My view

 Growing up in a small town in the fifties and sixties definitely influenced my future. East Hampton, yes of "The Hamptons" is where I lived. During my time it was a bustling place between memorial day and Labor day. That was when all the termites came out to enjoy the scenic beauty the Hamptons had to offer. They had their fancy parties with their wealthy friends and a few celebrities. They would interact with the local "characters" for their wants and needs, much like the concierge service they were used to. The locals liked the money, in fact counted on that revenue to get them through the long winters, and catered to them. 

  Over the years that dynamic has changed a great deal. I left there in 1971, joining the Navy. I wasn't looking for a way out, a better life or any of that stuff, I just needed a job that would give me independence. In 1971, at least in my house, after graduating high school you either went to college, went to work, or joined the service. What you didn't do was live at home with your parents. No, the expectation was leaving the nest, even when a little shove was necessary. I don't know what the kids are expected to do these days, the economic situation is far worse than when I was there. Those termites are there year round but they don't really have the wealth of those old families, with that old money. 

 I often bemoan the loss of the place I grew up in. I think the majority of us would like to return home, home being the place of our youth. I realize it isn't the same for everyone and some had a rough childhood for a variety of reasons. My childhood I have no complaints about whatsoever. I had a place to live, family, friends and at times a few dollars in my pocket. The ocean and the bay were both available to me at any time I wanted to go. I lived on the edge of a wooded area that I could explore for hours. It was a very safe place to grow up, I could ride my bicycle everywhere and not have to be worried. Of course there were places were you weren't exactly welcomed with open arms but you simply didn't go there. Today I'm aware that that place doesn't exist anymore. The past resides in the past and isn't here today. Funny how that takes so long to admit to, to grasp. 

  After traveling around a bit for my navy career, living in various places, I settled down here in Greensboro, Md. Small, you bet, population about 2500 or so. Just a few stores on main street and when I first moved here one stoplight, now we have two. Downtown hasn't grown a bit, in fact you could say a bit smaller as we lost the hardware store. I can't say how it was back in the sixties and seventies, I wasn't here, but I'm thinking it was quite a bit different from the stories I have been told by the old timers. By all accounts Greensboro had a very active night life with a movie theater and dance hall. I was told of the riverboat coming up the Choptank river docking at the Greensboro Hotel and providing that entertainment. There is nothing like that here today. A small town still, but the residents, for the most part, are isolated from one another. A reflection of the world today, neighbors barely speak. 

  I still like living in Greensboro, like that small town atmosphere. I joke about moving as things are getting crowded, did I mention two stop lights. Just the other day I read where they are going to install a speed camera on the 600 block of main street. Makes sense, that is where the elementary school is located. I'm not certain of the current population but it has to be more than it was twenty some years ago. Like everywhere else in America we have many undocumented residents. This is an agricultural area. It is also a relatively inexpensive place to live and law enforcement is rather spotty. If you wanted to stay under the radar for any reason Greensboro is a good place for that. Crime is low, mostly property crimes and the other stuff of small town America. All in all, pretty safe place to be, although dull and boring to those wanting the night life. 

  I find it amusing when I see a trip to the Hamptons as a prize on the Price is Right. I never imagined such a thing as a kid growing up there. The prize package is often quoted as worth over ten thousand dollars for a five day stay. If I won that I would sell it immediately for as much as someone was willing to pay. The reason being, East Hampton, the town I knew no longer exists. It was sold many years ago. I have never been one to place much stock in the wealthy or famous people. I don't care to be associated with them. I would take no pride in proclaiming I live in the Hamptons. That doesn't do anything for me as far as status or entitlement of some kind.

  It's the same as living in Greensboro as far as I'm concerned. I will say this though, I don't see Greensboro as ever being a prize on the Price is Right. I'll go out on that limb and say it will never be a prize on the Price is Right. We did have a tourist once, but he was lost. The Greensboro Hotel is now a half-way house for drug addicts. The river needs dredging and no river boat comes our way. 

                                                                                        

 Ariel view of Greensboro Maryland photo credit to my daughter in law Maria, the adventurer in the hot air balloon. 

Remember that

  The dates are piling up. I haven't set up my computer to give me reminders, an early warning system of impending dates marking significant events. This morning for instance I discovered it was an old friends birthday. I have to admit, the date escaped me. At the same time time I realized it was my grandsons' wedding anniversary, celebrating two years. I have a cousin that is also celebrating a birthday. There are far more days I should recall the older I am getting. That's what I mean about the dates piling up. It's a rather cruel twist of fate. The older you get the more you have to remember. God does have a sense of humor.

  Memorial day is fast approaching and I am reminded of that by all the sales advertised on television. Advertising informs us all of every holiday on the calendar. It would be hard to miss any of those. I'm old enough to remember when a holiday was celebrated on the actual day of the holiday. That changed back in 1971 to make things "uniform." Really we just wanted to ensure a three day weekend for the holiday. It didn't change the advertising much, just ensured we had a long weekend to buy something. So holidays I usually have no problem knowing about, it's those "personal" days that are becoming more difficult. 

  We all establish our personal days that may or may not coincide with others. What I mean there is, dates that have significance to us on a personal level. When we marry you had best remember that date! Guys are notorious for not remembering. Birthdays, other than our own and our children may prove to be challenging. The thing is, as we age we have to start adding in deaths as well. I find that a difficult date to remember as I don't like thinking of those folks as gone. I am surprised at times when I realize how long ago that happened. I wonder if I should be far more aware of that and if I'm not does that indicate something? Is remembering the date directly related to the personal importance of that date? That's the feeling I get when I forget and I feel bad about that. I should have remembered. 

  Generally speaking I think the ladies remember these dates far more often than the men do. Perhaps that is just a stereotype, an urban legend or something. I don't think women are more sentimental than men, I think they are expected to be however. Well, that's all a part of the marketing scheme in my eyes.  The men are supposed to be men, at least it was that way back in the twentieth century during my formative years. Society was different back then. We were expected to notice, and indeed recognize, the differences between men and women. There were expectations! Today I don't think that is as prevalent. Today all that just keeps me guessing. You can't be too certain of anything anymore. 

  When I was still in school and attending church on a regular basis I was aware of religious holidays. The big one I have no problem remembering; Christmas. Palm Sunday and Easter are more challenging as the date moves around on the calendar. Of course, advertising helps out there as well, with the Cadbury bunny making his appearance. I attended an Episcopal church and was aware of the changing liturgical seasons, advent, Christmas, epiphany, lent, easter and Pentecost. I don't recall there being any celebrations for that, just a mention from the Reverend that we would be celebrating Advent or whatever. Those dates I have no clue about today although I'm certain I could get reminders about that as well. 

  Dates are a challenge for me. It's funny because I also have a love of history and genealogy. Both of those require a good memory for dates. I can remember the event but the day it took place is often lost, or the decade for that matter. If I'm truthful sometimes the century! I have to look it up to be certain. That's true even with my family members birthdays. I know the month, the exact day however is another thing. I know when I was born, the date and year anyway. I don't expect to remember when I die. I figure I won't want to be reminded either. I've been here for 26,538 days and counting. I can't remember every date! If you want me to remember, advertise. 

