placing trust

  I will be glad when election day has come and gone. Not that the political climate will have calmed down, I'm expecting quite the opposite, but the campaign ads will no longer be on television. If I hear Joe Biden proclaiming how he can get this pandemic under control, IF HE IS ELECTED, one more time I just might be a liberal and start screaming at the sky! So Joe, your campaign is, I will save the lives of thousands but only if you elect me. You have the plan, the means, the knowledge, the ability to do that but only if you are elected. That's your platform? Oh yeah, you aren't going to raise taxes on anyone making less than 400K a year. That's your other promise and about as likely as you controlling the pandemic! Do you really think people are that stupid, to believe either of those statements? C'mon man.

 Say what you will about Trump but he is just promising more of the same. You already know what you got with him, he isn't promising anything new. Thing is; if you just set aside your personal distaste for him, he has a lot to offer. He has put America first, which does make a great number of unamericans' angry, like Mommy saying no to another piece of candy. He hasn't gotten us into any wars or conflicts, despite all the dire warning that he would from the last administration. An administration that, in my opinion, kow towed to rest of the world. I'll never forget my President bowing down before some Arab leader. And yes, as much as I found him distasteful he was my President at that time. The weakest President this country ever had! 

 Trump hasn't divided the nation, that was accomplished during the previous eight years. The problem now is bringing the "children" back into the fold. For eight years the children were allowed to just run free, do pretty much as they please, without discipline, and this is the result. Think about it, what are the demands from the left? Free everything, open borders, and this attitude that I can do whatever I like! And their response when told no, burn down the city, loot the stores, and claim they are oppressed! They throw a hissy fit! I'm afraid the worse of that is yet to come and I don't like thinking about it. At the same time I want this election to be over and move forward. For me the words have all been spoken, it's time to decide. Do we keep America?

 Make no mistake about it, the left wants a straight up Democracy, the mob rules! That has been their goal for quite some time, since 1860 in fact. That was the year South Carolina voted to secede from the Union. The others joined in and started what we now call the Civil War. It was a war about what? Control is the answer. They didn't want to be a part of the United States anymore, they were going to form their own country, a Confederacy, not a republic. It was a confederation of states, although touted as a Democracy to the common man. It wasn't anywhere near a Democracy. But, just as it is today, full of promises for the "working" man. All you have to do is surrender your voice to the government. Do as you are told and you will be rewarded. Things is, the government comes first, not you! Whatever the government wants, they take. The mob rules! The 51 takes from the 49 every time. Yeah, real good if you are in the 51, not so much in the 49. Joe promises to control the Pandemic, as long as you elect him. He also promises he'll "take care of you. " Yup and that means you will get whatever the government decides you should have, nothing more. You better pray that whatever that is doesn't cost too much or you will be denied! But go ahead, the government promises to take care of you. You can trust Joe. Remember this: Obama was the first two term President to be engaged in war all eight years of his Presidency! All eight years! And at the end of that eight years our military was weaker than when it began! That's because Obama was the weakest President ever! You know Arthur Purdue, yes the chicken guy, said in an advertisement: " It takes a tough man to raise a tender chicken. " I say it takes a tough man to run the nation. You may not like the man, but you like your chicken tender don't you? There are times when you just have to trust the process. It's pretty hard this time around, but I'll stay the course.    

proprieties

  I made a post about it yesterday. Gayle King reporting the news and using the term "badass" to describe a guest. I wasn't really listening to her but that jumped out of the background. For me it speaks to a lack of professionalism, a lack of decorum if you will. I see it as a reflection of the bigger attitude in America today. It just seems like it is all getting just a little too folksy to me. Yes, we are all equal under the law or are supposed to be anyway. But I was raised in a different way, a different time. I had role models! Those role models were television personalities like Walter Cronkite, the most trusted man in America. The Police were to be respected and obeyed. Everyone was exceptional, but no one was an exception. 

 This morning I hear on the news that Walmart has removed all guns and ammunition from their stores in response to rioting and looting. Imagine that, in America, a major retailer has to safeguard their inventory against gangs of thieves roaming the streets. What is being done about it? More importantly what can be done? When you have a populace that has grown accustomed to this sort of thing, you have a society on the brink. It may seem like a small thing, Gayle King saying this person is a badass, but what is the implication? This person will take violent action! That's what is being implied, plain and simple. A badass doesn't give a speech, or participate in peaceful protests, no, a badass uses force! And Gayle King is endorsing that behavior, indeed praising that. A small thing? It isn't just Gayle King either, I hear this all the time from all strata of society. Yes, you can say the President acts in the same fashion and that would be true. Trump surely isn't the most presidential of men. His demeanor is the typical New Yorker, at least the typical New Yorker born and raised in the city! The city is a tough neighborhood. You hear Senators and Congressmen using the same language and tactics. Rough language, coarse and bordering on vulgar at times. It is has become prevalent in our nation. And why is that? Because we have freedom of speech? Or because we wish to appear as a "badass?" 

 In my thinking we have lost a great deal of civility in our civilization. Have you listened to television commercials lately? What are they advertising? The latest I've heard is an advertisement for some feminine product that protects you against the gush! Yes, that is what they say. I expect some folks are laughing, that nervous laugh when you know something is just wrong, but you're cool. Another commercial talks about erections! Yes, not every man looks the same and that can be an addressable medical condition. More nervous laughter. Are there no barriers to civil discourse? My thinking is, this is similar to the story of clothes make the man. Allow this to go on, without speaking up and pointing out the truth, and it will just continue. And yes, I feel this just wrong. 

 It is just my feeling that we aren't even trying anymore. We have decided the standard is too high so we just keep lowering that standard. Where the standard used to be, don't do the wrong, it is now justify why you did it. As long as you can provide some excuse, it's alright. Heck, you can blame your parents, if all else fails. We are adopting this Robin Hood attitude. It's alight to be a criminal as long as being a criminal is for a good cause. as long as some justification is offered it is acceptable. I don't know, it is difficult for me to explain. I'm just thinking we have lost our sense of propriety. Observing the proprieties isn't a weakness, it takes strength of character. Just who do we have to admire today? Sports figures? Pop stars? Hollywood? All entertainers. Where are the leaders in character? They're not in politics or journalism! No, we have lowered the bar. Just keep us amused and we will go along with just about anything. Heck, we'll even say, that's badass. 

changes

 How far back is the olden days? I was informed my childhood was in the olden days. That was just four days ago and I have been questioning that ever since. It would be fair to say my childhood was fifty years ago, a half a century, five decades. a while ago. Is fifty years ago the olden days? Certainly not to me it isn't, seems like it wasn't all that long ago. I suppose if your childhood was only ten or twenty years ago, fifty years does seem like a longer period of time, well, because it is. Still, the olden days. I think it would also be fair to say the olden days are the days before anyone you knew was alive. What I mean is, like your grandparents, their childhood wasn't the olden days, just the old days. There is a difference. I'm thinking the olden days would have to harken back to the beginning of tradition. Cultural tradition though, not personal tradition. That is what I think of as the olden days. Before my time and the time of my parents and grandparents.

 I was told my attitude was from the olden days. You know back when we weren't so enlightened, so compassionate, understanding and accepting of others traditions and beliefs. That is how it was in the olden days. I wasn't told that attitude was wrong exactly, just that it was an attitude from the olden days. I'm bothered a bit because of that term, the olden days. It is an inference that I'm that old. Hey, I didn't live in the olden days, the days written about in fairy tales and history books. I had electricity and television when I was a kid; and indoor plumbing! What we are really talking about are cultural changes. Something that in another's mind used to be, but has subsequently been changed, changed meaning improved in some fashion. 

 Change is always assumed to be for the better when you are the one changing it. That makes sense, no one wants to change things to make it worse. But the ones wanting that change normally want that change for themselves, for some self interest. What I had commented on, to bring about the reference to the olden days, was whether men should kiss other men. It wasn't in reference to anyone being gay, that not that kind of kiss, but a kiss that shows affection to another. I said, that wasn't my tradition at all, not in my world, as I put that. That is when I was informed that was the way it used to be, back in the olden days. It was that way because back in the olden days a man kissing another man, in any fashion whatsoever, was thought of as being gay. I was surprised by that response as I had never thought of it quite like that. My tradition is, after a certain age, boys/men display affection with a firm handshake and possibly an embrace, if he was an old friend or family member. In general though, you keep your distance. Leave the hugging and kissing to the womenfolks! Yes, that is how it was in my olden days, which is today.

