Celebrate or not

 I do not celebrate on New Year's Eve. I honestly don't remember the last time I did. I just don't have the desire to do so. Seems like when Guy Lombardo left us the fun went out of the party. Either that or it was when alcohol left the party. I'm thinking the latter is closest to the truth. Anyone that tells me they drink alcohol for the taste alone is lying. Okay maybe that is too harsh but practicing self-deception is certainly involved with that statement. Everyone drinks for the effect. The only difference being an awareness of that effect. With me, I was all-in as the saying goes today. I always wanted to enjoy the full experience. There was no swirling, sniffing, or tasting going on. Nope, the point was to feel the effect.

 Now I don't mind people that want to celebrate the occasion, to mark the date and join in the revelry. I realize that not everyone doing so is drinking alcohol or perhaps using another stimulant/depressant. They are the people that enjoy crowds. I don't like crowds. I can't give my attention to more than a few individuals at a time. I do prefer that controlled environment. Crowds can lead to problems. And if you are in that crowd, you are guilty by association. How many were investigated recently for being in a crowd? Was everyone one of those individuals guilty? Yes, they were guilty of being in that place. I avoid crowds as much as possible. 

 In my experience crowds will always find something to justify their actions. Seldom does that action conform with my own thoughts or ideas. In years past alcohol was a common excuse. It was also an acceptable excuse, a reasonable explanation. In today's world that will not suffice as an excuse or explanation unless accompanied by an admission. You have to confess to having a disease beyond your control. In that way, it's not your fault. The only accountability required on your part is agreeing to that precept. As a child we used a more direct approach, everyone was doing it! The crowd justified the action. When asked if everyone jumped off the bridge would you do that too? You knew the answer was no but a part of you still justified that action. Perhaps there was a reason for jumping off the bridge. How could you know without trying it? 

 Well, I certainly wish everyone a Happy New Year whether you celebrate it or not. Back in the past when I could use alcohol as an escape, I could tolerate the crowd. I understand that completely. When drinking I could get lost in the world of my friends, or anyone else close by. Every crowd I have been in has been divided and sub-divided in that fashion. Never have I been a part of a crowd that was destructive, angry or causing any real damage. Even when I was in the crowd, I was never a part of it. I tried to be. I quit trying a long time ago. 

“A group experience takes place on a lower level of consciousness than the experience of an individual. This is due to the fact that, when many people gather together to share one common emotion, the total psyche emerging from the group is below the level of the individual psyche. If it is a very large group, the collective psyche will be more like the psyche of an animal, which is the reason why the ethical attitude of large organizations is always doubtful. The psychology of a large crowd inevitably sinks to the level of mob psychology. If, therefore, I have a so-called collective experience as a member of a group, it takes place on a lower level of consciousness than if I had the experience by myself alone.”

― C.G. Jung, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious      

there to help

 I decided to purchase a lottery ticket. Oh, I've bought them before, scratch offs and the mega-millions for a dollar or two. It's always been an impulse buy. A lot of that stuff is designed in that way, especially the scratch off games. A varied price range with an ever-increasing jackpot. Each game is designed a bit different with bright colors and many "chances" to win. It's an amusement I suppose. It is certainly advertised enough along with the warning to gamble responsibly. Don't worry though should your gambling get out of control there is a hotline you can call. It's toll free too, well because, you're broke. It's an investment on the part of the state, sort of an insurance policy. It's not the state's fault! They are here to help. Yes, when the government says they are there to help, be very careful. Ask questions.

 In the past I have always purchased my tickets from a cashier. Now I have discovered they have vending machines for that. I realize they have been around for a while now and that I'm behind the curve on that. I just didn't pay any attention to them. I thought they only dispensed scratch offs. That's not the case however, as a full array of lottery tickets are available. That vending machine will generate numbers for you or allow you to simply select your own. It's all at your fingertips! You are free to purchase whatever you like, as often as you like. I've seen these vending machines everywhere now that I've been looking. It reminds me of when another vice was being vended. 

 Cigarettes! Yes, I remember when a cigarette machine could be found just about anywhere you went. Brightly colored and lighted they were an attraction, emblazoned with catchy phrases and pictures of the "cool" people that smoked them. But then the government stepped in. While they didn't outlaw cigarette vending machines they did severely limit where they could be. They could not be where anyone under the age of 21 would have access to them. Those machines had to be under constant surveillance. No one under the age of 21 could operate them! Special permits are required to install one of them in any business establishment. The reason was simple enough. The government was here to help, to protect our children from the harmful effects of smoking. Limiting access would surely curb that vice! The warning labels weren't working. In 1966 congress mandated a warning from the surgeon general be on those foul things but people kept on buying them. It became obvious we needed to limit access. 

 Now I haven't seen any warning signs on those lottery machines. Yes, there are plenty of warnings about gambling, how to only do that responsibly, but no warning to not to do that at all. In fact, it would appear that free, unlimited access is being provided. Those vending machines aren't being closely monitored at all. You do have to be 18 to purchase those tickets, it even says so on the machine, but my feeling is that is not an effective deterrent. Yes, I think underage people may just go right ahead and buy them anyway! Why should that vice be allowed to proliferate, even tacitly encouraged, when cigarettes are vilified? No one ever said smoke responsibly. So, the message is now, some vices are acceptable if done in a responsible fashion. Addiction is only bad if it will kill you? Is that the message? It's not responsible to go broke, but it won't kill you, cigarettes will. Well unless going broke causes mental issues, anguish and suicidal thoughts. Then the responsible thing to do is call the gambling hotline. There they will tell you how stupid you are for thinking you can win the lottery and get rich. You don't get your money back just an explanation as to why you shouldn't have purchased those tickets in the first place. But they will also reassure you it wasn't your fault; you have a disease. That's a real comfort. And that's what the government does, they are there to help.         

