who's responsible

 I read an article about Georgetown University promising to set aside four hundred thousand dollars a year for descendants of slaves.  It was explained that nearly two hundred years ago Georgetown University had sold two hundred and seventy two slaves to raise funds. These funds kept the doors open. But I had several questions and problems with this that went unanswered in that article. The first one being, just how are you going to prove your ancestry to qualify for these funds? The records are surely incomplete and I just can't see any way to do that. So what's the problem? Is Georgetown University now setting aside funds for anyone that proves they are an African- American? If that's the case, wouldn't that be discriminatory? If you have to also prove you are descended from one of those slaves what are the requirements? But the question posed by that article was, " is that enough? " My answer to that is, no one is entitled to anything from an action that took place almost two hundred years ago. As uncomfortable as it may be, by the standards of the time it was a legal transaction. It was the Jesuits that sold those individuals. A portion of the money was used to pay the debts of Georgetown University. The Jesuits are Spanish missionaries, should the Spanish pay those reparations?
 The narrative was, of course it was evil white guys that perpetrated this injustice. If Spanish Jesuit Priests are evil white guys that's true. They were holding those folks as slaves and subsequently sold to plantation owners in Louisiana. The Jesuits were quite active in the slave trade. So just where should blame be assigned? Is the current ownership of Georgetown University responsible for that? Should people that had nothing to do with that, in any way, shape or form, have to pay? But the larger question, one I posted to Facebook last evening is this: who is worse, the ones selling or the ones buying? Now I think that question can be applied to any number of circumstances. The buying and selling of human beings is the most abhorrent of actions! Amazingly it is still practiced in some countries! But my point is, we all know that it isn't right! In fact that institution only lasted 82 years in America! Yes it was 82 years too long no one denies that. All of that being said, you can apply that to anyone buying and selling anything that is harmful to others. Who bears the responsibility, the seller or the buyer? In the case of slavery in America, who was the first to sell them? The majority were " purchased " from the western tribes of Africa. Yes, it was Africans selling Africans to Europeans. The Europeans in turn sold them to other Europeans. In 1619 Dutch traders sold twenty slaves to British colonists at Jamestown. That's correct, they were not Americans. The slave trade was prohibited by 1808. In fact, in 1794 ship building and outfitting ships for that trade was prohibited in America. In December of 1865 following the civil war and the loss of thousands of lives by those opposed to the entire slavery issue the 13th amendment was passed. Who is to blame for all of that? Is it all white people of today? Or is it those willing to sell their neighbors for profit? If the Africans hadn't been selling other Africans there wouldn't have been any slave trade in the first place.
 All of this is just asking a question. It's ridiculous that I even have to state this but I do not support or think the salve trade was alright! Where Africans treated unfairly, unjustly, and harshly? Of course they were! Did unfair treatment of African-Americans continue after slavery was banned? Yes it did and still does. Is there any amount of reapportions that will change history? No there isn't.
 So the question remains, who is responsible? The seller or the buyer? Indeed, who is responsible for the evils in the world? Is it the " traffic " that creates the jam, or is it the " drivers ? "  

success

 There is a commercial that comes on television that really bugs me. This advertisement is for a drug rehabilitation center. The thing about it that bugs me is this line, " you've succeeded before, you can succeed again. " Now wait just a minute. If I went to your treatment center in the past and have to return it's because I didn't succeed the first time! Success means you succeeded in eliminating your addiction! Yet the line is a relapse on your part is not a failure. You succeeded in completing the treatment last time, but now you need to return. We didn't " cure " you, but you succeeded!  The advertisement goes on to say, " you don't need to start from the beginning though, you can just start from where you succeeded the last time. " That's right, basically they are saying you came to them because of a drug addiction problem, you completed the program, a success. But you're back because you succeeded and can do so again. Well if that doesn't give me hope and confidence I just don't know what will.
 This commercial bugs me because of the narrative they propose. You succeeded at being a failure and so you can succeed again! Just what the heck are you saying? Come pay us " professionals " to listen to your sob story, your inability to control yourselves and we will listen. Heck we will even give you advice, advice like, stop taking drugs! Once you have been here long enough, paid us enough, you will have succeeded. If you come back, it's a success! Not your fault or ours! It's a success. No one to blame, no one needs to be accountable, as long as you can pay, you will succeed.
  I'm just sick and tired of reward for failure! That is what I hear in this advertisement for a service. Make no mistake about it, this is a for profit facility. That's why we wouldn't want to " offend " our customers. Hey you are a success every time you pay us! That's what I hear. Doesn't matter how many times you wind up here, you can succeed again. Now if a regular medical doctor should make a mistake, fail to treat you properly, well you should sue him or her for everything you can possibly get! We even have teams of lawyers that will do just that for a cut of the action. But if I go to a treatment center for drug abuse and later continue to abuse drugs, that's a success, no lawsuit here, it's not our fault! You succeeded and can do so again. I don't know I suppose it's more of this " liberal " logic stuff. What's more troubling is that there are those that buy this line. What's even more troubling is that there are people that praise those " successes " as heroic!  You didn't succeed. That is why you are back at the drug treatment center! Success isn't making the same mistake over and over again!
 Yes there are many reasons why you could wind up abusing drugs. There are times when it happens accidently. Yes you could have been prescribed something and got addicted to that, I'm not saying everyone that gets an addiction is a terrible person. But what I am saying is only you can stop! These drug treatment facilities can't " cure " you. Only you can cure you! Yes there are situations where it takes a professional to get you off of that product due to a physical addiction. You know how that physical addiction begins? By you deciding to take the drug in the first place. That's how it happens. You succeed when you no longer take that drug! That is success!  

that's life

 I received an invitation to join a particular Facebook group. I rarely join up with those things as I can't pay attention to them all. I try to keep my friends list short and my groups few. I figure there is less chance of being hacked and all that. Yes, it still happens and I get annoyed with having to change my password every few weeks. But I decided to join this one. Now I'm one of those few that actually read the rules of the group. I admit I don't study them or commit them to memory but attempt to get a general idea. This group has quite an extensive list of rules and a very large number of members, 98,000 or more. Seeing that number I expected some issues. 

 Reading through the rules I see that all political commentary is banned from this site. Sounds great to me, I could use a break from all of that even though I frequently participate in such. But, there is a time and place for everything. If this groups bans such I'm good with that. I found myself even excited about the prospect. If all the rules were followed this site would certainly be a welcome relief. So I did join and began reading and adding a comment here and there. That was later in the day and for that few hours all went well. The next day I go on that site and what is the first thing I see? A political post aimed at the President, very disparaging and disrespectful. Even though politics was banned and I shouldn't have responded at all, I did mention how politics wasn't supposed to be on there. Well, that was followed by a barrage of comments, over 128 at last count, directed directly at me. I was, to be blunt, disgusted. I hadn't even made twenty four hours on this site without that. Yes, I suppose it was my fault for responding, this individual succeeded in their attempt to get a response. You would think I would know better.

 The end result was I reported the person that posted that political commentary to the admin of the group. I even went so far as to send a message in messenger to one of those administrators. I received an answer, rather curt I would say, saying she doesn't monitor the site twenty four hours a day. I found that remark funny as I had begun my message to her with, I know it isn't your fault. hardly an opening that would solicit such a rude response. But I was informed that person had been removed/blocked or whatever it is that they do. Well that's good. But then having been disappointed in both myself and the site I politely excused myself and left the group. 

 I look at this as a confirmation. I had issues in the past with another group. I had followed their rules but my opinions weren't exactly met with enthusiasm. After having been met with such remarks as, don't post this or that because I don't like it. Yes, there was some controversy. Eventually I decided to leave that group and form one of my own. My rules are, there are no rules! Post what you like but be prepared for people to not agree with you. I am the sole administrator, judge, and jury! If I don't like what you are doing or saying I will block you. I have yet to perform that action on anyone. I can't help but believe it is because of the rules. No one is disappointed or upset by what is being posted. Sometimes less is more. 

 The world wide web is a wonderful thing and I enjoy it for what it is, a connection to the world. The only problem is with that large a group is there are bound to be problems. Yes I can avoid a great number of them, that is what the purpose of those groups were in the first place, birds of a feather and all that. As the group grows however, so too the variety of birds. No differed really than the town in which you grew up. No matter how small, there are those that are different. That's the basis of the " other side of the tracks. " Yes, we are all proud to be from the same town, but my side is better. Differences in opinion grow in proportion to the size of the group. That was confirmed by my venturing into that group. I know better, as my parents would have told me. Well, no harm done, I'll stick with my group. There's no place like home. The problem was my own, I had expectations and was disappointed. That's life I suppose. The disappointment is my own and leaving that group my choice. I'm aware that my doing so will not affect a thing. Guess I was just hopeful.  