                                                                                 

  

Memories returned

  I'm a bit of a hoarder, a collector of artifacts from the past related to my friends and family. I have been fortunate to have inherited these items over the years through the thoughtfulness of others. It is no secret that I treasure those things. Another artifact was added yesterday, sent to me by my brother in law, although my sister has been gone for seven years now. He has remarried but remains a part of my family and will always be. We stay in touch and he is in the process of selling his Florida home, the home he shared with my sister. That little artifact was on the side of that house, a relic my sister had saved from her past. That was a past I shared with her, a memory of someone special.

  I'll try to briefly explain. I lived on a dirt road with just four other houses. One neighbor, a lady we called Aunt Francis, although she wasn't related to us in any way, became especially close to my sister. Aunt Francis never had any children of her own, a medical issue I was told later on in life, and so "adopted" my sister Millie. Aunt Francis, Rollings was her last name through marriage and I'm not certain of her maiden name, was quite a colorful character. She always wore a dress, those rolled stockings, and bloomers! Yes, whenever she bent over to weed the garden or pick something up she looked like those yard ornaments you see today, the one with a woman's' bloomers showing. We also saw them on the clothesline. 

  Her home was quite small, one bedroom, a kitchen and living room, that was it.  A bathroom had been added to the bedroom at some point, more like a closet. Well, I guess that is why they used to call them a water closet. Aunt Francis was the queen of frugality. Having grown up "poor" as she often told us she had learned how to "make do." She saved the bacon grease, refused to buy paper towels, told me how you can get at least three uses of a tea bag and how to forage for food. She picked various fruits and vegetables from the side of the road, old orchards and any place else she could find. And Aunt Francis would occasionally shoot grey squirrels in her yard with a bb gun. She dressed those squirrels out and fried them for dinner! Yes, she shared them with me as well, along with a glass of dandelion wine she had made. As I said, quite the character.

  When she passed away she left her home, car, and personal belongings to my sister. Aunt Francis had a sister but said, my sister has enough and doesn't need anything. It wasn't that she didn't want her sister to have anything rather it was a simple matter of logic to her. My sister needed those things and her sister didn't. Aunt Francis was very practical about everything. Now one of those things left to my sister was a cast aluminum squirrel. This little decoration was nailed to side of her house by the back door. I remember it being there as far back as 1965 for certain. How she came to have that I have no idea. I suspect it was a gift as Aunt Francis wasn't likely to buy anything so frivolous as that. 

  To shorten the tale a bit my sister did marry and eventually sold that home. She kept that squirrel as a memento of Aunt Francis, taking it with her wherever she went. Her husband was an Air Force man and they moved around. That little squirrel has been to Germany and back! It finally rested on her house in Florida, nailed to the house by the back door. Yesterday, that squirrel arrived at my door. I am thrilled to have it as it contains so many memories, so much sentiment attached to that. I immediately took it to my workshop and nailed it to the side of that building. It isn't a back door but it is close enough. The squirrel is back in his habitat. 

  I've decided to call that squirrel Francis. I will get a smile out of that every time I see it. It's a bit of a time machine, the closet thing I will ever see to one anyway. It sure takes me back. Lots of memories there, covering more than sixty years. That squirrel was at my 16th birthday party, a party given to me by my sister at her new home. That would have been 1969. None of that could have been imagined all those years ago. What a journey Francis has been on. 

                                     

                                                                                         

                                                                                       

                                                                               

                                                                                    

The need to know

  After writing yesterdays posting I thought about starting a new project. It wouldn't be an autobiography, nothing that ambitious, but rather the telling of secrets. My working title is, "after I'm gone." That would be because I wouldn't want any of that to be read, to be available to anyone, until after I am gone. I'm thinking of a sort of time capsule thing, only digital in nature. I wonder how many months, or years, would be the appropriate amount of time before they were released. I see it more as a Paul Harvey piece, the rest of the story. Its' purpose being to provide an explanation. Perhaps after reading it some would go, so that's why. Trying to make sense out of life isn't an easy task, even when it isn't your own. 

  I have started writing a book, a memoir or whatever you would call that, several times. The results have always been less than satisfactory. I once shared a small snippet of what I had written and it wasn't received well. I get it, it just isn't very entertaining. My intent in writing isn't to entertain, but to explain. Textbooks are rarely read for enjoyment. We read text to learn the lesson presented, or at the very least, the ability to repeat what was written. Many receive degrees for doing just that, even advanced degrees. They haven't learned a thing, just repeated the lesson. Whatever I write will not carry the weight of celebrity or scholarship. It's my feeling they are requirements for a book basically concerned with philosophy. I have come to understand that is what I'm really writing. Very weighty stuff from just a high school graduate from small town America. 

  My family not being wealthy or influential I have zero recognition. As it turns out that is what is required, brand recognition. It's the only way the product gets sold. Well, more properly it is the only way the products gets "bought." If I want you to buy what I'm selling, I have to provide you with entertainment of some type. Brand loyalty is little different from a cult. In this new digital age we may go viral. When that happens you gain "followers." A viral infection? A following? It sure resembles a cult to me. That is way too much responsibility for me to handle. I'm willing to try if I have a few million dollars to help me along. I believe I could dodge the pitfalls of extreme wealth and remain grounded. 

  Getting back to what I  was thinking about, sharing the back story after I'm gone, I'm certain that would be more entertaining. We do like to read about the failures, the mistakes, the silly things and situation others get themselves into. It makes us all feel just a little better about ourselves. Now that we have decided to remove judgement we have adopted the "me too" attitude. In that way you don't have to feel bad about any of those foolish mistakes you may have made, you can simply say, me too. Join the club as we used to say back in the day. 

  Today we brag about our failures and shortcomings, proclaiming ourselves as survivors and hero's. I'm thinking those are the things I would share, "after I'm gone" as I don't want to embarrass myself while I'm living. I certainly don't feel like they are anything to brag about, I've often gone to great lengths to not have others find out about that stuff. What was I thinking? I wasn't, and that is the problem. Philosophy involves reason and at times I certainly acted in an unreasonable fashion. 

  My real trepidation about writing all that and having it read by others is the possibility of it hurting others feelings. To be more specific, family or friends. The truth can hurt. It may also change the opinion others have formed about me. That's why I wonder how long it should be before all of that would be available. How many generations removed from yourself? My thought is it would have to been when there is no one left that knew you personally while you were alive. When I first began writing these posts one of my thoughts was to tell the whole story. We are the only one that can do that with 100% accuracy. It does require courage to do that. It's also true that fools rush in where wise men fear to tread. 

  I'm well aware that I am of little to no consequence in the big scheme of things. My name won't be found in any history of the world being told. I'll just be another name among billions of names. I'm just fine with that, it is what it is. I confess I do hope my descendants will remember and repeat my name. Maybe even have a photograph of me on their wall. They are the ones I hope will want to read what I have written. Entertainment provided to satisfy a curiosity. At what point can a curiosity be satisfied without judgement?  