 For me it is a cultural thing. That is the way I was raised. Was I raised to be homophobic? I don't think so, I never heard anyone making threats against those folks, or discriminating against them. Yes, I heard many jokes and references to their choice which ran counter to my own, but all that was merely an identifier. I don't understand the issue with that, today they have parades celebrating that choice! Really not that much different from someone being real tall, fat, ugly, or a different race. I'm not phobic about any of those people either, they are different though and I will make reference to that 

 Today we are supposed to be totally blind to any of that. We are supposed to do that while celebrating our differences! Sounds a little confusing to me. You can't point out those differences but you can celebrate them. Makes me wonder just who is being intolerant? Well back in the olden days we didn't think so much about all of that. We just followed tradition until we started a new one. Tradition and culture often go hand in hand. When many cultures are introduced into a society the challenge of tradition becomes vastly more complicated. Not that it hasn't always been so, but today that problem is being exasperated by mass communication. Today it's more about change than tradition. We seem to be fixated on changing everything! A better tomorrow? Maybe so, but it is my observation people are much happier when they are comfortable, when they know what to do and what to expect. Those needs are fulfilled by tradition and culture. Keep changing that, and you'll never be happy. 

details

 Taking the time for details. That is something I've always had an issue with, as I'm always anxious to just get it done. I expect that is why my interest isn't held in one discipline for very long. That is to say, I'm not expert in anything. Some folks define themselves by their occupation, others by their hobbies. and me, I don't identify at all, I'm just me. That thought came to me this morning because of my flag. I had ordered a new flagpole, one that promises to keep my flag tangle free, and has a two year warranty. It warranties the pole will last two years, not that the flag won't tangle at some point in that two year period. a minor detail. But it isn't that detail that I got thinking about. I know the flag, when flown after dusk, should be illuminated. My flag is not. I should take that flag down every evening but often I do not. It's one of those details I am overlooking. Now, my plan is to buy a solar powered light to remedy that situation. My intention is to take care of that detail. What I'm thinking about however is that all I really have to down is take it down before dusk. Why don't I do that? Because I ignore that detail for the sake of convenience, that's why. Again I'm skipping the details, anxious to just move on. 

 It's all rather ironic if you think about it. When I was younger, I had all kinds of time. I could have spent far more time and energy pursuing the details. Instead I chose to just gain a working knowledge of whatever interested me at the moment, and just move on. You could say I was without direction. I say direction because I always had a purpose. The purpose changed according to the situation I found myself in and so I adapted. Not being concerned with the details that was sometimes perplexing. Life as it turns out is really in the details. That's why the old adage, the devil is in the details. The devil attempts to keep us from seeing those details is my guess. The devils' job is distraction. If he can keep you distracted long enough, he's got ya! My grandmother would say to me, you've got the devil in you, and I just laughed. She was telling me important information but I wasn't paying attention. 

 Ironically now that I'm older, and my projected time is shorter, I find myself examining the details far more closely. Now, I'm taking the time. Guess it is because I'm not that busy, not that much in a hurry anymore. Hey, what's the rush? I have established a good foundation, so it's time to build. That's the way I'm looking at it. I do have a good working knowledge of many things, time to start honing some of that. The issue now is what? I can rule out physical activities, too old to become a professional baseball player, I can rule out master mechanic or carpenter. a little late for those career choices, so I'm thinking philosopher. Philosophers are concerned with the details and I've got time for that. Thing about that is most philosophers aren't recognized until they are dead, even then it takes a while. But maybe I have saved up the details for just this occasion. I do find myself becoming a bit more fastidious as the years go by. That gives me hope, maybe I'll finish up strong. 

 People have short memories and will remember you as they last knew you. That can work in your favor. The trick is to avoid becoming a cranky, grumpy, old man. You can be highly opinionated, adamant in your beliefs, and be forgiven for that after your passing. Those remembering you will, at some point, see the truth of your words, and speak favorably of you. That's because opinions are transient things, subject to change at any moment. Being a negative person will stay with you, even after you have "left the building." That observation may be expressed with affection, but it is what will be said about you. I have become philosophical over time, so philosophy is my interest at this time. Philosophy is nothing more than trying to find answers. Answers to the big questions. 

 I asked my wife just the other day, I wonder if you miss this? What I was talking about is this life. If there is a life after, and you remember this life, will you miss this life? Will you say, dang I miss Barbeque or You Tube? I miss the imperfections that are living? In the afterlife everything is supposed to be perfect, I'm not certain I could handle that for eternity. Some of my biggest mistakes are also some of my best memories! I know, sounds weird, but the devil is in the details. I'm thinking I'll miss that. Well unless the opposite happens then an eternity of the devil will be too much! Maybe I should quit this philosophy stuff though, I'm not certain I want to know the answer. I could just wait and find out. Guess I'll have another cup of coffee and think it over. The problem with philosophy, at least for me, is that people seldom see the wisdom in your words until after you're dead. It isn't much fun if I don't get to say, I told you so. Yes, that is one of the great satisfactions in life, saying, I told you so. Being right is the goal, and that's exactly why we say get "right" with the lord. It's good to be right. Then again maybe that is what the after life is all about. Sitting on a cloud, talking with those you have known over your lifetime and being able to say, told you so. And there only response is, you're right.            

music and memories

 I listen to Spotify, the free version, when I am doing my workout. I also enjoy Youtube music videos. Those are the primary sources of my musical entertainment. Yes I have some CD's, do people still buy those? I am just wondering about that this morning. I, of course remember buying vinyl records, 45's, albums, eight track tapes, and cassette tapes. I remember the advent of the walkman, what an amazing technology. Today I hear about downloads. I think the kids just buy songs individually, although I can't say that for certain. I never was much of a record buyer, no large collection. 45's cost 90 cents and an album over five bucks! I didn't have that kind of cash to waste on that stuff. I just bought a select few, the best ones. Unfortunately I lost all my records over time and traveling. I have none from when I was a teenager. I do have a few that I picked up along the way somehow, more for sentimental reasons than actually listening to them.

 I understand that I am out of touch with the scene man. I hear them on the television saying so and so dropped a new song or album. I remember when they used to release them, seems more civilized to me than just dropping them, but then I'm not with it. Is it because I'm not woke? I don't know what the kids are saying these days. I do think they are still saying it's cool and that it is, all good. Guess you can't be groovy without having grooves, a reference to vinyl records that did have grooves in them. Still an amazing technology if you think about it. A needle (stylus) vibrating in a groove in a piece of vinyl amplified and you hear sound. Today it is accomplished digitally, a series of bytes, really on and off switches, a series of yes and no's that reproduce that sound. You can store literally hundreds of songs on a thumb drive or sd card. Do you know what the S stands for? It's for Secure, the technology used is owned by Secure Digital and was officially adopted as a standard in 1999. Been with us 21 years now. Wonder what will replace them? I'm certain something will. 

 The kids today can play their music anywhere, anytime, without any problems whatsoever. The earbuds they wear produce a far greater quality sound that most of us boomers ever imagined. We were impressed with those big speakers, they were the bomb! Names like Marantz and JBL ruled the day. Took a couple people just to move them around. Running the wires to those speakers was always a hassle too. The sound was awesome though. you could feel the beat. Today they put speakers in cars that will make you feel the beat! Rattle the windows in houses as they pass. Seems to me it is all about that bass, these days. Didn't someone sing a song about that? I think she was singing about having a big base, meaning her butt. Kids these days, who knows what they are listening too? Can't blame them though, we used up all the good music in the sixties and seventies. 

 Thinking about music makes me think about dancing. I know they still have school dances but do the kids dance? If they do, what are they doing? I mean it seemed like there was a new dance every few weeks or so when I was growing up. Now I was never one much to dance, at least not any real dance, I just moved to the beat. I didn't know how to do any of those dances but could always do my version of a waltz. If I am dancing with a lady I do want to hold her, never saw much point in standing back three feet and flailing about! But, hey that was the thing for a while. I haven't heard of any new dance the kids are doing these days. Last thing I heard about was twerking! That involved your base, er, your butt too. I don't think it would be allowed at the Prom, but what do I know? 

 I grew up in the rock and roll era. I still listen to that on occasion, when the mood strikes. But for everyday music playing in the background I'm listening to classic country. I have to chuckle when I hear them calling that music classic. No, it isn't classic, that's country music. I'm not sure what to call what the "cowboys" are playing today, it ain't country that much is certain. The last of that I'd say was with Dwight Yoakum, Randy Travis and Alan Jackson. For me, Garth Brooks started with all that "rock and roll " style country. His shows were more about a show than a song in my view. Yes, I know how popular he was, and still is I guess, but not for me. Randy Travis singing, Storms of Life, Dwight singing I sang Dixie and Alan Jackson with, where were you when the world stopped turning, now that's country. But I also know it is ever the same, it is what you grew up listening too, what memories are attached to the music. Rock and roll takes me to my teenage years, country followed that for me. It was like the song the Bellamy Brothers sang, Disco left me cold! Didn't like that music, didn't like the "lifestyle" it promoted, and it did leave me cold. It was all just a little too feminine for my taste, the beginning of the end. Cowboys wearing ear rings? I don't know where it will end, but I don't wanna be here when it does. Was here the day the music died, that's bad enough. 

in the context of time

 When you write your thoughts every day you do become aware of some things. One of those things is  cycles. I believe I have cycles of emotion. This morning I'm feeling a little bit introspective. I've noticed that feeling comes along almost every moth about this time. OMG, I'm having periods! Well I had heard that men experience periods but always thought that was just some kind of sick joke. Now I'm thinking it may be true, the only difference being they are neurological instead of biological. That makes sense,  men and women are different. Women are neurological every day, biology only intensifies that. I have noticed with women, once that biology stops, it is the luck of the draw what you are left with. Some remain the sweet and gentle ladies you married, and others just remain a screaming shrew! I was left with an angel, just so we are clear about that. 