Dedicated

 It was one hundred and thirty three years ago today that the Statue of Liberty was unveiled. The official name given to her by the sculptor is The statue of liberty enlightening the word. We were all taught that the statue is a gift from the French but that isn't exactly true. Bartoli, the sculptor, petitioned several nations for funding to build her. Lady Liberty could just as easily been at the Suez canal in Egypt. It is true that the French people did fund the building of the statue through various means. It was quite the struggle for him to get the money. When the statue was complete and New Yorks' Bedloe Island chosen as the location funds were required for the pedestal, America was to provide that. President Grant authorized the use of Bedloe Island, formerly a fort. In order for the government to fund the project, it had to have a use. It was decided it would act as a lighthouse. It was a lawyers use of the law to justify spending. There was a light in the torch but never bright enough to be an effective beacon.
 Congress wasn't overly enthusiastic about the project in general. The pedestal was going to be expensive. Various fundraisers were organized. Now Lady Liberty wasn't as popular as one would think. This was a time before women had the right to vote, Suffragettes protested a giant Lady standing in the harbor of a country where they had few rights! A valid argument I would say. It was for one of these fund raisers that the poet Emma Lazarus wrote the sonnet. The words most of us know are only the last few sentences, the sonnet is much longer. It is not a mission statement of the United States! Joseph Pulitzer, yeah that Pulitzer, offered to print the name of every donor in his paper the New York World, even if they only donated a penny. That was a great success as people just wanted to see their name in print.
 The statue is covered in symbolism. These symbols were " modified " from the original design to accommodate the United States of America. That's the reason the date of our independence is on the tablet she holds. It's also the reason there is a broken chain at her feet. That symbolizes America abolishing slavery, a symbol of freedom. We have created a great story about the statue. We have given new meaning to the words in that sonnet. An interesting fact is, when the statue was dedicated by President Grover Cleveland only two women were in attendance on the island. Suffragettes had rented boats and circled the island shooting protests.
 It's interesting to read about what the political climate at the tine was. It's also interesting to compare that to what we were taught and what is being taught today. The city of Boston had considered taking the Statue away when New Yorkers were failing to raise funds for the pedestal. Philadelphia had the arm on display for the Centennial Exhibition. The New York Times reported that the statue had been suspended due to lack of funds. It described the arm as " isolated and useless. " When it was known that Boston was attempting to " take " the statue from New York pride stepped up! New York wasn't going to allow that to happen. They didn't want the statue but, by God, Boston wasn't going to get it! Yes, even then there was jealousy and fighting among the various states. New Yorkers responded and the rest is, as they say, history. The basic feeling was, I don't want it but you can't have it!    
   

in the long term

 Yesterday I wrote, " what is vice, but what we like, but know it ain't right. " Posting it to Facebook I did receive a comment on that. The comment was an observation stating that depends on who is judging you. I can see the validity in that statement. I replied to that with a question. Do we not create our own morality? That is what I was thinking when I wrote that first line. Seems to me it is the only way something can be right to me and wrong to you at the same time. It's what I call situational morality. I also think it could be called vice. Vice depends upon who is judging whom as well. 

 Morals are a frequent theme of mine. I speculate about them, I present my beliefs concerning them and contemplate them. I've noticed that it has become a more frequent topic as the years pass. Yes I am aware of my mortality. Is it age, it is maturity, or is it because I had a heart attack? I expect truth be told, it is a combination of all three. The big question to be answered in all of that it is, to what end, to what purpose, is the application of a proper moral standard? Is it solely to gain the favor of God and enter heaven? For the religious among us that would have to be the answer. But what if you have no such belief, then what? I mean beyond gaining favor among others, popularity, fame or fortune, to what benefit is adhering to a moral standard? Why not just do as we please? 

 Vice can be defined as moral depravity, corruption or a bad habit. We all know when we choose to act in that manner. We ignore our conscience, trading that for pleasure, at least temporarily. The frequency with which we do that defines our character. Of course, that in itself is dependent upon what standard is being applied and by whom. Our character is what others perceive it to be. It may or may not reflect what we believe our character to be. If our vices are exposed do we not feel as though our character suffers? Yes, that's our conscience speaking to us. For that reason we establish our own moral code. All that is required is the dismissal of guilt, a willingness to surrender the prize. That's why defining the prize is so important, It is reward that motivates. If that reward isn't the continuation of life, what is it?  

 Governments are formed through the consent of the people. That is what John Locke thought and I have to agree with him. Governments' intent is to get us all on the same page. In so doing government establishes a moral code called, law. Laws are intended to delineate what is and is not acceptable within the society. Yes, they are a moral code subject to change. Man does enjoy the flexibility that system enjoys. But to what end? Are we here to just enjoy whatever life has to offer us? I mean, what is the final reward to observing governments' moral standard? We are all aware of a simple thing, you can't take it with you! Of course I'm speaking of the material things. What happens when the people no longer consent to be governed? Either the government imposes its' will upon the people or the people revolt against that government. 

 Gouverneur Morris, a name not known by many, wrote the preamble to the constitution. One of the founding fathers he signed the articles of confederation as the New York delegate to the continental congress and signed the declaration of independence. It is he that wrote the preamble to the constitution. He is credited with being the first to pen these words, " We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. "  The congress went on to delineate those ideals. " We the people " meaning what? A collective conscience is what I believe it means. We all agreed to the " rules. " It is true that about six months later the Bill of Rights was added to that document. They were added as a protection against government. The Bill of Rights protects " we the people " from government abuse. The debate today seems to center around establishing a moral standard among " we the people. " And that centers around one thing, reward. 

 There is much talk of the future and how best to preserve that future. But can we really do that? No I don't believe we can, we have no real say in that. Did we have any say in creation? Nope, we were created. No matter your train of thought in that regard, either through evolution or creation, we didn't have any input. It's rather arrogant to think we have any say about when it ends. Yes I suppose we could blow up the planet if we wanted too, but that is destruction not creation. For the future, for our continued existence, all we can do is pray. Are we rewarded for just doing what we please? No, reward is given for compliance. The government will reward us with benefits and entitlements if we are compliant. The government will punish us for non-compliance. But can the government reward us with eternal life? So the question remains, what is the reward? Depends entirely upon what rules you follow I suppose. If you find yourself engaging in acts that you know to be vice that's your conscience speaking to you. Then you have to decide whether to change the rules. Just what reward do you want? Can you change the rules and receive the same reward? Depends upon who is giving out the prize. Something to think about.     

steadfast

 Yesterday I saw a Facebook post celebrating a pastor of a local church. It was a picture of a cake, with a cross in colored frosting. I couldn't help but remark, I wonder if that is appropriate.  I can certainly appreciate the congregation wanting to show their appreciation to their pastor and I'm certain that it was a heart felt gesture on their part. Still it struck me as somehow inappropriate and I'm struggling to say why. That the cross is an icon cannot be denied. I'm thinking perhaps it is that fact that disturbs me. I don't know, having it on a cake, to be cut up and eaten, seems a bit disrespectful. Could be I'm just old and set in my ways. It is a topic I often touch upon, this familiarity, this less than formal attitude we have adopted in the last decade or so. It all seems just a little too chummy to me. I'm talking about the way children address their elders, the way we address our elected leaders, the way we address the clergy. I often speak of " polite company " as a way to describe that relationship.
 After posting my remark and receiving some feedback I continued to think about that. I remembered how my church always had a birthday party for Jesus. Yes, it was called that, not a Christmas party. There was a cake, although I don't believe there was anything on it other than Happy Birthday Jesus. As I recall the scene it began with everyone singing Christmas carols. A Christmas tree sat the front of the room with presents piled high around its' base. There were cookies and hot cocoa. At one point you would hear sleigh bells! It was the signal that Santa Claus would be coming through the door. Presents were distributed to all. I believe each present was marked Boy or Girl and was handed out accordingly. Once all the presents had been handed out it was time to sing Happy Birthday to Jesus and the cake was cut. I wonder if the technology had been available to put a picture of Jesus on that cake if it would have been?
 Why I felt compelled to question putting the cross on the cake I can't really say. It just struck me differently. I suppose it is just the passage of time and a lack of participation on my part. Everything changes over time, call it evolving or whatever, I don't always agree with the change. I think that is true of us all. It is doubly evident when you have been separated for some time. I admit to not being a regular church goer. I don't have any particular " excuse " for that, I just got out of the habit. On the few occasions that I have attended services I found them a bit uncomfortable. The services just didn't seen quite as reverent as I was expecting. Not that it was wrong in any fashion, just not what I remembered or was expecting. Sorta like going to class reunion. You know everyone but are still a bit nervous.
 I think I just miss the formality of life sometimes. Not that I am a particularly formal person, whatever that means. Perhaps it is nothing more than expectations. You could say I have higher expectations in certain situations than the generations following me. When I was young, when I was the younger generation, I didn't have any expectations. That was because I had to be taught those. Call them social norms, rites or rituals, whatever you wish,  but I was being taught what to expect. I adopted the majority of them. But, like every generation before my own, and every generation to follow, I rejected some as well. And today, today I'm thinking I'm no longer in the majority as far as that goes. Different expectations. A different acceptance of social norms. It becomes uncomfortable at times. It is only uncomfortable when we refuse to surrender. Surrendering the things we want or expect is a difficult thing to do.
 I was taught to remain steadfast. It was a common theme in my church and in my home. Stick to your guns was the axiom used most often. If you feel you are right, don't back down. The challenge we face is determining when to surrender. Thing is, like everything else, the more you do it, the more likely it is to become a habit! It is far easier to surrender than to continue the fight. There is a passage in the Bible that says, " steadfastness comes through pain. " I believe that verse is telling you, it might hurt you to remain steadfast in your belief but it is worth it. " Faith is what someone knows to be true, whether they believe it or not. " ( Flannery O'Connor. ) So you see, I'm not stubborn, I'm faithful.   