  I'm thinking that point will never be fully realized. Consider what is happening today with many historical figures. They enjoyed great admiration and respect for many generations. Today, many of those people are now being exposed as bigots, slave owners, and just terrible people. Their statues are being torn down and replaced, in some cases, by criminals now viewed as hero's. History will judge. No one is above that judgement! Even our Gods have been, and continue to be judged. Judgment is the discernment of truth.  Moral truth is established by society, not by textbooks, scientific methods or degrees. 

  If I am to write that memoir I am obligated to tell the truth. It is a moral obligation. Religion , we are told, is the vehicle to a moral life. We need to follow and practice the tenets of the religion. In that way we will please our God and be granted the reward. It is not so important what that reward is, as it is in obtaining the reward itself. That's the goal. Obedience to a moral standard. How is that standard established? It is established on an individual basis. Yes, there are social pressures associated with all of that, indeed there are civil pressures as well, that is what laws are all about. The choice to adhere to the moral choice is an individual choice. 

  It is an internal struggle. Do I really have the strength, the moral standard to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Isn't that the standard? It is, still I'm concerned about others reading it and that causes me some self reflection. Does everyone need to know? We all certainly feel like we do, that can't be denied. How can we make a fair judgment without all the facts? The thing is, in this case, do I want to be judged fairly? Do I want to be judged at all? Well that depends doesn't it? Judgment is a bad thing when it goes against your wishes but celebrated when it goes your way. I have thought this; there are things best left between you and your God. That's true even when that God is simply your own conscience. 

  Conscience is the establishment of a moral standard. That is the reward of a moral life. It is only realized after our death. Can you live with your conscience, for an eternity? Something to think about isn't it. We don't get a participation trophy for just being here, that's my thought. 

                                                                                       

                                                                                       

                                                                                              

Recorded?

  I often feel like these blogs of mine are nothing more than talking to myself. That's not a bad thing, I seldom get into an argument and have learned a few things over the years. I have found that I will talk about the same stuff and I'm pleased to see I haven't really changed all that much over those years. I still pretty much feel the same way about most things. There really is little new in the world, something I heard my parents say and only now do I really understand what they meant. People and their emotions and notions haven't changed, still self centered for the most part. I include myself in that assessment. Today they call that "mental health" and you are urged to get help with that, mostly through pharmaceuticals. A few pills and a therapist, you'll be good to go.

   According to the statistics I have posted 5,257 blogs over the last twelve years. I have received 646 comments. So, as you can see if you counted one comment per blog that would mean about 12% of the time. It's actually less as some blogs have multiple comments, the vast majority having none at all. But all that depends upon how you want to report it. Still these generally early morning discussions I have with myself have become somewhat more a force of habit than motivated by anything else happening in the world. There are many mornings when I contemplate not continuing at all. But I remind myself of my original intent in posting them, to leave a record of me. 

  I don't believe there is enough material for me to write an autobiography that would be of much interest to those that aren't related to me, or a close friend. Beyond that little circle my life has just been the same everyday story as most everyone else. It isn't a drama or any great story of success, of survival or empowerment. No it has just been me doing whatever I thought best at the time. I didn't always do what was best. I just moved on from that, sometimes learning from it, sometimes repeating that mistake multiple times. But, I'll be leaving my thoughts behind, and that is what I was thinking about. It matters to me. 

  I now view this as the modern day version of a journal or diary. Many people have kept those over the years, I know my sister did. She didn't share her journal with anyone however. She told me as she filled her journal, she would simply discard it afterwards. I think the earliest version of that would have to have been the family bibles. People used to record births and deaths in those bibles, marriages and other life changing events. For genealogists they are a treasure trove of information and taken as the final authority! If something is recorded in the family bible it will stand up in a court of law! My blog postings will not carry that weight. It's my feeling that they should however, as I am the authority on my opinions and views. It's what I said.

  The biggest difference in blogging and keeping a diary is in the information shared. I do not share my personal thoughts and views. Diaries are far more intimate. I have no desire to engage in that practice, I don't want to record my shortcomings and failures, something required of a diary. No my hope is to leave behind something that may prove useful to others. At the very least I hope to entertain, if only for a few moments at a time. I now have a great granddaughter. I hope one day she may read some of my postings. 

  I knew my own great grandfather and wish I had asked him a lot more questions than I did. I would love to read his opinions on things never discussed with him. Not personal things, that isn't what I mean, I just mean things in general. The things that were new to him, like a telephone or a television set. What did he think about cars? Just the everyday life sort of stuff. He was born in 1878 and had certainly seen a lot by the 1960's when I knew him. 

  I was born in the mid twentieth century, the 1900's and my great granddaughter will most likely experience much the same with me. Then perhaps when she reaches her forties she will wonder about the stuff that happened in the late twentieth century, stuff like the Vietnam war, 9/11 and social issues. Today we think back and read about those things we didn't experience, things like slavery, and wonder what did those living at that time really think. What were their views?  I wonder if these blogs of mine will still be on some server somewhere, accessible to the everyday person. We tend to believe things will last forever but that certainly isn't the truth. Or will this all be lost, like the great library of Alexandria, destroyed by some catastrophe. Will we be some "advanced" civilization lost to time. 

                                                                        

The file cabinets of the 21st century. Will they endure? 

Friends

  There are those on Facebook that I am "friends" with. It's a term loosely thrown around these days, like saying I Love You to everyone and anyone. Even guys are saying that to one another, to prove how macho and secure in their masculinity they are. I do enjoy exchanging my morning salutations with who ever chooses to answer. I began typing in a simple Good Morning some years back as a means of being social because, well, it is social media. It has evolved into somewhat of a morning ritual. All my friends responding in time throughout the day. 

  Now a number of those friends I have on Facebook I have never met in person. There are those I only know through past associations with their friends or families. There are those that went to the same school as I did, sometimes in the same year and class, but I wouldn't have called them friends back then. It wasn't that I didn't like them or anything like that, we just didn't hang out together. Then there are those that I only recognize by a family name. It is surprising to me how many had brothers and sisters that I didn't know about. I'm surprised at how many cousins I had in school and was unaware of that. Somehow, I have 369 names on my friends list. And I don't accept every friend request sent my way, and so that is rather surprising as well. Out of the 369 I'd say I only really know about thirty or so.

  I was thinking about that this morning after responding to someone. My thought was I consider these folks friends and they are some of the best ones. Then I realized the reason for that. I really know so little about them. Our interaction has always been a simple exchange of pleasantries. Polite conversation you could call it. It rather reminds me of the 1960's when people did observe the rules of what I call, polite company. You didn't discuss politics or religion. It wasn't that those subjects weren't mentioned, they certainly were, but no argument or debate followed. You either agreed with what was said or you didn't but you kept that to yourself, for the most part. Of course, if you were in agreement you could let that be known, to strengthen the friendship. If you didn't, often times you just excused yourself and moved on. 

