stove to cool event.

0540-0600.  Eat breakfast and drink coffee, while reading the morning Casper paper.

0600 Shave.  This would involve a straight razor and whipping soap chips into lather. Something folks don't do much now.

0615 Get dressed.  Hopefully I'd have a starched shirt ready to go as otherwise I'd to iron one, which would be quite a process as irons were heated on a stove at that time.

0700  Walk to work.

0730  Arrive at work and to the typical work for a law office of the period.

1200-1300  Take a break for lunch.

1300-1800  Typical law office work for the day.

1800  Walk home.

1830  Get home and warm up.

1900  Eat dinner

1930  Help do the dishes, no automatic dishwasher in those days.

2000 Read evening paper.  Most towns had a morning and evening paper in those days.

2030  Read a book

Quite a bit different in a lot of ways.


Technological Habituation

I forgot to bring my cell phone with me to work today.

That should be no big deal.  There's a phone here at my desk, although I do have a few clients who are routinely used to using my cell phone. But to my surprise, I fee odd without it.

The reason I feel a bit odd is several fold, but it shows how acclimated we become to technological changes, for good or ill.

When I started practicing law in 1990 I did not have a cell phone. Cell phones weren't even available, I think.  I know that we didn't have them as college students.  The first cell phone we had at all, in my family, was one that my father bought for some reason. It is what they called a "bag phone", which is a relatively large cell phone which you plugged into a vehicle's cigarette lighter (which is what we called a "power point" at that time) for power.  It had no power of its own.  And it was designed for use in a car.

Exactly why my father thought we needed one I don't know.  Maybe it was so that we would have it when we were out in the sticks. We didn't use it much, but we did have it for a period of years.  I know that I still had it when I started dating my wife, which was after my father had died, but only barely.  It seems to me that I also had it when first married.

I'm not really keen on cell phones, even now, and didn't have one for a long time after they became available.  My first one was a cast off from my wife.  Now, however, I have an Iphone and the reason is that it essentially became impossible for a lawyer not to have one.  You need it to check your email while traveling. That sounds like an excuse, but it is not.  I skipped the whole Blackberry thing but there came a day when I was working on a case, while I was on the road, and settlement negotiations broke out while I was traveling.  Having not adopted the smart phone at the time, I found that I was reduced to making piles of calls, where I had cell phone coverage, to see what the heck was going on.  That week I had an Iphone.

I never thought I'd be a person who texts, but I do, and that is what makes not having the Iphone here today odd.  Throughout an average day I'll send a few text.  My wife texts me, and some times my son does, even from school.  I like the fact that this means they're sort of connected to me all the time.

That's something that was totally different before the cell phone.  I was, and remain, used to the idea of being out in the sticks in contact with nobody.  And prior to the cell phone when I was at work, I was out of contact except via the office phone, which I limited pretty much to work calls. At that time I can recall it being a real irritant that some office staff took huge numbers of personal calls in a day. People still do, I'm sure, but  they aren't tying up an office line now by doing it. 

More significantly, when I was away at school, I was really away.  That wasn't so pleasant, but that's something that the current generation will really not experience, again for good or ill.

This is, of course, a species of habituation.  I'm habituated now to having a smart phone.  And a computer.  But it wasn't always so.  And perhaps it isn't a good thing.  Indeed, I have some changes coming up regarding that.

One thing I've been doing for a couple of years, and which I'm electronically habituated to, is updating a couple of historical daily calendars.  One is my Today In Wyoming's History blog and the other is the daily  history thread on the Society of the Military Horse website.  I've done those, for some time, every day before I head to work.  I'm stopping that, however.

Indeed, I've already stopped updating the Wyoming History blog entries, as of about December 1.  I have the old posts set to keep posting daily until December 31, but after that I'm changing the format of the blog to stop daily entries.  I have been updating it for over a year, and I have most of the daily events I can readily catalog entered, so there's no need for it to be repetitious.  I'll keep the blog, and hopefully find a way to make a calendar for it so people researching any one day can do so easily, but after December 31, 2013, the blog will only be occasionally updated with new entries pertaining to Wyoming's history. 

I'm also gong to stop updating the SMH calendar as well.  Maybe somebody else will take over it, but it's run for several years and is very complete.  Most days, I don't add anything new to it, so there's no reason to update it.  Or at least somebody else would add more flavor to it.