annoyed

 Since beginning blogging, although it turns into more of a journal at times, I have become more aware of my moods. It happens when I can't decide what I want to write about. As I think about possible topics I become aware that I'm happy, sad, angry or whatever. I don't believe it changes anything, just that I am made aware. A new consciousness? Maybe you could describe it that way, it does sound rather Zen. Japanese Buddhists came up with that, probably after writing all those characters in their language. I'm thinking it would change my mood for sure. But I'm beginning to wander off.
 I haven't recorded these moods, or charted them out on a graph, but I think they are cyclic in nature. Maybe I should start writing that down. That would seem " Sheldon " like, you know the character on Big Bang. I'm a little worried about that, the first week of October is Mental Illness Awareness Week! Graphing your moods could be taken the wrong way. Think I'll just leave that alone. But I do think there is a cycle in all of that. Or at least it seems that way every time I become aware. Of course there are a finite number of moods you can experience unless of course you go off the chart! No telling what moods those folks experience. Well I suppose they are the same moods just taken to an extreme. I can see that happening. Not to me though, I'm just passionate.
 Having composed in excess of 3200 of these posts I have repeated myself a few times. I am begining to see what topics I visit more often. Morality, ethics, and religion seem to be the major topics. I have written a number of " stories " that are just memories from my past. I do enjoy writing what I call speculative blogs. This is one of those. There is no right and wrong, just a guess. Yes I will present my speculations in a factual way, to do otherwise would seem like a deceit. It's what I think, based on what I have read or experienced. I make no claims to being a scholar or an expert in anything.          Sometimes these blogs are nothing more than a conversation with myself that I chose to share. I am aware of political correctness and what prevailing attitudes are. That doesn't mean I agree or will comply. That sometimes leads to problems, for others though, not me. I already knew what I thought. When you begin surprising yourself it's back to Mental Illness Awareness Week.
 I have to remind myself every now and again why I started writing these blogs. Initially I was just amused that a old boy from a corner of the world most would not know about could have a world wide platform. I'm still somewhat amazed by that. I haven't gone " viral " or have a great number of " followers " but the possibility exists. The evidence is before me, I have seen and heard from all sorts of people that I'm certain would never have happened if not for this web. It's pretty cool. I began writing not to entertain others but to leave a record. They say nothing ever disappears from the web, well unless it is on Hillary Clintons' server, then, well I'll just leave that there. But my point is I have to remind myself that I'm not writing for popularity, or entertainment, as both of those actions would change the conversation. It's not difficult to tell people what they want to hear.
 This morning I woke up annoyed. Annoyed at the world in general is the way I would describe it. There is no particular thing just an aggregate. Seems like common sense has left the building at times. And then I'm annoyed that I can't put my finger on anything to carry on about. Well it's just a mood, it'll pass. Can we change our mood at will? No, I don't think we can, although it is possible to get distracted. Maybe that is what annoys me, too many people are distracted by nonsense. Have we, as a nation, lost focus? What is the most important thing in your life? I believe most people would agree it is family. Could be we need to focus on our family before worrying about the neighbors! Yeah, I'm annoyed this morning.         

as the world turns

 Before posting a conclusion yesterday I did some reading. I wouldn't call it research as I merely read what was printed without going to multiple sources. What I was reading about was immigration in America. I was only interested in the law and how it progressed over time. I started with the definition of immigration. Just what is that? The dictionary says it is the act of coming to live permanently in a foreign country. Okay, that's what I thought it was. The first laws regarding immigration in the United States were enacted in the late 1800's. In 1790 there was a naturalization act establishing rules for citizenship including a residency requirement, but that didn't address immigration, only obtaining citizenship. 

 In 1875 the Supreme court declared that immigration regulation was a federal responsibility. That came about because individual states had begun making their own laws and regulations about that. In 1882, as economic conditions worsened with the sheer number of immigrants, the alien exclusion act was signed. A head tax of fifty cents was imposed on every immigrant. It also blocked the entry of, idiots, lunatics, convicts and those likely to become a charge to the public. They certainly aren't terms we would use today but you can't deny the sensibility of such restrictions. It wasn't until 1921 that the first restriction on numbers of immigrants were imposed. By 1990 this number had risen to 675,000. Then in 2006, then President Bush signed the secure fence act! This act authorized the building of a fence on our southern border. It's purpose is obvious. Remember back in 1875 the Supreme court declared immigration was a federal responsibility. The government was to control immigration! 

 I was reading about all of that, it's quite interesting really and the reasons shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, money. But I was interested because I had once again heard this claim that America was a nation of immigrants! That immigrants had built this nation. Well now that just isn't true. 

 What is an immigrant? A person coming to live in a foreign nation permanently. In 1607 when those folks landed at Jamestown just what nation was here? The answer is a simple one, none. There was no established country on the north American continent. I'd say it was pretty hard to immigrate to a nation that doesn't exist. Yes you could argue that the Indians were here but they had no nation in the sense of a central power  (government) some estimate as many as 650 tribes and they certainly didn't have any immigration laws or policies. So, they weren't immigrants, they were migrants. And as migrants they did what ever other migrant in history has done, occupy the land and conquer whomever was in there way. And yes that's different than attacking a sovereign nation. That action we call, waging war. The attacking party doesn't necessarily have to have a nation, the intent being to gain one. You can't gain what doesn't exist, right? Seeing as there was no nation to attack, those Europeans just migrated to north America. The Indians had done so by crossing the land bridge, the Europeans used ships. The action was the same.

 It wasn't until the treaty of Paris was signed in 1783 that America became an officially recognized nation. The nation had been built by then, that's why we call them the founding fathers! It was they that founded a nation. Were they refugees, migrants or just rebels? All depends upon your point of view I suppose but one thing they weren't: immigrants. So all that has transpired since 1783 is history, as the saying goes. The migrants established a nation. Science tells us all humanity came out of Africa. If that is so then everyone is a migrant, followed by immigrants, followed by naturalized citizens. That's how it works. You could say " As the world turns " or how you wish to spin it. Something man has done since the beginning of time is my guess. A nation of immigrants? Nope, a nation formed by migrants.     

accountable

 I'm watching the morning news and the weather lady is wearing slacks, the news desk people are cracking jokes and in general acting informally. I was remembering when that wasn't so, I remember when the news shows were just cold, factual programs with an air of dignity. At the end of the program the anchor man would give an editorial. It wasn't a political statement, just an opinion. It was certainly a more formal setting. I can't help but think, lots of things used to be more formal than they are today. Weddings, funerals, classrooms and going to church services to name a few. I'm thinking it was better that way. It did, as we might say today, raise awareness. That's been replaced with a ribbon. As long as you wear the ribbon that's all that is necessary, no other effort required. And yes, it did take effort to get up, get dressed, and confront the day. It is what was expected. We weren't expected to be survivors, we were supposed to conquer. Yes, a different attitude than today I would say.

 I think it all speaks to accountability. Personal accountability that is. There were expectations to be met and a failure to do so wasn't easily excused. There was no rush to place the blame elsewhere. The first place to look for the problem was you! You knew better than that was the common response. It was left to you to explain your choices, it wasn't societies' fault. Hey, if all your friends jumped off that bridge would you do that too? That is what I heard often enough when I made questionable decisions. Yup, it was my fault, no matter what the others chose to do. 

 The thing is today it is more about being entertained than anything else. That's why the news is presented the way it is. The entertainment factor is far more important than distributing information. The news will tell you how and what to think! They are your friends, your buddies, and that is why they act the way they do. The weather man is slowly being replaced by the weather lady. Her job is to look great while telling you the forecast. Some make it to the news desk as well. The guys are still wearing a suit and tie but I expect that dress to be relaxed soon. Same as politicians taking off their jackets and rolling up their sleeves, the message being, I'm just like you. Saw one lady wearing her mom jeans and a jean jacker while campaigning in the mid-west. I'm just like you. 

 It also seems to me we are encouraged to be concerned with the obvious. What I mean to say is, to wear those ribbons, to rant and rave about the things that are obvious. I want to know who likes cancer or muscular dystrophy. We are making national laws about cruelty to animals. Just who is saying that it is acceptable to be cruel to animals? Do we need a law for that? Bullying, do we need anyone to tell us, to raise awareness, that bullying is wrong? But the agenda is just that. We will support those causes that we are certain everyone agrees with. If they don't, let the name calling begin! Above all else we mustn't tell anyone they made a bad choice! You mustn't judge them. It isn't their fault, it is probably yours! Now about the best you can be is a survivor. No matter the choices you made, you are to be hailed as a survivor. That's the goal these days. Don't be concerned with how you got where you are, just know you survived! It's not your fault. Relax, just enjoy yourself, someone will take care of you. Someone will be held accountable, just not you.  