  There is nothing like getting too personal with someone to ruin a good friendship. It may sound strange but it is the truth of the matter. It's my feeling that is a part of the problem today. Everyone wants to be in everyone else's business. That's bad enough but when you are constantly trying to force your business on others that really exacerbates the situation. There are some things I would just as soon I didn't know. Yes, you could say I keep some things in the closet. I have found that to be a prudent thing to do on many occasions. I'll share that with you when the time is right, if ever it is right. It's true that each of us are a unique individual and as such we have our foible's. It isn't usually a good idea to expose them. 

  With all the talk today about DEI and prejudices and biases it seems many have missed the point. In order to have meaningful dialogue you have to hold somethings back. If you alienate the other person they surely aren't going to consider your thoughts, ideas or ideology. You will be summarily dismissed. At least that is what I do. When I have determined no further discussion with you will be fruitful in any way, you are dismissed. It's like reading a book. Some you will just sit down and others you will read time and time again. It isn't about hate, it's about what you feel is beneficial to yourself. 

  We have all heard the expression put your cards on the table. The meaning being, show your hand, complete transparency in todays' jargon. It is also the end of the game. That seems to be what people are missing in that scenario. If you wish others to continue to interact with you, you can't show them all your cards at once. The rule of the game can't be, I win. Friendship is a gradual thing, not established all at once. Attempting to do that can be an overwhelming experience. Too much, too soon. Allow the other person time to decide if they want to join in or go another direction. Friends walk alongside one another. It's the same way with a happy marriage. 

  I do discriminate.  Yes, I don't accept every friend request that appears on my Facebook page. I seldom go look at a person profile page, I place as much trust in that as I do the evening news these days. If I do not know the name, it isn't familiar in any way, I will dismiss that request. You could say I'm just a bit suspicious. I would call it being prudent. I realize there are those out there attempting to gain access to my account for nefarious reasons. I also know they would be sorely disappointed if they did, but I'll just keep'em guessing. I judge, I discriminate, and I make no apologies for any of that. I don't have friends of a different race, a different religion, or a different sexual orientation, I just have friends. I may or may not know about any of those traits. I may agree or disagree with any one of those traits. It really does depend upon the person and how they interact with me. I don't like lima beans. If you invite me to dinner do not insist I try them, I won't; and I won't be coming to dinner again. That's how that works.   

                                                                            

"A friend to all, is a friend to none" (Aristotle)  

"Be slow to fall into friendship; but when thou art in, continue firm and constant."  (Socrates) 

 

Defining

  Change the meaning of the word and you change the reaction people have to that word. It is something I have been talking about for some time now, this redefining. When I was in elementary school we had a classroom devoted to those children labeled, retarded. I know, sounds terrible right? But at that time retarded just meant they were a little behind, like retarding the spark on an engine. It was just something held back a bit. Today we call those children special needs children. I don't see them as needing anything special at all, just time and patience. Treat them as you would treat any other child and eventually they will catch up. I even read where that was being proposed by a highly educated and respected member of the psychiatric community. It's a progressive approach. Yeah, like we did back in 1963.

  Queer certainly has changed in meaning several times over the years, along with gay. I remember when we said someone was acting queer it meant they were doing something odd, out of the ordinary, or out of character for them. During Christmas we were all gay, today not so much, unless you identify with a community of gay people. In recent years trans people have arrived on the scene, they're gay too. Wasn't that long ago they were considered mentally ill people that required treatment. It was called gender dysphoria. It lead to psychological distress. The cure, it has been determined, is to simply tell those folks it is completely normal to feel like that. Don't be upset, we have drugs and surgeries for that now, it's fine. It isn't a mental issue after all. We can now treat any dysphoria you may be experiencing. Better living through chemistry. We call that mental health. Back in the day we called it being medicated. People whose bubble was just off of plumb a bit were treated like that. 

  Abortion has certainly changed in meaning as well. It was known as a illegal procedure to abort the birth of a child. That was back when we all knew and understood if a woman was pregnant, no matter how long she had been in that condition, the expected result was the birth of a child. Yes, if you were pregnant, you would have a baby. You really didn't have a choice about that, it was what was going to happen. It's true that it wasn't 100% guaranteed, there were instances of problems and miscarriages that prevented that from happening, but generally speaking it was expected a baby would be born. Today many feel like an abortion is a constitutional right. It's just a choice you can make, life or death. Nothing wrong with doing that. Strange how we decided the death sentence for even the most heinous criminals is just inhuman but the death sentence for an unborn child, well, that's a valid choice, no issue there. 

  Illegal aliens are now undocumented migrants. Yeah, those people just migrated into our country without bothering to tell anyone about that. In the real estate world they would be called squatters. As far back as the 1600's in north America people were squatting on land that didn't belong to them. They were simply migrating west. In years past they were called explorers and settlers. We celebrated them, even have a holiday remembering one in particular. Today we have folks squatting in homes that don't belong to them and it is taking a court ordered removal to get them out. It's no different with these illegal aliens but now we are giving the squatters food, medical care, a free education and citizenship. We're still debating the whole housing issue. 

  Yeah, things have changed alright. Some of those giving all that to those illegals also say we should give the land back to the Indians because we squatted on their land. Well, the land that we took by force or was sold to us. Then there were those that just went west and squatted on that land without filing any claim, deeds, or paperwork to establish ownership. It was undocumented. They just went there and squatted down like a liberal at a gay parade! Eventually most were removed by force. There were just refugees from the cities in the east, migrating west, seeking a better life for their families. But history records them as, squatters. Seems like we should be celebrating their heroism today! Consider all the strife and struggle they had to endure just to get there. Those poor refugees.

  This redefining takes place with every generation that comes along. I get that, I understand that but I don't like it. If we can't define the rules how can we expect to continue to play the game? Just how we all arrive at a common definition is something I have no answer for. Each of us are different in our views and ideas. I call it the acceptance of reality. Reality is defined by the majority, as is normal. If you can convince the majority of the people that something is normal, it will be accepted as the reality. Remember there were civilizations that actually believed human sacrifice was an acceptable means to satisfy the gods. It was the normal and expected thing, a reality of life within that society. You begin that process by redefining the meaning of a single word. Normal is that word. Make an action normal and everyone will accept it. 

  The only problem being, defining what is normal. Normal is established by conformity. But conformity is a bad thing; right? Yes, those that refuse to conform will tell you that. What is good is bad and bad is good, that's the narrative. Do as I say and everything will be just fine, failure to conform to the rules will result in punishment. The rules are subject to change at any moment. I know that is what it says, but that isn't what it means. I'll tell you the accepted meaning at this time, just conform to that. I'll tell you when it changes. Conservative now means you are a Republican supporter of Donald Trump. Liberal means you are a Democrat attempting to establish a socialist state. There are no other meanings for those words. 