Moral agency

 The ability to understand and share the feelings of others. That's what the dictionary says empathy is. I understand that completely. It can be quite difficult at times to understand the feelings of others. When you don't understand them, you certainly can't share them. But the thing is this; is understanding something the same as accepting something? I say no. Just because I understand your feelings about whatever does not mean I have to approve of those feelings. I certainly don't have to share those feelings! That is where the train seems to be going off the track today. Those two actions are being confused. I can empathize without encouraging, endorsing, engaging in or empowering you in those feelings. 

 "Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph."  (Haile Selassie) "No person is your friend who demands your silence, or denies your right to grow. " (Alice Walker) These quotes express well my thoughts on the matter. I had written some time back that I feel there is little that can be said that hasn't been said before. That doesn't mean we should stop writing or talking, however. 

 I am struck today by the apparent need to signal your virtues to the world today. Isn't that what receiving those "free gifts" for your charitable donations are really all about? You can wear this "exclusive" tee shirt as a symbol of your love and caring for animals, or disabled children, or those that are hungry, suffer from medical conditions, live in war-torn areas or any number of causes. Tote bags/blankets and throws are also popular, to show your support. Isn't that what wearing various ribbons is all about? Ribbons and flags! Look at me, look at me I am a virtuous person and I have the stuff to prove it! My virtue is so strong that I will support anything! I will also say those that voice any opposition lack empathy! They just don't understand the feelings of others. “We value virtue but do not discuss it. The honest bookkeeper, the faithful wife, the earnest scholar get little of our attention compared to the embezzler, the tramp, the cheat.” (John Steinbeck) "When we decide that virtue is the same as desire, we must allow that in others." (A.B. Reichart) That is what I see going on anyway. 

 Virtue is high moral standards. That's what the dictionary says. Moral standards are the rules we hold ourselves to. Morals are the "normal" standards applied to a society. That is the reason that morality is subjective to a society. The United States of America in its' founding concepts was based on the Judeo-Christian ideas of what is moral behavior. It is also the reason the Muslim world is in constant conflict with the Christian world. The concepts of what are moral behaviors are quite different. Of course, over the century's concessions have been made, by both groups. It is what we call politics. Politics is nothing more than the art of getting your way. It is getting what you want despite the objections of others. Sometimes accomplished by force, sometimes by agreement. This may also involve the rewriting of religious texts! Yes, that has taken place many times as well. Often it is just called a new "translation" to bring it up to modern times. Now the Torah is the first five books of the Bible, that's what the Jewish people use. Torah is also used for giving certain laws to Israel. I'm no scholar on any of that but I'm betting it has been rewritten/modified and reinterpreted over the years. The Bible has as many "translations." The King James version is probably the best known but has fallen somewhat out of favor. And today many say if the Bible doesn't specifically prohibit an action that means it is acceptable. It's moral as long as the Bible doesn't specifically say it is not! And then you have the Koran. That book has also surely been reinterpreted. This is what it says, but that isn't what it means.

 Okay, so setting aside all religious texts as a moral conscience what is left? The laws that men make is the only answer. Government as a moral entity? That surely can't be a good thing. Government is run by politicians. And as I mentioned earlier politics is the art of getting what you want, that is to say, to satisfy your desires. It really has little to do with the "welfare" of the people. Their welfare is only a concern when it is an impediment to obtaining what the politician wants. For that reason, government is an ever-changing set of "standards." We call that changing the law. Look at the laws being changed in a society, and you can see the direction that society is headed. What is now allowed, taken as normal and supported by legislation? That is the moral course of a nation. It is accomplished through empathy. That's the mantra today but it is a false testament. I understand you want the candy; I know exactly how you feel about the candy. I too have wanted the candy, but you can't have the candy! I can empathize and still say no. That is called; moral agency.       

Listen

 Explaining the answers. That is what I feel like I'm doing at times. You can't change the past or your reaction to that past. All you can is offer an explanation. I'm reminded of my short stay in Algebra one class. The teacher had posted a problem on the blackboard, yes, we were still using chalk and a blackboard, and I provided the answer to that problem. I was asked how I arrived at the solution. I offered my explanation which didn't seem to satisfy her. She told me I had to prove it. I asked if the answer was correct. She responded that yes it was the right answer. I responded with, there's your proof. The proof is in the pudding, right. Still not satisfied she pushed the issue, and which eventually led to my dismissal from that class. I had to go down the hall and take business math. All that was required there was the correct answer. I passed the class.

 All of that involved substitution. That is to say letters were being substituted for numbers. I failed to see the significance in that process. I did have an attitude about the whole thing. A+B=AB? This means this or that. Well let's just say I never did take algebra or any other advanced math courses. I have to say I have never encountered a time in my life that I wish I had either. Never have I needed that particular skill. To be honest I'm still not sure about compounding interest either, although I can balance a checkbook. Yes, I still have a checkbook. No, I don't use it. 

 So, what does all of that have to do with anything? Well life is all about substitution if you think about it. The thing is though, the answer will always be the same after the fact. You can't go back in time and substitute one choice for another. So that was your answer. Hard to explain sometimes. Just why did I choose this or that? There are right answers and wrong answers. The right answers achieve the results you want, and the wrong ones impede your progress. So, what is right and wrong? Is there an answer to that? There is when the answer only applies to yourself. When the answer, the solution affects others, not so much, too many variables. That's what all the letters, x's and y's are all about. X, Y, and Z are the axis in a three-dimensional plane. Handy to understand that if you are a machinist. It's also the basis for 3D chess. We live in a three-dimensional world, we think. At least that is our experience. Where does your answer fall? 

