it's treason

  I watched and I listened as General Milley explained why he was calling the Chinese. He says he wanted to assure them that Trump wasn't planning to attack them. He made it sound like he was doing something heroic, saving the world almost. Thing is, that is not his job! Why this General hasn't been relieved of his duties pending a complete investigation is beyond comprehension. If Ronald McDonald threatened to tell what the special sauce was he certainly would be silenced quickly enough. The General is not in charge of state affairs, his job is to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief! And that remains true regardless of your personal opinions. The Biden administration has taken no action on this. When Trump made a phone call the Democrats tried to impeach him, but when it is disclosed what this General did, crickets.

 So here you have the chairman of the joint chief of staff engaging with foreign powers behind the presidents back. It's no secret that Milley doesn't like trump. It's also no secret he has political ambitions of his own. He has been in the military for over forty years and holds numerous degrees. Still all of that does not give him the authority to act in the way he did. He can not speak for the president. If this goes unpunished it is setting a very dangerous precedent. Just who is in charge? Is it the president or the chairman of the joint chiefs? You could look at his actions as a sort of mini coup. If your intention is to inform an enemy of your intentions, or indeed, plans, how could that not be viewed otherwise?

 Milley is the highest ranking officer in the Army and principal advisor to the president. Now we have this Afghanistan debacle. The current president says he doesn't remember Milley telling him to leave 2500 troops there to maintain stability. Milley says, I told him. Biden is a weak man, we all know that, we all know his handlers are doing their best to keep him in check, the general is no exception. Milley is using the Afghanistan debacle as a tool to cover up his own treason! It's an attempt to deflect blame and responsibility. Milley is responsible for that botched withdrawal, it happened on his watch! 

 Troops are being stationed at the capital. How many national guardsmen are there now? How much fencing is being installed? Troops have been deployed in support of the vaccine mandates. No troops protecting our border however, just protecting the capital. No troops were deployed when entire city blocks were being occupied. The FBI had plants in the crowd on Jan 6th, that is now known as fact. Where those plants there to report, or to follow instructions? That's the next question to be answered. If they were there solely to report why did they enter the capital building along with the "insurgents"? Why wasn't steps taken to prevent that beforehand if they had that knowledge? And now we know, Milley is informing the enemy on state secrets. What else has he told them, in his reassuring way? Treason being a capital offense is not enumerated in the Uniform Code of Military Justice nor covered under article 134 of that code. Still there are numerous charges in the punitive section of that code that applies to this General. If no action is taken other than discussions it would certainly undermine the whole system of justice in this country. The highest ranking General in the Army, the advisor to the President, is not above the law. He must be charged! He must be held to account. What he did was treason! And that's the long and short of that.  

forty years on

  The news as entertainment. It seems to me that has what it has become. I was listening yesterday as it was pointed out how many missing persons they are that you never hear about. You can't argue with that, it is the straight up truth. The case of Gabby was being used as an example of that. Why was her picture and disappearance all over the news? There was some discussion about that being the case solely because she is white. Yeah, some truth in that as well, although I don't believe that as the prime motivation. No, I think it made the news because it was, and still is, a good drama. Drama sells almost as well as sex. The whole back story is what the news was reporting on. A young couple traveling the nation, he comes home without her, she's missing, he disappears, the body is discovered and now Dog, the bounty hunter, is on the case. Reads like a script. And that is the reason for all of that.

 None of that is meant to detract from the tragedy of Gabby. None of that is intended to minimize a serious problem in America as far as missing people go. All I'm saying is, in order to make the news the story has to be entertaining in some fashion, that seems to be the criteria. The evening news is reflecting social media or maybe it is the other way around. Whichever way it is, that is why there is such a lack of trust in the media. I certainly don't believe everything I read on Facebook and I don't believe most of what is reported on the news. The truth is, simple facts are often boring and people want to be entertained. Good old Walter knew that and that's why his tagline, "and that's the way it is." He said that on air, for the last time, forty years ago. 

  Walter Cronkite explained his use of that phrase. He said his newscast was intended to be a mirror. He tried to reflect back to the audience what they were seeing, hence the phrase, and that's the way it is. It was up to you, the viewer. to figure out just what you were looking at, all Walter did was provide that mirror. It was much the same way as your parents, siblings and friends present the world to you. Yes, you thought that girl was a dream boat until it was shown to you what she really was. The news wasn't always entertaining or favorable to you. Sometimes the news just served to inform you about the reality of the situation. Sometimes that was a real bummer. The truth wasn't spun to favor any agendas. Can't say that about the news cast of today. Today the objective is to tell you what to think, not have you arrive at your own decision. The news today just paints the picture they want you to see. no mirror allowed.

 Aside from journalistic standards, much stricter back then in my opinion, the availability of news was limited. There wasn't all the social media we have today, all the websites, all the television channels. The competition for viewers wasn't nearly as intense. That plays a big part in all of this. Revenue, money rears its' head once again. For that reason we have to focus on what sells. Sensation sells! Whether that sensation is one of anger or pleasure isn't the issue, the issue is selling the product. In short, convincing you what you are seeing is the truth. Hey if I can get a celebrity to endorse whatever, it must be the truth. Whether that celebrity has any expertise in the field in question has no bearing on that. That's the reason you have pop stars and sports figures endorsing everything from political dogma to hemorrhoid creams! Ice T is now selling cold water tide because he is an expert on laundry. 

 Whatever sells the product. Also the reason the news people aren't necessarily journalists anymore, they are entertainers. Don't think so? Take a good look at who is reporting the news. No, really look at them and check their journalistic backgrounds. Have doubts? Take a good look at the meteorologists  today. Are all those those attractive women really weather experts? And the traffic guy is pretty entertaining isn't he? Ours is, doing food reviews for all the businesses that support the television station. And be sure to send in your photos of the weather, wrecks and other amusements, we will mention your name. 

 The news used to be a half hour. The reason was simple enough, that is about as long as you can expect to hold the attention of the general public on something boring. Same reason the ideal class length in schools is thirty minutes. Often they go much longer that's true, but educators say thirty minutes is best. It's true, just stating the facts doesn't take as long. It is your job to determine what those facts mean, that's the learning part of the equation. Repeating what you have been told isn't that difficult. And with that I will close, borrowing a familiar phrase, and that's the way it is. Forty years on and we are in trouble for certain. If you voted for this, look in that mirror! What caused this?  

that doesn't sound right

 As I'm listening to some commentary on television about race relations and racial inequity, I couldn't help but ask a question. Why are all poor black people poor because they are black, but poor white people aren't poor because they are white? That's what I was hearing being said. That was the reasoning behind the need for reparations. Well because if slavery hadn't happened, you know if all the black people taken captive and sold into slavery and then transported to America, they wouldn't be in the situation they find themselves today. No, they would just have stayed on the African continent and lived happily ever after. No poverty, no problems. And if they did come to America, not as slaves, they would have all been successful businesspeople, artists, musicians, tradesman and politicians. But as it turned out, they were black. 

 I just had to ask myself that question. I guess the thinking is being black is a disadvantage, I mean there are certainly plenty of white people that are disadvantaged but you seldom here about that. Take those folks living in Appalachia. They are just poor white folks for the most part. You don't hear anything about them celebrating their culture or demanding others change their culture to suit them. They aren't complaining about being white in America. Are they enjoying white privileges? Guess so. And what about the white folks that get into trouble with the law or involved in drugs, what's their excuse? They all come from two parent homes with a three bedroom house in the suburbs but make bad choices. It isn't because they are white, it's because they screwed up! It's their fault not great, great, great grandfathers misfortune. 

 All I keep hearing is equality. And the method to achieve that equality? Separate but equal! Thing is that was settled with Brown v the board of education. 67 years ago. And here we are right back to that. When one group receives special consideration, for good or ill, over another that is discrimination. When one group is granted exceptions to the rule, that is discrimination. Is having the Black Entertainment Awards, Black Miss America, the Black National Anthem all touted as equal but separate? That's what was being decided in Brown V the board of education. What was the answer? Separate but equal isn't a thing! 

 The thing is this, Brown V Board of Education was really the decision to remove the trump card from the deck. In that case it went in favor of blacks. It was decided that even when all else is equal separate facilities is discriminatory. It's true lots of white people weren't happy about that, not wanting to surrender their trump card, those laws we called Jim Crowe. But that works both ways. Today many black people don't want to surrender their trump card, being black. Now when things don't go their way, when things are difficult, when they are not successful, they can blame it on being black in America. We will ignore the myriad of programs available to those people altogether. Programs only available to people of color, white people aren't allowed to apply being discriminated against because of the color of their skin, but that is equality right? 

 Look I'm not complaining about whatever programs are available to whoever. I'm not saying there aren't challenges to be overcome. I'm not saying there aren't different levels of social strata. Blacks currently make up about 14% of the total population. White people make up about 56% of the population. The remaining 30% are everyone else. Wonder why more white people are successful? It's probably because there are more white people, duh. Why are there more tall athletes in the NBA than short ones? But if you are black the only reason you are successful, indeed the reason you are not, is because you are black, period, end of discussion. That's the trump card. If you're white, well that's on you! You have no excuse. Segregated discrimination ensuring equality? That don't sound right to me.    