                                                                                 

 

  

  

The rule of law

  The supreme court is hearing a case concerning birthright citizenship today. Well, that's what the news will tell you that case is about anyway, but it really isn't. No, it is really about whether federal judges can override presidential authority. It's about those judges issuing injunctions to block executive orders. The decision to be made is whether a federal judge has authority outside of their own jurisdiction. Can they legislate on the "federal" level? That is to say, a national level. Can they issue what are called universal injunctions?

  This case has come about in response to Trumps executive order to end birthright citizenship. That's what the news will tell you, the Democrats and the left leaning media. You will hear the line about violating the constitution and the 14th amendment. The truth is they are not asking the court to decide on birthright citizenship, only on limiting the scope of the power of federal judges. Yes, it's a legal quagmire and one I don't pretend to have expert knowledge about. I have read several explanations about just what this is all about for sources without an agenda. They are out there if you search for them. The bottom line is Trump is not trying to end birthright citizenship with his executive orders. 

  These universal injunctions were issued because of the concerns of a number of illegal immigrants, that are pregnant and worried their children wouldn't automatically become citizens of the United States. That's a constitutional right! What we have are democrats protecting illegals by using our own judicial system. Todays arguments in the court are not about birthright citizenship, that isn't the question being asked. In fact there is no question being asked of the court at all. What is being asked is a modest request. The judge can only issue a judgement or order for the litigants in the case in front of them. The same thing the democrats are calling for with everyone to be deported receiving a trial. That, they maintain is only fair, in fact, a constitutional right. All Trump is saying is, federal judges would have to issue a judgement individually, in each case. He wants a ruling on this "universal" injunction. 

  As I said I'm no legal beagle but I can read. The democrats have been weaponizing the legal system for some time now. There latest is this issuing of universal injunctions, a practice that was relatively rare in the past. Federal trial courts issued more universal injunctions and temporary restraining orders in the month of February than the first three years of the Biden administration! It's getting out of control. The executive branch should not be overridden by a federal judge sitting in Maryland or Texas. That isn't how that should work. That is what this case is all about. 

  All of this is just another attempt to redefine the terms and conditions outlined in the constitution and the bill of rights. Can a federal judge issue a universal injunction to prevent the presidents' executive orders? Is that a part of their role? The supreme court is the final authority regarding the constitutionality of any legislation. That's what the constitution says. To a layman like myself that seems pretty clear. If that is in question, the supreme court has to decide that, not some random federal judge. As far as birthright citizenship goes that is also in question as a constitutional right. People born in the United States must be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That depends upon whether they owe allegiance to, and are entitled to the protection of, the United States. Children born to the parents of those in our country illegally are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, simply entitled the due process of law. But that is a different argument altogether from what is being brought before the court today. 

  Today the argument is about the scope of a federal judges authority. Can they issue a universal injunction to block the executive actions of the president? There is no specific federal statute allowing federal judges to issue universal injunctions. The authority comes from the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65. It isn't in the constitution enshrined as some right, it isn't even a statute. That's why the court has to determine the scope of this authority. It's a ruling on a rule. A legal quagmire for certain, as are all legal disputes when it comes right down to it. That is the purpose of the supreme court, to provide that final statement, "because I said so, that's why" Does that say so belong to the president or to any one of 1,761 federal judges not on the supreme court? The answer is; the say so belongs to the congress of the United States of America. The say so belongs to you. 

 Here's the rules: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/federal_rules_of_civil_procedure_december_1_2022_0.pdf

                                                                               

shamed

  The big news I keep seeing on social media and the evening news is that the baseball hall of fame has removed players names from the banned list. Every name removed is a deceased player. The big excitement is that Pete Rose is now eligible for induction. He had agreed to a lifetime ban over thirty years ago in exchange for all investigations into his gambling stop. They did, he was banned and he has since passed away. His lifetime ban agreement has been fulfilled. I'm wondering why all the hoopla about his eligibility. That was the deal.

  No one has ever said that Pete Rose didn't have a baseball career worthy of being in the hall of fame. His talent on the field was indisputable. That had nothing to do with the ban. He alternately admitted to betting on games and denying betting on games. It was proven, he was given due process, something we are all deeply concerned about today, that he had in fact violated the rules in betting. That is the sole reason for that ban being instituted. While being given his due process he negotiated that deal with major league baseball. It was signed, sealed and delivered. 

  Now for over thirty years Pete Rose whined and complained about that. He wrote books, went on talk shows and tried every way he could to gain public sympathy. He succeeded in getting public sympathy from Pete Rose fans, but that never changed the agreement. Major league baseball stood firm, exercising the integrity that was expected from Pete Rose. Pete Rose never displayed that particular trait choosing to be make excuses, whine and cry about his misdeeds. He felt he was above the law, he was not. I will say he remained true to his personality till the day he died, unapologetic and arrogant. 

  There were sixteen other names removed from that list. How many do you know? Honestly I couldn't name a single one of them. It's true I'm not a "fanatic" when it comes to baseball. I call myself a Yankee fan, I enjoyed playing the game, I still enjoy watching the game but I haven't memorized any stats for any players. Those players are now also eligible for induction  into the hall of fame. This came about as the result of litigation on the behalf of Pete Rose who, apparently was still complaining even after death. The hall of fame agreed that from now on a "lifetime" ban means the lifetime of the player, not the lifetime of the hall. Ah, more of that liberal logic and interpretation of language. So forgiveness after death is now included in the code of conduct for major league baseball.

  I have no doubt Pete Rose will be inducted into the baseball hall of fame at the next available opportunity, that's if they don't make a special exception in his case and do it sooner. Will all the others be included as well? I highly doubt that unless those players are a member of a minority group, then almost certainly as we saw that happen back in 2020. Remember when they added those players that had never played in the major league into the major league hall of fame because they were black. They hadn't been included prior to that because, they hadn't played in the major league. The reasoning was simply, they could have.

  I guess it is the same reasoning with Pete Rose and the others. They could have not violated the rules, got themselves banned by cheating. Now they are dead and gone and can't cheat anymore, put them in the hall of fame, maybe create a new category for them. The bad boys hall of fame. The shortcut guys. Cheaters and liars. Why not, we are erecting statues for criminals these days. Once you're dead it's all good. The bad guys can be heroes too! A redefining of integrity, morality and fair play. Yeah ok, he did fulfill the deal, he was banned for a lifetime, his death put him in the hall. Thing is, in my opinion he should be standing in the corner! The hall of shame is more appropriate. 

                                                                                

                                                                                      

take me away

  About a week ago I saw a post on Facebook. In this post they pointed out that some are now referring to the 1900's. It was said Gen Z is doing that. Well, we have created a generational awareness since Y2K. I don't recall the term baby boomers being thrown around much when I was growing up. I certainly didn't hear about all the others. The silent generation? My parents were both members of that generation and there wasn't anything quiet about them! I understand the term actually refers to their "conformist" and "civic" sensibilities. It was us boomers that started shaking things up, some say because of the boob tube! Yes, television was going to cause the downfall of the empire. In some ways I'd have to agree with that. Mass communication has certainly been a contributing factor to social unrest. Too many people talking, not enough listening.