This means that my morning routine is starting to change, and I like it.  I may not turn the computer on as much in the  mornings, or at all, as I've grown used to.  My blogging will continue on as for some reason I have a compulsion to write, but the daily entry type of stuff will cease and I may go back to reading in the mornings, like I used to do.  Indeed, I did that this morning and didn't miss the computer really.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Persistent Myths III: Pacifist Canada, Cowardly French, Invincible United States

The Canadians have never fought a war.

 World War One Canadian Army recruiting poster. The thought that an Allied loss would cause Canada to disappear from the earth seems dubious, but lots of Canadians signed up.

Here's a really weird, but very common, one.  There's a sense in the United States that Canada has never been in a war.  A few years back a junior high middle school teacher actually lectured a class my son was in to that effect.

Well, guess again.  Canada fought in the War of 1812, and in its view, probably correctly, it beat the stuffing out of the US in it.  Canadian militia pretty much wiped up on American troops in the War of 1812, to be followed by the British landing in the US itself and beating the tar out of us, which relates to another myth below.

Canada also fought some Indian campaigns, just not as many as we did. And it also occasionally had to repel Irish rebels who somehow thought that launching an invasion from the US into Canada would achieve something.

And Canada fought in the Boer War. And Canadians bled in vast numbers in World War One and World War Two. And Canada fought in the Korean War as well.

What Canada did not do is fight in the Vietnam War.  Because the Canadian government at the time was sympathetic, for some reason, with American draft evaders in that period the myth seems to have been created that Canada is a pacifist nation.  It isn't.  Indeed, Canada has been fighting with us in Afghanistan.

"Surrender" is a French word.

 This intrepid French aviator is not amused that people accuse France of surrendering easily.

This rumor is even nastier than the idea that Canada is a pacifist nation.  It's common in the US to accuse the French of being cowardly.

This rumor seems to have come out of the French defeat at the start of World War Two, but it oddly hasn't attached to any of the other nations that Germany ran over at the start of the war.  And it shouldn't even apply to France.  The French were defeated on the battlefield in 1940 and the government did surrender, but it was being overrun and simply being realistic. Even at that, however, French troops kept fighting where engaged in order to allow the British to evacuate the continent, a valiant act.  A sizable number of French troops never surrendered and effectively disobeyed a legitimate order of their country to keep on fighting.  When the opportunity came in 1943, the French armed forces were pretty quick to get back into the war against the Germans even though it was technically an act of rebellion.

At any rate, accusing the French of cowardice ignores the fact that the French nation bled itself white in the Napoleonic Wars.  I don't admire Napoleon, but like him or hate him, the French troops of that period, which made up in some ways one of the first modern armies, sure weren't cowards.  They died in such numbers that nearly the entire army died in Napoleon's service.

And the French fought hard, if to defeat, in the Franco-Prussian War.  They fought extremely hard in World War One. After World War Two they put up a real fight in Indo China and Algeria, and they've fought with us in Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. They fought with the British and Israelis in the Suez incident.  And they've been involved in third world fights, mostly in their former colonies, to an extent we can hardly appreciate. The French have conducted over 200 combat air jumps since World War Two. We've conducted less than twenty.

The United States has never lost a war.

 American naval heroes of the war of 1812. The naval war was about the only thing that went well for us, at least at first, although a war in the Atlantic was highly irritating to New England's merchants who thought about succeeding form the nation and who didn't support the war.  On the ground, we were pretty much a universal flop.

This may be a matter of perception, but  I'll occasionally hear that the Untied States has never lost a war.

Arguably, we lost the War of 1812.  We may pretend otherwise, but basically the Canadian militia wiped up with us in Canada, and the British pasted us everywhere else.  The war basically ended when the British defeated the French in Europe, and then dictated to us what the peace would be. We were allowed to enter into the peace or suffer the consequences. We did.

The US also lost Red Cloud's War. This may be a minor matter in the overall scheme of things, but still, we lost. Red Cloud's Sioux won.

We also lost the Vietnam War and there's no reason to pretend otherwise.  This isn't a simple story, in my view, and it is true that militarily we won. We were not defeated on the battlefield, but the American populace grew tired of the war and in 1975 when the North invaded for the second time in the 1970s, we threw the South under the bus.

If viewed as a campaign in the Cold War, however, which is how I feel the war is more properly viewed (and I'll blog on that in future) the result is a bit different.