 

The Dreen

 A friend of mine sent me a photograph of a special place, at least a special place to me anyway. It's just a small stream running through a little plot of land, nothing spectacular, but a stream of note nonetheless. This little stream is known to me by a different name. An archaic name in fact, it is the dreen. A Dreen is an old English word meaning drain. I wasn't aware of any of that when I was a child growing up less than a quarter mile from that dreen. It was just the name used. It is Soak Hide Dreen in fact. The name is self explanatory, this dreen was used by native Americans, Indians when I was a kid, as a place to moisten animal hides for tanning. The water isn't very deep, just a few inches but runs in a continuous flow. Today it runs through culverts under the road and enters three mile harbor at that point.
 My childhood home was less than a quarter mile away, as I said, and my Aunt & Uncle lived on that road. The road is, Soak Hide Rd. Well that makes sense doesn't it? Usually referred to as going to Soak Hide, everyone knew exactly where you were going. I knew everyone that lived on that road back in the day. I even had other relatives on that road that I didn't realize were relatives! Strange how kids can be so unaware. And soak hide road led to Damarks' store. We called it Marys', for the obvious reason, and Mary was like a mother to all us kids. It was the quintessential neighborhood store. It felt like my house was on one end of Soak Hide and Marys' store was on the other. How many trips I must have made between the two I can't imagine. And the dreen? The dreen is right in the middle of it.
 Now the dreen runs straight through a small triangular shaped piece of land. This land is bordered on one side by the Springy Banks road and the Three Mile Harbor rd on the other. That little patch of land was marked as a game sanctuary. The signs were old and faded but they were there. There was a footpath that cut through that small wooded lot at an angle. You would enter off Springy Banks Rd. and cutting across the corner come out on Soak Hide Rd., not far from the Dreen. Who or why that footpath was there I couldn't say, I only know it was always there. As a kid it felt as though it were a secret path even though it was obvious to anyone that looked. It was the normal route I took going to Marys' and returning as well. That small piece of land became like the hundred acre wood of Winnie the Pooh fame over the years. I didn't have imaginary friends living in there, or any great adventures. It only became that place in memory, if that makes any sense. Over the years, and in absence, Soak Hide and the Dreen, that little patch of woodland, is the place I go in memory. It's a special place.
 It's true that my home sat on the edge of Northwest woods, a much larger area of woodland, sparesly populated when I was young. I had acres of woods to play in and I certainly did. I explored those woods and had plenty of adventures, But Northwest woods, due I suppose to their size, just wasn't as intimate as that little triangle of land by Soak Hide dreen. If I wanted to get lost, where it would difficult to locate me , Northwest was the place. Still, I chose that patch of land by the dreen when I wanted or needed solitude. There was a small meadow in there, a quiet place just off the path, where I could sit and ponder the mysteries of the world, although mostly I was there pondering why something wasn't going right for me. I could hear my Mother call from there when it was time to come home. There wasn't much traffic or noise in my neighborhood. Princess Pine grew in that meadow, once or twice I did see some deer munching on the tops of that Princess Pine, a special treat for them. The animals came to the dreen to drink and if you were quiet and observant you would spot them. Squirrels abounded, racoons, ducks, an occasional muskrat and deer. Running pine could also be found just beside the meadow, pulling on it you could gather several feet of it at a time. Great stuff for wrapping around bannisters and stuff at Christmas time.
 Now that little patch of land is still there, untouched, undisturbed, as was the intent. I was told that plot was given to the town, as a sanctuary, and was never to be used for anything else. The lady that owned it loved nature and wished for it to be preserved. It's looking like her wish is being fulfilled. I know there are many more homes in Northwest Woods these days. I suspect that foot path could still be located. Marys' store is still there, well sorta. The little neighborhood store that I knew has been demolished, relegated to history and a new structure has taken its' place. Still the same family owns it and runs it and that's a comfort. My aunt and uncle have long since passed on, my other relatives on Soak Hide Rd. moved. There is no one on Soak Hide that I know anymore, although the homes still stand. My own home has been demolished just recently, I am fortunate that the person doing so sent me a brick from the fireplace, a memento I will cherish, a piece of home. And in between, the Dreen still runs through it all, just as it did when the Indians where there. A comfort and a refuge. That picture is now my screen saver. Who could have imagined it?

The Dreen. 

Thanks to Joyce Bennett Klien. 

the final goodbye

 I heard on the morning news that Elijah Cummings will be laid out at Morgan State University on Wednesday, followed by lying in state in statuary hall at the U.S. Capitol. From there he will be taken to the New Psalmist Church in Baltimore for his funeral service. Now I didn't like this mans' politics, but may he rest in peace. I mentioned to my wife how I wouldn't want to be moved around like that and put on display. It seems to me more like a carnival sideshow than a show of respect. I realize I am in no danger of that happening to me but find it disturbing. I'm thinking the Jewish folks have the right idea about that. Get the person buried as soon as possible. I read where their belief is the soul can't go to heaven until the body is in the ground. You certainly wouldn't want to delay that journey! Well, at least I wouldn't want any flight delay in that regard. 

 I will say that as long as the family is happy with that , it's certainly their prerogative. Perhaps Mr. Cummings wished it to be so and that's fine too. I believe we should try our best to fulfill the wishes of the deceased, whether that is an immediate thing, funeral arrangements, or a long term thing. I'm not saying bury the person and forget about them. All I am saying is I don't want to be carted around and put on display. My wish is to be cremated, as soon as possible. I don't want anyone looking at me. Want to see me? Come on over and visit. Do it now, don't wait. Tomorrow is guaranteed to no one. 

 In a way, some things never change. The funeral of a person does depend largely upon the wealth and status of the individual. The ancient Egyptians were perhaps the best example of that. We all know about the pyramids and all that but the regular people attempted to match that as well. It was just a matter of wealth. Other cultures felt it important to bury there dead with weapons and objects of value. Ceremony has always been important and to a degree remains that way. As I said, I want to be cremated, as soon as possible. That doesn't mean I don't want any ceremony, a small dignified good bye would be nice. The playing of Taps and a few kind words is all that I ask. Well, that and a marker of some type. I believe a man should leave a marker as a reminder to others that he was here. I've heard others say attending a funeral gives them some comfort, some " closure " as the term is used today. That's not the case with me, I don't get that from attending a funeral, all I get is sad. The " closure " part comes later for me, much later. A deep loss takes a long time to accept. But, that's me.

 Of course all of this is personal in nature and there is no right or wrong. Whatever makes the survivors feel better. As Hank Williams so astutely observed, we'll never get out this world alive. How important it is to show the survivors the value of what is lost? Isn't that what a funeral is all about? It certainly isn't for the deceased. Death to me surely isn't much different than birth. One day I wasn't here then I was. One day I was here, then I wasn't. The time in between is finite. I believe our memory will be as well. How long I am remembered by the survivors will ultimately determine my worth, not what my family can afford. That's my thought anyway. How long is it before the final goodbye?  Depends on how long you are remembered I suppose. 

 

leaving the house

 Five years ago, as part of a coalition, the United States began providing aid to the Syrian rebels fighting ISIL. This aid was of a non-lethal variety, food and pick up trucks. The Obama administration authorized a plan to train 15,000 Syrian combat troops. 500 million dollars later a few dozen fighters had been trained and the program canceled. At the same time the CIA was conducting a similar program, a bit more successful than the other program it was canceled after one billion dollars was spent. That was in 2017 and yes Trump was the one that canceled it. Didn't hear much about that in the news though. Interesting to note is that the Obama administration initially limited our troops to a maximum of 503 personnel. Individual commanders were given the authority to exceed that number if it became a military necessity. The number rose to about 2500 over time. Yup, the Trump administration allowed that to take place. Of course now that Trump has decided to withdraw the Troops, back to about 400, a little less than Obama allowed it's an international tragedy. Another interesting thing to note is the coalition forces, yeah those other nations that are supposed to be helping refused to send any more troops.
 Now the United States has spent about 11.5 million dollars a day, every day since 2014 when we first intervened. Think about that. What if we spent 11.5 million a day helping our own citizens, what difference would that make? Wouldn't do much for the politicians and businesses dependent upon the war making machinery but surely would help with domestic issues. The question is, why are we there, in Syria, in the first place? Well, the first objective was to help get rid of Assad. Excuses were made for this support of rebels fighting a civil war, yeah we took sides in that. Syria is a key player in the middle east and the middle east means what? Oil. Enough said. Then Russia began offering support to Assad, an old friend and ally. So what we have is basically a proxy war against our old nemesis, Russia. The only difference is the ones actually getting killed are the Syrians fighting against each other. Yes they are Kurds and Iranian troops as well. Yes we have some special forces guys involved in actual combat, about 300 or so spread across Syria. The vast majority of our troops provide air support and advice! Now I'm no military commander but if I have a force of three hundred men spread out over hundreds of miles opposing a force of Iranians, Isil, probably some Russians and others my advice would be, send more troops! Could be that's the reason I hear that on the news, you know the Generals getting upset that Trump is pulling out the troops. Personally I think it's a fine idea. Let them fight it out among themselves.
 This is, of course, all political. It's about controlling natural resources, namely oil, and forming alliances. Just like on those reality TV shows instead of direct conflict we are attempting to work behind the scenes. We are fighting Russia while living in the same house. No one wants a direct confrontation between two countries with the military might we possess. So we get to play puppet masters. Also the reason we are concerned with who gets what weapons. Have you noticed there is little said about North Korea lately? That situation is on the back burner. Russia not wanting to stir things up too much. World politics can make for some strange bedfellows. All us little people can do is watch from the sidelines, unless we are dragged into the fight. When it comes time for people to get hurt the politicians step aside and in go the troops. I don't believe we need to be in this civil war. I'm all for leaving the house! Big Brother is calling the shots though, never forget that. The producers control the show and the narrative, we are just here to play the part. 