  I did grow up in a rather rural area. What was somewhat unique was the influence of the "tourists" or "summer people" and the very wealthy. Growing up in the amusement park of the wealthy had its' challenges. We native folks were rather down to earth people, the blue collar workers of the world and in general, stoic New Englanders. We lived in a harsh world and lived accordingly. The tourist business kept the majority of us going throughout the long winter months, riding on that cushion of revenue made between memorial day and labor day. I mention that to explain that we weren't country hicks unaware of the modern world and all it had to offer, that wasn't the deal. We were very much aware of what the rich folks were doing and tolerated that for the money. My father probably best explained that to me when he called them termites. Those folks came out of the woodwork and destroyed everything in sight! 

  I can only speak of the time and place where I grew up. That is my area of expertise. These are my memories, my thoughts and my observations. Sometimes they don't agree with others that were living there at the same time as I was. There were two sides of the tracks and  it was quite obvious to anyone paying attention. I'm told that still exists today, although I haven't lived there in over fifty years and so have no first hand knowledge of that. I do hear stories about those attempting to hold onto the past, aware that is is all just slipping away. Happens everywhere is my thinking as each generation passes. 

  I began thinking about that this morning as a memory filled my mind. I was remembering when I would go to the coffee shop each morning before work. Now it wasn't like today, stopping at the drive up at Dunkin' Donuts, or ordering your Latte at Starbucks. No, I went in and sat at the counter. Usually had about 45 minutes before I had to be on the job. Yes, I got up early enough to make sure I had time. Coffee and a corn muffin or English muffin was the normal thing. Some days when I was flush with cash I would order that egg and cheese on a toasted hard roll. It was a treat, a reward to yourself. Cost over a dollar. Sitting there at the counter and catching up with all the local happenings is something I do miss. Thinking back on that it does look like an old movie. If I had to define nostalgia I would just show a picture of that morning ritual. Like a Norman Rockwell painting, that's how it really was. 

  Perhaps there are still places like that in this country. I can see that in some remote area where they are unaffected by "progress" and what the newest thing is. But I harbor some doubt about that as the internet is everywhere and I'm certain the younger people clamor to that as quickly as I did with the television. I found it hard to believe that families used to gather around the radio, but my parents said they did just that, like the Waltons. I think perhaps before all of that people were far more curious about things and far more accepting of foreign ideas. Well, as long as those with those foreign ideas weren't trying to impose those ideas on them. Today, we hear it all, see it all, and many believe they know it all. It's my feeling we live in a very insecure world these days. We dismiss that as being "progressive." The easiest way to avoid conflict is just to go with the flow, don't upset that proverbial applecart. 

  I was born in the 1900's. Mid 1900's to be exact. Almost smack dab half way through the century. I did see a lot of changes. I wasn't a hippie though, never joined in that movement. The long hair, casual relationships, and commune thing. Yeah, none that worked really worked out, as socialism never does. And that is all that was, another experiment in socialism. I wasn't sold on that idea then and remain opposed. They call it being woke these days. Oh, I listened to the music, I wore some of the outfits and all that, I was cool man, just not that cool. I'd say I was always just about a decade or so behind. I'm way back there today, still in the 1900's. Some say I'm a relic! I'm not an activist, just grumpy. But with luck I may live long enough to be back in style.

  I have learned the truth in you can never go back. There are a hundred quotes, passages and essays about that and each of them true. There is no recreating a place and time. The past lives in your memories, which is an exclusive neighborhood. It's so exclusive that you are the only occupant. It is the way you remember it, regardless of what anyone else has to say about that. The past is the only real truth you can hold! That's the way it was. The only difficulty is holding onto that truth. 

  We humans tend to want to change everything, including the past. We call it being current. Well, currently I'm wishing for the 1900's. The 1950's and sixties being my preferred timeframe. The first half of the twentieth century was mostly wars. I was fortunate to be born during the boom. It was all good but we weren't satisfied with that. No, we needed color television and more than three channels! We protested the wars, blamed the soldiers for fighting in them, and demanded "social justice." Gone was the confidence of the past, we wanted a change and we got it, insecurity and doubt.

  And now here it is the 2000's. What have we got, confusion and chaos. We can't decide what a woman is for Gods' sake! Our swagger has turned into a wiggle, and we have drag queens to do that for the children. Pronouns are mandated. Free speech and hate speech. Free speech is when you can say any hateful, mean or vile thing about any elected official, but that same speech is hate when directed towards others. We even label abortion as healthcare. Yes, that is where we are today. Illegal aliens are just undocumented migrants, unborn children are just clumps of cells, and children get to choose a gender identity, which all the adults have to recognize, and indeed, enable through surgeries and pills. Doctors with years of training and experience no longer have to state what sex the child is, they can just check X. Yeah, we've come a long way baby, and much closer to hell in my opinion. Seems like we are headed there, in the proverbial handbasket. Makes me wish for something from the past. Calgon, take me away! You have to born in the 1900's to understand that. 

                                                                                 

    

Counting

  I'm always seeing posts about how the wealthy aren't paying enough in taxes. The billionaires are avoiding paying their fair share. Well to set the record straight that simply isn't the case. Using the existing tax laws to pay the least amount possible is just good business sense. Anyone telling me they won't do the same is simply a liar. Now it's true you may not be able to afford a tax attorney and an accountant to accomplish that task for you, but that isn't what I'm talking about. You will pay the least amount in tax that you can legally get away with, sometimes even when it isn't exactly legal, but you figure you can get away with it. 

 The confusion here is that we don't have a flat tax system. If everyone were to pay a set amount based on their income, a set percentage of that amount, then everyone would be paying their fair share. Say 10 cents on every dollar. You make one dollar, you pay ten cents, you make a million dollars, you pay 100,000 dollars. That's fair right? And those paying ten cents get everything those paying 100,000 do as well, as far as healthcare, government loans, and everything else. In fact, those paying that 100,000 should have to feed, clothe, house and provide an education to those ten centers. Now, that's fair! But that isn't how it works in the real world, you get what you earn, what you pay for. That's why we have a graduated tax system. There are benefits to be being successful, rewards and incentives. 

  With our current system 72% of all taxes collected come from 10% of the taxpayers. Yes, the top ten percent, those wealthy folks are paying 72% of the bill. Does that seem fair? Well, they can afford it, right? So is that how pricing should be. Everything should just be individually priced based on your income level. Your fair share is determined by your income level. I'm unemployed, I'm only collecting 75% of my income on unemployment insurance, my groceries, car note, mortgage and everything else should now be reduced by 25%, that's only fair. If I quit altogether and go broke, everything should now be free because I have zero income! That's fair.

  Well, we can all agree how ridiculous that is. There is nothing fair about that. The reason is a simple one, we are not all alike. Some are more ambitious than others. So we have tried to establish a set of tax codes to even things out a bit. Then we added in the tax regulations, which serve to interpret the code code and we have over 75,000 pages. That's why we have tax attorneys and accountants as well. If you can read the entire code and follow all the rules you can reduce your tax burden substantially, in some cases. Thing is, you have to make it before you can qualify to save it. Even then, the top ten percent, with their teams of lawyers and accountants are still paying 72% of the tax burden. 