 Can the right answer for me be the wrong answer for you? Of course, it can. Does that then make my answer wrong for me? Or can there be two right answers? If there are two or more correct answers wouldn't that require a few more axis points? Surely, we can't be on the same plane. Can both answers be wrong? Is there only one wrong answer? Well, two wrongs don't make a right nor does two rights make it wrong. Can you prove that? No, I don't think you can. The best you can do is give the answer. Is it right or wrong? That will rest upon the judgement of another regardless of your feeling. Unless you can prove it. When it comes to life there is only one way to prove it. That way is by a review of history. History will provide the proof I seek. It will be expressed with a simple statement. I told you so! Yeah, it's that simple really. Listen, I'll explain it to you.  

sufficient for the day

 I was remembering the days when I went to work. Yes, that time in my life before I retired from all of that. It has been said do what you love, and you will never work a day in your life. Well, no one ever hired me to give my opinion on anything so I retired as soon as I could. Now I get to do what I love, give my opinion. I do that nearly every day. But I do remember having to go to work and the time between Christmas and New Year's Day. It wasn't exactly a vacation period, but everyone was lacking in motivation so little got done. I'd call it a "no"tivation. We'll start on that next year was the prevalent attitude. 

 I'm not one to make plans more than a day in advance. I do like to have a plan for the day, as I've mentioned before, but next week just seems too far away to think about right now. One day at a time. I was doing that long before I heard anyone giving that advice. All that talk about a journey always begins with the first step and that sort of thing. Yeah, real wisdom there. I suppose if you sit still long enough and meditate that is what you will come up with. A rolling stone gathers no moss is an interesting observation. But even a rolling stone will stop one day, even Mick Jagger! And my dad explained to me what being a big wheel was. It carried the heaviest loads, rolled through everything, dogs like to pee on it, and it was usually in a rut. I have never wanted to be a big wheel. 

 So, with the new year just around the corner I'm not making any plans. I was also told, expect nothing and you won't be disappointed. That has proven to be the absolute truth. I've also found that surprises are fun. Yes, I like a surprise. It's like getting a gift. Gifts aren't as much fun when you know you are going to get one and especially so if you already know what it is. That has been known to be disappointing to some. Sounds childish but even adults get disappointed when they are not "remembered." And isn't that the point of the gift? So, for me the new year is just a date on the calendar. 

 What is amazing to me is looking back at history. Now I was born in 1953. I know, the last century. It's amazing if I look at what happened less than 100 years before I was born. In 1856, just 97 years before I was born, Franklin Pierce was the President! Who the heck is Franklin Pierce? Marines from the USS Decatur were fighting off an Indian attack, Dallas Texas became an incorporated city, 2 clipper ships, yes, the big ships with sails, were lost at sea and Congressman Preston Brooks (Dem) beat Charles Sumner (Rep) with a cane so severely on the Senate floor that it took three years for him to recover. HIs offense was supporting the abolishment of slavery. The Civil war began 95 years before my birth. That was followed by WW1, WW2, and the Korean war which ended seven days after I was born. All of those items were in my history books in grade school. Was any of that planned or expected? Not so much planned, as it happened. I'm certain there were people forecasting each event just like today. 

 I'm not certain I know what all this means. I'm not certain there is a thing I can do about any of that. I do know I can't change the past. The best we can do is learn from the past. That should be the only profit gained. You can't compensate people today for yesterday's injustices. But I'll think about some more tomorrow. Heck next year is soon enough if you think about it. Enjoy the minute. Waste not, want not I always say. 

 "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." 

I like it

 To be resolute is to be determined. If you are determined, you are often described as stubborn. I certainly don't want to be called stubborn so therefore I make no resolutions. Many will however, and then fail to keep that resolution. That can lead to depression, another reason not to make a resolution in the first place. It's self-care. We don't know what the new year will bring. It's best to tackle that one day at a time. That doesn't begin with a resolution, that begins with a habit. Many people feel like they are going to kick a habit, like it is always a bad thing, that's the connotation, but habits are the building block for success. For that reason, I continue in my habits. If I enjoy doing something, enough for it to become a habit, it must be a good thing right? I wouldn't intentionally form bad habits. That is to say, continually do something that I don't enjoy doing. I'm in control of me. Isn't that what choice is all about? My choice right, regardless of what you or anyone else tells me. 

 I was thinking about that with the new year approaching. It's what we do every year, make resolutions. I often wonder why we focus on that in the new year. Change should be an everyday thing. That's what I keep hearing. Out with the old and in with the new. Old fashioned ideas need to go. Oh, it's fun to reminisce, to be amused by those old things but not to repeat them. Things that happened in the past can trigger you today, so you have to be careful about that stuff. Just because those old things got you this far is no reason to believe they could take you further. No, that old stuff has to go. So, we make a resolution to change. But we don't. Well at least that doesn't change does it.

 The reason I believe we do this is for a basic reason. It's difficult to keep doing the right thing. That's why we want to make what is wrong, right. It starts when we are small children. Pick up your toys, wash your hands and face, brush your teeth, use the potty is only the beginning. There is sharing your toys, going to school, and all that other stuff you have to do! All that don't do this, don't do that. Well, I'm older now and I can do whatever I want! They're such an old-fashioned notions, responsibility and accountability. It's my choice that matters most. For that reason, no one is going to tell me to make a resolution, no sir. And that isn't a resolution, that's a choice too. I might change my mind. I'll just wait until the new year gets here to decide that one day at a time. In fact, I think it will become my habit. I like it.  

Merry Christmas

  Merry Christmas to all. Old friends and old memories are the greatest gifts of all. May the New Year bring you all happiness, prosperity, and good health. Each passing Christmas makes the next one that much more special. Create memories today they are truly the gifts of tomorrow. 

for sale

  I made a post on Facebook about this, and it is still on my mind. I keep seeing an advertisement begging for money. Just 19 dollars a month will show our veterans how much you care. The commercial contains so many scenes of sorrow, disabled vets struggling with various handicaps caused by battle. I think it is Trace Adkins that is the celebrity endorser for this organization. I can't tell you the name of the organization though, DAV is prominently displayed. A bit misleading as it implies the Department of Veterans Affairs. It isn't the Wounded Warrior Project, as I said, I can't say for sure. Seems to me that the Wounded Warrior Project had been marred by fraud and deceit as some point, hopefully that has been resolved. But what's on my mind is the need for any other program besides the Department of Veterans Affairs to take care of those veterans. It seems to me the government should have enough funds to provide all the necessary help. Why am I being asked to donate 19 dollars a month? I pay my taxes. Our government gave nearly 300 billion dollars in foreign aid last year alone! Yet, the government doesn't have enough money to care for our veterans. I need to donate 19 a month. I can use a credit card or debit card; I can charge that if I want.

