There’s the hair on our heads and the hares in our yards, and there has been some confusion about which one is part of the expression "harebrained."

Game 6 of the Detroit Pistons series with the New York Knicks takes place after my deadline for this, so by the time you read it, future me will either be a bit happier or a bit sadder than current me. Either way, let's go Deee-troit basketball.

We can presume things, which may or may not be presumptuous. We can also assume things, which then raises the question of whether things can be "assumptuous."

I am particularly proud of the simple, clear message behind this week's cartoon: If you're implementing policies that consistently tank the market, then maybe don't implement those policies. No need to overthink it.

For those of us of a certain age, if we whack a tennis ball or a softball too hard or at the wrong angle, we could throw our back out of whack.

The behavior of our elected representatives is often more uncomfortably reflective of our own behavior than we would necessarily like it to be.

We sometimes talk about stealing or robbery in terms of "lifting" things, and this is relevant to "heists" as well.

Is it not clear at this point that the fate of our economic system should not be subject to the whims of a single person? This has been like watching great-grandpa, who never drove a car, trying to parallel park a Winnebego on a city street. Yeah, he's got the biggest vehicle and may eventually get it into a space. But there is gonna be so much damage. And so many enemies.

We will never know some of the informal language that was bandied about among speakers in the time of Beowulf.

A common criticism for an editorial cartoon: "It's not funny." The common response from an editorial cartoonist: "You're right." That's because the main goal of an editorial or political cartoon (a good one anyway) should be to stir a thought or even start a conversation. Humor can help, but it isn't necessary.