Why

  Motivation. I find myself looking for that this morning. I have several projects in mind, things I tell myself I should be doing, but find I'm lacking in motivation. They are things I want to do for myself, all the while trying to convince myself I'm doing them for others. It's always better to do things for others, isn't it? It's certainly what I have been taught over the years. But it is a lesson full of contradictions. You should do things for yourself but doing for others is better, the right way. Recognition, validation, has to come from others. You are not truly successful until you are recognized by others. And that is where the contradictions lie. No matter how much you are told to the contrary, to just do it for yourself, to pay no attention to what others have to say, to "dance" as though no one were looking, we can't shake that. Well, we can if those actions get us the attention, the validation we all seek. Isn't that the truth? We are getting the validation or recognition we seek. For many of us that is true even when the reviews are bad! P.T. Barnum, the great showman said: "You know I had rather be laughed at than not to be noticed at all." I think that is the truth of it. 

 When we believe we will be rewarded we are motivated. Rewards must be earned. For that reason, the product must be worth the reward. That's true no matter the product. When we feel our product will not be deserving of the reward we are not motivated to produce that product. That is usually where the excuses/reasons begin. We have a lot of those readily available at all times. We don't have the material, the money or the time, are the most popular ones. Not having a proper workspace is another and one I use often. The issue with all of that is the reward. Reward has to come from others before it is meaningful. You have to believe the product will be worth the reward. Worth it, not just to you, but to someone else.

 I think what I'm looking for is something more. I think everyone feels that way at times. When you feel the product is worth just a bit more than what you are being given. But what is that something more? For that I have no answer. I realize that it is a passing thing however, nothing to be deeply concerned about. No need to seek professional help or therapy. It's a human reaction. I don't need anything from anyone else to resolve this. It is something I have to do for myself. I just have to settle. Sometimes settling is the issue. I'm reminded of a childhood adage, Good, Better, Best, never let it rest, until your good is better, and your better is best. Is being the best the motivation? If it is, you are not supposed to say so. Another contradiction 

the thinking man

 This is one of those times I feel like I'm standing at a crossroad. I'm sure you are all familiar with that feeling. Not quite sure of your destination, or exactly where you have been for that matter, but standing at a crossroads with no signs. That's how I feel  this morning. Perhaps it is as simple as the changing of the season, fall is upon us and in more than one way. It's a winding down, a period of rest, like finishing up a job in a way, time to clean up and put the tools away. I do feel like something has been completed, not sure what that is, but something. I have mixed feelings about that, satisfaction in the job being done, a sadness, a wonderment of what to do next. All of those emotions. All the while I'm just standing here, thinking about it all. 

 The thing is you don't have to take a different road just because you are at the crossroad, although we often feel compelled to do so. I guess that stems from this idea that everything new is somehow a good idea. Nothing is farther from the truth. There are plenty of times and situations when the tried and true is the way to go. Stay the course is usually good advice. Can you really win the game if you keep changing the rules? I don't believe that you can, the best you can do is create a temporary lull. History is evidence of that, as history does repeat itself. It repeats as a result of trying something new, at least new to you. Aristotle was correct when he said, " republics decline into democracies" and if you are paying attention you can see that happening right now. 

 Old dreams are persistent things, visiting every generation in turn. It is only the reaction to those dreams that changes. It is the recognition of those dreams that drives that reaction. Yes, we would all like be treated equally. That's never going to happen, it's a dream. For it is like I have pointed out in the past, everyone wants to be treated equally, until they are. It is at that point that entitlement and privilege's enters the picture. We are all equally guilty. We are at a point in time where that should be quite evident to anyone paying attention. We are using race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, financial status, where we were born, where our ancestors were born and indeed the actions of those from hundreds of years in the past as the "excuse" today for inequality. Will those things ever be eliminated? No, they will always be a thing. 

 What is the dream of America? America is standing at a crossroad. Do we stay the course or wander off in search of something new? I'm not thinking there is anything I could do to change this course of history. I am saying I can see the path we are currently on and it isn't good. It's not the latest administration, it's not the previous administration, America embarked on this course two hundred and forty five years ago. Our first change to the Constitution was the addition of a Bill of Rights. That had been hotly contested at the original conventions drafting the constitution. Why? Because the Bill of Rights empowers the people, not the government. You have to remember that the delegates to the convention were politicians. Yes, that is what they were and interested in holding power. That hasn't changed in the least. 

 For that reason I feel like I an standing at a crossroad looking for a sign. At the same time I don't think I will even get that choice. Seems like the politicians are now directing the parade. They are exerting more power today than ever before and calling it, democracy! The next change according to Aristotle is despotism. What is that? Many people think of that as a single person but it is not. Despotism is really just a form of government where that government has absolute control over its' citizens. That is accomplished in many ways. Control of commerce, control of your ability to engage in that commerce, control of the food sources, control of medicine, and fear. Fear of reprisal is the hardest to establish, the hardest to get people to accept. The best way to do that is by convincing those citizens they need the protection. The caveat, only the Government can provide you with that protection! You will submit to that authority or die. 

 America stood at that crossroad and took up arms. We gained our independence. Independence from what? Think about that. Just why did we revolt against the King? We have all heard the famous statement, Give me Liberty or Give me death. But how many know the meaning behind that statement? The liberty being referred to was government. It was government intervention in our everyday lives that was being contested. We wanted to be free (liberty) from that government oppression. The articles of Confederation, the precursor to the Constitution, sought to create a unified effort to fight the British, to engage in war as a unit instead of individual states, cities or towns, while maintaining the sovereignty of the states. The fear being a central government would become too strong and begin denying states rights. That is the liberty being spoken of in that phrase. Liberty, freedom from government oppression! Are mandates issued by Republics? No, mandates can be issued by Democracies, by the majority. Mandates issued and backed by government forces however are signs of despotism. It should give pause to any thinking man. 

the temperance of time

  Once again I find myself blocked from posting on Facebook, having violated their community standards. Yes I did it without thinking about it, without even trying really. Well, as I always say, it is their ball and they can take it home whenever they like. I do feel like I was baited just a bit this time as the comment that violated their standard was left on an article that should have also violated their standard. I disagreed with their robocop but was unable to tell them why. Apparently the robocops are too busy fighting Covid misinformation to be bothered with facts. What is it the French say, C'est la vie. I'll be back in a week.

 I'll find some other activities to fill the gap. I have a few projects that could use my attention and this will be a good time. I do get distracted by Facebook at times, I guess we all do. I admit I enjoy the interaction with others, however brief it may be at times. It is difficult to carry on any extended conversations. I expect that was the idea behind Facetime, trying to give the illusion of being in the same room anyway. Skype is the same concept isn't it? I tried Skype once and didn't like it. Now I hear one has to be careful about what is in the background with your video feeds, big brother is watching! I was watching the Waltons and have noticed that Rebel flag appears in several scenes, surprised that hasn't been edited out by now. I can only surmise the censors haven't picked up on that yet. But I guess that is what "raising awareness" is all about. I never paid any attention to that before it became a big deal. It's that way with a lot of stuff the left seems to concern itself with these days. Those pesky microaggressions! 

  When I was growing up I was often told to just ignore it. That was the advice given when I was being teased or other where acting out. I learned that most of the time those folks were just seeking attention. Yes, I know, that's an old fashioned simplistic way of seeing things, not enlightened like todays scholars would be. Funny thing is, it worked fairly well. It's a mechanism I still use today. When I'm done with someone, I'm done. I will just ignore them. Now, that doesn't happen often I admit, but it does happen. Some people probably pray for that. Like Facebook though, I keep coming back. But I think this ties in with yesterdays posting regarding civil aggression. All this awareness is making people mad. They are getting mad about things they hadn't even thought of! But, now having been informed what they should be mad about, they are acting out. They're aware! 

 Well I've always been a fan of spontaneity. Surprise me. We often think of that as being a good thing, a fun thing, but that isn't always the case. You can also react poorly on impulse as well. But being conditioned to think or respond in a set fashion makes for a dull life. I mean, it's great if you are in the military where discipline rules the day and reacting correctly may mean life and death, but reacting to a historical statue, not so much. Or stain glassed windows. I saw on the news that the National cathedral has some stained glass windows depicting, gasp, southern symbols and sentiments. Yes, that pesky rebel flag is in there among other things. They will be removed by 2023! I wonder how many people even knew that they were there? Well I guess the church isn't as forgiving as the founder of that church would have been. That must be erased from the national memory. A fine line between remembrance and memorial I suppose. Judged with the temperance of time. I failed to exercise temperance with my comment on Facebook and have been exiled as a result. No one to blame but myself. I do not feel the least bit contrite however. using todays standard I should feel empowered. But mostly, I'll just ignore it.     

  

Civil aggression

 I don't respond to a number of the meme's found on Facebook that are fishing for information to use in guessing your passwords, or the ones insisting I need to do this or be condemned to hell. I did respond to the question, what word or phrase annoys you. That answer is empowered. I grimace every time I hear someone using that. They are empowered! What does that mean. really? Permission is granted. You have granted yourself permission to do, say, or act in a certain way. Yes, empowerment is all about self. And it's my thinking all this empowerment is what has lead us to the mess we are currently living in. What I'm talking about is civil aggression. That's what I'm calling it anyway. 