 Anyway, I am feeling a bit introspective and so was thinking about the past. For whatever reason I got out my great grandmothers bibles. I was given those for safe keeping some years back. Family heirlooms you know. I opened the front cover to read the inscription there. It reads: To Lucy J. Terry from A. M. King. Christmas 1890. A.M. King is her grandfather, my 3rd great grandfather. This year it will have been 130 years since he gave his granddaughter that bible. I feel a little something special when I hold it. My thoughts travel back in time, a time long before my birth. Sixty three years before that event in fact. The other bible is one Great Grandmother Lucy read every day, I am told it was a habit of hers. There is a bookmark in there I can only assume she left there, where she had left off reading. This Bible has an inscription in it too. It says, To Lucy Lester from Elwood Reichart Sr. Elwood Reichart Sr. would be my grandfather, a grandfather I never knew. He gave her that Bible in 1924, for Christmas. 

 1924 was the year my father was born. That was in September. His brother, Elwood Jr, was two years old. September 1924 is also when Grandmother Clara passed, just a few days after giving birth to my dad. So Christmas 1924, for my great grandmother, brought a lot of change to her life. She had lost her youngest daughter and was taking care of her grandchildren. As I said one was two and dad was just four months old. Seems fitting she was given a Bible. Great Grandmother would go on to raise both of those boys. Their father, my grandfather, remarried and had two more sons. But he passed away in 1932 from a ruptured appendix. And now I hold that Bible in my hand, the only connection I have to my grandfather. 

 So I look up at my digital day counter that tells me it is fifty nine days, 18 hours and twenty two minutes until Christmas and those thoughts enter. One hundred and thirty years will have passed. All those folks mentioned have long since passed on. A.M. King, round the world whaler passed in 1902 and saw a new century unfold, the twentieth. I was here for the arrival of the 21st. Great Grandmother Lucy passed in 1956 and I don't remember her. All those names and faces in the past, all a part of me, or am I a part of them? I think about all of that and figure it has to mean something, Surely it all leads somewhere. Each of us carry it a little further down the road, but to what end? Is it just to begin again? There has to be more, something I am missing. And that is why the introspection. It's a good thing, something we all need to do. 

 This writing is a bit of whimsy, I'm aware of that. I like to laugh about things, especially the things you can't change. No sense in being remorseful and sorry all the time. You can't change the past, only appreciate it for what it was. You have to keep things in the context of time. Christmas in 1890 and Christmas in 1924 were certainly different for Great Grandmother Lucy. In 1890 Lucy was ten years old. In 1924, at the age of 44, she was raising grandchildren! Born in 1880 she was married, had three children of her own, lost her youngest daughter, and gained two grandchildren! She lived through the great depression, saw her grandchildren go off to war and return. She was 76 when she passed away. A full life indeed. I was three years old when that happened. I'm doing my best to keep all of that alive, I don't want anyone to forget what even I don't remember. It's all in the context of time. 

sharing stories

  I was telling my wife a little about my childhood. We grew up together in separate states, she in Maryland and I in New York. When you think of Maryland, what comes to mind? Unless you live in the state, probably not much. I never gave it a thought to be honest about it. Mention New York  and most people think, New York City. Anyway, the point being she doesn't know much about where I grew up  and I don't know much about hers. Oh, we have shared memories over the last 36 years of marriage, but she has never been in my hometown. I did pass through hers on at least one occasion. 

 I lived on the edge of Northwest woods. That's the name given to a tract of land, you got it, north and west of the town. As a child it seemed like a forest but of course it isn't nearly that large. Winnie the Pooh lived in the hundred acre wood, I played in Northwest woods. I'm not certain how large those woods really are, Mapcarta, an internet resource says they are a forest. Not certain of the criteria for either one, but getting lost in the woods here. Anyway I was telling my wife about a path we used in the woods. There were footpaths in those woods that had been there for many years. Just who made them and why I couldn't say, just that they existed. They weren't game trails, too large for that, they were made by men. 

 One of them began directly across from my front door. I always liked to think of them as trail made by Indians. I only lived a short distance from Soak Hides Dreen, a place known to be used by the Indians for the purpose indicated by its' name. The path I used didn't lead there however, it was going in the opposite direction. However it came to be I was very familiar with it. As I said you could walk out my front door, cross the dirt road I lived on, and enter the woods through that path. You would walk just a short distance when you came to a fork in that path, a branch going off to the left and one to the right. It was in that area, under a large oak that you could find lady slippers in May and June, Mom loved those flowers. Rumor was they were illegal to pick, which made it that much more exciting. I would pick them and go straight home, not letting anyone see what I had. Not that there was anyone around to see anything, but it was exciting anyway. If I weren't looking for lady slippers I would continue on that path going to the left.  It lead to a small clearing. It was on the edge of that clearing that we, by we I mean my brothers and sister, had a tree house. Only we didn't call it a tree house, it was a tree fort. It wasn't very high up off the ground, not more than a few feet I'd say, but it was cool. It was built using three trees that had grown in a cluster. Two by fours made the framing, nailed directly into those trees. The walls and roof were constructed with whatever materials could be had. Some of which was gained by illegal means. Yes, we pilfered it! 

 We knew of a stash in a shed. It was at the end of that dirt road we lived on and was only used by the summer people. There was this artist, I only knew his name as Pablo, that had his summer residence there, and that shed was his studio. This was in the sixties and he was painting those large abstract paintings on sheets of what appeared to be thin plywood covered with canvas. After he had left for the winter they would become the walls, some pre-painted! The next spring we heard rumors that the Police were looking for stolen artwork! We got carpeting from somewhere and carpeted that tree fort ceiling to ceiling. Even then I remember being nervous and avoiding that tree fort for a while, you know, until the heat was off. All of that was over fifty years ago now. I expect someone discovered our tree fort and speculated about that at one time. Maybe remnants of it are still there. I doubt that though, there is a house built right where that path began. My house has been torn down and I assume a replacement home built in its' place. 

 Now if you went right on that path it lead to another small clearing. It was in that clearing that my brothers and I dug a rather large hole or pit. Probably eight foot by four foot or so. It was definitely larger than a grave, I remember when we were digging it we thought about that. It was maybe six foot deep when it was first completed. There was a tunnel like entrance on the west end. The top of the tunnel and the hole were covered with boards, fallen trees, and whatever else we could find. Now the largest animal in those woods would have been a deer. It never occurred to us, as kids, that a deer could fall through the roof and get hurt or trapped. We also never thought about it falling in on us when we were inside there. This was our underground fort. Yeah, we were big on forts, made snow forts too. This underground fort had niches dug into the walls to hold candles. It was great, well, until after the first hard rain anyway. That fort didn't last long before we abandoned it. Last I knew there was just a big hole in the ground. Something for someone to puzzle over. 

 I enjoy telling these stories to my wife, and to be honest about it,  anyone that will listen. When I do I am walking down those paths, picking the flowers, hiding in the forts. The stories are really for me and I think that is true for a lot of us. That's why we call it sharing, after all. We aren't giving you the story, we are sharing the story with you, but the best parts I keep for myself. Maybe that's why our stories get embellished over time as well. We like to add a little something extra, spice it up a bit, even your favorite food can get boring. You know I saw aliens in Northwest Woods one time, aliens from outer space, not Mexico, but that is another story to tell. I wasn't alone, had a friend with me that night, he saw them too. Well, as I said, another story for another day.  

  

the olden days

  I commented on a post yesterday and was surprised by the reaction I got from some. The post was a picture of Joe Biden kissing his son. At first glance I wasn't aware of who was in the picture but that it was an older guy kissing who was purported to be his son on the cheek. Okay, fair enough. The headline said Fathers' should kiss their sons. I didn't click on the link just assumed it was some "expert" talking about mental health or some such thing. So anyway, I just left a comment saying, not in my world. I said a firm handshake while looking each other straight in the eye, that's how it's done. That is all I said initially. To my surprise it was subsequently implied I was some kind of "sick *ss". The person implying that said Fathers that don't kiss their sons are homophobic! It wasn't said quite that bluntly but that was the explanation. That's what made them sick? 

 Now I responded to that comment, and perhaps I should have just remained quiet, but I couldn't help myself. I had to point out that I had made no mention of homosexuality and wondered why that person had gone there? I wasn't talking about any of that. I was simply talking about my tradition and pointed out to that person was entitled to theirs. We had a bit of an exchange, not the most polite or sociable. Yeah, I went there but I am a grumpy old man. That was brought out in me when it was pointed out that in "olden" times men didn't kiss each other. Yeah, I was raised in the "olden" days, back when men knew they were men, and women were aware they were women. We really did only have two genders in the olden days. Still do in my world. 