  The deal is this. With our current graduated tax system the more you make the higher your tax rate becomes, to a point. Currently 37% for the top earners. The lowest one is 10%. That means the top earners are paying 27% more than the lowest and 37% more than those not working at all and collecting benefits from the taxpayers! Seems fair enough doesn't it? 

Group	Avg. Wages
Top 0.1% of Earners	$3,312,693
Top 1% of Earners	$819,324
Top 5% of Earners	$335,891
Top 10% of Earners	$167,639

  

  Took this chart from this website: https://www.investopedia.com/personal-finance/how-much-income-puts-you-top-1-5-10/

Notice how much the top ten percent are actually making. And they are paying 72% of the burden. Tell me again how those rich folks aren't paying their fair share. The top .1%. that's one tenth of one percent are making 3.3 million, not all that much really. As of 2024 there are 2,781 billionaires in the world. Their combined net worth being about 14.2 trillion. 813 of those billionaires are Americans. Our national debt is 36.2 trillion! They don't have enough money no matter how much they are taxed! Yeah, numbers are troublesome things when they don't add up in your favor. It's always an issue when someone else is doing the counting. 

                                                                                   

the secret

  This being Mothers day my thoughts just naturally turn to my own mother. Mom left us on the 18th of May in 2021. She lived a long life having been born on the 16th of September in 1929. I listened to the tales of her youth and the stories of the old days. Still, there is much I don't know, and much I will never know about the lady that was Mom. Funny how we don't think of our parents as people. Oh today we see a lot of that on social media, the old photographs reminding us that our parents and grandparents were at one time cool cats. The secret lives of parents, especially mothers if you are a guy, is often history denied. My mother would never have done that!

  It's a funny thing. I've heard stories about the deeds or misdeeds attributed to my father. Those youthful escapades and adventures every young man has. I've smiled and laughed about them, accepting those tales as the gospel truth. I've had no issue with accepting any of that. When I heard just a snippet of a tale involving my mother I drew back in indignation, not my mother. My mother would never be doing anything remotely like that. Even today, at age 71, I find it hard to believe what history has told me. Mom did get a divorce, but she wasn't my mom when that happened. It wasn't her fault! She once got a ticket for a traffic violation, wasn't her fault though. She had fights with her sisters and brothers! Saw her smoke a cigarette once, and drink alcoholic beverages too, but she stopped all that sometime back in 1960's. 

  Mothers live in a ether world for us little boys. A world full of purity and light. Mom never did anything wrong, it was always for our own good. Even when the evidence lies before us, indisputable, that remains the case. Moms can do no lasting wrong, it's only temporary. There was always a valid reason, a purpose behind her actions. Sometimes she did things wrong just to show you that it was wrong! She didn't want to, she had to. That is the job of a mother. Mothers love and protect you forever, against anything and everything. With mothers you can remain that sacred little boy that just needs a hug. Mom is your lifelong therapist. Mothers understand. They understand what you don't know, and that is the secret to a mothers' love.  

                                                                              

Mom and I, summer 1958. 

brothers

  In listening to the news of the new Pope, something I offered my opinion on yesterday, I keep hearing about his Creole roots. The black community is celebrating the first black Pope is what I've heard. I'm certain there are black Catholics in America, although I can't say as I ever met any. But I didn't know that Creole was black, I thought Creole was being Creole. I haven't heard any comments from those that are Creole, wonder what their take on that is. All of that isn't important to me though, just a matter of curiosity. I'm amused by the claiming of heritage and ancestry these days. It's like it's a race to claim some prize or privilege. I see it as a part of the "me too" movement that was so popular not long ago. Oh, me too! Yeah, okay you're whatever.

  My ancestors were German, Swedish and English peoples. I did a DNA thing with Ancestry.Com and got that pie chart. Yes, what a surprise my ancestors came from all over the place and some I had no idea about. Thing with that is it doesn't change what I am. I'm a white American guy from the New England region of the United States of America. I am not German, Swedish or English. I have no first hand knowledge of any of their customs or beliefs. I was never subjected to that culture, to their governments or involved with those folks in any way. No, I'm just an American. We are whatever culture we are raised in and there is no changing that, no picking a nationality or ethnicity. You can't do that any more than you can pick your gender. Changing pronouns has nothing to do with that.

  I have known people that want to tell you of their relationship to some celebrity, like that makes them a celebrity. For me, this claiming of your ancestry falls in the same category. Yes, my great grandfather was a man named Christian Reichart and arrived in the United States in 1855. He was a German. I was born in the United States in 1953, I am an American. My grandmother was born in Munkfors, Sweden and came to America through Ellis Island in 1899. My mother, her daughter was born in America and was an American. That's how that works. I'm amused today when we are using our DNA to identify ourselves. Go back far enough and we are all related to one another. We are all just one thing.

  The deal is what those folks are attempting to claim is culture. What's strange is most do not even know what that culture entails. Consider this, what is black culture? Is it different from African culture? I suspect that it certainly is a bit different, seeing as how it has been one hundred and sixty five years since a black African was brought against their will to America. Heck, I suspect there are differences in black culture even in Africa itself. And not all black people come from Africa, there are black Germans, Swedes, Italians, Greeks and every other culture on the planet. Your skin tone doesn't define your culture! If I were to say all black people are the same I would be called a racist, prejudicial and biased! Yet, black people are trying to tell me all black people are the same, claiming that based on their skin tone. My feeling is the Pope is no more a black man than I am. My feeling is also, it doesn't make a bit of difference.  

  Here's what AI has to say about culture: "Culture encompasses the shared behaviors, beliefs, values, and practices of a group of people, including their language, religion, cuisine, social habits, and artistic expressions. It's essentially the way of life of a particular group, differentiating them from others. Culture is learned through socialization and shapes how individuals perceive and interact with the world." Notice it didn't mention color. There is a reason for that. Color doesn't define culture. Do you think Pope Leo embraces black culture? His skin tone certainly isn't black so it has to be his culture that is black, that Creole in him. Seems like he would be more inclined to be an alligator hunter if he were a creole. But he was raised in the south side of Chicago, a white American catholic kid. That is his culture, his background. No, he's not one of the brothers. But he is your brother. 

                                                                            

There are many varieties of apples, each looking a bit different from the others, but all are apples.

It's the same way with people, just depends upon which orchard you come from.  

Changes

  Has a new Pope been elected or a new political leader of some type? The Pope certainly wields the power of a head of state. He is much more than a religious leader, the leader of the Roman Catholic church. Everyone in the known world is aware of that. That has been the case since Saint Peter. I'm no theologian, no expert on the Catholic church and its' history, and much of what I think could be debated, possibly disproven or simply not accurate. I compose these blogs without doing extensive research, after all I'm not writing a thesis on any of this, just offering my opinion. I do not feel any obligation to "fact check" anything I'm saying, you are welcome to do that should you feel it necessary. In fact, I think it is a good thing when you do, at least you are thinking about what I wrote, even if only to contradict me. That's where discussions should begin. 