 There was a story on the news concerning that. The journalist was reporting on the rise of violent incidents at the airports and on the planes. There was speculation about that rise. I thought about empowerment. Empowerment can lead one to entitlement, at least in your own mind it can. I'm thinking that is what is happening. People are feeling empowered to act out! Isn't that what we used to say about kids that were brats! They were just acting out. Nowadays we analyze the children to determine an excuse for that behavior. Well, because we have also decided we are all victims. But, at the same time we have empowered ourselves to overcome all obstacles. Doesn't matter how you feel, I'm empowered.

 Somehow all of this progressive thinking, this empathy and understanding has gone off the tracks. I will be empathetic to you if I have to kill you to do it! I will express my concern for your choices forcefully if necessary. You will get this vaccine if I have to deny you everything else to gain your compliance. After all, it is for the good of all humanity! And that takes precedence over your feelings or beliefs, although you are allowed to have those feelings and beliefs, you just aren't allowed to have feelings or beliefs different from mine. I can force all that on you because I'm empowered. You know all this empowerment is really no different that bigotry. It is just self awarded. It's an excuse for acting out, for behaving in an uncivilized fashion, a justification of bigotry. 

 I miss the days when we were all repressed. You know when we were taught to be considerate of others, and not insist we get our way. It was a little something called manners and civility. I was taught about being in polite company, remember that? Today I listen to public figures speaking to crowds and cursing as they do so. Governor Hogan and his wear the damn mask mandate. How eloquently put by an elected official. That sort of speech is aggressive in nature. Read the banners and signs being displayed these days, they are the same way. *uck Biden, Trump or whoever emblazoned on flags and flown in public. Bumper stickers the same. All signs of aggression. 

 Passive/Agressive? I don't know anything about that, I'll leave that to those with their degrees and years of education. I do know that sort of thing leads to heated discussion and sometimes violence. Why? Because that person feels empowered to speak in such a fashion, being protected by civil law? When people react in an uncivil fashion towards that it shouldn't come as a surprise. It sure doesn't surprise me at all, having learned what the reaction would be at an early age. If I had said to my Father I feel empowered the response would have been, I've got your empowered right here! You are not empowered, you are being a brat!

Happy Fall

 Fall has arrived. The leaves are just beginning to turn, a few already making it to the ground. I'm seeing the fall grass come in also. Corn is being combined and fields laid bare, yes, all the signs are present. I am looking forward to cool days and chilly nights. Fall is my favorite time of year. I think that reflects my age as well, having reached the fall of my years. Not too hot, the days aren't too long, everything is less busy, except for the squirrels. I enjoy seeing the children at the bus stops, another product of aging I suppose, almost sentimental in nature. Soon it will be dark when I go to bed, another indication of ageing. Now I wonder why I ever thought it a good idea to stay up half the night. When I was young I wanted bedtime to be much later, I wanted to stay up. Now that I can, I want to go to bed. Life sure is full of paradoxes. 

 In todays world Pumpkin spice dominates the fall. As for me the only use a pumpkin has is making a jack-o-lantern. I do not eat pumpkin pie or pumpkin anything else. I've scooped the guts out of too many pumpkins to want to try and eat that disgusting mush. Well, fact is I'm not much on any kind of squash, just doesn't appeal to me at all. And the turkey is best the next day, as a sandwich, on toast with lettuce and lots of mayo. That's how you eat turkey. But the fall does present the ability to have oatmeal for breakfast, grilled cheese for lunch and chili or stews for supper. Fall foods are the best. Months with an "r" in them allow the eating of oysters and scallops. That is what I was taught growing up. Long clams had to wait for a month with an "r" in it. How I remember digging those clams, hands freezing reaching into that mud. Worth the frostbite every time. But that has changed over the years and all are enjoyed year round. I have to say it has removed some of the excitement, the special feeling, about that. They say anticipation is often greater pleasure than the thing itself! There are cases where I believe that to be true. Self denial is something that we should all learn, and something sadly not being taught today.

 I enjoyed burning leaves. I loved that smell, still do. Someone should make a cologne that scent, call it fall. Yeah, I know there are some folks that think it stinks and I know they say it causes cancer these days. I know that practice has been banned in a lot of places. I know they say you shouldn't rake up those leaves anymore, leave them as natural fertilizer and as a blanket to warm the ground. I don't care, I'm raking and burning whenever I can. It was a time when the neighbors would stop by and chat, no one wants to miss a fire. It's like working on your car, the guys will stop by to give advice and tell you how they fixed there stuff. The ladies would chat over the clothesline too. But all that is in the past, for the most part. The neighbors don't see your unmentionables anymore. And that reminds me this time of year would also see quilts and heavy blankets being aired out for use in the coming weeks. Taken out of their chests or a box under the bed they would be hung on the clothesline to be aired, sometime you needed an extra clothes pole because of the weight. We would just find a branch in the woods or use a 2x4 temporarily. When I was growing up there was always lumber around. 

 Fall is the prelude to the cold hard winter. I have a love/hate relationship with that season. Not a big fan but would miss it if it didn't arrive. I know that from having lived in the south a few years, I like the stillness of winter interrupted by the excitement of Christmas. Memories and sentiment do warm the soul. Still a sadness accompanies all of that when we remember those that are no longer with us. Still tradition remains, even if only observed by you. I was born in the heart of summer, on a Monday morning. That was back in '53 and in a different world. I've seen the seasons come and go many times, fifty two to be precise. Winter is coming, next! That is perhaps the function of fall, to give us pause, a chance to reflect. The "golden" years are when? Some experts say that it is the time between retirement(65) and eighty, when our bodies generally begin to fail us. I suppose it is a fitting description as in fall the leaves do turn golden, it's only the returning to the ground part that gives us pause. Well, Happy Fall to all of you born in '56 or sooner, you are in your golden years. 

under control

  So tired of hearing about the mask. The whole deal to me is simple enough. The mask works both ways, it keeps the virus from going out and it keeps the virus from coming in. And we could debate that science if we really wanted to. A surgeon wears one to prevent the germs from going out. Makes perfect sense. Never before has anyone suggested that we all wear a mask to prevent that from happening in our everyday life. If we did would that prevent everyone from getting the seasonal flu, the common cold, and countless other airborne infections? Well, if we all lived in a bubble that could be accomplished I suppose. But if you are concerned with an airborne virus, germ or other contaminants wearing a mask is a great idea. I do so when sanding or in very dusty conditions. Those in another room do not however. So, that's my point, if you are concerned wear a mask.

  That being understood we have to ask where is the virus coming from? I mean did all this really start with one person coughing? Then another breathed it in and so on all the way around the world? Just an airborne virus that can't live on surfaces, can't travel more than six feet through the air, but breathed in? Well, I'm no scientist but that seems unlikely. There is a contradiction here. We are told the virus can't survive on surfaces, it can't be spread by contact, yet we are busy sanitizing everything we touch. Schools are closed for "deep cleaning" because a student had covid. Why? All you have to do is wait, the virus can't survive remember. 

  Well, like I said, if you are concerned wear a mask. I'm tired of this whole narrative. When I feel it necessary I will wear a mask. You are free to do the same. Wear it twenty four seven if that is what makes you feel safe. This virus is spread by other means, not just me breathing! I'll tell you another thing. The body produces a cough as a defense mechanism. The purpose of coughing is to expel bad things from your body. I fail to see how trapping those bad things in my body is helping me. Providing a breeding ground for a virus just doesn't sound like a good idea. 

  In my opinion the whole vaccine/mask thing is more about control and compliance than it is science. A method of control. Your freedom, your job and your entertainment all being controlled. Without the proper "papers" you will be restricted from all of that. It's just the next step. Government, in all forms, seeks to control the population. Always has, always will.   

deferred celebration

   My granddaughters birthday is tomorrow. She is in college now and so will not be home for the occasion. I'll see her over the weekend and celebrate then. And that is what inspired this morning musings. When you were growing up how important was it to celebrate the occasion/holiday on the actual day? What I'm thinking about was having your birthday party or whatever, but scheduling it for a more convenient day. The federal government did that in 1968 with the Uniform holiday act. It is interesting to read what President Johnson had to say about all the benefits to doing that. All in all he was saying it would be more convenient for everyone. This change was pushed by lobbyists for the retail industry. It's better for business. Sentiment takes a back seat to profits. Also the reason I am seeing Christmas wreaths for sale at the Walmart today, next to Pilgrims, Witches and Scarecrows. 

 I was remembering how it was when I was a kid. Now I only had one birthday party where others, outside of my immediate family, were invited. That happened when I was sixteen, orchestrated by my sister. I can not honestly say if that took place on my actual birth date or not. It was, after all, a long time ago. I'm just remembering that every birthday when I was at home Mom made a cake, we had ice cream, and that was the celebration. It happened no matter the day of the week. The thing was, at least for an hour or so, I was the center of attention, it was my day, my time. It was my birthday! So, for whatever time it was, everything else stopped. Mom wasn't busy, Dad wasn't too busy, my brothers and sisters were there. That's the way it worked. It was special.