 I'm not trying to discredit the DVA or wounded warrior project or any other group that wants to help our veterans. That isn't what bothers me. Yes, the CEO of Wounded Warrior earns a salary of 325,000 a year, a bit much in my opinion. That's about 100,000 more than the vice-president! But I don't understand why it is even necessary. Any veteran that has a legitimate need should have that need addressed by the DVA. Billions are given away in "aid" to others while our veterans are denied? That certainly can't be right. 

 Of course, I realize it really isn't all that simple. Determination of eligibility isn't the problem, determining what is legitimate can be. It is unfortunate but there are those that will use the system to their advantage. There is always that problem. Never before has that issue been more prevalent than today. The attitude has certainly changed. Does serving 90 days in the National Guard, never leaving the armory, count the same as serving in the jungle of Vietnam? Yeah, that's a problem isn't it. Today many feel they deserve hero status. I hear it all the time. Then I hear those that have never served piling on the platitudes to justify their lack of service. They would have joined but: and it is always some reason other than they didn't want to. They always wanted to. 

 It is the extension of that entitlement attitude that I'm thinking about. I was told I could get a 10% veterans disability payment every month if I applied. What disability do I have? I have a scar. It was caused by a surgical procedure performed by a Navy doctor. Ruined my whole career of being a male swimsuit model! Yeah, I could take the taxpayers dime for that. I simply looked at that "advisor" and told him, save that for some one that really needs something. That's the type of thing that I'm talking about. Getting something for nothing and lacking a conscience in doing so. I should get whatever I want because I want it, right now, without question or qualification. 

 It just bothers me when I watch that ad asking for money. The veterans portrayed have all lost arms, legs, their eyesight, or suffered terrible burns. All combat related injuries and the implication is that they won't get help unless I pay for it. Can that be true? I don't think that it is. I think that the government will provide what is medically necessary. 

 So, what is going on here? That's what I want to know. If you are a veteran, should you receive whatever you feel you want, need, or demand carte blanche? That is to say without question. What is the real purpose of donating my 19 dollars a month? I don't know it just seems to me they are asking for my money under a false pretense. If the objective is to provide all the "extras" for a veteran I'm alright with that, just say so. Those that wish to do that are to be commended for their charity. It isn't alright to insinuate that the necessary care they need will not be provided unless I donate. Are you asking for charity, or selling virtue? That's the question I have.       

almost ready

  A few final preparations to be made before the big man arrives. The weatherman on television is going ballistic with the approaching storm. It's their time to be in the spotlight. I always admire their enthusiasm. That's especially true when they get it right. Makes me think of professional athletes. A player gets paid millions of dollars to play a game. When they make the play, catch the play or whatever, they celebrate, strut about and receive awards. They always seem surprised! I just wonder why, isn't that what you are getting paid to do? Weathermen are the same way. Both are successful in equal amounts. 

 I'm not concerned about the weather as I do not have to go out for anything. I have my supplies. My only concern is losing electrical service. Now that would be a problem because my apartment is all electric. Ah, but fortunately I have gasoline powered car that I could sit in to stay warm, have a full tank of gas so I'm good. Yes, I know you have to be careful about carbon monoxide, I'll take my carbon monoxide detector from the house, its battery powered. In my area snow isn't supposed to be an issue just rain followed by extreme cold, so icing. Well, it is what it is going to be. I feel safe enough, the weatherman has given me fair warning, when it is freezing outside you can get cold, maybe even frostbite, if you don't bundle up. I'm grateful for that information, I wouldn't have thought of that.

 The plan today is to finish up a little baking, last minute treats. My wife does the lion's share of that, but I do help. I'm in charge of the mixer. After the baking is done, I have a few more gifts to wrap. Always seems like there is just one more thing. I am somewhat of an impulse buyer. Well, I am with lower priced items anyway. I'm thinking if I were a very wealthy person, I'd be buying all kinds of stuff that I really don't need but that is cool. Yeah, I'd have a lot of junk. I once worked for a man that was addicted to the "as seen on tv" products. He had them all from Ronco and K-Tel, remember them? Impulsive? I'd say he was. Gadgets and gizmos. 

 So, it's time to get up from here and get going. Christmas day is in one day 17 hours and 12 minutes as I type this. The wind is really howling out there, but it isn't cold yet. Still time to make a run to the store for whatever it is I have forgotten. I'm certain there will be something. Be safe out there all. The weatherman is getting a bit frantic! It's going to be cold! No global warming in sight. I'm sure Trump had something to do with this. If you have an electric vehicle, be advised that the charge will not hold nearly as long in extreme cold weather. It can be reduced by as much as 41%. Plan accordingly.  

winning

 Just who is winning? That's what you have ask yourself as you watch the world situation. Ukraine is here begging for more money, forty-eight billion hasn't been enough. Those damn Russians are still fighting, waging a war. The question is, who is really getting the upper hand? As we sink deeper and deeper in debt to the tune of 31 trillion dollars it makes me think. Seventy four percent of that debt is on the public, that's you and me. The remaining 26% is intergovernmental debt. There's an old saying, there's more than one way to skin a cat. It seems to me Russia is using an alternative method. Drive the country in bankruptcy, divide the population, convince that population that defending their nation is wrong and you have a country ripe for the picking! You don't need to invade or take over the government. All you have to do is control the purse strings! It really is as simple as that. Look to the southern border for proof of that. All those people aren't running from prosperous lands. And it needs to be understood they are being financed in this quest to invade America. They aren't fleeing their homes in fear, on foot, walking thousands of miles without food. No, with their pre-paid cell phones that hold a charge for months at a time and never lose service, their Nike shoes, backpacks and Yeti coolers I'm not buying that. Follow the money.