thanks Doc

 Yesterday I spent an unexpected day at the hospital. Nothing serious, just a series of tests. Now that I've exceeded the age of 65 and the warranty has expired, you have to expect such. It all began Thursday afternoon. I wasn't feeling quite right and the feeling continued for some time. Now with an older machine it is best to carefully inspect the components now and again. Having had a heart attack about a year and a half ago, which came as quite the surprise I might add, I decided to go to Care First and have them take a look. I should have known better. Checking in and filling out the paperwork it was noted that I had had an MI. That's Doctor talk for a heart attack, myocardial infraction. The red flag was run up the flagpole and the EKG machine rolled out. After taking that test the Doctor reveals they are not very prepared for heart attack patients and I get the general impression she is not really sure about what she is reading on that printed chart. I'm not disparaging this Doctor I realize that in todays' world each one is specialized in some fashion. Perhaps her area of expertise was in triage, you know spotting what the problem is and sending you to someone to fix that. They called an ambulance and off to the hospital I go.
 Now if you need to go to the hospital the ambulance is the way to do it. They just roll you right into the place and into the emergency room. That's not to say you don't wind up waiting, but you are definitely moved up in the queue. More EKG's were taken and they differed from the previous one, a source of curiosity, if not alarm. It was decided I should spend the night, more testing would follow in the morning. Of course there was more paperwork to fill out, gotta love how the folks from registration come to get your signature while you are in the emergency room. Guess they figure they had best get that while they can, you know, just in case. So I scan over the documents and it is explaining how I will still be an outpatient, even though I will be admitted to the hospital. It all has something to do with Medicare, and what they will and will not pay based on that. Looks like loopholes to me but the accountants understand all of that. So, I spent the night in a hospital bed as an outpatient in the hospital. I'm beginning to understand this liberal logic.
 To wrap up this little tale, after a series of tests I was told, you're fine. Well at least it was determined that I had no cardiac issues. That is welcome news. In one sense it all seemed like a waste of time and resources. I feel a little guilty about that. I'm not one to run to a doctor. It also caused others to be worried about me, I don't like that either. My wife, my son, and my grandchildren all having their days disrupted for what turned out to be nothing. Of course I was relieved to hear my heart wasn't failing me. So I came back home and things are back to normal. I did miss posting a blog yesterday morning, a habit I am aware of. In fact I went the majority of day without being on Facebook at all! I know, it was different. I did check in briefly though, got a fix as they say, and so was able to continue.
 I have to say I hear a lot of folks complaining about the health care system. Mostly I hear the complaints about the cost, not the quality of care. That there is a great deal of bureaucracy no doubt about that. It's a necessary evil I suppose but can seem impersonal. I get that, everyone feels like the medical issue should be addressed before we become concerned with the cost. But that's not how you run a business. Make no mistake about that, health care is a business, not a charitable deal. It is that simple fact that causes most of the issues. There are those that campaign for free medical care of all. A very noble sentiment. The problem of course is how to pay for that. Now if the government begins to control that and all medical care becomes just a business, it will be run as a business. What I mean is, the care side of the business as well as the administrative. I question the wisdom of such a system. I sure don't want bureaucrats deciding how much my medical needs are worth. When you become a liability to the business, the accountants tend to want to remove you from the books. In a government funded operation that may mean it doesn't make good business sense to resuscitate you or provide treatment for certain illnesses. What becomes of elective procedures? Would it be fair to say if you can afford that you can have it but if you are in the universal health care system you are refused? It's fair if it is just business. Well, anyway, I'm not complaining about the services I received. I'm thankful for that.   

hero or fool

 There are times when I feel like Don Quixote, at least the way he was portrayed in Cervantes novel. He was portrayed as an altruistic individual attempting to restore chivalry to the world. The world he had his adventures in, of course, didn't exist. It existed in his mind based on the books he had in his library. And like Don Quixote there are times when I get beaten up! Not in a physical sense like he was, but metaphorically speaking. Quixote never gave up and remain undeterred. You can judge whether that is a good or a bad thing.
 Don Quixote was concerned with moral justice. That is the theme of the novel and what the author was exploring. That may or may not be what the experts say about it, I don't know, but it is what I got out of it. Don Quixote, like all of us, was acting upon his personal moral assumptions. In doing so it was his hope to achieve moral justice for everyone. Lofty goals indeed. Now I'm not saying I hold such lofty goals, I am certainly on no crusade for justice, just a person sharing my thoughts. Unlike Don Quixote I am well aware I'm tilting at windmills! It's a frustration for sure, but a necessary one. Change can happen in an instant but also take a Millenia. There is no standard. In this world absolute value can not survive. That is the dream we call heaven.
 Our moral assumptions include ethics, fairness and the law. Legal justice is not moral justice. Our moral justice supersedes personal pleasure and our own happiness. Legal justice, sometimes called social justice, is based upon the society. That's why it is called social justice. Legal justice is the general consensus of the society on what is moral and what is not. Each person in the society making different moral assumptions based on there past and experience. Legal justice is dependent upon the individuals willingness to alter their personal morality. That is where things get sticky. It is in that realm where we seek guidance. Often that guidance comes in the form we call religion, adopting the tenets of a particular practice as our own, be it Christianity, Judaism or Islam. Perceived moral absolutes maybe found there, even when they don't agree with our moral assumptions. That is what defines us as faithful or not. Well, it defines us to others anyway.
 So like Don Quixote I often find myself defending a moral value, one that is absolute to me, against the ever changing values of society. I do so for the benefit of future generations, not for myself. Yes I'm tilting at windmills on occasion. But the effort is not wasted if it causes just one person to pause. Yes, I may seem silly at times, I can be annoying, and am sometimes dismissed, just as Don Quixote was. Sometimes folks will say or do whatever, just to get me to move on. I'm aware of all that.
 Don Quixote, hero or fool? There is much debate among scholars and casual readers about that. I can see both in him. He's a fool to believe that he can effect change in a world that does not agree with his moral absolutes, the code of Chivalry. He's a hero for at least trying. Nothing gets done if you don't try and that is where the value lies, in the effort. Much as if a soldier on the battlefield charges the enemy and is killed, it was foolish. If he charges the enemy and emerges the victor, he's a hero. In societies opinion today everyone is a hero, that's the narrative. Quixote however I think would not be judged as such. In society today he would certainly be derided as a bigot, prejudicial or worse. I have been called all of those things and more. And like Quixote I remain undeterred. I certainly don't think of myself as a hero, nor do I think I'm a fool. But, the thing is, I don't get to decide that at all. That is for future generations to decide. Most likely I wouldn't be happy with either answer.
  

sentiment and pride

 Yesterday I spoke of treasure. I was talking about those things that I have a sentimental attachment too. I do make an effort to pass that sentiment to others in the hope it stays alive. Like a Hallmark movie, the value of sentiment is in the sharing of it. It is that way with many things. I do however retain certain memories for myself, the choicest tidbits as it where. Still, the greatest joy comes from sharing those sentiments.
 Last evening as I scrolled down my Facebook timeline I read an exciting notice. My granddaughter, Morgan, has been accepted in the National Honor Society! I knew her grades were worthy, I had read her essay that is required as part of the application process, and now it is confirmed. What can one say but, congratulations. It is true her older brother Mark was also a member of that society. Now I won't say she followed in his footsteps because Morgan walked her own path to success! Morgan deserves the credit and the praise. She did the work and now enjoys the reward, and that is just as it should be. I am looking forward to attending her induction ceremony.
 It is all those moments with my children and now grandchildren that I hold closest of all. The purest form of joy is happiness for others. It takes a parent or grandparent to fully understand that. I remember the little markers and milestones that got those children to where they are today. Yes, I said children, for our children remain ever so regardless of time, and grandchildren the same. Award assemblies, school plays, report cards, all the triumphs and tragedies that constitute life. I have shared that with them. Every once and a while another shining moment appears on the horizon and this is surely one of those times. I'm thinking I'm prouder of her accomplishment than she is! That is also as it should be, accomplishment, like fine wine takes time to fully mellow. It is then we can enjoy that.
 Perhaps that's why I have my treasures. The appreciation for them has grown over time. Oh there are some objects that were lost do to my own negligence that can not be replaced. I haven't lost or misplaced any memories however, at least not yet. Another reason I started writing them down I suppose. I have awards and letters from my Navy days that meant very little to me at the time I received them. Medals and ribbons awarded to be displayed on your uniform. As anyone that has served would tell you there value lies in having earned the right to wear them, at least while on active duty that is, following that they take on other meaning, sentiment replacing pride.
 I'm confident that there are more moments to come. Morgan has yet to complete high school, her brother is a freshman in college. There are those events to look forward too. So many possibilities. None of us can know what tomorrow will bring, even when we are expecting it. I was confident when Morgan applied to the honor society. I expected her to be accepted and thrilled when I heard that she was. I immediately posted her picture and that news to Facebook. As the congratulations and likes accumulated so too my pride swelled. It has brought me much joy. It's almost as I had been awarded the invitation myself. I want to stand in her spotlight! Is that selfish? No, I say it is reward. Thank you Morgan for being you. You have added to my treasure. Congratulations. 