 I also remember when a holiday was celebrated on the holiday. Didn't make any difference what day of the week it was on. If it was a Federal holiday you got the day off. Now I admit I was a little young and not working full time in 1969, the first year the holidays were actually moved around or clumped together, but I do remember holidays being on a Wednesday. Of course I remember when stores were closed on holidays too. But the holiday was the holiday, not a scheduled event. I guess that is what I'm trying to say. It just seems like everything today is becoming a scheduled event. Yes I know the dates of birthdays and holidays, with a few exceptions, haven't changed but the scheduling appears to have. Holidays are on a Monday or a Friday, for the most part. Your birthday remains that day but celebrating that may be before or after, whenever it is convenient. 

 Does that make a difference to you? I've certainly grown accustomed to that but remain aware. Maybe that is nothing more than having something to complain about, or point out how much better it was in the past. We all have a tendency to do that, things were almost always better in the past. The soda tasted better, the cake was better, the weather was better and people were kinder. I do think we should have just left things alone. I believe we should celebrate/remember the day on the day. Deferred celebration doesn't seem as exciting to me. When I'm planning ahead for that it just takes some of the excitement out of it. All holidays are Anniversaries. It's my thinking they should all be treated in that fashion. I'm just saying if I told my wife we will celebrate our anniversary at a more convenient time it may not go over well. No, I didn't forget, it's just that it isn't convenient for me today, Friday is good though. 

 I just think the stopping of everything else to observe an occasion or event in history adds to making that special. It's like a Sunday. When I was young stores weren't open on a Sunday. Maybe the corner Deli, but certainly no supermarkets or retail stores. Where I lived you couldn't buy a beer until after one in the afternoon on Sunday. Sunday was a special day, at least the first half was. But today it is just another day of the week , like all others, business as usual. Won't be long, if it hasn't already taken place, that Christmas day will be like that. I suspect that if it weren't for the retail aspect of that holiday it would have been relocated as well. 

 So what do you think? Schedule celebrations for convenience, or celebrate on the day?            

impressions

  After writing yesterdays post I have been thinking about impressions. I've been thinking how we say we know people, we know our parents, our siblings, our friends and acquaintances. We know our spouses. But the truth is, we just have our impressions. Do we really know? I'm thinking that we don't. Still I believe we should share those impressions, they way we feel and think about others. I'm inspired to begin that process. My thought is to write my impressions of my family to accompany the family tree. I'm thinking it will be a project over a number of years. I'm not sure when the proper time to present such a gift would be. Perhaps it should just be left as a legacy. That is to say, I shouldn't be around to see the reaction to that. 

 As I mentioned yesterday, I wrote my impression of my grandmother and that upset my mother quite a bit. Although in my opinion I had written a fine and fitting impression, almost a tribute, that isn't what my mother received. Feelings were hurt on both sides. In fact it created one of the strongest disagreements I ever had with her. Still, I wouldn't change the words. I had written my truth.

 So I'm thinking about that as it relates to the family tree. That is something I have been working on for years now. I've made many discoveries about who, what, where, and speculation as to why. In looking at old records, newspaper clippings and the context of history I have formed impressions about those ancestors. I'm thinking of the family tree as a sort of map. A map that leads to me.

 It has troubled me for some time, what to do with that information. A list of names is rather boring, attaching photographs helps a great deal, and providing any details about their lives does add interest. I'm thinking adding in an impression of that person would be great as well. Of course those that I never knew I could only make assumptions about, based on hearsay evidence or old records. Which brings me to today, what I write about those I knew would also just be my impression of them. That impression would most certainly disagree with their own vision of  themselves, of that I have no doubt. I'm just as certain their opinions/impressions of me wouldn't agree with mine as well. That's why I'm thinking any such endeavor would have to be a legacy gift, you can't disagree with the dead. Well, you can, but you won't get into an argument anyway.

 That is what is on my mind this morning. Whether or not that will ever happen is another question altogether. I tend to have great ideas, get excited for that idea but that excitement dims. Perhaps that comes from my Dad who did much the same. He always had several projects going at the same time, many of them were left unfinished. Like him I'll find myself distracted with something new. It is at that point excuses are made for not completing the project. Often those excuses are time and money, but the truth is misdirected interest. I wander off. Happens all the time. Perhaps it involves commitment. For a legacy project I would never know how it was received and that does make it harder to commit to. We all want recognition for our efforts. It all revolves around being "good enough." Are impressions good enough? Sometimes, they are. Sometimes that is all we have.    

remembering

 My dad would have been 97 today but he didn't make it past 66. Well his body didn't anyway, he is with me everyday. He does live on. It saddens me to think his memory will fade away a bit when I am gone. None of my children every got to meet him or know him. My sisters children did so that privilege belongs to them. They were fairly young so I wonder how much they remember. Still I realize that is just the natural order of life. 

 We are lucky today to have photographs and recordings of our loved ones. The photographs have been around for quite some time, that began in America around 1840 or so, not quite two hundred years. I have a photograph of my second great grandfather and his brother. I'm not certain the year it was taken but is most likely the oldest I have. Whenever I think of Great Grandfather Abraham I can see that image in my mind. Of course I have no idea what he sounded like or indeed, what he was like. Today our children and all our ancestors could not only see us but hear us, see us walking and talking. They might access our social media accounts and gain a sense of who we were. I suppose that will depend upon whether we leave them our passwords or not. Will you include them in your will? Have you even considered that? I admit I haven't given that much thought at all. I have known a few that passed away and their profile still appears. I still get reminders when it is their birthday. What we call our social presence. 

 As for my own father he wasn't a writer and so I have nothing of his in that regard. I just have old photographs, some of his things, and a lifetime of memories when it comes to that. He was interviewed by the newspaper at one time, an opinion piece covering the passing of a generation, and if you read it you can get a sense of him. I'd say he was typical of the time in his views. As for myself, well there are volumes you could read, what you make out of any of it I won't speculate on. My intent has always been to leave a record of my thoughts. I do hope that among those thoughts, and thousands of words, some find "words of substance" as I expressed that at one time.

 I am aware that he died at 66 and I'm now 68. That gives one pause to contemplate things a bit. None of us know the hour of our death and so we should be prepared. That begs the question, how? I think it is accomplished by simple acceptance. To put it plainly, it is what it is. It's also something I see a lot of folks struggling with these days. The emphasis today seems to be focused on ideals at the expense of reality. Reality being used as the cause rather than the result. Facts being challenged whenever those facts run contradictory to our wants. But I'm wandering off a bit. I was really just thinking about getting every thing done that I am supposed to. My father accomplished it all in sixty six years. It was his time, his job done. My mother on the other hand lived to be 92. It was then her job was done. 

 Now all of this may sound sad, depressing or even morbid to some and I get that. It isn't the way I feel however, not at all. I find myself not so concerned with dying or death, as the preservation of memories. I'm thinking that may be a portion of my purpose. And I am not solely concerned with my own memories, it is the memories of friends and family that concerns me. Not my memories of them, but the memory of them. That is the distinction I am trying to make, an essence I wish I could capture. To know the person, not just remember them.

 I have found it difficult to write my impressions of people and what I think they thought, felt or believed. The difficulty comes when others that knew them disagree. I wrote an impression of my grandmother and that upset my mother a great deal. She didn't agree with my conclusions and she reminded me that she was the authority, after all, it was her mother! And I get that, we are all the authority when it comes to our own thoughts and memories. I had to concede that she had a far greater insight than I. The other problem when doing that is the dismissal of bias. Histories biographies are riddled with bias. Just how great was Alexander? I haven't written my impression of my father. I call it an impression because that is what interests me and what I want to share. I believe he was a man of time of his times, perhaps a bit progressive in some ways, but conservative in others. In the end he was my father, just as he had always been. Can I be objective? Yes, I believe that day will come and I'll write that impression for further generations to read. That will only happen if someone remembers. I remember. Happy Birthday Dad.              

legislated humor

  For the past few years I have made this Halloween decoration for my grandson. I first saw it in Facebook, get lots of ideas that way and copy them. This one just happened to be a craft done with a pumpkin. You see, as I said a few years back this "tradition" began. My grandson was becoming socially aware as the saying goes these days, becoming sensitive to the nuances of life. Political correctness is another way of saying that. But to me it is just a touch of humor, no offense intended. Yes, it's a grandpa thing. A grandpa joke, slightly inappropriate but funny. Yeah and as the grandchildren grow so too the jokes. I mean he wouldn't react to pull my finger anymore. So, finding this humorous I made him a Jack-O-Lantern. Well, it is really a Jack-O-Rantern. This picture should explain that: 

     This may be the earliest version of that, I have made many improving them over the years. They are usually accompanied by some "racist" remarks, like "so sorrie for china virus" or ah so, stuff like that. One year I made about six of them. I used those real small decorative pumpkins and hid them all over his house, in the refrigerator, the microwave, his bedroom and bath. Pretty funny stuff!

 Mark is in college now and has his own apartment. He hopes to become a lawyer one day and is concerned with his social media accounts and all of that stuff. I understand and commend him for that. He does have enough foresight to know that things from your past can crop up later to be used against you. When I was his age I could do stupid things with little fear anyone would know about it later on. You know what I mean. Statements made when I was eighteen wouldn't be remembered, or at least no record of it would exist, ten years later! And so for that reason I will not ne making Mark a Harroreen Runkin this year, the year of the Ox. In this modern digital age the sins of the grandfather may be visited upon the grandson. I do find it amusing that he is so concerned with this stuff but also realize it is a serious business. You can accuse me of racism, I really don't care, but my professional career is over. I'm just Marks' grandfather, his version of "Archie Bunker" and I'm sure he doesn't even know who that is.  Well, he might but I'm sure it isn't for comedy. 