 Setting all of that aside I was just talking about tradition. It was the way I was raised. After a certain age, no set age you just knew when that was, you stopped kissing Daddy. I'm guess that happened about the same time you began calling him Dad. A firm handshake was all that was necessary when you wished to show affection or you were in agreement. Of course back in the "olden" days a mans' word and a handshake sealed the deal! That was all that was necessary. You know I read somewhere that the tradition of shaking hands began as a show of trust. I couldn't pull a weapon on you if you were holding my hand. It had nothing to do with affection, it was concerned with safety. With the native Americans raising your open palm in greeting served that same purpose. It is wise to keep strangers at arms length. 

 Now as far as the kissing thing I can't say I've ever read anything about that. I don't recall when I became interested in kissing the girls, but it was a natural thing. I expect when I was very small I kissed my Daddy, although I can honestly say I  recall a time I ever did. My point being it is dependent upon tradition. It is what you are taught and your acceptance of that teaching. Guys kiss girls, I saw that all the time at home, on television, in the movies. Guys don't kiss other guys, I never saw that, at least not until I was much older and that sort of thing went public. Oh, I saw the French guys "kissing" each other on each cheek in the movies but that was in France, foreigners, who knows what they might do next. I had heard that if an Italian guy kissed you that meant you were a dead man. The mafia would take care of you, the kiss of death. I stayed back from those Italian guys and my half-brothers were both Italian! But guys kissing each other as a sign of affection? Didn't happen in my world. Didn't have anything to do with sexuality, it had to do with tradition. 

 I have mentioned this before, this world where I was raised. Being in New England, living in quite the remote and rural area, the people there were of a stoic bend. That is to say practical, matter of fact, people. Emotions were restrained, logic and practicality ruled the day. Those folks could be blunt, forthright is a gentler term for that. Public displays of affection were reserved. A husband may peck his wife on the cheek, call her honey or dear, but that's about as far as that went. Men shook hands when it felt appropriate or necessary. They didn't embrace each other and they certainly didn't kiss one another. Could be Fathers were doing that with their sons, I can't say, but never saw that in public, not ever, not once. As a result that is my tradition and seeing something different does surprise me. It is "alien." It doesn't make it wrong, it doesn't indicate anything else, it is different. Of course that was in the "olden" days. 

 Now, I'm not referring to this kissing thing when I say this: if something was wrong yesterday, it is still wrong today. What I'm talking about are virtue, morals, and tradition. Traditions are formed in response to morals and virtue. What are the qualities the society admires the most? Their laws, their customs and traditions will evolve around them. If something was wrong in the "olden" days it is still wrong today, in the "modern" world. It is still wrong to the one that was raised in that world, in the "olden" days, because that world hasn't changed. I was surprised to read that quite a few people view that kissing thing as a natural and normal interaction between father and sons, and indeed between brothers and friends. I can only imagine the reaction I would have received from any of those had I attempted to kiss them. The truth is, as my father lie in his hospital bed, both of us knowing the end was near, when I went to say goodbye, I extended my hand. He took my hand with a renewed strength and I felt that familiar grip, it was strength. Strength of spirit is what I felt as we shook hands. I looked into his eyes and I could see pride and yes, love. No words needed to be spoken, no embrace, no kiss, just a firm handshake between men. And that is my tradition. A tradition from the "olden" days. It's a good one.  

your choice

  I occasionally drop a truth bomb or two on the New York Times postings. Did that the other day and I got mentioned over 142 times! I felt like I was going viral. at least according to those people commenting I was sick! Funny thing is I don't recall exactly what is was that I wrote. Whatever it was it is just an everyday fact to me, that's why I don't remember. Nothing new, no earth shattering revelation, well except to the readers of the Times I guess, they sure were upset. I'm guessing it has something to do with my conservative values, morals or sense of justice. Those are the usual things that upset those folks. They sure don't like it when they are told they are actually accountable, or responsible for stuff that happens to them. Stuff like getting arrested when you break the law. You shouldn't be arrested, you should be rehabilitated and given an award for that. Yes, if you "make a mistake" you shouldn't be punished for that mistake, you should be celebrated for having made that mistake! That's liberal logic at its' finest.

 I realize of course that it is my truth and truth is not universal. That is because apparently we don't all live in the same universe. I've always known city folk have different ideas about things. But now it appears that it isn't only the city folks, the demographic is much larger. I've always associated the Times with those city folks. It is after all, the New York Times, and that used to be the central theme of that paper. You do produce your product to the demographic. The Times used to enjoy a stellar reputation as an informative and insightful newspaper. A bit of the upper crust as it where. No more however, in my opinion they might as well be labeled a tabloid these days. The bias in their reporting is so obvious, so blatant, so politically motivated as to be laughable. 

 What happened to the times? How did this newspaper wind up being little more than a rag sheet? Corporate control is the obvious answer. You would have to be 84 years old to have seen the New York Times endorse a Republican for President. To say they lean left is a gross understatement. Fact is that paper was always in favor of the Democratic mindset. It is just that the mindset has become more alien with the passing years. The Times appealed to those city folks most of all. City folks tend to embrace the concepts of the Democrats. Government control is the top priority of the Democrats. They are the party of dependence, not independence. City folks, both rich and poor, are used to being dependent upon government, in its' many forms, for most everything. They stand in stark contrast to the country folks. Country folks resent the intervention of government. There is a fundamental difference in philosophy. City folks figure laws give them something, they stand to gain from them. Country folks figure laws are made to punish people for doing bad things. 

 I suppose I'm like everyone else I live in my little world. I venture out into a larger world every now and again and am often surprised or even shocked. The country boy in the big city. The big city is a dangerous place to be at times. The danger coming from a philosophy. In the city it's every man for themselves. Don't speak to strangers and don't trust anyone. Seems like a stereotype doesn't it? It holds a lot of truth though. It's dog eat dog in the city. In the country most folks just mind their own business. They will speak, offer a good day or a nod of the head. The difference being in the country you are in plain sight, no hiding in the crowd. You will be known in short order by the deeds you do and the words you speak. Country folks are naturally trusting, but don't cross them, they will act independently! That is to say, the law comes later on, after the punishment. 

 There really are two worlds in America today spread across the continent. There are city folks living in the country, and country folks in the city. Left and right and those in-between. Mass communication is what bred this. My fear is the city folks will prevail in the end. That philosophy of dependence will eventually make it impossible to be independent. We are getting closer to that every year. There are many restrictions today that we all just take as normal. Can you build your own home? Can you just drive a well point and get water? How about traveling the highways? Can you chop down a tree or fish a stream? In most cases, you can not. You require "permission" from someone. Make no mistake about it, government is someone. And you can bet your bottom dollar that "someone" wants something in return. Your independence is dependent upon your dependence upon "someone  " It isn't you! My advice is simply, be careful who you vote to be that "someone." Some want a whole lot more than others, choose wisely.   

Politics before faith

  I heard on the news yesterday that Pope Francis endorses civil unions. Now I'm not a Catholic but I do read the same Bible. It says homosexuality, at least the act of having homosexual relations, is a sin. Yes, it says that in a few different places. In the Catholic faith matrimony is one of the sacraments of the church. It's true the Pope didn't advocate for that, but rather the civil union thing. You don't have to be a theologian to see the conflict there. Just changing the name of sin doesn't make is not a sin. And that is the  politics I'm talking about. The Pope has just given tacit approval of committing sinful acts. We all know that civil union is just the politically correct way of saying, we are having marital relations.

 I have heard every reason, every explanation, attempting to justify this concept. I never expected to hear any of that from the Pope. As I said I'm not Catholic, I don't believe the Pope is infallible, he is just a man as far as I'm concerned. Yes, he is supposed to be an example, the leader of the church, a speaker of the truth and doctrine of Christianity. Thing is, he is, and always has been a very important, very powerful, political figure. And in all fairness Pope Francis isn't the first Pope to put politics before faith, the examples are numerous throughout history. I'm not writing this piece as a condemnation of Pope Francis but rather as an explanation of my thoughts on the matter. For me, according to my Bible, to my religious belief, homosexuality is a sin. It's immoral, unnatural, and as it says in Leviticus, detestable. 