 The first Pope in history that was born in America. That is certainly a significant thing, a reflection perhaps of a shift in global politics. Is America becoming more like the "old country" we have all heard stories about. Nations that have existed for hundreds of years, but not as Republics, as various other forms of government. Are we losing the American Republic? There was a deep concern about just that back in 1960 with the election of John F Kennedy. He was a Catholic! 

 Yes, the concern was that Kennedy would follow the directives of the Pope. At the time it was Pope John XXIII and he was known for reform. In short, he embraced liberal views and many non-Catholics in America were concerned about that. What if Kennedy started changing our laws to align with the views of the Catholic church? You know, you have to keep an eye on those Catholics! Remember Martin Luther wrote 95 these in opposition to the Catholic church. Yes, there was a prejudice against Catholics, just as there are prejudices against the Jews and Muslims today. I don't believe we have a problem with Trump however, he will not be swayed one way of another. Thing is, this Pope is only 69 years old, quite young, and will be in office long after Trump is gone. 

  As a protestant I view the Pope more as a political leader than a religious one. I do not believe he is a descendant of Saint Peter or has any divine powers or whatever. He is just a man like all others, albeit a man with tremendous power and responsibility. His profession is being the political leader/arm of a religious order. A man that has been elected to lead that group into the future. The church itself is facing many challenges in this new world. It has come under attack and close scrutiny. The true reason for that is because of the wealth and political power of that group. That hasn't changed one bit over the centuries. Remember when the Pope ordered the arrest of the Templars? Why was that? Wealth and Power is the answer and an allegiance with the King of France. It was a win-win. 

  I expect this new Pope will make some changes to the policies. Is he a DEI hire? Well, that remains to be seen. I don't mean any of this in a disparaging way, just personal observations and opinion. The movement toward what I have called "a more convenient faith" has been an ongoing thing and will continue. Will we see Priests getting married and female cardinals? I think so. I remember when Catholics weren't supposed to eat meat on Friday. The church doesn't recognize civil divorces because the state can not undo what God has done. You have to get an annulment from the church for that to be valid. If you don't, you can't participate in certain sacraments. That could change, if it hasn't already. Currently the church opposes same sex marriages but will bless them, something I find rather confusing from a religious standpoint but understandable in the political arena. 

  I don't believe whatever the Pope does will have any great effect on my life. I understand how important he is to the millions of Catholics around the globe. I can see changes in the doctrines and practices will effect Catholics. It is always difficult when the old traditions, beliefs or ways are challenged or changed in any way. I have been to church where their was a woman minister, wearing a collar, and it didn't feel right to me. I can offer no valid reason why they shouldn't but that feeling remains. I've seen people in church wearing shorts, crop tops and flip-flops. Doesn't seem right to me. What will this Pope do? Is he liberal or conservative? He is one or the other, regardless of anything anyone has to say. 

  He's just a man like all of us and believes what he believes. As Pope he can not change doctrine. His role is to preserve, protect and offer clarity to those doctrines. I have read that Catholics believe the Pope, when speaking from the chair (ex-cathedra) is infallible. But that infallibility only applies to matters of faith and morals. It's about discipline. He can change practices that do not contradict doctrine. It's a very fine line in my opinion and one I really don't have a good understanding of. Sounds like a bunch of political double talk to me. But, that is the concern of those calling themselves Catholics. He is Pope number two hundred and sixty seven. It is up to him to carry that faith forward, it's a big job. May God Bless and guide him. An American pope. The times they are a'changin'. 

                                                                                 

Pope Leo XIV 

professional people

  It's something I have noticed over the years, perhaps beginning with the emergence of the internet and you tube videos, everything has to be "professional" these days. Take something as simple as pickle ball. Now I've never played a single game of pickleball, know very little about it, but I was under the impression it was intended to be casual fun. Turns out their are leagues, taking over the courts, and those complaining about the level of play. From all accounts I've read, the fun is gone, it's a competition! There are professional pickle ball players. 

  It isn't just sports, it is all forms of leisure activities that I've noticed this with. Karaoke is another example. Was once something a bunch of drunk people did and now it is quite different. Some folks bringing their own microphones and backing tracks, very professional. I understand that as there was a time I would bring my own pool cue to the neighborhood bar. It did make me feel more confident and added a level of intimidation to those having to use the house sticks. Didn't make me any better at pool though, but that was before instructional videos on you tube. 

  I am amused with how many "professional" people there are on Facebook. It doesn't matter what the subject is, there is someone on there at all times that is an expert in the field. I will read a list of credentials and  life experiences. Every known profession is represented 24/7. I'm on there more than I should be and my expertise is in giving an opinion. I have an opinion on everything and anything. I even have an opinion on opinions. I'm an expert opinion giver. It's rather amazing really. Whatever starts making headlines there will soon be a hundred experts on Facebook. Constitutional scholars, philosophers, rocket scientists, animal behavioral experts, you name it, they are there. Well, that's my opinion.

  There does seem to be a compulsion by the public in general, to do everything in a professional manner. What I mean by that is, looking it up on the internet and following that advice, guidance or whatever. That in and of itself isn't a bad thing, it's good to learn about new subjects, techniques and methods. The downside to all that being readily available is the lack of experimentation on the part of the individual. The learn by doing, that was prevalent in years past. Today we tend to believe you can learn by reading, by earning a degree, without ever having to actually do anything at all. Those "highly educated" folks that have really done nothing but be professional students.

  We are seeing the results of that. That's why we are hearing the cries for "professional" people that know how to do constructive things, like fix your car or build a house. Reading about that stuff isn't learning how to do it. Anyone that has ever worked on an automobile will tell you, the engineer that designed it, never had to work on it, if they did the design would be different. And now we are seeing some of that from our politicians with their designs for a better society. If they had ever lived in society themselves, they would know better. Take Bernie Sanders as a prime example, he has never worked a real job in his life but owns three homes, several automobiles and a big fat bank account. How? You paid him to tell you how to live your life. Well, mostly you have him agreeing with you that you should get everything for free. Obama is another example, what job did he ever work? None, a community organizer isn't a job, it's a scam. But they are professional politicians. Now there's an oxymoron for you.

  We are all professional people. I drew a picture, so I'm an artist. I write these blogs, I'm an author. I've been at various times in my life a stationary engineer, machinist, mechanic, heavy equipment operator, quality assurance inspector, recruiter. stock clerk, held a CDL license, a license to operate waste treatment plants in the state of Maryland as well as water treatment systems. I've held a badge issued by the Maryland State Police valid in a restricted jurisdiction. The thing is, none were my profession. They were all just jobs that I held. I did try to do them in a professional manner. Still, when asked  I will say, I'm a jack of all trades and master at none. I'm good with that. Thinking I will try that pickleball, probably need to buy equipment, take lessons and learn all the proper jargon. I'm certain there is one associated with that. But then again maybe not, wouldn't want to wind up in a pickle. That wouldn't be professional.