  I'm not sure how I feel about this though. It certainly amuses me as a "tradition" of sorts. I believe it amuses him as well. Still we have to move past these things sometimes, or at least set them aside for a while. When humor isn't funny anymore. I'm going to miss that. Maybe I'll just make a runkin' for myself. It's not as much fun but could still cause a bit of discomfort for him should I post a picture to social media. It is that that causes my hesitation. But jokes aren't much fun if you don't get to share them are they? So I'm thinking that the "runkins" may be relegated to memory. A story told to close friends and relatives after I am gone. My grandfather used to make these racist decorations, LOL. Yeah, and some of my "observations" have shocked him a bit along with some of my philosophy. He has reached the contradictory stage that all kids go through. After all he is in college, it's 2021, and he knows more than I do. That's what he is thinking anyway and I can remember when I had similar thoughts about my father and grandfather. Dang old people are just too far behind. Imagine, a harroreen runkin being thought of as funny. Why, it is just racist! 

 Now if you think about it it is no wonder. If you grew up in the 50's and 60's the cartoons were racist, the soap operas were racist, the most popular television shows, all racist. Of course we didn't know it but a theory was developed later on. That theory is being taught in colleges today. And I thought we were just makin' fun, you know, being friendly. I mean you knew better than to say certain things that may offend, but for the most part we were just kiddin' around. We called it having a sense of humor. Today that is called being insensitive, displaying microaggressions and discriminatory. Today we are supposed to act like we don't notice. Play it cool brother. Yeah, well I notice, I still poke fun and still get made fun of too. The only time that really hurts is when it is the truth. And I decide what is true or not. And that is the big difference today, today our truths are being legislated. You will believe this and respond accordingly. But this blog is just about having a little fun, nothing serious. I'll have to think of something else, something less offensive.  

mandating life

 Ever wonder why we all want to live as long as possible? Is it because we are afraid we are gong to miss something? Or is it something else? I think it is because life is all we know. Death is a mysterious thing. We all fear, just a bit, the things we don't understand. That's true with just about everything. Remember going to the next grade in school and being just a bit scared. I always wondered if I was going to be able to cut the mustard, as the saying goes. Meeting someone new was the same way. Staying alive becomes almost an obsession for some. Taking care of ourselves is what we call that. Now we expect our government to provide the means for us to do that as well. Isn't that what state sponsored health care is all about? The right to life is a sacred thing, enshrined in our constitution, both the national one and our individual constitution. That right shall be protected at all cost! Hard to argue with that isn't it? 

 Well I don't like to bring the same subject up but abortion appears to be an exception to the rule in some people's thinking. I guess that is simply because it isn't their life being terminated. Those same folks may oppose the death sentence, you know, just in case there was a mistake. Sure the guy, or gal shot and killed someone else, that is fact beyond any shadow of a doubt, but we can't take another life, that just wouldn't be right. Hey, life is sacred! 

 Now if we even think about ending our own life that is a mental illness. If we indicate that we aren't really worried about dying, that is a mental illness. If you just choose to eat the pizza anyway, despite the Doctors advice, you will be met with, what's wrong with you? Yes, we are expected to do everything possible to stay alive. That is also the reason the government has become involved. It began with safety rules and has progressed all the way to mandates and the withholding of benefits, forced testing for a disease you may or may not have, being fired from your job and social insolation! All of that is for your own good, to keep you safe and alive! And you will stay safe and alive even if the government has to kill you to get you to comply! No more will mere civil penalties be imposed for safety violations like refusal to wear your seat belt, now it is total isolation. You can not move about freely in society without the proper papers. 

 But exceptions are being made. Religious exemption. Well now why is that? Where are those folks that constantly scream about separation of church and state? You can be exempted if your religion allows you to kill me? If you go unvaccinated isn't that what is being said about you? You are the problem you are perpetuating the pandemic! If your religion forbids getting the vaccine that means you can't spread the virus? Is that how that works? Or are going to say that it is only a small percentage of the population so it doesn't matter. Well and those people are socially distant from everyone else. Seems like a rather inconsistent policy to me. Is everyone mandated to get the vaccine or not! And if religious exemption is going to be used what is the religious test? Article Five of the Constitution specifically addresses the religious test issue. It shall never be applied to hold any office in the land! That has also been interpreted to mean you can't apply a religious test individually either. You can't refuse me services, office, privilege or employment based on my religious belief. In fact you have to make concessions for that belief. Like Muslims that refuse to handle pork products, you can't require they do as a condition of employment. I've already heard the vaccine proponents saying religious exemption may be used as a loophole. How are we supposed to "prove" our sincere religious beliefs? Do we have to? 

 I guess I wandered of the topic a bit, sorry about that, but that is what happens when thinking out loud. I'm just as interested in staying alive as the next guy. I do wonder why we worry about that as much as we do. There are times we are so worried about staying alive that we stop living. We freeze like a deer in the headlights. We seek help from any source we can. We demand that help too! But what about when the "help" starts making demands upon you? Are you always willing to comply? If we are all to do everything possible to stay alive, following all the rules, do we surrender our choices? That is to say, kick all the bad habits that lead to illness. Are you drinking alcohol? What about smoking? Eating fatty foods? Are you exercising daily? If you aren't following all the guidance provided by health authorities you are the problem! You are driving the cost of healthcare up. No exceptions or exemptions! That is why it is called a mandate. 

 Another thing to consider in all of this is mental health. What if I say this vaccine mandate is causing me emotional stress. Isn't that a valid reason to be exempted? If I can take a goat on the airplane for emotional support I certainly should be able to refuse a vaccine. That's the way I see it anyway. the constant, unending barrage of get the vaccine, get vaccinated, you are killing others, is causing me much emotional stress! You are effecting my health! If, as a man, I can go in the ladies room because I identify as a woman, can't I identify as a religious person objecting to a vaccine? Or is that an all or nothing thing? I mean if my religion forbids one type of medicine does it also have to forbid every type of medicine? What about emotional support? Can an animal provide my emotional support but refusal of a vaccine not? 

 The bottom line in all of this as far as I can tell is your emotional support. You have decided your only chance for survival is to have everyone vaccinated. My emotions, my feelings about that are not important! This is for the emotional good of the entire country! No, it is for your emotional support, not mine. Spin that anyway you like but that is the bottom line. This is about control, easing your fears, gaining that feeling of, I'm in control of this. Fact is, you are not. Fact is you are not in control of your life either, you will die one day and you have no control over that, unless you make a choice about that, Then if you do that it will be said you had a mental illness. That's how that works.     

your own fault

  I was reading a news article about a lawyer in South Carolina. It was on the news and then appeared on my newsfeed on Facebook. So I read the article about this lawyer who had found his wife and two of his children shot to death. That was earlier this month. He knows nothing about what happened to them, he has no involvement with that. The police do not have him listed as a suspect. But now this same lawyer hired a hit man to shoot him so that his remaining son would inherit a ten million dollar life insurance policy. The guy he hired he had defended a few years back in traffic court. So, he provides this guy with a pistol, drives out to a designated spot, and the guy shoots him in the head. The shot only gazes him however causing a skull fracture. So then the lawyer calls for help. I guess he decided he didn't really want to die after all. The shooter drives off and ditches the pistol. Ah, but the lawyer confesses to the plot. Everyone is facing charges, a whole bunch of charges. A sad tale for sure. But it is how the final chapters in this story being reported that gets my attention. 

  You see this lawyer has a drug problem, addicted to opioids. He has been for some time, he even stole money from the law firm he worked for to support that habit. After discovering his wife and children shot he planned on checking into a rehab center. Before he did that though he decided to get the guy to shoot him. You see, it's all the fault of opioids. That is where the "reporter" went with this story. Yes, that is what bothers me about this whole tragic event. In the end the blame is on the drugs not on the individual. Sounds to me exactly the same as blaming the gun and not the person shooting it. Are we really going to say that drug abuse is the excuse? What I mean is, the drug is to blame for everything and that lawyer was just a victim? Is that what we are going with? Does that excuse everything? That is where the story goes. In the end I am supposed to feel bad for the lawyer, feel bad for the shooter who is now implicated in this plot, and blame it all on those bad drugs. That's where the blame goes!

  I couldn't help but shake my head in response to that article. It is further proof of the way things are going, toward dependence. There is always something or someone else to blame for our troubles. Think about it. If you do drugs it isn't your fault, if you shoot someone it's the guns' fault. It's hot outside, it's climate change, the fault of those using carbon based fuels and cows farting. If you find yourself involved with any of that stuff, it isn't your fault! You should spend your time and efforts advocating for everyone else to change their ways! In fact you should finance all that as well. Rehab centers and mental health facilities should be free to all, readily available to those victims. And make no mistake about it, you are a victim, not your fault. If you loot stores, rob people, assault others and generally get involved with criminal activities, not your fault, probably the fault of your environment, or something that happened two hundred years ago. You are just the victim of all that. The fact that a business owner doesn't want to build a store in your neighborhood because it would be robbed every other day isn't your fault. They should build a store in your neighborhood, you know, so you don't have to travel so far to rob another one! 