treasure

 Who knew that growing older would come with time? You get up every day and it's pretty much like the last. Oh sure there are distractions, work, vacations, holidays, sickness and stuff like that. Then one day you wake up to discover you are not as young as you used to be. It comes as a bit of a surprise. Then you get used to that idea, being older, and begin to embrace that. You get use the preface, at my age, as a qualifier. It can work to your advantage. Not as much in todays' world as in the past but still. Today we are seniors, as long as we are mobile anyway, if not, we are elderly! I don't think anyone wants to be elderly. It's like being called a spinster, you just don't hear that term used much anymore.
 Now I'm no different than anyone else, I figure I'll be around tomorrow. There is always tomorrow. Well, even if you aren't there, there will still be tomorrow. The objective, of course, is to make it! And if you don't make it you don't want to be forgotten. You want to remembered as though you might reappear at any time. It's a comforting thought for me anyway. It's probably the reason I have such an affinity for my ancestors, trying to keep them alive. Strange seeing as how I never knew the majority of them, not even Grandparents. I knew my Great Grandfather and one Grandmother, that's about it. But I have gotten to know them over the years through pictures, stories and Ancestry.com! I have created a life for them in my mind. It makes no difference if those lives are anywhere near the reality, it's what I think. The importance lies in the remembering.
 Then there is the question of possessions. What concerns me the most are my personal possessions, the stuff I have gathered over the years that holds value to me. These objects hold no monetary value, they may not hold any value at all to another. They are the objects we treasure. Knick-Knacks, Bris-a-Brac, collectibles or junk, whatever you wish to label them. I wouldn't want anything to happen to them, even after I'm not here to take care of them. For that reason I feel a need to assign a value to them, almost like a price tag. This is what this means to me. It's an idea I struggle with. Another idea came to me yesterday as I wrote a post about my Troll. Perhaps I should just create a catalogue of my treasures. I'm thinking I could write a brief story or explanation about my treasures, include a photograph, and bind them together. In that way, someone could check the catalogue before discarding the object. It's a project that would occupy me for a while, maybe over a long cold winter. I'm thinking about those mysterious things we hold dear. I have a stone, it's just a plain old stone, why would I keep that? There is a reason. There is a gyroscope, an old, slightly damaged gyroscope, that I treasure. Why? Because it was a gift from my sister less than a year before her passing. There's a whole story behind that. A book, certain pictures, and other objects that apparently have no value, invaluable. My father decorations from WW2. So many little things to catalogue and explain, give a description, like a catalogue enticing you to buy.
 To be honest I guess that is what I want, for someone, anyone, to buy my stuff. Yes, preferably it would be family but barring that, any caretaker will do. I don't want my stuff discarded. To do so would be like discarding me, even though I won't know it, or will I? It's the unknown that concerns us all. I wonder what will happen to my stuff, more than I worry about what will happen to me. Could be that's because I feel like I can control that to some degree. I have no say about what happens after I die, or do I? Is that what ghosts are all about, refusing to go? Well I don't know anything about that but I know my stuff will be staying behind, you can't take it with you. I guess the deal is this, I want my treasures to be treasured. Hmm, seems right.   

Trolls

 Do you remember Troll dolls? If you grew up in the 1960's it would be pretty hard for you not too as they were everywhere. Unlike today, they were good luck and wildly popular. They came in many sizes and hair colors. I had a pair of handgrips for my bicycle that featured trolls! Yes, those darn Trolls were everywhere. They were invented by a Danish man named Thomas Dam. According to Wikipedia they were called Dam Dolls after him. I never heard that and even if I had we certainly wouldn't have been saying that! Back then if I said to my Mother or any adult for that matter, I want a Dam Doll I would have gotten something quite different. But, as I said I never heard that term used. Seems like Rat Finks were popular about the same time. Of course this was long before Amazon and E-Bay delivered everything you could imagine. The local 5&10 was our source, Mr. Brill was the hook-up.
 I hadn't though about Troll dolls in a while, although I have been called a Troll on more than one occasion. I just laugh about that and say yup, I'm the truth troll! The truth does make some folks uncomfortable. Then I remembered it was a troll that lived under the bridge the three Billy goats wished to cross. They wanted to get to that greener grass on the other side. The Troll wound up in the river and disappeared after the biggest goat charged into him! The moral of the story? If a Troll blocks your way just push him in the river! I'm thinking they don't teach that lesson anymore, now you just slander him until he capitulates. Strange that Troll wasn't a Dam Troll although some would call him that. Well, it was a time of action, not words.
 You may wonder, what made me think about Troll dolls. Well, it's because I recently came into possession of one. My sister inherited that Troll as a part of an estate. Growing up we had a neighbor. George and Francis Rollings. As kids we naturally figured them to be an old couple, Truth is they were in their late forties, Aunt Francis, as we called her, was unable to have children of her own and became quite close to my sister. That was following the death of her husband George. Now Aunt Francis loved to play Bingo. It was a fairly new activity at that time. The early Bingo games were held at the Catholic church and others soon followed. Bingo became quite the fundraiser for fire departments and the like, and still are. Aunt Francis had her good luck charm  and it was, you guessed it, a Troll doll. Whenever she needed that winning number she would set that Troll doll on it. Whether it worked or not I couldn't say but Aunt Francis was convinced it would sway fate. That's because it had some added MOJO. Aunt Francis also had a cat that she loved very much. She had taken some of that cats' hair and fastened it to the Troll! That's right, she removed the fake hair from that Troll and replaced it with her cats' own hair and that, my friends, gave the Troll the power.
 All of that took place back in the 1960's. Aunt Francis passed away in 1968 and left her home, with all the furnishings and bric a brac, to my sister. Now I have that Troll sitting on my desk, a reminder and a memento of the past. Very small, very insignificant looking, and unimportant. It has no value as a vintage Troll Doll, yes there are people that collect them, as it has been modified. Still I smile whenever I notice it and the memories flood back. Amazing how that happens isn't it? That little Troll is about 35 years old now. He's been around the block as they say. Was he good luck? I'd say so and I feel lucky to have that. I'm not certain of his fate but hope he survives. I'd hate for him to be thrown into the river and disappear.  I do find it ironic though, I've been called a Dam Troll a few times, guess it is only fitting that I should have one. Life is funny that way sometimes if you take the time to look.

Remember? This isn't the one I have but is for illustration only. 

stick to the script

 Could be just me, but I wonder if anyone else has noticed? A lot of posts on Facebook these days ask you to copy and paste. The reasons for doing so are usually to prove something. If you love Jesus or oppose something like cruelty to animals, stuff like that. I wonder if anyone supports cruelty to animals but that's another topic altogether. To me all of those posts are like a chain letter and I will not participate. Now if you enjoy it, go for it. I have to state that clearly or face being accused of something, anything, because I don't agree. So to be clear, if you enjoy the copy and paste thing by all means copy and paste.
 I don't normally copy and paste just because I find it annoying. I will not be cajoled, guilt tripped or in any way made to feel like I have to do that, for any reason. If it means my eternal damnation, so be it. Another reason is because of others on the internet that use that particular thing as a tool. We call them hackers and they are up to no good. Now I don't like it but can understand a crook. They want my information to enrich themselves, if possible. I get that. What I don't get is why you would just want to mess someone's computer up? I fail to see the entertainment value in that. If I want to do something, good or bad, I also want to see the result. Do you know what I mean? What satisfaction can you get from not knowing? Well, like I said, I fail to see the point.
 All that being said I will copy and paste certain things. If I feel something has value as information, or entertainment, I may copy and paste. I will copy and paste web addresses to share. I'm not against copy and paste, just the notion that I can somehow affect the outcome of the world by a failure to do that. I am pleased when I see that someone shared something I posted. It's an acknowledgement that they found it interesting. worthy of their time to share. The value being in that it was unsolicited. Like paying a stranger a compliment. I appreciate that.
 In the same vein I don't get the whole ribbon thing either. I'm supposed to wear a specific colored ribbon to show support. 99% of these causes are ones that no one would disagree with in the first place. C'mon who likes cancer? There are ribbons for, breast cancer, substance abuse, HIV/AIDS, leukemia, multiple sclerosis, suicide, mental illness, lupus and epilepsy, just to name a few. I googled a partial list and there where 38 on that! Is there anyone that likes any of these things? Why do we need to pin our empathy to our sleeves? Are we looking for approval? Sure seems that way to me. Look at me, I support fighting breast cancer! That means I'm a good person. Just seems more self serving than anything else. Charity shouldn't require recognition. Neither should empathy. Remember almost two years ago we were being told to wear a safety pin? It was to show others that you were a safe space! That's right, you could wear this safety pin and that would reassure others that you would agree with anything! You were safe! Yeah, but that one got laughed off the street. Even the most liberal among us thought it was a bit too much. Besides, it certainly was a good way to invite someone into your lair, if you were that type of person, like offering candy to a baby.
  So let me add a disclaimer here as well. If you like wearing your ribbon, wear your ribbon. Yes, I have made known my feelings on that and offer no apology for that. I also don't like those croc shoes on men, just so you know. I don't hate everyone that wears a ribbon or crocs. I don't hold a grudge against those that urge others to copy and paste to save their souls or the world in general. I am just expressing my opinion on those things. Feel free to judge me, I believe everyone judges everyone else no matter what ribbon you wear or don't wear. I have noticed that telling the truth does get you in trouble these days. Not supposed to do that, only express the obvious, those things that people have no choice but to support and then deride others should they fail to immediately laud your efforts! Whatever you do, do not attempt to use facts or logic! Just stick to the script! If you don't know the script just listen to the main stream media, they'll keep you up to speed on that. Or just copy and paste. No independent thought allowed. 