 That being said I understand that not everyone is a religious person, not every person reads the Bible, not everyone agrees on that. It also doesn't mean I hate anyone, would cause harm to anyone, or discriminate against anyone because they disagree with me on that topic. I will never agree that something I believe to be wrong is right, because you believe it is alright. No different to me than you telling me you love lima beans, I don't and you will never convince me they taste good. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy them, it means I don't. See how simple that is. You see, it's politics, same as what the Pope just said. You can't tell me on one hand that you are a man of faith, a follower of Christ, have belief in the words of the Bible, but that it's alright to ignore whatever part of that faith you choose. That's the problem I have with that, a bit hypocritical don't you think? An example I like to use is when Jesus saved that woman who committed adultery. What did he tell her? Go and sin no more was the instruction. It wasn't go ahead and sin some more, it's alright I forgive you. No, the instruction was really, I forgive you this time but don't do it again! Jesus also told that to the man he healed. He told him, stop sinning or something worse may happen to you! Sounds like a warning to me, not that it's alright to sin. No where in my Bible does it say, well people are going to do it anyway so it's alright as long as they ask forgiveness every time they do that. The Catholic church, during the middle ages, practiced indulgences. That was where you could just buy forgiveness and get your dearly departed out of purgatory. You could also buy forgiveness for yourself, a sort of eternal salvation savings account. That was when the church was running short of cash. 

 Okay so what if you don't believe any of that. Well that's on you in my feeling. I will, if asked, tell you exactly how I feel about that. If you don't want to hear any negative comments on the subject don't bring it up. Civil unions are in the realm of civil law. Whereas my personal feelings are different I can see the legality of that. Given the choice I would just change the tax code removing any advantage traditionally married couples may enjoy. That would be my solution to the legal inequity. Government has no role to play in morality, only legality. That's the premise behind the separation of church and state. The fear being the church could start imposing all sorts of things on citizens whether they believed in the state religion or not! Best to keep those separated. And that is my problem with this ruling by the Pope. His job is to lead the faithful, not to pander to those that aren't. For me it's a matter of integrity. The Bible says homosexuality is wrong, I believe what the Bible says, I won't change that to suit you. I will not say, it's alright as long as you say you don't believe in the Bible. Call that sin by another name and then endorse that sin. Nope, I still believe it is wrong in my area, faith. What the civil authorities have to say about all of that is an entirely different topic. 

 1 Timothy 1:8-11 8We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers-and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. 

  

A social society?

 I've been using Facebook for over a decade now. It has become a part of the daily norm. Strange how only ten years ago it was something brand new, cutting edge as they say, at least to me it was. It had been around earlier than that but I had resisted owning a computer. There was a time when I couldn't understand why I would want a computer at all. What could I do with it? I wasn't aware that by having one I would put the worlds library at my fingertips. I won't go as far as to say it is indispensable but like television or the radio I certainly feel the loss if I don't have it. It's true I do spend more time entertaining myself on Facebook than I do browsing in the library. That speaks to human nature I suppose, or my nature at least. I guess that is simply because Facebook is more interactive. It's true that sometimes that interaction is annoying or maddening, but it is interaction. The world talks back. 

 Over the last decade I have seen some changes. Facebook has become far less friendly than I remember it being in the beginning. Seems like folks weren't taking everything as seriously back then. Yes there were a few that just wanted to start trouble but they were ignored for the most part. I remember when some where only interested in growing their "friends" list. It was also popular to see how many celebrity, or semi-celebrities you could acquire. Politics wasn't really a topic of discussion either. Then there was a period of pictures, lots and lots of pictures. I enjoy seeing all the pictures but they have been overtaken by meme's. That is what I see the most of these days, meme after meme. Some are funny, some are mean, some are inappropriate and others are attempting to bring you to God. But always there purpose to present something as briefly as possible. That's because, as a good number of postings will point out, many won't read a longer posting. And that speaks to the "library" doesn't it. Yes, we are in the worlds' library while online, and choose to read the funny papers. Facebook would be found in the periodicals section. 

 I did join one of the sub-groups that formed over time. Those groups attempt to focus your interest a bit more or find friendly ground. The group I joined changed over time, as most things do, and I left that one to form my own. My group is a sub-set of the larger group I had first joined. You could say, just a different part of town. And not surprisingly, birds of a feather have flocked together. Interesting is that those that lived in the other part of "town" followed me for a while, then retreated back into their section of town. Leopards' really can't change their spots. Roots do run deep. I have seen those leave the group, I have restricted but three individuals over my ten year period of Facebooking. 

 I got to thinking about this when I was asked about a member. This was a man I never knew personally, never shook his hand. His was just a voice on the internet, a fellow traveler. But he checked in on a regular basis and was known by many. I had to respond by telling the person who asked that he had passed. Oh, he isn't the first of those I considered my Facebook friend to pass, but each time it hits a bit harder. His presence is missed. I am reminded sometimes by the birthday notifications. I look at those names and realize they are gone now, celebrating in heaven. The impersonal world of computers doesn't recognize that I suppose and so continues to post. And so sometimes I admit, I don't remember and am left puzzled. Should I wish that person Happy Birthday? I wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of their loved ones. Sometimes I'm uncertain as to the response? Most times if I'm uncertain I'll just say nothing at all. That is because I do feel a personal connection to the majority of the people I interact with. Total strangers I try to give the benefit of the doubt but often find they are rude, crude, and will attack you in an instant. Society has definitely become far more aggressive than in the past. My thinking is that is simply because in the past, "polite company" also included being in the physical presence of that person, and as a result we were more reserved. There was a bit more of a feeling out period before challenging. 

 Well a decade of Facebook. Old friends and new. For me Facebook is a distraction. I like to see others photographs, read their little stories and exchange a little friendly banter. It is a place you can share your thoughts, your inspirations and receive feedback. Yeah that feedback can be a problem sometimes. But, you have to take the good with the bad. I try to post a Good Morning every day. Ironically today I forgot to do so but will following this post. I started that because it is my feeling that Facebook is supposed to be a social network so we should be sociable. Sometimes it seems to me we are losing that art, the art of being sociable. I still speak to strangers, exchange little quips and jokes. I get looks at times, suspicious looks, looks of fear, looks of puzzlement. Some folks just aren't used to people talking to them I guess. At least not real people, in person. What's that saying about society in general? I wonder. 

a warning

 I read an article on Facebook about Disney attaching disclaimers to some of their older cartoons and movies. Yes, the ones I grew up watching, and you probably did too.  The disclaimer involves racist stereotypes. Indians with red faces, and other discriminatory caricatures that could certainly  implant, on a subliminal level, prejudicial thoughts and beliefs in children! And not only that, those with  disabilities as well, think Mr. Magoo. Elmer Fudd is another offensive character that our chidden should be warned about. So Disney will preface those things with a full disclaimer that I'm certain all the children will read and comprehend fully. I'm as equally certain the parents will explain all of that to their preschool children as well. It's definitely going to make this world a better place. 

 I do wonder about such things. Is this being done to benefit children or to avoid litigation? I'm quite certain some " marginalized group " has tried to sue Disney over something silly like a caricature. Hey we are renaming football teams over that these days. I can't see how including a disclaimer would change the way children view a cartoon. Still Disney says it is for the children. Of course Disney is now involved in many things that aren't very childlike at all, some bordering on outright pedophilia. Disney has definitely turned the corner on cutesy, immature, simple comedy. Well it is their company I suppose, and they are going to go wherever the money is. 

 The thing to me is this, when I was growing up I was taught the difference between reality and fantasy. It seems to me a lot of people are living in a fantasy world these days. A world were everything is just right, nothing offensive, politically correct, and socially acceptable. I knew a cartoon when I watched one. The humor was because it was so silly! Talking animals, people doing stupid things, what is called slapstick comedy, it was hilarious. Didn't require a disclaimer to explain to me that a stick of dynamite stuck in someone's pants would kill them. Knew that even though I had never seen a stick of dynamite, fact is, I haven't seen one yet. Mr. Magoo had a houseboy named Charlie, although it was always pronounced Cholly as he was an Asian stereotype. Cholly was hilarious in the way he spoke English but wasn't the source of comedy, that was Magoo. Today however, that is very offensive, requires a warning! Funny thing is there was a Chinese gentleman I knew as a child that sounded a whole lot like Cholly. He was funny too, just like the man with a hair lip. Didn't think any less of those people though, I didn't need a disclaimer to tell me anything about any of that. 

 Well, I suppose I'm just an old bigot, prejudiced and insensitive. Guess I'm not "woke." So be it. I know reality from fantasy and embrace reality. Thing about the truth is, sometimes it hurts. Sometimes you don't like it, sometimes it is just plain inconvenient. And sometimes, sometimes the truth can hurt your feelings. But I don't want to be a boy mommy, that's okay dear, you can be a girl. But those old cartoons, now, the children should be warned about them. They could get their feelings hurt.   

a plan for government

  Yesterday, once again I tried to read the Democratic platform, I couldn't finish it. That document contains little of substance. I expect if you are a Democrat you would love it as it says everything a true liberal/socialist would like to hear. I was reading to try to grasp the plan. Things is, they don't really have a plan at all. That platform is nothing more than a condemnation of Donald Trump and little else. A description of a Utopian society where it's all rainbows and unicorns. I read a little of what they say they won't do, and those are the things that should be done. No securing the border, no holding illegal people accountable for their actions or activities. Open borders, free everything for everybody, and only the top 1% of the top !% of wage earners will fund it all. No new taxes, just the removal of tax breaks that Trump instituted. They won't be new taxes, they will be the old taxes, see how that works? 

