of the latest buzzwords to hit the American scene is "diversity." You find it in politics, on college campuses, in hiring practices, just about everywhere. It’s being continually touted as a kind of cure-all. So all we need for better government is diversity. All we need for a better informed voting constituency is diversity. All we need for a more democratic process is, you guessed it, diversity.

But its proponents never specify the kind of diversity they’re talking about.

You see, there are all kinds of diversity. As that old saying goes: different strokes for different folks. Let’s just look at two of them — physical diversity and mental diversity.

If they mean physical diversity, then that would include the short and the tall; those with big feet and those with little feet; people who are skinny and people who are fat; the bearded and the clean-shaven; people with long hair and people with short hair; people with big noses and people with little noses; people with . . . Well, you get the picture.

And if they mean mental diversity, then that would include the bright and the stupid; the optimistic and the pessimistic; the generous and the miserly; etc., etc., etc.

Now if you’re going to have diversity, wouldn’t you have to include one of each? You sure would. But that would make the whole process unwieldy and unworkable. Right? But that’s only if you do it the old way. So I’ve got a better idea.

Webster’s says that "diversity" is "the condition of being different or having differences." So given that no two things in the universe are exactly the same, just put any two people together and you’ve got diversity. Right? And a lot simpler than the way it’s done now.

Just shows you what you can do when you put your mind to it.

Think about it.