entitled?

 Paul Sarbanes, a lifelong Senator from Maryland, has passed away. Most remembered for drafting the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon, he had retired from the Senate in 2006. I won't mention his political affiliation as it isn't relevant to my opinion. Governor Hogan has ordered the Maryland State Flag at half mast in his memory. Certainly a thirty year Senator should be given his due but I find myself shaking my head about that. It is my feeling that all this lowering of the flags, national and state, has diminished that honor. To me, it's like everyone is getting the trophy. This isn't the first time I have written about this topic. It probably won't be the last either.

 Now I have nothing against Senator Sarbanes on a personal or political level. This opinion is not intended to disparage him in any fashion whatsoever. Should the state flag be lowered to half staff in his honor? I'll be honest here and say, I don't know. Other than drafting those articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon I can not cite any major legislative triumphs he is responsible for. Could be, he did a great deal, as I said, I really don't know. It's just that when I heard the flag was to be lowered once again, it once again gave me pause to consider that. How many of us, when we see the flag at half staff, know the reason? The usual question will be, who died? Isn't that the only time the flag is flown at half staff? Well, sorta. The flag can also be flown at half staff out of respect, or a sign of mourning. Yes, we are normally mourning the dead so yeah, someone or a lot of someone's died. The lowering of a state or national flag is a high honor indeed. For that reason alone I believe it should rarely be given. For me it is like receiving a military decoration. You should have to have earned that decoration through extraordinary circumstances. The most glaring is of course, the Medal of Honor, the highest decoration a military member can receive. The original intent of the award was to recognize conspicuous valor in the face of the enemy. The medal was created in 1861 and 1,522 were awarded during the Civil War. Today the total number awarded is about 3500. There were 124 in WW1, 464 in WW2, and 246 in Vietnam.   The remainder of those medals are spread out over various conflicts. Interesting to note is that 193 have been awarded to non-combat related individuals. Those men are mostly sailors killed in boiler explosions, men overboard, and other calamities. The question being, should they have received that medal? If you are a friend, shipmate or relative of that person the answer is certainly yes. But the Medal was intended for Valor in the face of the enemy. Were they facing an enemy? The distinguished service cross is the second highest ranking military decoration. It is for valor in combat that doesn't rise to the level of conspicuous valor in the face of the enemy. A slight distinction. Still, we have all heard of the Medal of Honor but unless you were in the military you may not have heard of the Distinguished service cross or what it is awarded for. The question is, has the value of the Medal of Honor been lowered by the more frequent awarding of that honor? No, I'd say it hasn't, but it isn't viewed in the same way as in years past. The perception today being, it isn't that infrequent, still difficult to obtain, but not necessarily heroic. And my feeling is the same about the lowering of the flag. The question is, who died? 

 Entitlement. That is what it boils down to. Just who is entitled to what and why. It seems to me that far too many today are unwilling to just say, no. You are not entitled to this or that. The reason is simple enough, you are not entitled to this or that because you have not met the requirements. There are no exceptions, no exclusions, just the requirements as written. When I was in grade school we received different colored stars for whatever we accomplished. There was chart on the wall listing the tasks you were expected to perform daily. At the beginning of the next week you could check your status. A gold star meant you had accomplished the task completely. A red star not so much, a blue star was minimal. It was there for you to see and everyone else to see. If you didn't get the gold star that was your fault, no one else was responsible for that. You weren't entitled to it! Meant a lot though when you did get it. That's what I'm talking about. I guess I'm just saying we should tighten up just a bit. It's all getting to be just a little too loosey goosey. Good enough isn't good enough. As I heard as a child, Good, Better, Best, never let it rest, till your good is better and your better is best. We all need to quit resting. There is work to be done. Just what are we being rewarded for? For giving out the medals? That's what I'm seeing these days. As long as I praise and recognize whatever others do, that makes me equally as deserving. I should get a medal for issuing the medal! After all, I'm entitled too.