 The Republicans didn't write a new platform this time around. They just stayed with the one they had. The goals are the same. Their platform isn't about how much they hate and despise Biden. or anyone else. The Republican platform just spells out what the party wishes to accomplish and a plan to do that. The Republican platform is based on a simple belief, the people are the best stewards of the Republic, not government. Their platform talks about and explains improvements to the tax code. The whole document stands in stark contrast to the Democratic manifesto! 

 I'm well aware of the hatred and vitriol aimed at Trump. I'm well aware of attacks on Bidens' competency to serve. This election cycle has become ugly. It is a disgrace. I'm ashamed in the face of the world, a world I believe that looks to America as an example. Say what you will about America but you don't see thousands of people attempting to flee to other nations. No, the objective is to get to America. It has historically been so and remains that way to this day. The land of the free and the home of the brave. We all need to review our history not to find faults, but to see the reason for our success. In my view the Republicans want to preserve that legacy, retain our heritage of independence. Yes, there were injustices in the past, attempts have been made to correct those. We have litigated everything that can be litigated. No matter the desire, you can not litigate how people feel. Those that harbor hate, prejudice, and any other negative emotion will continue to do so regardless of any law. There are no laws impeding anyone! The truth is we have created programs to help those that are disadvantaged. Programs that can be viewed as biased. Those programs, no matter how well intended, do favor certain demographic groups on a broad scale. An attempt to level the field? Depends upon which team you are playing for doesn't it? 

 Well the thing is this. When you go to cast your vote you should be voting for the idea, for the platform upon which the party stands. Presidential elections, any election, shouldn't be focused on the popularity of the person, but rather the popularity of the platform. The candidate is really just the pitch man. It's true that some are much better than others at filling that role. Like the coach, they will be held accountable for the results. But it takes a team to get things done. The President leads the team, that much is true, but the President doesn't propose every action, every play in the book. We need to read the playbook and vote on that! It's unfortunate that so many just hear the pep talk, the rallying cries, and the optimistic reassurance that we will WIN. That is what they cast their ballot on, having never read the play book. My suggestion is simply to read the play book. Will these ideas work? Are they really viable, common sense solutions? Are they fair to everyone? Or is that playbook really just an outline of what they would like to accomplish? No plan to do that really, just saying, we will win. A plan for government, not for people. That's the difference in my opinion. The Republican plan is to allow the people to help themselves, the Democratic plan is, the government will tell you what to do. In fact the government will legislate what you are allowed to do, who you are allowed to it with, and when.   

Conscious choices?

  Being responsible. Being responsible is winding up the extension cord and neatly storing it away for next time. That's what you do. Being responsible is putting your trash in the trash can, even when it is just a small wrapper. Being responsible is putting that shopping cart in the space provided instead of just shoving it on the grass or in the parking spot next to your car. Being responsible is doing the things you know to be right. Being responsible is reacting to your conscience, not making excuses for it. Sometimes called, becoming your parents. There is a television ad campaign centered on that, although I don't remember what it is they are advertising. That happens sometimes, the entertainment value distracts you from the message. I've had that happen with my blogs on occasion. I'm not certain if it is entertainment or disagreement, that causes that distraction. 

 I think it is just something we learn with age. Responsibility is what makes the road smooth. Sometimes it is just for ourselves and at other times for others. It is when you aren't concerned about which that is you have begun to mature. When you do the responsible thing without the expectation of recognition or a desire for that recognition, that's maturity, or getting old, however you choose to view it. Some will call you an old fuddy- duddy. Fastidious is also a term applied to you. That is when others think you have gone over the top, being fastidious is not a good thing, unless that person is your surgeon, then you would want him or her to be extremely fastidious! Same with your banker, then it's a good thing. 

 The outcome is based in the details. That is true in life as well as deeds. Attention to detail, a responsibility to doing what is right, that is the mark of maturity, or just getting old. whichever way you look at that. When we learn to listen to our conscience that is where we find peace. We also discover that it tales effort, patience, and an acceptance of failure. It isn't excusing the failure however, it is just accepting that you failed. You don' make excuses for that, you don't attempt to justify or rationalize, you just accept the outcome. The secret is not to have others conscience conforms to yours, but rather to learn to live with your own conscience. If you have to make excuses for that, it is wrong. 

 What can you allow, in good conscience. The reality is you can really only control yourself, not what others will do. So it really isn't about allowing others to do anything, it is about allowing yourself. How easily will you deviant from the responsible course of action? You know what is right, but will you do it? That's being responsible. All of that is on an individual basis. 

 Today we are faced with our national conscience. That is what we call politics. We are discussing our conscience, what we will allow, condone, codify and declare to be the fair and responsible actions to be taken. The Constitution defines our national conscience. That is my feeling anyway. And like we do with our own conscience we interpret what it is saying depending upon circumstance. The Constitution is now 231 years old, having been ratified in 1789. It has been amended 27 times over that span. The first time included ten amendments, known as the Bill of Rights. There were included to delineate the basic civil rights of the people. That was their concern, not the administration of government. We are all aware of most of them, more so today I would suggest than of any other time since they were written. Those rights are being scrutinized and redefined. Consider the second amendment as an example. The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. That was written to protect the citizens from the government. That is the conscience of America. A person should never be denied the right to defend themselves. The people writing and voting on that amendment were all too aware of what can happen when the people are stripped of that ability. They also knew you don't bring a sword to a gunfight! That's the very reason they said what they said, shall not be infringed. Infringed means restricted! We the people have the right to stand on equal ground. Then there is the 9th amendment. One you don't hear others repeating very often unless they are a lawyer attempting to defend someone, some company or corporation. That being extended to include those entities. It says: " The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny, or disparage others retained by the people." So just what does that mean? It means just because a right isn't written down in the Constitution doesn't mean you don't have that right. It's a matter of conscience. And it is conscience that we are discussing so vehemently today. What is right and wrong, not necessarily convenient or the easiest thing to do. Yes, it is easier to just allow everything without restriction, to take the politically expedient path. But we must obey our conscience for harmony to exist. Our Constitution is that conscience and one I will not abandon. Rewriting that document will redefine what the American dream is all about. Yes, we have made amendments, 27 of them as I pointed out. The first ten secured the rights of the people, the rest have all benefitted the government in some fashion or another. You could argue that isn't true because of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. I can see that but what did they actually do? They just reaffirmed our conscience that all men are created equal. That was declared in the Declaration of Independence although it hadn't been written into the Constitution itself. As a result some in our nation set aside their conscience in favor of commerce. Others denied certain rights based on race and gender. Hey, the conscience of America, the Constitution didn't say they couldn't, so that made it right, at least in their view it did. And so in my view those amendment did benefit the government by delineating those rights as a part of the collective conscience! What a tragic thing it was to have to write that down, that some would allow their conscience to endorse such. 

 And here we are today, debating the national conscience. And what is the deciding factor? Our individual wants, that is what it boils down to. What will you decide? Are you comfortable with your choice based on conscience or what you want? Voting is an adult decision, the choices you make not for personal gain but rather for the common good. The issue of charity is often raised as a moral choice. We should vote for this or that because it is the charitable thing to do. The Constitution doesn't address charity. The Constitution delineates the function of government. It is a defining of those powers. Charity is a matter of personal conscience, not a function of government. You can not litigate charity! Consider these statements: " To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea. "  ( James Madison )  " Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. " ( John Adams ) 

Both men are speaking of conscience. Isn't our conscience developed by what we are taught is virtuous? Does that instruction not come from our religious teachings? As to whether we accept those teachings , that is another matter completely. Still, they are the standard, the measure in which society judges our actions.   

yesterdays' choices

  It's a funny thing growing older. Some say you get wiser but I can't testify to that, I was called a wise guy when I was twenty. But I do sit and wonder about things, things from my past. I wonder just what the heck was I thinking about? One of those things is the consumption of alcoholic beverages. I pretty much consumed them all at one time or another. Started out with Schaefer beer which I snitched from dad, usually after he had a sufficient quantity himself to be distracted. I only progressed from there, beer, wine, liquor in all flavors and varieties. There was a time, not all that many years ago, when drinking alcohol was the event. Didn't really need to be doing anything else, just drinking. At least, I tell myself, I was always honest with myself. I never drank because I liked the taste, I liked the effect. It gave me, shall we say, a heightened sense of living. Each episode was a little different but followed the same pattern. Started out a comedy and usually ended with drama of some kind. Sometimes it would end up a tragedy. I read somewhere alcohol is a depressant. I'm not certain that is true for everyone though. I've known some to take a few drinks and the waterworks begin, oh poor me. I've known others that just wanted to fight. As far as I know, I was just a delight, although I have heard varying opinions on that subject. But with all of that, looking back, I ask myself why. Was it for the social aspect? I guess that was the original purpose. To be grown up, to gain confidence in the crowd, alcohol does have a way of "empowering" people. So, I guess I'll go with that, I felt "empowered." Over the years I became "empowered" even when I drank alone, something I've been told is not a good thing. I don't know it was the best company I ever kept, no arguments, no disagreements, just simpatico. I don't see the issue. 