  Some years back there was a popular term thrown about, tough love. That phrase was basically saying to tell the person the truth and having them face reality. Yes, that's tough love. It's tough to understand that you are wrong, you are not a victim, and it is your own fault! It goes back to what your Mom or Dad may have said, if Billy jumped off the roof would you do that too? It wasn't Billy's' fault if you did something stupid! Get drunk and do something idiotic? That's your fault, not Jose Cuervo's. He may be a friend of yours but bottom line is you are responsible for the company you keep. It's my thinking we need to return to that. It's true that change starts one person at a time. It is also true that person should be you, not someone else, or something else for that matter. When I was little I wanted a pocket knife and I got one. Almost right away I cut myself with that knife. Whose fault was that? Mine and mine alone. It wasn't the fault of the knife in any way, in fact that knife performed exactly as it was designed. It was me that fouled up! I learned a valuable lesson from that and have carried a pocket knife ever since. It hasn't cut me again! 

  For me I am just getting sick and tired of it all. You can't make yourself a victim and then blame someone else for that. You can't start a fire, put it out and declare yourself a survivor or a hero! You are neither. In that scenario you are a arsonist! You can't own a gun, shoot other people with it and then blame the gun. And now we blaming everyone else because we are getting sick! Guess what, you have always caught sicknesses, diseases and such from other people. That's not new! Protect yourself is the best you can do and do not insist everyone else share in your paranoia. The mask works both ways doesn't it? It prevents the virus from escaping and prevents it from entering. Worried about airborne virus. Wear a mask. Take responsibility for yourself and I'll be responsible for me. I have a one in three hundred and sixty six chance of being in a car accident. The odds would be a lot more in my favor if you just parked your car and stayed off the road! Yet, I'm not insisting you should do that. I'll just risk it because I want to drive my car. I'll assume the responsibility for what happens. If I run into you, it's my fault! If you run into me, it's your fault. 

  As for that lawyer and that whole mess, it is his own fault. He is responsible for it. Lock him up! The accomplice is just as guilty, lock him up! What caused all that to happen? Choices, the lawyers choices, the accomplice choices. It wasn't drugs or mental illness, it was the choices made. Start holding people accountable for their choices and things will change. Maybe we just need to start using middle names, like your Mom did. When you heard that you knew that wasn't a good thing and the hammer was coming down. The best thing you could do is accept the punishment and promise to never do that again. And you would be reminded of that, frequently, for years to come. There was no parole or probation! Nope, it was your own fault.      

granting permission

  Is it being progressive, inclusive and accepting, or is it allowing the forbidden? When you think about it a great deal of the behaviors we now embrace we once forbidden by general consensus. Think about the things your parents told you not to do. Weren't they generally things to improve your life? Weren't they trying to keep you safe, protect you and instruct you? But we all grow and feel like we know better and try things we are told not to. We are even told, you know better than that. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we just like it. Whatever the case may be we begin to allow that. On a personal level at least. we allow that. From that we move on to advocating for that action. Have we learned and moved forward or are we just allowing the forbidden. There are even times when we allow ourselves the forbidden while forbidding our children! Yes, what parents haven't done that? 

  I wasn't thinking about parenting though, I was thinking about the progression of a nation. Now despite all the rhetoric to the contrary this nation was founded on the Judeo-Christian tradition. Yes, it was mainly Christian doctrine but that is certainly inseparable from the Jewish tradition. If you think about that what is the difference? It is in what is allowed, what adherence to "rules" apply. The same could be said for the break between the Catholics and protestants. All in the manner of practices. In what is allowed. The Catholics felt like they were making progress by breaking with the Jewish traditions, then the protestants took issue with that, they felt progressive, and it has continued until this very day. I'd say Evangelists are the final result, really a return to what Jesus was doing if you think about it. 

  Now that being established the constitution and the bill of rights was written by Christians. Yes, I know they all weren't Christians, I know they was protestants and deists, but in general they all believed in the Christian doctrine of right and wrong. In short, what should be allowed, and what should be forbidden. Remember the Constitution was written only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate to any other. John Adams said that and he ought to know. The Constitution was to limit the power of the government, not limit the power of the people. The Constitution delineates what the government can't do! What the people can't do, what is forbidden, is ruled by our morality. Where does your moral base come from? Well, that goes back to what you were taught as a child, what was allowed and then later endorsed. What was your religious instruction? There are, of course, those raised without any religious instruction at all so where does their moral base come from? Simply on what is allowed is the only answer I can offer. It is also the reason modifications to the Constitutions are undertaken. 

  Jewish scholars say there were originally 613 commandments. That came as a surprise to me. Later pared down to a more manageable ten, an alteration. Those ten are what I was taught as things not to do. I was also taught that just because it isn't written down that I shouldn't do something, it is permission to do that. But my point here is simply man likes to change the text, change the instructions to align to his wants. We call that making progress. The behaviors that have been denied to us, those frowned upon or forbidden previously receive new labels, labels such as discriminatory. Interesting that discriminatory is a derivative of discrete, exercising discretion, which means what? Not allowing others to know what you are doing. If you are doing something questionable, it is best to be discrete isn't it? But does that discretion make the action correct? No, the hope is that no one notices. You don't want them to notice because it is wrong. That's how that works. 

  Now if we abandon or modify the text enough we can allow just about everything. That's true in government and in religious belief. It doesn't take much of a scholar to see and understand that. The law.  The law is the law whether written by government or what we are taught to believe. Violating government law has its' punishments. Violating our personal laws of conduct also has punishments, but those punishments have to be self inflicted. What we sometimes call belief or conscience. Belief is fueled by conscience, can't have one without the other. We can eliminate conscience by allowance. That is, what we decide is allowed despite any moral instruction we may have received. We decide to rewrite the text. There is no immediate punishment for that, as long as we don't act contrary to what the government says. Thing is, we can change what that is any time we want to. We can change what the law allows in that context. 

  The problem we face, and all governments face, is aligning morality and law. When the law begins to mandate moral virtues a new document is required. When the Republic was formed John Adams, and I'm certain all the others, were quite aware of that. That was the reason for the very first amendment to that Constitution. The separation of Church and State. Even when we are all reading the same text the interpretation of that text will vary. That is increasingly evident in todays world. There are Priests that support abortion, think about that. I do not doubt their sincere religious belief but commandment number six seems clear enough in the Kings James Bible, Thou Shalt not kill. But if you are reading the Hebrew Bible it says, Thou Shalt not Murder. Does that give me permission to kill my enemies as long as I don't murder them? But even then what is murder? To kill someone deliberately and with forethought and planning. Isn't that abortion? But all of that is just by way of example. The government in Roe V Wade made a moral choice allowing what is forbidden. We all know you shouldn't murder people, we all know you have a right to life. But we are rewriting that text. Is it progressive or is it allowing the forbidden? Is it written anywhere in the Constitution that we "shall not kill?" Why isn't it? The answer is simple enough, the government shouldn't kill its' citizens, and the constitution limits the power of government. Not killing other people is self-evident! Yes, those rights didn't need to be written in the constitution. 

  Ultimately we are all subject to the law. Whether that law is government or natural, we will be held to account. The concern is for what lies beyond man's law. That is what the founders realized when writing the constitution. We will all come and go, nothing lasts forever. Eternity does, at least that is the concept, the theory we live our lives by, those of us that hold religious belief. For those of us believing in such, what we allow today determines what the reward will be in eternity. Really it is the same as that old commercial, pay me now or pay me later, but later is far more expensive. Our constitution was written only for a moral and religious people. The question is now, has that Constitution become inadequate? It has if we allow it! Progress? Inclusiveness? Or is it simply allowing the forbidden? When it comes to all of that we are the ones that grant permission, to ourselves and our posterity. If you really think about it, it is your posterity that will pay in the end, the debt satisfied. Whether it is a rise or fall depends upon the choices made.     

Shhh

  Things have grown a bit quiet lately, since the withdrawal from Afghanistan that is. Amazing isn't it? I have heard murmurs about the drone strike by the current administration, just how that drone managed to blow up someone delivering water and supplies. Sounds like a friendly fire situation, but like I said, haven't heard much chatter about that. Haven't heard much about additional Americans or allies getting out of Afghanistan either. Oh, I've heard of a few but things are pretty quiet on that front as well. And this morning I hear about concern for the J-6 rally. The capital has erected more fencing, and installed additional cameras borrowed from the military. Strange how they secure the border of the capital so quickly when they feel threatened. They say they don't know how many to expect but that they are expecting extremists! Well, extremists in this case meaning Republicans. I admit I am not paying close attention to any of that. There is a weekend rally scheduled for 18 September in support of those involved with the events of January 6. Of course those folks are being referred to as "insurrectionists." Funny how those that took control of entire city blocks, burned police buildings, and all of that were just peaceful protestors. Well, it's all in the name isn't it?