It's unfair

 I read a post from a friend. I have never meet this person just interacted with him on Facebook. I  say friend because acquaintance implies having met the person, know what I mean? Well it's not important really I'm just trying to be clear. I only know what this person has shared with me online, and he only knows of me what I share. A friendship? Well whatever you wish to call it I believe we share some common beliefs. Friendship is based on commonality, wouldn't you say? My friends generally agree with my core values, although we may have different opinions on a variety of topics. But anyway, I read this post where he says life is unfair. I don't disagree, but it made me ask a question; if life is unfair, what is fair?
 The dictionary says fair is in accordance with the rules or standards. Who makes the rules and standards? The answer has to be the society in which you live. Society however can only delineate what is considered right and wrong behaviors. But is that what defines life? Is your life " fair " if you follow all the rules? No, because we all feel that at least some of the rules are unfair. So if we follow those rules we would be unfair to ourselves. Still, fairness is marked by impartiality, honesty and is free from self-interest, prejudice or favoritism. So in order to be fair, we would have to be unfair to ourselves, at least sometimes and in some instances. Then we get into the realm of morality, and morality is always subjective. Being subjective it cannot be fair to everyone. Morality is self imposed restrictions on behavioral choices, in short, what is right and wrong.
 Can government make life fair? Some would like to believe so. If we had a society where everyone got the same thing, regardless of any subjective outside influences, that would be fair, right? That is the goal of socialisms isn't it? The equal redistribution of wealth and property. No matter the highest producer gets exactly the same as the lowest producer, or indeed, the one that produces nothing at all. Is that fair? I don't believe anyone would agree to that. Strangely you hear proponents of just that, in the interest of being fair. Mostly from the lowest producers however, or those who perceive they aren't getting their fair share. Or from those wishing for a larger share with less effort on their part, like politicians for example.
 Consider our current government (a constitutional republic ) as an example. Is it fair? Many people believe that it isn't, but reject any alternative form that we currently know. I did a quick Google search and found at least 44 alternative forms of government listed, many I admit I have never heard of. I admit that our current form of government isn't perfect, there are portions of the policy that are not fair. Social Security, In its' present form is unfair. Why? Because it is placing a burden on future generations that may or may not benefit from it. Is that fair? No, it isn't.  The monies being collected are not invested, rather they are spent making the payments promised by the government. The only way future payments can be made, the promise honored, is if future generations contribute to the system. In essence, It's a Ponzi scheme. It pays ( profits ) benefits to earlier investors ( senior citizens ) with funds gained from more recent investors ( pay roll taxes ). Should those pay roll taxes cease, the whole scheme collapses. Is that fair? No, but it's the best we have at the moment.
 Okay, so I think we can all agree that government can't make life fair. That leaves us with the question, what can? To answer that we have to answer the question, who controls your life? Are you solely in control of that, or can a God, or higher power intervene? Well now that is a completely subjective thing isn't it? I mean, no one can answer that for you, there is no right or wrong answer. No matter what your decision on that subject is, you will still have to live your life. What's worse, your life will be effected by the choices of others. Now is that fair? It is if you agree you affect how others choose to live their life. Turnabout is fair play, right? Or is it? An eye for an eye? Maybe life can only be fair if you aren't looking. Somebody will always have something better than you, if you allow that. Only you can make it fair! And that, is just unfair!           

coming around

 Monday will be Columbus day. A holiday now shrouded in controversary. I was taught that in 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue. Indeed he did, arriving in what we now call the Americas. Interesting to note is Columbus never set foot in North America. No, he landed in the Bahamas and later Hispaniola, never getting even close to what we now call America. He believed he had discovered a new route to Asia. Even though other navigators knew differently, Columbus didn't believe them. There are those that say Columbus had secured charts showing this " new world " and was following them. Columbus was far from the first to sail over here. The Vikings had done so hundreds of years earlier. But we celebrate Columbus, at least we used to, for his accomplishments.
 The first celebration of Columbus in the United States took place in New York city in 1792. The idea was to celebrate Italian-American heritage. Yes, all the way back in 1792 people were concerned with their heritage. It was a group called the Colombian Order that first celebrated what was to become Columbus day. It was supposed to be about Italian heritage more than the man. It was Roosevelt in 1937 that established Columbus day as a national holiday. And here we are less than a hundred years later talking about doing away with it altogether. Well, several states have renamed the holiday Indigenous peoples day. The intent being to honor those folks. My thinking is, if I were an Indigenous person I wouldn't want a recycled holiday, I'd want one of my own. Not sure what day you would pick though seeing as those people were here thousands of years before Columbus and the Vikings. No denying the treatment of the indigenous peoples Columbus encountered was completely abhorrent. Of course Columbus never encountered any of the indigenous peoples in north America but we'll set that fact aside. It was later Europeans that interacted with north Americans but we'll blame the Italian guy instead. Seems fair enough.
 Now I'm all for the telling of history in a factual way. Columbus wasn't all I was taught he was. Sensibilities were different back then, Fact is Europeans were writing the books and as we all know the victor writes the narrative. It has always been that way and I suspect will remain that way in the future as well. Now we have Europeans writing the history books as a sort of atonement for the misdeeds of the past, by pointing out we know we did wrong, and promising not to do that again. It would be interesting to read what is written about today a hundred years from now. Well I guess that isn't going to be an issue what with global warming destroying the world in the next twelve years and all that, but I won't go into that. You know Columbus knew he wouldn't sail off the edge of the earth. There are those that still insist the earth is flat to this day though, so.  Wonder why the name isn't changed to Italian-American heritage day, you know, what it originally was intended to recognize? If you want to blame anyone for the interaction with north American indigenous peoples shouldn't the British carry that blame? After all , it was they that arrived in Jamestown in 1607, 115 years after that Italian fella Columbus. Why blame him? There are numerous other lands that he is indeed responsible for! What we call the United States isn't one of them however.
 I don't know, it just seems a bit strange to me. There are those attempting to rewrite history that was written incorrectly in the first place. Here in the United States of America we were taught about Columbus discovering America. He didn't. Yet that was the answer that got you a hundred on the test. Columbus discovered America in 1492 was the response. We weren't told much else. Oh we were told how he went to Ferdinand and Isabella to get the money for the voyage. He was an Italian guy but was financed by the Spanish, I don't recall why though. We celebrated Columbus day in October because that is the month he arrived. Later, when we were older, we were told of some of the atrocities he committed. We were also told that most of the " civilized " world was doing the same thing. We called it exploration and bringing knowledge and culture to the heathens of the world!
 Today we are teaching the children that Columbus was nothing more than a thug that destroyed millions of lives. No holiday for him! We will instead celebrate and recognize the Indigenous peoples. We don't call them Indians anymore, that's offensive why? Because Columbus thought he was in the east Indies and called those indigenous peoples Indians. He wasn't talking about North American indigenous peoples however, he was never here! It was the Europeans, predominately British, that called them Indians. But don't allow the truth to get in the way of a good apology. Sorry, it was that terrible Italian guy that started all of this, it's his fault. Here, take his holiday as a token of our repentance.
 I'm not defending Columbus or anything that he did. It was wrong, we all know it was wrong, but it is what happened. A day was set aside to honor the heritage of Italian-Americans. They had chosen Christopher Columbus as their champion. Why did they choose him? He was the greatest explorer of his time. A hero to the nation that wouldn't finance his voyage. But, he discovered America! That was the belief, the teaching at the time. Italian-Americans felt they should be recognized as they had and were suffering from prejudice. Not unlike some ethnic groups today, the Italians were being marginalized and treated unfairly. They were, after all, darker skinned and Catholics! It took 155 years but in 1937 FDR gave them a holiday named Columbus day. Now less than a hundred years later we are taking it away. What goes around comes around I suppose. What group is enjoying favor today? 

In my thoughts

 I woke up this morning with my sister on my mind. Today is her birthday, although she has celebrated her last. Those of us that knew and loved her are here to celebrate for her. Her birth and life will never go unappreciated or uncelebrated. This is the first year I haven't been able to mail a card or call on the phone. That isn't to say I always did so, we all have a way of letting dates slip by us. Yes, there were years when I failed to do either. Still, there was never a year I didn't think of her on her birthday and they say it is the thought that counts. Thing is, it only counts for ourselves, a form of self therapy I suppose. But I believe she knows my thoughts this day just as surely as if I where to speak to her on the phone. I need to believe that, to have a measure of comfort. 

 As I thought of my sister this morning I could see the place of her internment. She was cremated and her ashes placed in a vault. It is high up off the ground, so high you can't touch it. This place is located in Florida, the state in which she was born, and the one in which she died. Many years in between those events where not spent in Florida. She and I were raised on Long Island in the state of New York. She married an Air Force man and traveled with him around the world. After his retirement she did settle in Florida raising her children there. That she should pass there could be viewed as serendipity. I'm certain she wasn't seeking that, it was unexpected, unplanned for sure. 

 I feel a bit of sorrow that I can't visit that place this day. I would like to stand before her and place a rose in memory. Oh, I suppose I could have had one delivered but it wouldn't be the same action. At least that is what I tell myself. I rationalize that I need no reminder, no marker, to remember her. On the other hand it would be a comfort. And isn't that the reason we leave these markers in the first place? We place these markers to preserve the memory of those we loved beyond on own memory. A name recorded in stone, or in her case, bronze. In memoriam, means in memory of. It is an expressive word that holds so much emotion, so much meaning, in a condensed form. It conveys the knowledge that this person has departed this world. 