 Meanwhile the entire European union hasn't given even half of what we have. All those nations are taking care of themselves first. I have to admire that. Makes more sense than what we are doing. It isn't compassionate to give away my money! That's not how that works. You can't burden the public with billions of dollars of debt and call that charity. That's irresponsibility! Even more so when there is an influx of thousands of people that we know are going to be dependent upon that same public. In 2010 the average illegal immigrant family in the United States received about 25,000 dollars a year in assistance! It has been calculated that illegal immigration costs the taxpayers about 116 billion dollars a year. 

 I'm not trying to say the Russians are behind all of this. I am saying the Russians are happily participating in all of this on a global scale. We owe Japan and mainland China the greatest portion of our debt. Neither of those nations have a history of being very friendly toward the west. It was only 81 years ago that Japan attacked us, killing thousands of Americans. It has only been 43 years since the United States normalized trade with China. That resulted in an explosion of trade mostly in favor of the Chinese. It wasn't until 2018 that we instituted China specific tariffs to create a more equitable trade agreement. If those other nations don't decide to simply invade us directly, or attack with nuclear weapons, they are certainly trying to weaken our economy. It's always about money, don't ever forget that. Almost anything will be allowed if it is profitable! Let me repeat that, almost anything will be allowed if it is profitable! 

 I don't blame Ukraine for asking. I would certainly ask if I were in their position. I'm just saying we have to take care of our own first and foremost. The same way I do for my family. I'm not giving the homeless shelter T-bone steaks while my family eats ramen noodles! Nope, not happening. Nor am I borrowing money to give it away to someone else. Just who is winning in all of this? Ask yourself that question. It isn't the ones acting responsibly, going to work every day and raising their children to be productive citizens. No "programs" for those people. No, they simply finance the programs for others. Who wins? In the end it is always the "administrator" of the programs that wins. You can call him or her whatever title you like. President, Prime Minister, King, Queen, Dictator, El Chapo or whatever. The one controlling the purse strings controls the world! When the purse is empty, it's all over.      

 

it ain't over

 Some days seem to rush at you. This is one of them. It began with an early morning phone call. Then I had some business to deal with. I'm on the computer first thing every day giving my morning salutations. It's a habit I developed over the years. I always say Good Morning on my Facebook page in that block that says what's on your mind. If I wrote in there what's on my mind most of the time, I would be in Facebook jail. It would seem that the "rules" have been relaxed somewhat following the mid-term elections. I'm expecting a tightening of those once again once campaigning begins in earnest. Facebook does act as an influencer, no doubt about that. For me it is an amusement. 

 Today are my son's birthdays. Yes, they are twins. One lives in upstate New York, state, not upstate New York City. The other is the mayor right here in Greensboro. I've already spoken to the one in New York, that was some of the business I had to take care of first thing this morning. Not the wishing of happy birthday but dealing with a gift I had shipped to him that arrived damaged. But that's not a big deal. Anyway, as I said some days seem to rush at you. It was after five this morning before I even began composing this post. The news is on with all the usual stuff that annoys me and leaves me shaking my head. This morning Stanford University has produced a list of terms/words that may be harmful. American is on the list. The explanation being it may indicate that America is the best country on the continents. I would explain to Stanford that the "America's" are indeed two continents named for the navigator that charted them. Americo Vespucci. Being an American can indicate your ancestry is from the Americas in much the same way as Native Americans are indigenous peoples. I would remind Stanford that the President of the United States of America has promised 55 billion dollars to Africa. Africa is a continent, not a country. Aren't all the inhabitants of that continent called Africans? Ask an Egyptian, an Ethiopian, a Nigerian, or any one of the other fifty-two nations citizens if they are Africans. And if they are, is that harmful or offensive? Yeah, it's stuff like that I find annoying. Oh, and don't call Freshman freshman, they are first year students! 

 Christmas day is now rushing at me as well. I have the gifts wrapped, the cards have all been mailed, the decorating done, but it isn't over yet! That's the way the holidays work. It's not about expectations, but it is. We all want everything to be just perfect for the day. We all try to remember everything. And it never seems complete until it is over. LOL, I guess that's the way it is supposed to work. It ain't over till it's over. (Yogi Berra) 

           

making it work

 Making it work. That's what I thought this morning as I tapped the bubble lights on the Christmas tree. I had almost forgotten about that as I haven't used bubble lights in a number of years. This year as I brought out some of the decorations, I noticed them and decided to go old school. So, it is bubble lights and tinsel. At first, they lit up and I watched in anticipation for them to begin bubbling. Some time passed when I noticed some were not bubbling. My first thought was, guess they have gone bad from being in the attic all this time. But then I thought, that can't be, Mom and Dad kept ours in the attic and they worked every year. Thinking back, I remembered. Take a pencil and gently tap on the glass tube and presto, they begin to bubble. If that doesn't work tilt them on their side, turn them back upright, and tap again. Works every time. That's when I thought about making it work. 

 I thought there are a lot of people today that probably wouldn't know about that, about how to make them work. I was reminded of putting aluminum foil of our tv antenna, to make it work. It did improve the reception. We all learned a little bit about how that worked. If you had a skip in your favorite record album, what could you do? Put a penny on the tone arm, that would usually take care of that. You could make it work. Does your bicycle tire have a hole in it? Sure, you could put a patch on the tube but what about the tire itself? Simple, wrap it with friction tape. That would get you twenty miles or more. Your cassette tape tangled? All you need is patience and a pencil. What if Moms' favorite pot got a hole in it. Just get a tinkers dam, no problem. It'll work just fine.