Related Threads:

Persistent Myths

Persistent Myths I. The Great Income Tax Bracket Myth

Persistent Myths II: The First Amendment Protects...

Cold Then and Now: CST; December no colder.


The Casper Star Tribune reports today that, in spite of a common perception to the contrary:

[D]ata from the National Weather Service shows the weather system that brought sub-zero temperatures this past week to Wyoming wasn't unusual. Weather service meteorologist Chris Jones poured over decades of temperature data and said that, despite conventional wisdom, Decembers have not been getting warmer in Wyoming.
I'll admit I'm in the surprised category.  My recollections matches that of the person interviewed (whom I slightly know) who recalled it being colder, or at least snowier, than presently.  That person recalled that there seemed to be snow here all winter long, and that's basically my recollection too. The meteorologist claimed that people recall cold exceptional winters, but tend not to recall the more average ones.  Perhaps that's correct.

Tool Room. National Cash Register Company. 1904


Sunday, December 8, 2013

The Big Speech: The United Kingdom Declares War on Japan


Sir,
On the evening of December 7th His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom learned that Japanese forces without previous warning either in the form of a declaration of war or of an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war had attempted a landing on the coast of Malaya and bombed Singapore and Hong Kong.
In view of these wanton acts of unprovoked aggression committed in flagrant violation of International Law and particularly of Article I of the Third Hague Convention relative to the opening of hostilities, to which both Japan and the United Kingdom are parties, His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo has been instructed to inform the Imperial Japanese Government in the name of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom that a state of war exists between our two countries.
I have the honour to be, with high consideration,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Winston S. Churchill
 

The Big Speech: President Roosevelt asks for a Declaration of War upon Japan.


Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives:
Yesterday, December 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And, while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has therefore undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense, that always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the un-bounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph. So help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire.

Saturday, December 7, 2013

Today In Wyoming's History: December 7

Today In Wyoming's History: December 7: Today is, by State Statute, WS 8-4-106, Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day.  The Statute provides: (a) In recognition of the members of th...

Friday, December 6, 2013

Cold, then and now.

 Crow Indians, early 20th Century.

There's a really arctic cold snap predicted for Wyoming later this week and its 17F right now.  Bitter, bitter cold. The paper has the temperatures regularly dropping down below 0F.  Some folks I've spoken to, who must get their weather report from elsewhere, have even more dire weather reports.  I've heard predictions of temperatures reaching -21F.  I've personally seen temperatures here below -40F, so it isn't impossible.

So, what will occur is that we'll plug in our vehicles and keep the temperature up a bit at night.  And we may run facets at night as well.  Most folks will run their vehicles awhile in the morning before heading out to work, to let the cab heater (or whatever we call them) heat up a bit.

We'll also worry about the heat bill. Those of us with electric heat (such as me) will particularly worry about that.

So that's what we do in 2013.  And frankly that's not really any different than what we did a half century ago in 1963.  Cars seemed to be more sensitive to extreme cold at the time, but I don't remember much else being different.

But what about 1913?



In 1913, in most places, heat was by coal or wood.  I suppose folks with coal furnaces, which would have been most folks, made sure they had a plenty of coal in the coal bin. That houses had coal bins is probably something most folks don't know now, but I can remember being a bit fascinated with a house that one of my aunts and uncles had which had a heavy iron door for a coal chute.  The house, of course, had long prior been updated and didn't use coal.

Coal burns dirty, and smelly.  Even really high quality coal has a distinct petroleum smell.  A lot of people do not recognize that smell at all anymore, as they've never smelled it, but every now and then you'll run across somebody who heats even now with coal, almost always as an auxiliary to their main heat.  Towns must have smelt like and had a layer of smoke over them all winter.  This must have been particularly true during heavy cold snaps, as that almost always causes a temperature inversion, at least around here.

 Coal furnace.  I've never seen one.

Even now, where people burn a lot of wood for heat, and in some places in the west that's common, you'll often smell wood smoke during the winter, and that's just from auxiliary use as a rule.  This became more common in the 1970s and 1980s than previously, reflecting the nationwide rise in fuel costs.  A quarter century ago while a student in Laramie I lived in a rental house where we did that.  We largely heat the house with a wood burning stove and with wood that we'd cut in the Snowy Range on a Forest Service permit.