 As all those thought traveled through my mind an idea came to the forefront. What if each cemetery, each graveyard, contained a universal marker. What I'm thinking is a stone, perhaps an obelisk, with just two words on it, In Memoriam. It contain no indication of race, creed, national origin, gender, age, or anything else, just the words, In Memoriam. It would serve as a place to go and place that rose or whatever remembrance you wish. I can't travel to Florida this day but I could travel to the nearest cemetery. It would serve as a sort of surrogate memorial. Is that just a sentimental thought? Perhaps but I'm thinking not a bad one. 

 Happy Birthday Millie. You are the only sister I ever had, and the only one I ever needed. I miss you. 

what I mean

 It's what I said, but not what I mean. That is an issue before the supreme court. Fact is, it's not the first time and won't be the last. The very reason the court only issues an opinion. In their opinion that is what was meant! Somebody has to decide. In this last instance the court will issue an opinion on whether sex and gender are interchangeable. In the context of the wording in Title Vll does sex mean gender identity? That is to say, if you are biologicaly a male but believe you are a female, or want to be a female, or dress like a female, is that your sex? Title Vll prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, national origin and religion. The question to be answered is, does sex, in that context, include whatever gender you identify as? Reading a little further race and color are apparently considered separate things as they are listed separately. National origin and religion are self explanatory. The only thing there is it has to be a recognized religion as defined/accepted by the United States government. The reason for that is simple enough, if I get to just say " it's my religious practice " and that exempts me from the rule of law, I could just do as I pleased. It's really the same thinking behind sex and gender. If I just get to choose what gender I want to be at any given moment that certainly opens up all avenues doesn't it? Ladies night, I get the discount on drinks, the ladies dressing rooms, available to me whenever I want, and the list goes on. So, what does it mean?
 We can all agree that discrimination based on sex is unacceptable. I don't believe anyone is attempting to say that it is. Sex in this instance meaning gender. We have to remember this was written in 1964. Sensibilities were a bit different back then. Title Vll was intended to change that. Women could work out of the home, women could do what was traditionally considered a mans' trade, like mechanic or carpenter. And yes there was discrimination based on everything else, race, color, national origin and religion. In 1961 when JFK was elected there was much concern that he was a Catholic! That's correct, what was commonly called a Papist! The fear was the Pope would dictate policy to the President. Jewish people weren't exactly treated with equal respect either! In 1964 saying or even writing the word sex was a bit edgy. Gender identity issues were considered a mental issue! In fact it wasn't until 2013 that the World Health Organization changed transgenderism from a mental disorder and began calling it gender dysphoria. I'm not offering an opinion on that, just saying that is the history of that. So I'd say in 1964 when they wrote sex they were thinking of gender but felt no need to further delineate that, after all, if you believed your sex wasn't what your body showed it was, you were considered a little bit off. That's 1964. Fifty five years ago. I'd say sensibilities have changed significantly. Still, what is sensible has not changed.
 So perhaps Title Vll needs to be revised, I'll leave that decision up to you. Discrimination is wrong, do we really need to write it down. Unfortunately we do. Why, because there are those that will say the law doesn't say I can't. Does it change their attitude or feelings? Nope. It just acts as a deterrent to them, to avoid bad consequences. My question is doesn't the employer deserve equal protection? That is to say, choose who they want to represent their business? What if the person identifies as a clown and wants to wear a clown suit all day, do I have to hire that person? Now I agree I shouldn't be able to discriminate against a person based on gender, race, color, national origin and religion. I do think I can choose to discriminate in hiring an employee. To discriminate is to recognize a distinction, to differentiate or perceive a difference. Yes I said discriminate, but that's not what I mean. See how that works?
    

left to their own devices

 Perhaps the most difficult thing to accept is the knowledge that one day the next generation will be left to their own devices. Are they ready? Well that was our job wasn't it, to prepare them? Yes, it was and how do you measure success? Is it when the next generation blindly follows your teachings? No I believe we all want our children to be independent thinker's, as long as they think similar to us. No one wants to raise a radical! The challenge is in finding that happy medium. Most will operate on a sliding scale. That is to say, compliant when really young, then rebellious, and finally settling into life. That time we call adulthood stretches' from our early twenties until we retire, generally speaking. Then we are called seniors. Seniors, think about that, in our last year before graduating. Graduating from what? Life  has to be the answer. And after we graduate the kids are left to their own devices. How much of a warm fuzzy feeling does that give you? 

 I'm thinking about this in the big picture, not just our own children which we prepared, they're great. Sure they have their moments when you question that, but, you are equally as certain they'll be fine. But what about all the others? It's true this is always the case with every generation. My parents thought the same thing, their parents thought the same thing, and their parents before them. It is nothing new. Still we get this unsettled feeling, moments of doubt. As society evolves that is the result. The very reason we long for the good old days. The old days are settled! You can't change history except in your memories. That's fine as long as you don't attempt to teach memories as facts! 

 To be honest I have to say I'm not one that made much of a difference. No crusader, no activist, or political force I have just lived life as best as I know how. I believe that is my role. I'm fine with that. Over the last nine plus years I have taken to writing down my thoughts, observations, and feelings about all manner of things. Perhaps those writings have aided someone in some way, I doubt they have changed a thing. Again I'm fine with that. Sometimes I amuse myself by thinking a distant descendant of mine will discover them and be interested. They will read first hand accounts of history. True those accounts will be biased, they have to be. Bias is nothing more than a point of view. Do you know what it means to cut fabric on the bias? If you do, you know that the reason is a simple one. It keeps the material from fraying and makes it supple. Go against the bias and you have problems.Same as in real life. Go against the bias and you will have problems. My bias is a part of me. I don't have a problem with that either. Bias is a necessary attribute. It can be in favor of or against something. It is usually associated with prejudice and considered a bad thing. That is what those with a different bias think anyway. That's how it works. As an engineer I can tell you it is necessary to interject some bias in order to have a system operate over a predetermined range. Operating outside that range is a bad thing, usually catastrophic.  

 So what is troubling about all of this? One day that bias will be removed. I am that bias. Then the next generation will be left to their own devices. You could say it is a matter of trust. I trust my descendants, yours I'm not so sure about. Well to be completely honest sometimes I have my doubts about mine too. It's like leaving the kids home alone. Yeah, they'll be fine. Then again, do you want to leave them to their own devices? Depends upon how much you want to do whatever it is you want to do doesn't it? The problem now however is, I don't get a choice. They will be left alone whether I like it or not. 

 It is fitting that the last paragraph of the Constitution states, in part, " We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in general congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions "  Rectitude means equality, that their intentions are in the best interest of the whole. I probably would have just said, God help us. That sums up the way I feel about what is happening in the country. In the end, in the last paragraph or our story, that is the best we can hope for.  

the goal

 To paraphrase Lewis Carroll, If you don't know where you are going, any road will do. My question is, do you have to have a destination? I mean we are always told we have to have a purpose, we are here to accomplish something, we should be working toward a goal, that sort of thing. I question whether that is actually a necessity. Well I should preface that with, if you are retired. So I guess the question really is, can retirement be the goal? Not that it has to be the only goal, just can it be the goal? Is there something inherently wrong with just relaxing, doing what you like, and walking the path you choose? 

 Lewis Carroll said, " If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." The implication is what? That it is a bad thing. Isn't that the impression you get? So why don't we think of that as an exploration, an adventure, instead of something negative? Is it because exploring and adventure are the destination? That is the goal? A self centered goal, as it satisfies only yourself. And aren't we conditioned to think our goals should benefit others? The most noble goals are selfless! The highest achievements benefit all of mankind. Sure we can have adventures, exploring new thoughts, ideas and the unknown, but they should benefit others. We all know who the first to climb Everest was, but who came second? The goal isn't nearly as impressive when you are the second to achieve it! 

 But what of personal goals? Are they a necessity? Do we all need to be working toward something? If that is the case how do you decide upon the goal? The goal should be to please yourself, that's why it is a personal goal right? What if your goal is just to please others? In that scenario you would have to take the road others select for you. That's because you are trying to get where they want to be. See how that works? If I start walking my own path that may displease others. It can cause embarrassment, friction, and in some causes concern. You know, " elders " are expected to respond and act in a certain fashion. Start pursuing some personal goal and eyebrows may be raised,  your mental acuity may be called into question. Words like dementia and Alzheimer's enter into the conversation. It can result in what the kids call, a buzz kill. Takes the fun out of things you know. 

 Then you could just set no goal at all. I'm not out to do anything. Accomplishment? I've already accomplished the goal. I'm retired, no more 9 to 5. I don't have to get up at any certain time, be any certain place and do any certain thing! I can just do whatever I what. Well as long as that whatever isn't too far out of the norm. Or there is the issue of being met with platitudes. You begin to pursue some new interest, set some new goal, only to be met with that. You get that same feeling as when you were encouraging your child to, dream big, you can be a star! All the time you knew that child really had little talent for whatever it was. What I mean is, when I was a kid I thought I could play major league baseball, be a great shortstop. Hey, Mom thought so, and others too. After a few years, I knew that wasn't happening. 

 So now I'm thinking maybe the best thing is not to set any goal at all. You can't be disappointed or let anyone down that way. Except, you are supposed to have a goal. It's a bit of a quandary. I guess I'm stuck on the same old highway. I don't know where I'm going but I'll get there anyway. Is that what Lewis Carroll was saying? Epictetus said, " All religions must be tolerated for every man must get to heaven in his own way. " Each of our paths are different but the destination is the same. You could say we are all born with a common goal, to get to heaven. The only thing then left to define is heaven. Once you define that, you can choose the road to get you there. Isn't that the goal.