  The push for vaccination continues strong. Another variant has been loosed beside Delta, although I haven't heard a lot about that. But in other news the Pfizer vaccine may be approved for use in children soon, in a couple weeks maybe. J&J and Moderna have yet to be approved at all but remain choices. My Doctor counseled me on those vaccines. He agreed that the Pfizer vaccine had never been tried on humans before and explained about "platforms" in medical terms. He told me the J&J vaccine was the closest thing to a real vaccine in the platform. As I understood that it uses some actual spike proteins to initiate a response in the immune system, much the way the seasonal flu shot works. He also explained that the J&J had caused fatal blood clots to form. For that reason he didn't recommend that one but did urge me to get the Pfizer one. I like him, trust him, and feel like he was just doing his due diligence. I'm still on the fence about this vaccine having reservations about it. 

  I did read where China has now offered support to the Taliban. What a surprise. I guess no one saw that coming. Now I know this all sounds like a conspiracy but the facts are interesting. Turns out Afghanistan's biggest resource is lithium, yes lithium, that stuff needed to make lithium-ion batteries. Those are the type being used in the majority of electric vehicles. Guess who produces the batteries? C'mon I know you can get it. It's China. Do you know why China is the leading producer of lithium-ion batteries? The reason is a basic one, their industry is not throttled by regulations that inhibit that production. In short, they aren't concerned about safety or the environment, they are concerned with making batteries. I'm sure it is only coincidence that Hunter Bidens' investments groups have already profited millions of dollars by their investment in lithium. Yeah, just a lucky coincidence.  Makes me wonder what was on that laptop? Was it just forbidden fruit or was their evidence of something else? Well, it's all just a theory. Meanwhile China is producing batteries in fossil fuel fired manufacturing facilities and supplying them to the "clean" energy folks. 

  But that is why it has grown rather quiet I suppose. Nothing to see here folks. Get your shot, mask up and keep your mouth shut. That's the new plan. Variants and vaccines will be released as the need arises, when control begins to weaken. There is some concern for the recall election in California, that being orchestrated by Republicans. Many high powered Democrats rushing in, saying it is all a Republican plot to gain control. Funny thing is, I haven't one of those people say that Newsome has done a great job, just that he is a Democrat. The Texas abortion law will be challenged because federal law takes precedence. Roe V Wade must stand! But Federal law doesn't apply with pot, many states legalizing that, no challenges coming from the Democrats about that. There is a push for vaccination cards, proof of compliance, or producing a test every week, because we need to be certain. Requiring an ID to vote however is just discriminatory. No need to prove anything there! Yeah, nothing to see here folks, just move on. 

are you sure

 Technology. We hear about that all the time these days. The challenge being how to use that technology. I mean that in a literal sense, how to use it. Yesterday I found that I had purchased a Google Chromecast device. I must have forgotten about that as it was a bit of a surprise. Well, the truth of the matter is I had to take serial numbers off that device and ask the computer what it was. Then having discovered what that piece of technology was I also went online to obtain a users guide. I determined to hook that thing up. That's what I mean about using technology. The first step in using that is understanding the terminology. And that is the biggest obstacle for us "senior" people that didn't grow up with those terms. To me, a text is still a book. Being online probably meant the wash had already been hung out. Mom, were is my red shirt, it's on the line! But, I look up the terms and manage to grasp a bit of understanding. Still, it can be a real challenge to identify components. According to the instructions I read online I should have that thing up and running in just a few minutes. Suffice to say that didn't happen. Well, after several attempts and several hours I did manage to get it to work, I was now using that technology. A sense of accomplishment washed over me. I did it! LOl, I was using technology.

 Now what is different about using technology today, and using technology when I was a kid, is when I was young you just turned it on. In order to use it you didn't need to go through a complex series of steps to "set it up." Another thing was, with the exception of electronics, you could see the technology being employed such as chains, gears, or whatever. If it wasn't working you could figure it out. Todays' technology isn't like that, if it doesn't work there is no determining the cause for the average user. You are left with, wth? Go to the manual and you are faced with a stream of terms that does nothing but confuse you. Make sure this device is on the same wi-fi as the device you are attempting to set. I only have one router so don't I just have one wi-fi? Not necessarily as it turns out. Turns out I have dual band broadband secured and unsecured networks. Okay, what does all that mean? That is the technology I'm, talking about. Then you are met with the answer, just go to settings. And that is like being told, by your Mother, to explain why you did what you did. You know what I mean? You click on a setting and you will be asked, are you sure? I hate that. No, I'm not sure but what are the other choices? 

 Later in the day I had an issue with my satellite television. Yes, I get tv by using a satellite dish, isn't that amazing? Well, it is until something goes wrong. Then that technology kicks in. I do get a bit insulted when the first question is, are all the wires connected? Yes I know the wires have to be connected. But soon enough I am asked what type of coaxial cable am I using? Uh, the kind you buy at Walmart with the ends already on it. It is then I am informed the cable should be RG-56 or some such thing. Ok, I'll go check, it should be printed right on the cable. Anyway I wind up calling the service representative. Ha, I luck out this time and the person is speaking English. Well, it is English but their is an issue with, you guessed it, terminology. I have Dish. I also have two televisions which requires the use of the Joey. That means I also have the Hopper. And that is where the terminology was getting confusing. You see trying not to sound like an idiot I referred to the Hopper as the receiver. Problem was the technician didn't understand that and thought I was talking about the satellite dish itself. Then I was asked if I had a Joey. I replied I didn't think so but had another receiver in the kitchen. That confused the technician once again. But, we eventually got that figured out. The technician then asks for permission to control the Hopper remotely. Sure, go for it. After twenty minutes during which I watched as many different screens appear and disappear the technician asks, do you mind finishing the last steps yourself. I'm agreeable and give it a shot. It still doesn't work. The next thing the technician says is we have to send a technician out to repair the issue. Oh, okay whatever. Then I'm told do not turn anything off or touch anything for at least four hours! The technician will be there in two days! Ok, thanks and good night.

 But no problem I still have other technology available to me. I simply go on the computer and watch You Tube videos, browse Facebook, and do some shopping. This technology is working, for now anyway. After all of that I think I am beginning to understand. I really haven't much of a clue how all of that works. Now I know why people call for plumbers, mechanics, carpenters and such, they have little to no clue how that stuff works. That is technology that I understand. You see it is a matter of understanding the terms of usage. I never thought of those skills as technology, that was knowing how to do stuff, how to fix stuff or build it yourself. Technology wasn't in knowing how to use it but knowing how to do it. A change in the terms of usage. You know as it turns out you need a lot of wires to use wireless technology, isn't that something? Just go to settings, or advanced settings if you are an adventurer. Then answer that question, are you sure?  

the passage of time

 Almost mid September. The summer is winding down, I'm seeing school buses once again. The mums and pumpkins have appeared at the farm stands. Soon, that is all that will be available at those stands, although a few will spring up with Christmas trees. The way things have been going I expect to see them in October. This is the first year for all of my grandchildren to be in college. Mark, the oldest is scheduled to graduate this year! He will have completed the course of instruction in three years. That is due to having taken College level courses while in high school. The girls, Shyann and Morgan are just beginning their academic journey. Now I don't just notice the passing of the seasons, I notice the passage of time. I believe you have to reach a certain point in your life before you begin to understand that, and to appreciate it. Time is far more than minutes, hours, days, months or even years. Time is a passage in itself. A progression toward the unknown, best met with resolve. It is only in the method of resolve that we differ. 

 We have to get comfortable with time. That is accomplished in many ways, different ways, and is a bit different for everyone. I do think most of us concern ourselves with what we leave behind; to a degree. Some use their accomplishments as a vehicle to achieving peace with time. I find myself a bit uncomfortable with that. Perhaps that stems from not having a feeling of any great accomplishment, I feel like I have done what was necessary, perhaps a bit more, but certainly nothing to be remembered for, no heroic deeds, no accumulation of fame or wealth. Noteworthy is what I'm thinking about. I do believe all of us want to be remembered. Certainly our immediate family will remember us, for a generation or perhaps two. but I have no expectation beyond that. The anonymity of time will engulf us all sooner or later. I find myself writing down thoughts more than memories. I'm thinking more may be interested or entertained by that rather than memories. Memories unless shared in the first person are just stories. That is something I am keenly aware of. Some of my memories have already been lost to time and all I can share is the story. That happens with the passing of our friends and family, when we are left behind. 

 I guess I'm thinking that I have reached the mums and pumpkins stage of time. It presents as a marker. There is still plenty to come, Thanksgiving looms large on the horizon. How fitting that is when taken in a larger context. I have a lot to be thankful for over the passage of time. Time has treated me well. Still I feel like I have to pack some of that time away, relegate it to history, it is what was, not what is. That is the hardest lesson of time for us to grasp. Just my thought. The older we become the more we wish to embrace the past, the familiar, a place where we know the outcome. And in our thoughts and dreams the outcome is often different. That is the understanding of time. Time isn't the constant that we believe it to be when we are young. It isn't linear at all. The timeline of our lives is measured in memory, our memory and the memory of others. The prayer being one day our story will be told. 