 There were all sorts of little tricks we used back then to make things work. You grew up with them and gave them little thought. It's no different today. The thing is today the kids will learn how to make the computer work or the phone, that sort of thing. The things that we senior folk have little clue about. When we learned about getting the boot it meant something entirely different than it does today. The web was something Mom got the broom for, to reach up and get rid of that. A hack was somebody that didn't know what they were doing. Was before my time but you used to have to wet the tip of a pencil before it would write. My Dad still had that habit. He always put the tip of the pencil on the end of his tongue before writing. 

 I was thinking about the things we would know how to "make work" or simply use that many today would not. How many young people today would know how to start a fire in a wood stove or know what kindling is? Get me the sprinkle bottle. Do we have an ice box or a refrigerator? How do you heat a flat iron or tell the temperature of that iron before using it? Wet your finger and tap the surface, listen for the sizzle, that's how. How do you thread a movie projector or use a mimeograph machine? Lots of things like that. everyday stuff to us, lost to a new generation. It's the way with each generation. Nostalgia will keep some of it alive, while some of it will fade away forever. Vinyl records are making a comeback, but I don't believe 8 track tapes ever will. Fashion will almost certainly repeat. Can't see outhouses ever making a comeback. Baby carriages? Haven't seen any of those in a number of years. What can you think of?  

introspective

  "To suppose any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people is a chimerical idea." (James Monroe) It is this defining of virtue that constitutes the soul of a nation. What did James Monroe view as virtue? Being a member of the Anglican church, you have to assume it was those virtues that were foremost in his life. A full discussion of just what that would have been in Monroe's time I will not attempt. The manner of practice has certainly changed since his time, and some would argue some of the basic precepts as well. It's my feeling whatever changes have been made and accepted have been done more so for maintaining membership or profits for the church. Sin has certainly been redefined! But that has always been so and shouldn't be of great concern. It is virtue that is the concern. 

 So, what is virtue? The dictionary says it is high moral standards. Okay, so what defines the moral standard? The people do. That's the long and short of it. Those values will be assigned by the people regardless of any text or testimony. They will simply be modified to meet the moment. When viewing history, it must be remembered that a moment may be a decade or a century. 

 Liberty, a term Monroe and all the other founding fathers used frequently. What is liberty? Here's what the dictionary says: "the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views:" From that definition you could surmise it to mean, you can do whatever you want. But we all know that isn't true, in a group, a community or a nation you have to conform to a standard of behavior. Virtue is that standard. Monroe said it plainly, without virtue in the people neither liberty nor happiness can be achieved. To suppose otherwise is just a fantasy, an unattainable goal. 

 Monroe has been called a Diest. He never said so in any of his writings. In fact, he rarely spoke of religious matters at all, at least in his writings or public life. But Deism was a popular thing in his time, the new thinking, the progressive movement. It was "religion" based on reason. Still, it's goal was to instill a sense of virtue in the people. That is the goal of every religion, or so that is the way religion is advertised. The sincerity of those spreading the word is at times, questionable. But that isn't the point. The point is that all religious belief is designed to provide a set of moral "rules" or "codes" for a good person to abide by. Its' purpose is to instill virtue in the people.

 All of man's appeal to the Gods are an appeal to themselves. That is what a Deist would tell you. A supreme being exists but does not intervene in the affairs of man. Man's inhumanity to man would seem to be the proof of that. Our appeals to the gods are nothing more than the request for a do-over or an appeal for mercy for another. Prayer does provide comfort to the believer that is indisputable. Prayer is self-reflection is it not? It is a review of our own virtues! At least in my opinion it should be. I pray as a supplicant not a celebrant. And yes, it takes supplication to be virtuous. 

convinced?

 I've found the hardest person to convince is yourself. At least that has been my experience so far in life. It's proven true even when I have decided on some course of action. Now some would confuse that with a lack of confidence, but I don't feel that way at all. I have all the confidence in the world, I just seem to lose interest rather quickly. Then I want to move on to something else. I've never convinced myself that I have any particular talent for any one thing. I think that is why people have hobbies, do crafts, or whatever you wish to call that. It is because they are convinced, they have a talent for that. They do not require any validation, they are convinced.

 I do think I have skills. I am a sort of jack of all trades. Trades meaning occupations. I do not think of myself as particularly skilled in any one of them. As far as the arts, I am sorely lacking in that area. To be truly skilled in any one area I believe you have to be born with that ability. You can take as many lessons as you like but you will never be Eric Clapton or Vincent Van Gogh. Those skills are innate to those people. You can learn skills, but you can't learn talent. Talent isn't taught.

 It's been said that everyone has a talent. I've heard that many times over the years. I've heard it from those offering encouragement, and from those offering kindness. You know what I mean? Hey this isn't your thing, but everyone has a talent for something. You just have to discover what that is. My thinking however is a bit different, I think you just have to convince yourself of that talent. It's the only way I can understand why some people act as they do. You know the type, those that sing karaoke or dance believing they are really good but leave you cringing. There are plenty of other examples, sometimes with craftsmen. Not all mechanics and carpenters are skilled! Still, they believe they are, they have convinced themselves. That is the essence of vanity. Humility is the exact opposite of that. The concept of humility is what I feel is lacking in society today. I believe the true meaning of humility is being lost. The dictionary will say humility is a lack of self-regard or a sense of unworthiness and that is what many grasp today. But humility is an essential ingredient to the spiritual man. It is placing oneself in the proper order of things. Without humility a person will soon become angry, disappointed, depressed and disillusioned. You can see all of that in society today. Too many people believing they are the most important thing in the universe. Too many people feeling entitled. Too many people saying, look at me, look at me, me too. 