 World War One vintage poster urging the early ordering of winter coal.

Of course, this all deals with houses. What about office buildings, or even substantial apartment buildings?  I know that heat was provided via a boiler, but what was the fuel?  Oil?  I can't imagine that a building like the Con Roy Building, for example, was heated through burning coal. And it's been around since 1917.  Plenty of substantial buildings in the west are older than that.

 World War One vintage poster urging coal conservation.

In 1913 the majority of people walked to work, but cars were around to be sure, with a majority of those cars no doubt being Model T Fords.  I don't know how hard to start they were in cold weather, but they started with a hand crank, so I'm guess that they wouldn't have been easy to start.


Walking, of course, implied heavy dress, in weather like we're speaking of, and frankly the winters of that era imply heavy dress in general,  walking and being out in the cold on a regular basis will mean that the person who engages in it will dress warmly.  Indeed, people who work outdoors a lot will tend to wear warmer clothes all year long, rather than the current trend, for our indoor age, of people wearing shorts in the middle of the winter.

 Jack and Etta Johnson in winter finery, 1910.

Winter clothing of the period was heavier, sometimes considerably heavier, than now.  All the modern synthetics that most people sport in winter to some degree did not exist, and therefore natural fibers, and furs, were what were used to avoid freezing.  Heavier dress even applied to some extent indoors, as buildings were simply not heated as well as presently, and were sometimes fairly cold even under the best of circumstances.

German soldier, 1914 or 1915.

Postscript

Today provides a good example.  I got u pat 05:00, it was was -1F.  I turned up the electric heat a bit.  What would I have done had it been 1913?  Threw some logs in an iron stove?  Checked the coal burning stove?  I'm not sure.

I went and made coffee with an electric drop coffee maker.  I know I wouldn't have done that in 1913.  I would have had to put some logs in the kitchen stove and boiled coffee on the stove top.  And I had cereal for breakfast, which I likely would not have done in 1913, unless it was oatmeal, which I would have had to cook on the stove top again.

Any my truck is warming up outside.  If it were 1913, I doubt I would have driven downtown, I probably would have walked.  Had I needed an automobile for something, it probably would have been a Model T, which no doubt is okay in snow, but not the same as my Dodge D3500.  And I would have had to hand crank it in subzero weather, which would have been iffy.

Postscript II

Or what about a day like today.  -22F when I got up at 05:00.

Postscript III

One thing that weather like this serves to illustrate is how much easier cars have gotten to start in cold weather.

Even up to the 1970s, weather like this required that a car with a substantial engine have its block heater plugged in overnight.  Every vehicle I've ever owned has had one, but frankly it has to get this cold before I plug them in anymore.  They just don't need it as they'll start in very cold weather.

This is particularly true of diesels.  I have a diesel now, and I've had one made in the 1990s before it. They both start in very cold weather.  When its this cold, I use the block heater. But at one time people wouldn't even buy diesels in this region because they'd freeze up, sometimes on the highway, during winter.

Also, it's interesting to note how much better insulated houses are. This started to be emphasized in the 1970s during the country's first energy crisis.  The cries has waxed and waned, but the emphasis on insulation has not, and modern houses are very well insulated as a rule.  Not all, of course, but most are.

The degree to which this has changed is perhaps best illustrated by my wife's belief that we need to run the water at night if its really freezing, which happens to this level a couple of times a year.  The only places I ever lived in that required that were in Laramie, and were very poorly insulated.  Here, I've never done that, and we've never needed to.  It still, however, makes her uncomfortable.  But then the farm house she lived in was probably built in the teens.

The Big Speech: Today In Wyoming's History: December 6. President Roosevelt's telegram to Emperor Hirohito

Today In Wyoming's History: December 6:

1941  President Roosevelt sent a telegram to Emperor Hirohito reading:

Almost a century ago the President of the United States addressed to the Emperor of Japan a message extending an offer of friendship of the people of the United States to the people of Japan. That offer was accepted, and in the long period of unbroken peace and friendship which has followed, our respective nations, through the virtues of their peoples and the wisdom of their rulers have prospered and have substantially helped humanity.
Only in situations of extraordinary importance to our two countries need I address to Your Majesty messages on matters of state. I feel I should now so address you because of the deep and far-reaching emergency which appears to be in formation.
Developments are occurring in the Pacific area which threaten to deprive each of our nations and all humanity of the beneficial influence of the long peace between our two countries. These developments contain tragic possibilities.
The people of the United States, believing in peace and in the right of nations to live and let lives have eagerly watched the conversations between our two Governments during these past months. We have hoped for a termination of the present conflict between Japan and China. We have hoped that a peace of the Pacific could be consummated in such a way that nationalities of many diverse peoples could exist side by side without fear of invasion; that unbearable burdens of armaments could be lifted for them all; and that all peoples would resume commerce without discrimination against or in favor of any nation.
I am certain that it will be clear to Your Majesty, as it is to me, that in seeking these great objectives both Japan and the United States should agree to eliminate any form of military threat. This seemed essential to the attainment of the high objectives.
More than a year ago Your Majesty's Government concluded an agreement with the Vichy Government by which five or six thousand Japanese troops were permitted to enter into Northern French Indochina for the protection of Japanese troops which were operating against China further north. And this Spring and Summer the Vichy Government permitted further Japanese military forces to enter into Southern French Indochina for the common defense of French Indochina. I think I am correct in saying that no attack has been made upon Indochina, nor that any has been contemplated.
During the past few weeks it has become clear to the world that Japanese military, naval and air forces have been sent to Southern Indo-China in such large numbers as to create a reasonable doubt on the part of other nations that this continuing concentration in Indochina is not defensive in its character.
Because these continuing concentrations in Indo-China have reached such large proportions and because they extend now to the southeast and the southwest corners of that Peninsula, it is only reasonable that the people of the Philippines, of the hundreds of Islands of the East Indies, of Malaya and of Thailand itself are asking themselves whether these forces of Japan are preparing or intending to make attack in one or more of these many directions.
I am sure that Your Majesty will understand that the fear of all these peoples is a legitimate fear in as much as it involves their peace and their national existence. I am sure that Your Majesty will understand why the people of the United States in such large numbers look askance at the establishment of military, naval and air bases manned and equipped so greatly as to constitute armed forces capable of measures of offense.
It is clear that a continuance of such a situation is unthinkable. None of the peoples whom have spoken of above can sit either indefinitely or permanently on a keg of dynamite.
There is absolutely no thought on the part of the United States of invading Indo-China if every Japanese soldier or sailor were to be withdrawn therefrom.
I think that we can obtain the same assurance from the Governments of the East Indies, the Governments of Malaya and. the Government of Thailand. I would even undertake to ask for the same assurance on the part of the Government of China. Thus a withdrawal of the Japanese forces from Indo-China would result in the assurance of peace throughout the whole of the South Pacific area.
I address myself to Your Majesty at this moment in the fervent hope that Your Majesty may, as I am doing, give thought in this definite emergency to ways of dispelling the dark clouds. I am confident that both of us, for the sake of the peoples not only of our own great countries but for the sake of humanity in neighboring territories, have a sacred duty to restore traditional amity and prevent further death and destruction in the world.

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Customer Service

Greetings!  You have reached our customer service line!  I'm not a real person, but a disembodied voice.  Please choose amongst the following options.

Uno por  Espanol!

Dieu pour Fracais!

Drei vor Deutsch!

6.5 for English!

 . . . . .

What, you're still there?  Well then, press amongst our following options to be better help you.

Press one if you are calling about billing (we really care about that one).

Press two if you are calling to spend a pleasant afternoon talking with our customer benevolence representative in Bopal.

Press three if you have a problem with our service which needs to be addresssed.

You have a problem?  How dare you. Well, pick amongst one of the following options regarding your problem

Press one if you can fix it yourself

Press two if you have ever been to Lithuania.

Press three if you are about to meet your ultimate demise due to our product, in which case you will be put on prema hold.

Press four to speak to a customer representative.

Hello, this is the automated line for customer representatives.  Please answer the following questions by speaking into our phone, which only recognizes the telephonic accent of a person born in Botswana who has learned to speak English solely through movies featuring Sean Connery.

Do you have a problem?  Please say "aye" or "nrrrrr."

Do you wish to speak to a person?  If so, give us their name right now.

I'm sorry, that person doesn't work to us, you will be transferred back to our answering service.

Greetings!  You have reached our customer service line!  I'm not a real person, but a disembodied voice.  Please choose amongst the following options.

Tuesday, December 3, 2013