 Now at some point, there isn't a particular moment in time I can recall, all of that just sorta stopped. It wasn't in response to any outside force or event, just a loss of interest. I will still drink a beer or have a drink when the mood strikes, I can't say I've become a teetotaler. I have no problem with others should they choose to drink. I'm just trying to remember the fascination with that in the first place. I think about that when I see pictures on Facebook of others enjoying that activity. I mean, there they are posing with a glass of wine, or a beer, or doing shots, presenting that as an event. An event worth photographing. I suppose it is the same as posting pictures of my homemade soup or chili though. It's an event for me. But there is a part of me asking, why? What was the fascination when I was doing that? I was in an altered state of mind, no denying that. We describe that by saying, I was only a little drunk. But we will brag when we were wasted, that being an excuse for all sorts of inappropriate or bad choices. I wonder why it never occurred to me that I didn't do good things when in that state. Yes, on the surface buying a round for the house seems like a good thing, but not so good when the rent was due. Didn't stop me from making those choices though, alcohol can induce amnesia. Maybe it has lasting effects in that regard, that's why I wonder.

 I think I quit that hobby, and that is what it was, a hobby, I never became a professional at that, because I became bored with it. Been there, done that. I just never found anything of lasting value in that hobby. As I said, perhaps I felt empowered. You hear that a lot these days, being empowered. Alcohol certainly empowered me, or if it wasn't empowerment it was certainly being emboldened. Ten foot tall and bullet proof as the saying goes. Could it be that age doesn't always bring wisdom but empowerment? I have become empowered to just be me, without any influences from outside substances of any kind. I don't need permission from anyone else, no pep talks or self help books. No booze, no drugs, just me. 

 Today, I can't remember why. And that is the strangest part about getting older; explaining the past to yourself. I can tell everyone else what they did wrong and why, explaining all that to myself is much harder. It's not just about enjoying some libations, that's not what this is all about. I'm thinking in more general terms, about a variety of choices. Trying to rationalize yesterdays' choices with todays' logic can leave you confused. It's not about regret, that's not it. I've had a good time, maybe too good some times. You can't change the past, change your choices. But if you could change those choices that would change today. I don't want to change today. Still I have dreams for tomorrow. In those dreams tomorrow is different than yesterday, which is today. But yesterday is made of memories, and memories are subject to change. We may remember the action, but not the reason for that action. That's the funny thing about getting older. Understanding the why. 

is it enough

  When all we have to offer is our intellectual property is that enough? That, I believe is the challenge in social media. I have noticed others are quick to dismiss you when you disagree with even the littlest thing. That is true with complete strangers anyway. I see it all the time and I am amused. The name calling and berating will begin almost immediately. Some apparently go to your profile page to find ammunition, or at the very least what they perceive that ammunition to be be. For me I have listed, worked at Save-A-Lot and I often get derisive comments about that. The implication being you are not very smart or successful if you work at a grocery store. This usually from the same people that heaps praise upon the "essential" workers and how they admire their courage. Well, unless they disagree with you, then you are somehow less than. I just chuckle. I get many remarks about studying at the University of Life. I'll usually respond with, I've got my PhD! But as I said that is usually from those that are complete strangers. 

 Now, on social media we also encounter those that we have known from years past. What we know about them are memories. We do share some common bonds, hometown, school, teachers, perhaps the military or other job. The thing there is time, the length of time that has gone past. People do change in their ideological views over time. That is shaped by their experiences in life. Some become arrogant, some become disappointed and angry, others somewhere in-between. With those folks once we get past the memories, past the common bonds, an exchange begins. With many of those folks we never had a relationship in the first place. We know their names, maybe their brothers and sisters, their parents or some other connection. The thing is, we weren't really friends, not in the traditional sense of friendship. Still, there is a certain sense of courtesy, of mutual respect in the beginning at least. Then the differences begin to show, the disagreements, the differing of opinion. Indeed, a new perspective on history may be shared and that can be quite upsetting. When others attempt to correct your memories, there will be issues.

 There is a third category. Those that we know, those that are "current." These are the folks we interact with on a daily basis. They may also be from either of the other two categories. They are also the ones that you can share just your intellectual property with. To put it simply those that agree with you most of the time. They can also disagree without rancor, name calling and making it personal. How long they remain current depends upon their willingness to, as they say, put up with you. I say, to accept your intellectual property. For me, that property should be original. That is to say, honest and forthright. I don't like phonies, or those that just go along with the crowd. I admire strength of character, not those easily influenced. Those people become my friends. 

 I began by asking a simple question; when all we have to offer is our intellectual property is that enough? I believe it can be. It can be when the other person isn't expecting anything in return. That is where many so called friendships fall off the rails. It's true with personal contact, true with a memory, and true with a complete stranger. That return is often labeled, respect. It is an expectation, that you will be respected. The trouble begins when defining that respect. For some respect means you should always just agree with whatever they are saying. That's respect. Others feel respect is only given when they are able to change your mind, quite a difficult proposal in my case. Still others feel respect is integral to empathy. If you don't agree with their view, it is always because you lack empathy. But always, respect is an expectation and it must meet their standard. 

 That standard becomes flexible for some when there is something other than an exchange of ideas. That is to say, a material or financial gain to be had. In that situation the standard lowers, you are tolerated for whatever it is you can provide. Provide enough and you become "best" friends. Wealth and fame will get you a get out of jail free card whenever necessary. Any indiscretion on your part will be summarily dismissed. But on this platform we call social media there is no material or financial gain to be had. At least not for those of us just seeking entertainment without any expectations. Expectations like finding true love, financial security, or other promises. Those folks become the victims. And that is why I asked the question, is your intellectual property enough? Well , it all depends upon what you are trying to buy I suppose. As for myself I expect nothing in return, my intellectual property is a gift, take it or leave it. I'd be lying if I said I'm not bothered when rejected, I think everyone does. Thing is I'll continue to offer the same product, I won't change to suit the current market. Never one much for fad or fashion I remain pretty much the same. That's who I am. I even wrote a short ditty about that, " My name is Ben, that's who I am, and all I'm gonna be, I tried to be someone else, but it just wasn't me. "  Me is my intellectual property. Is it enough? It is for me, you can take it or leave it. Friendships require attention, like anything that grows, they must be nurtured. Nurture that which first drew you together and see what grows. Is it something material? Are you dependent upon that? Or is it something more, a personal connection of some type, a mutual understanding. What is the expectation? Define that, and you define the friendship.   

beware of politicians bearing gifts

  "In this world of ours, in other lands, there are some people who, in times past, have lived and fought for freedom, and seem to have grown too weary to carry on the fight. They have sold their heritage of freedom for the illusion of a living. They have yielded their democracy." 

 Those words were spoken by Franklin D Roosevelt June 27, 1936. They can be found in his speech that is known as, the Rendezvous with destiny speech. Some list this speech among the greatest of his career, indeed one of the great speeches of all time in America, by an American politician. A staunch Democrat Roosevelt was not the Democrat of today. He recoiled at the suggestion he was a socialist! The truth is he supported capitalism. It was his feeling that it was the best method to preserve the nation, to honor the founding fathers and their ideals. I believe he was spot on in his assessment of  what had transpired over the centuries. It was 1936 and WW2 was sitting on the horizon. Hitler had invaded the Rhineland in violation of the treaty of Versailles. The Olympics were being held in Berlin. And, in my opinion, Roosevelt, saw the German people surrendering their freedom to Hitler, for the illusion of a better life. Hitler promised them everything they wanted, said everything they wanted to hear. Jobs, restoration of their lands, and more importantly perhaps, prosperity. The farmers would have a market for their produce, the factories would be producing all matter of goods, the military restored to its' former glory! Yes, he just appealed to their baser desires to gain their support. Many of the German people had yielded their democracy in favor of an illusion. 

 I can see the same path being followed today. right here in America. Obama, no matter your personal feeling about the man, his moral character, or his politics, was a good orator. He wasn't great, I don't believe any of his speeches will be much remembered or quoted in the future, but he said what the people wanted to hear. Well, at least a certain block of people, those that had grown weary of protecting freedom, those willing to surrender that for an illusion of living. Fortunately his term was limited to eight years, it took ten years for Hitler to gain full control.  

 Now those people that supported Obama are claiming Trump is like a Hitler. I beg to differ. He isn't a great orator, he isn't even a good orator. He will certainly not be remembered for the speeches he made, but certainly remembered for the things he said! And, yes there is a difference. He isn't a politician and doesn't really play politics. His approach is as a business man. The object being, to get whatever it is you want. Almost always that is wealth, but in this instance I'm not certain of the goal. Perhaps it is solely his ego that will not allow him to quit or concede. It's still my belief he never really expected to win the Presidency in the first place. His appeal is to those people that wish to preserve the freedom we have in America. Those that have not grown weary of the struggle, those willing to fight, those that are unyielding in their desire for freedom, not some illusion of a utopian state. No those supporting Trump support reality, even when reality is harsh. Founding this nation was harsh, preserving it is also harsh.