 There is also the danger of becoming too vain in your beliefs. Yes, we can see that today as well. How many mega-churches are there? Each of those is a display of vanity, certainly nothing humble about them. Throughout history there have been examples of that taking place. Perhaps the most famous being the Spanish Inquisition. It was a tool to consolidate the power of the king while fighting heresy! You will believe, even if I have to kill you! It isn't heresy, but political beliefs that are faced with that today. And that changes depending upon who is in power. 

 I often call it accepting reality. That's how I speak of this in my blogs. My thinking is if you accept reality, you will be humbled. It isn't something you need to work on, nothing to concentrate on, it will come naturally. If you have ever been on the ocean during a storm, you have been humbled! If you have ever read or listened to the stories of others, you have been humbled. "Humility is the solid foundation of all virtues" (Confucius) Being humble isn't simply acquiescence, that isn't what it is. It is accepting reality. 

Decided

 Majority rules. It's a phrase and an ideology we have all heard since we were born. In America, the majority rules. This is a Democracy. The truth is slightly different however as we are a constitutional republic containing some democratic principles. The majority, in our Congress, requires 2/3 of the representatives to vote in the affirmative for legislation to pass. Yes, there are instances where a simple majority will suffice. That is what a true Democracy entitles, a simple majority, mob rule. The largest mob rules even when there is only one more member of that mob. In short, the 51 overrule the 49. 

 Now in a Republic with representatives acting on behalf of the voting public a simple majority isn't enough. Of course, the ideal is that everyone is represented. That representation should also be equal. In the United States today (according to the 2021census) this breaks down in the following way. American Indians .7%, Asians 5.9%, Black 12.6%, Latino 18.7% multiracial 2.3% and white 59.3%. So, that should be the makeup of Congress. It's not. It isn't even close. But that would be if the only qualification for office was your racial identity. It certainly seems obvious enough that each racial group is not voting for their representative based solely on their race. That's a good thing by the way.

 The thing is this. Is each racial group somehow different from one another? You hear about culture as the defining measure. There is black culture, Asian culture, Native American culture and a host of others based on their ancestral roots. Does each culture want something different? Personally, from my experience of nearly seventy years, they do not. At the core they do not. People are pretty much people no matter where they came from or what ethnic group they belong to. It is true however that people will use whatever tools they have available to gain an edge, some advantage, including their race or ethnicity. 

 To me that explains the demographics of our congress. That is to say why it isn't a direct reflection of the percentages present in the voting public. Fortunately, voters are not voting strictly on race but on their beliefs. Fifty-nine per cent of the American population are white people. It's a number in decline. Yet in Congress that number is closer to 75%. That means the other demographic communities must be voting for these candidates. If only whites voted for whites the number would be 59.3%. Another demographic group, one based in their sexual orientation comprises 5.5% of the population. Yet that 5.5% have gained significant legislative measures in their favor, the other 94.5% yielding to them. If we went solely on the majority rules that certainly couldn't happen. 

 All I'm saying here is this narrative that the majority are white people, and the system is systemically racist is false. The Constitution was written for all people. It applies to everyone equally today. It's true that wasn't always the case but that's what the Bill of Rights and the attendant amendments are all about. In the Declaration of Independence, it was clearly stated, "all men are created equal." That was the basis for the republic we all enjoy today. Remember there were those that opposed that idea as well. We called them Loyalists. Those people believed in the divine right of kings and that a monarch had the right to do as he/she pleased. They believed that in return for the protection the King (government) provided. The cost was freedom. There are those today that would do the same in exchange for a monthly stipend and the freedom to engage in any activities they desire. We call those folks Democrats! 

 I take some solace in knowing that nearly 75% of congress still represent the voters of this nation. That is why that number exists. It isn't a vote for white culture. What is white culture? The Europeans that migrated to this continent came from many different cultures themselves. In the early twentieth century America became the great melting pot, all cultures coming together. If there is such a thing as white culture that would have to be it. That is what votes to keep that congress at about a75% level, a two-thirds, a majority. Remember only 59.6% are white people, not enough to control the show. In fact, 15.4% short of the required number to do that. Blacks comprise 12.6% of the population yet outnumber Latinos in Congress despite the fact that Latinos represent 18.9%. Native Americans number .7% so they shouldn't have any representative at all yet have six! And that's not even counting Elizabeth Warren. 

  I see this as equal representation. Everyone has an equal chance to run for office. There are no barriers to that based on race. And in the current administration you certainly have to say sexual preferences certainly don't make a difference. We have non-binary, transgenders, lesbians, gays, and those that can't decide what they are at all holding office. Although I belong to the demographic group in the majority, that 59.6% that says I'm white, all of that remains true. My majority isn't enough. It's the price of freedom I suppose. You have to take the bad with the good. I remain confident that the majority will make the correct decision. I may not agree with that decision but that doesn't make it wrong, or right. It's simply decided.  

denial

 Election deniers. That's a new term I hear a lot these days. It's nothing new really though. What is an election denier? It is simply anyone that does not accept the results of an election. Is it solely based on the belief that there was fraud of some kind taking place? You could say that and argue for that. Still the essence of the denier is that they are unwilling to accept the results of the election. An early example of this took place in December of 1860. Democrats refused to accept the election of Abraham Lincoln. They did that by the "declaration of immediate cause" Christmas eve 1860. In that document they declared the federal government was infringing upon states' rights. They refused to accept the results fearing Lincoln was going to abolish slavery in the United States. They believed that despite Lincoln never having said anything to indicate that he would. Lincoln said in a campaign speech in 1858,   “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and Black races,” he began, going on to say that he opposed Black people having the right to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites."

 Their argument hinged upon the issue of state's rights. That is what they tried to use as the cause of succession. They explicitly talk about the holding of slaves and the refusal of free states to return their "property" as a violation of their rights. What they didn't mention was their refusal to honor the rights of the other states to not participate in the slave trade, recognize slaves as property, and any obligation to return those that escaped from slavery. Clearly all of that was a violation of those states' rights! To be clear, the issue was the fear that Lincoln would free the slaves and it would decimate the economy of those states holding slaves. The argument that it was about rights was a deceit, it was clearly about the holding of slaves.