I'll always remember

 This being 9/11 I woke up with that memory. Twenty years having passed and it is spoken of with sentiment. When I think of that anger comes to the surface. That is what I remember the most, the anger I felt, the hurt, the injustice of it all. I believe it is the same emotion my parents felt whenever Pearl Harbor was mentioned. At least I know that is how my Father felt. It was anger directed at a nation, not necessarily an ethic group. Often it is hard to separate the two, a trust having been broken, but with effort it is possible. I listen to the tributes, the memorials and the lamentations. I can not help but place blame, it is the natural and normal human reaction. Setting aside any philosophical sentiments, that is the reality of it. That being said it doesn't mean one should or will act upon that. I just don't believe one can remember without exploring and knowing the cause. Can there be justice for such a grave injustice? No I don't believe that is possible. Just as imposing the death sentence will not restore what was lost, but retribution is sought, an accounting taken. With those acts committed twenty years ago there is no retribution, no accounting sufficient, all that remains is grief. After Pearl harbor a war was waged and we emerged victorious. The enemy was defeated. Yes, certainly anger remained, but that anger was for the necessity of waging war more so than the event that precipitated that necessity. It was rather a transference of anger. No such transference has occurred in my feeling for 9/11. I further expect it never will. 

  There are those that say the guilty parties have been eliminated. Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts are all dead. Yes, that's true but terror lives on and you can not defeat terror. Those people talk of the war on terrorism and the words are hollow to me. You can not wage war on an ideology, on thoughts, emotions and beliefs. It was terror that attacked on 9/11 and that terror exists today and will exist tomorrow. That  heightened sense and awareness they are calling vigilance in one sentence, being taught as bigotry, discrimination and hate in the next. That is the war on terror. It is the identifying of the enemy that is the issue at hand. These enemies are only enemies when they openly declare themselves to be so. It is like being on the battlefield and everyone wearing the same uniform. Unless the enemy identifies themselves as such, how can you know? We can not just make assumptions can we? That is what we are being told. Today I watch the news, especially our withdrawal from Afghanistan that has certainly emboldened the Taliban, and we are told to not judge the Taliban as terrorists. That must be the official stance of the current administration as they admit to negotiating with that group, another official policy being, the United States doesn't negotiate with terrorists. What other conclusion can I draw from that? 

  Never forget. That phrase is being repeated over and over again. But what is it that we want to remember? Certainly we want to remember all those that lost their lives. But why did they lose their lives? That portion is becoming glossed over, almost as a footnote to the story. I suppose that is the transference I speak about. We remember and honor our veterans, those that served in service to the nation. When I was young I walked among many veterans of WW2 and the Korean conflict. They seldom spoke of those wars or their experiences. When they did, in my experience they spoke of lost comrades. They also spoke of victory! They spoke not with pride so much as righteousness. They had prevailed against evil. Can anyone today speak of victory against terror? No, I don't believe you can. I was there for Desert Shield/Desert Storm when we drove the forces out of Kuwait. But that job was left incomplete. When I returned home the yellow ribbons were there and flags were waving but there was no victory celebration. On September the twelfth American Flags were flying everywhere, not as a sign of Victory but as a sign of defiance! We had been attacked, we raised our colors and prepared to march upon the battlefield! Where is the enemy? Twenty years on and I'm still looking, I'm still watching, and I will not forget! As I remember the lives taken that day I will remember why and who. That's what I'll remember. I'll remember always  

Moral Agency

  What is moral agency? It is defined as the ability to make moral judgements on right and wrong. Each of us are moral agents. The question to be answered is, should government act as moral agents? Well, that's what a Republic is all about, a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It's what those founding fathers were concerned about when establishing our government. The government is the moral agent for the nation. One nation. Therein lies the issue doesn't it, unity? Are we united as one? It would certainly appear that we are not. Oh we have had our moments, this nation of ours. Pearl harbor and the attack's on 9/11are prime examples of that. All Americans were united in their moral judgement that those actions were wrong. The official government response and the individual response being the same. United in agreement, if not in how to react to that judgment. The important thing was we all agreed. 

  There is another train of thought called ethical egotism. Ethical egotism believes the only way to achieve the common good is through pursuing your own self interests. Not a very popular thing to claim as it appears self centered. Ayn Rand is probably the best known advocate for that way of thinking. Now I'm no philosopher, at least not a trained philosopher that conforms to the educational model one is expected to have. The issue there being all of us having to be like minded, having a common self interest. That is where the real thinking/understanding process has to take place. Can a nation be like minded? There is much discussion about that being Nationalism, and we are being taught that to be nationalist is wrong. By extension then, ethical egotism has to be wrong as well. What is being advocated then is statism. In statism the state (government) has centralized control over social affairs as well as economic affairs. And statism is what liberals are really advocating for without admitting to that out loud. Ethical egotism is what the founding fathers advocated for, before that term was invented. The individual being the government! It's a difficult concept for most to comprehend. No, I shouldn't say that, it isn't that difficult to understand, it is difficult to live your life in that manner because it requires self accountability. You can't blame anyone else for your failures! You also can not be dependent upon others, ie: you act independently. 

  And that brings me to this mornings' thought. The politicians, those we elected to be our moral agents are acting independently, not as ethical egotists. If they acted as ethical egotists they would arrive at the same conclusions instead of being in constant conflict. Make no mistake about it, we the people have become the pawns in government, when we are supposed to be the Kings! How has that happened? Too many politicians not acting as moral agents, is the answer. They are the ones giving politicians a bad name. Abandoning their morality for self interests. What is that morality? Moral agency, the ability to determine right from wrong. In its' most basic form it is the golden rule. That is why ethical egotism applies as a ruling factor. "The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see." ~ Ayn Rand 

  Here is another quote" There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for me to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt." ~ Ayn Rand  

  An example, get vaccinated or you will be treated as a law breaker! Government will decide what is right and wrong, not you. Is that a moral judgement? It is when you are saying that same government can decide that abortion, as a moral choice, must be allowed. You can not on the one hand say I can choose to terminate a life, but I can not choose to not protect my own. I'm already empowered to kill another, under certain conditions, a conditional moral judgement, but the government shall be the moral agent? Just a bit ambiguous wouldn't you say?    

it all depends

  I've heard those supporting the current administration attempting to justify leaving all those weapons and materials behind. The administration itself declared that they demilitarized all that stuff, or as much as they could. The common sentiment/explanation being that it was left to the Afghan army. It was the fault of the Afghan army that it is now in the hands of the Taliban. So, you see, it isn't Bidens' fault at all. Just because the Taliban has controlled about 75% of Afghanistan for the last few years there was no reason to believe the Afghan army would surrender. Just because the United States had withdrawn all air support, the only thing really that stemmed the Taliban advancements in any measurable way, was no reason to think that. And then having made an "arrangement" with the Taliban to allow flights to leave Kabul one couldn't expect they would take the United States storehouses full of equipment, along with vehicles, once the United States had left. No, that is the fault of the Afghan army which should have defended that stuff to the last man!

  Listen I'm no foreign policy man. no expert on global politics and all that but ask yourself a question, just who is in charge of Afghanistan? How much have you heard about the Afghan army? Who is the president of Afghanistan? Just who were we training? For the past twenty years we have supposedly been training the Afghans to defend themselves, to fight. I hear they are doing that, just a bit, here and there. I'm also hearing that there is civil unrest throughout the land. Gee, what a surprise as that is the way it has been for at least twenty years! As I said I'm no expert in any of that but it sure looks like we picked sides in a civil war. Just as it was during our own civil war each faction was looking for foreign support in their cause. Britain and France both recognized the Confederacy as "belligerents" The United States, lead by Abraham Lincoln made it clear, if you supported the confederacy that is the same as declaring war on America! Still, aid was given from foreign nations to the North and the South. It was the industrial might, and the fact that the north had more manpower, that resulted in the victory. 

  Now we have decided to quit, leave the civil war to the residents. We left a great deal of equipment and supplies. Was there a reasonable expectation that this would only be utilized by the Afghan army? If that were the case why did we disable it? Don't have to be tactical genius to understand why we disabled it. Was it because we were leaving it for the Afghan army? I don't think so. That begs the question then, why did we leave it? Was it because we couldn't transport it out of there? Or was a deal made? The official line is we have withdrawn all our troops. Have we also withdrawn all support? Have we really just thrown down our arms and walked away? I don't believe that, not for a second. There is too much money involved for that to happen. The only thing changing is the way that income is produced. The Taliban will soon exercise complete control over Afghanistan. that is a forgone conclusion. Thing is, the Taliban will have to receive international recognition in order to be successful in a global market. Can they secure that? Well, they recently received a vast storehouse of bargaining chips, that much is certain. Disabled technology can be reversed engineered easily enough. Listen, if investigators can determine the cause of an explosion that levels an entire building they can figure out how to activate that technology once again. The only issue being those nations that would be interested in securing that technology or equipment from them aren't meaningful enough to make a difference as far as world politics go. Still, it can be sold and help fill the coffers of the Taliban. And make no mistake, money is power. 

  The bottom line is for whatever reason we have decided to abandon Afghanistan, at least officially. I won't pretend to understand the reasoning behind that decision. It does appeal to our base instincts though, our people aren't getting shot anymore. We shouldn't be fighting some one else's civil war. I agree, makes sense to me. However if that is said out loud, verbalized, you do stand the risk of being called, gasp, a nationalist! Yes, that's wrong, you are not supposed to think about your own self interests, you should be empathetic to the plight of all peoples! But, not too empathetic. Not to the point that you get hurt! I don't know, just seems like a contradiction to me. But I suppose it aligns with this leftist thinking of Conditional Morality. Yeah, it all depends doesn't it?