 Obama and his ilk appeal to those folks that, are willing, even eager, to surrender their heritage, their freedom, in exchange for promises. That is true even when they are faced with the realities of life. This promise of everyone gets the same, socialism is the real name for that, and it is an illusion. That system has never worked and will never work, still many are willing to embrace that, if it makes their life easier right now. Those people are weary or just plain lazy! There are unwilling to work, to sacrifice anything for the greater good, it's all about what they want, now. They are always talking about change! We need to change this or that. Well the truth is stability doesn't come from change, stability comes from consistency. What was wrong yesterday, is still wrong today! 

 Consider what Roosevelt was talking about. This speech was given at the 1936 Democratic National Convention. It was his acceptance speech to his party. He said, " this generation of Americans have a rendezvous with destiny." He spoke of faith, hope and charity. In speaking of charity he said, " charity, in the true spirit of that grand old word. For charity literally translated means love, the love that understands, that does not not merely share the wealth of the giver, but in true sympathy and wisdom helps men to help themselves. " What was he saying? He was saying what we all know to be true, true dignity, true worth comes from hard work, not from charity, charity as merely sharing the wealth, No, it is much more than that. Indeed Roosevelt was correct in saying that generation of American had a rendezvous with destiny. WW2 was that destiny, a destiny that defined a generation. Known today as the greatest generation. It was the generation of my father. It is my heritage! My heritage is not for sale, nor will I surrender that heritage for the sake of economic gain, or personal comfort. I am not weary, I will continue to fight for a way of life, a government of the people, by the people. A land where the dignity of man is recognized by his contributions to that society, not his rebellious nature against it! 

 In concluding his speech Roosevelt said, " We are fighting to save a great and precious form of government for ourselves and for the world." That was true then, and is certainly true today. We must not allow our Republic to fall. It truly is borne out by history, just as Aristotle said. Republics decline in Democracies and Democracies degenerate into Despotisms. " Do not allow our Republic to become a Democracy. That is the struggle we face today and everyday. It has been the struggle since that day in 1787 after which when asked, Dr. Franklin what kind of government have you given us? His response was, " A republic if you can but keep it. " Aristotle knew that as well. Below is the full quote Aristotle said:  

Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms. Democracy passes into despotism. There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots - suspicion.        

keeping a record

  Yesterday I wrote a story about a gate. Yes, a gate. I just write about whatever comes to mind most mornings and am just as surprised at those reading them. Or I guess people are surprised I can't see their reactions. I'm surprised anyone bothers to read them at all to tell you the truth about it. But I have received encouragement over the years and will continue a long as I am amused. I believe that is the way it is with the majority of us. Maybe that would change if I started making a lot of money. I wonder about that some times as well. Not just myself, but I wonder if success effects the artist, regardless of what that art may be. If you are making money would you continue even if you were no longer amused? I suppose you would. Is that what happened to one hit wonders? 

 But after writing that post about a gate another thought occurred to me, when we remember the little things, the bigger picture becomes clearer. I think that is what is meant when we say, it's all in the details. That is something I firmly hold to be true, it is in the details. I am what I'd call a jack of all trades and master at none. That is to say I dabble in lots of things. It is the details that make a project stand out, give it that special appeal. It's true even when we are not consciously aware of those details. I also believe that is true in our lives. It is something I have only begun to appreciate in the twilight. LOL, that last comment I have to chuckle at, you know being a senior and all. Still, it's true you do have to reach a degree of maturity, I prefer that term to aging, to understand that. I guess that gate I was writing about is one of those details. It doesn't have any significant purpose, no great defining moment or memory, but is just there, in the picture. A small detail to draw the eye. Just a single thread in the tapestry of life. Yeah, I used that cliché but it is a good one. 

 We have to study the details in order to understand the whole. It seems obvious enough doesn't it? I've always told my sons, you have to know how it works before you can fix it. That's not always true, but it sure is helpful information. When it comes to humans we call that knowledge, empathy. Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. What it isn't is adopting that feeling or understanding as fact.

  Empirical evidence can be deceiving when we fail to examine that evidence closely. We can not assume the emotion justifies the reaction. We get angry, but most agree, violence isn't the answer. Only through discussion, the free exchange of information, can a resolution be reached that is amicable to all. Yes, it is in the details. To understand those details requires a close examination of fact, not emotion. The only secret to negotiation is the acceptance of facts. We have to agree on what the facts are. 

 I'm thinking that is why some like to reminisce more than others. That is based in the acceptance of fact. It's true, even when we have doubts. What I mean is, that's what we remember, therefore that is what was. Take that gate I wrote about as an example. Is the description 100% accurate? Probably not, but it is what I remember. What I remember stirs some emotions within me, a feeling. By writing that feeling I hope you share in that. That's empathy. Well, it's empathy if I am successful anyway. But will you feel the same way regarding that gate? No you won't. It's still just a story that perhaps stirred a memory, or some emotional response in you. It doesn't become your memory. 

 This morning I'm writing about what I wrote about yesterday. I'm still trying to figure out what I wanted to say. I haven't condensed that thought yet. But I guess I was just thinking about getting older and examining my life. Life is in the details! I have this desire to leave every memory of mine behind for others to enjoy. But those memories include lessons learned, mistakes made, and insecurities. I think that is why I began writing things down. It doesn't bother me when I can't remember things, after all I forgot, so why would I remember. It does bother me when others remember and remind me of what I forgot. Does that make sense? So, I figure I'll write that stuff down, keep crib notes on my past as it where. I had almost forgotten about that gate, now it's recorded as I remember it. And maybe, maybe that is all that is necessary. 

be careful

  It was just a homemade wooden gate in an old stone wall but it is stuck in my memory. I wonder why such things as that happen. I didn't use that gate, just knew it was there. I'm quite certain it has long since returned to the earth. It was made of some logs, not too large, maybe three or four inches in diameter. A basic square with an x shape in the middle. Those logs seemed ancient to me then and that was over fifty years ago now. Great Grandfather Lester had built that gate, he said, when he was younger. It would swing either way on its' simple iron pin hinges. Those pins stuck out of solid stone! I was somewhat fascinated by that, how had those pins been put in the rock? The answer was simple enough, holes had been drilled, by hand into that rock and the pins pounded into place. There was no latch, but at one time, a length of rope thrown around the fence post served that purpose. It was long gone by the time I noticed that gate.

 Now along the front of Great Grandfathers property there was a stone wall. It was a good drop from there to the sidewalk below. I'm aware that sizes change over the years, I thought the wall was quite high but today I'm guessing it isn't more than three or four feet. I loved to walk along the top of that, as all children do, pretending all sorts of dangers. Gramp would hold my hand and walk along the sidewalk, such a patient man, as many times as I liked. Back and forth, back and forth. On the far end, was that gate. There were steps beyond the gate, three of them. But the gate wasn't on the front side, no it was on the side. That is to say, the gate was parallel to the wall itself. You could barely see the steps, they not having been used for years. They were filled in with dirt and debris, but still discernable. Who had used those steps?

 Along the front of the property, just before that wall, was the remnants of what is called a lop fence. A lop fence is a fence that was made by bending sapling trees to form a barrier. It was a method to contain your stock. Only a few of those trees remained and I played on them often. A few had branches that were parallel to the ground and a few feet up. I would ride those branches like a horse. My great grandfather would tell me tales of my own father playing on those trees and of the days when his garden was there, stretching clear to the end of the wall. He told stories about the "old" days as I climbed on those trees, barely listening, just hearing a word or two. Oh how I wish I had listened more closely today. That wall still stands to this day, I have seen images of it on Google earth. Who could have imagined such a thing being possible all those years ago. The trees that were that lop fence are there as well, still standing, waiting to contain the stock, or be the stock in the imagination of a child. 

 That gate was stuck in my mind, tucked away in a corner all these years. I wonder why it came to the forefront this morning. What has jarred it loose? I can't answer that but enjoyed the stroll through it. I'm certain I would have passed through that gate at least once or twice, as that's what kids do. I would have had to try it. But, I don't remember it being the usual way to go to Gramps house. No, I usually just climbed over that stone wall. His driveway was on the side of his house. He didn't drive though, no car in his driveway except someone coming to visit. That didn't happen often I guess, as I don't recall any ruts in the driveway, just that the grass didn't grow there. I have a vague memory of his chicken coop outside his back door. There were no other fences or walls surrounding his property. And that gate wasn't there to keep anyone in or keep anyone out. That gate was only there as a warning, be careful, watch your step. Prophetic? Be careful when walking through the gate, be careful of what lies beyond.