 Now Lincoln was opposed to the holding of slaves on moral grounds. The problem was the Constitution allowed the practice. It was 100% legal. We are struggling with similar moral issues today. The marriage equality act is an example of that. It, by federal mandate, forces every state in the union to acknowledge, support and defend same sex marriage. Moral misgivings notwithstanding, that's the law. Roe V Wade is a famous example of the same thing, a moral dilemma. In Lincolns time just as it is today when campaigning the object is to garner as much support as possible. You can't do that by being direct, forthright and expressing unpopular sentiments directly. Case in point, Donald Trump. That stuff only goes so far before toes are stepped on. 

 Well, it is what it is. History can be told from many different viewpoints, each one slightly different from the other. A just cause or a denial? South Carolina issued that declaration of immediate cause in December although as far back as April of that year there had been talk. It wasn't until the election results were known that that document was issued. It basically was a denial of the election results, a lack of acceptance. There would be no "working across the aisle" in this case. They took their ball and left the game completely. They were the Democrats. Ironically the party that wants big government to control everything! Hardly the group that seems concerned with your rights! There are interested in power and control. That can be maintained by any means necessary, including the holding of slaves. That was indeed included in their constitution. "The Confederate version used the word “slaves,” unlike the U.S. Constitution. One article banned any Confederate state from making slavery illegal. Another ensured that slave owners could travel between Confederate states with their slaves." Quoted from a web source not my own words. 

 Election deniers? Yes, I'd say they were the first to openly deny the results of an election. By deny, I mean refuse to accept the results. Maybe that's splitting hairs, but I see it that way. One thing to question, to say you have doubts about the legality or validity of reported results, quite another to secede! To just say, I'm not acknowledging that at all, I'm starting my own country! You violated my rights by exercising your rights! 

having a plan

 The plan today is to bake some Christmas cookies. Being retired I have developed a habit of planning the day. That doesn't mean that is what will happen though, just a plan. When I was in the Navy there was an actual Plan of the Day every day. Usually issued after the evening meal it listed in chronological order what was to take place the next day. It also contained notes and bulletins about things to come. It was always highly anticipated. Having been retired now for twenty-nine years I wonder if the Plan of the Day is just an electronic message these days. I wonder if they actually print those anymore. I don't print mine, sometimes I'll text my wife though, to keep her informed. But anyway, today I plan on baking Christmas cookies.

 We'll be making cookies more for the tradition than anything else. Home baked goods are a staple for the holidays. The grands are all grown now so we won't be baking for them as much as we used to. We remember baking for the kids' school parties and such. A great deal of that has been curtailed these days. Maybe they aren't even allowed anymore, I really don't know. In today's world we all have to be aware of allergies, allergic reactions, and passing our germs around instead of cookies and cakes. Not sure what happened over the years but apparently peanuts turned against us! George Washington Carver would be a villain today! 

  All of this brings back memories. Now my mom wasn't big on baking cookies and all that, although she was certainly capable enough when the mood struck her. But it wasn't like a tradition at our house. Grandmother Bennett was an excellent baker. In fact, she had gone to school to be a baker. She had been sent to America to care for a sick aunt. She did so until that aunt passed away. As a sort of reward her uncle paid for her to go to a baking school. Following graduation from that school she obtained employment with a wealthy family. The Gardiners of Long Island and Gardiners Island fame. While working there she met and married Horace, my grandfather and had ten children. She knew how to bake! After she passed there wasn't much baking going on. I was young but still remember her Swedish cookies and pastries. 

  I do think it is important to have a plan. That is especially so as you get older. It makes it appear like you know what you're doing. Goes a long way in avoiding confusion. Also, surprises aren't nearly as much fun when you are a senior citizen. It messes with the pacemaker. Without a plan you begin to sound like Joe Biden, you know, we'll be making, you know, those things. So that's the plan for today anyway. We will be using the rolling pin and cookie press that belonged to my wife's grandmother, Elizabeth. Grandma Mo, mother to Uncle George, was born in 1890 and passed in 1987. Her rolling pin and cookie press continue on. Call it a tradition. 

  There is one other tradition that I had all but forgotten about. Do you remember getting those little boxes of Christmas candy? The boxes that were the same size as the boxes animal cracker came in, with a little string handle. I haven't seen one of those in years. I'm guessing they still make them. I remember getting one from the church every year. Seems like other places handed them out as well. Was it when you visited Santa? Well, that candy and an orange was in my stocking every year. A bowl of that candy also sat on the coffee table, and you had to pry a piece off the pile. Oh, and ribbon candy. I have seen that in stores. Well, time to bake the cookies.  

                                                       

                                                             

                           If you remember this, you are old.  Merry Christmas 

breaking the law?

 Heard on the news about a big break in nuclear fusion. Not being a scientist, I can't claim to really understand all they are talking about. I did read a bit about how they used 192 lasers in this experiment to achieve fusion. These lasers were aimed at a frozen pellet of some form of hydrogen. Fusion took place and generated 50% more energy than was used to fire the lasers. The science guys calling that a net gain. The largest net gain ever achieved. The point, as it was explained, is a source of clean energy, virtually unlimited energy. The science guys are pretty excited about all of that. Personally, I'm reserving judgement. 

 It was reported that this breakthrough is the most significant in the 21st century. It was also pointed out that this ability to create fusion is many decades away from being of any practical value. But the big deal is, getting more energy out than you are putting in. The laws of physics that I was taught says you can't do that. You can't create energy at all, all you can do is transform it from one state to another. This net gain however would seem to contradict that, sorta. Energy isn't being created; it is being released. So I see it differently than the scientists. Gasoline is simply a distilled version of crude oil. Both will burn but gasoline is far more volatile. I can get a bunch bigger explosion using gasoline than I can using crude. Have I created more energy? No, I don't think so. I just released that energy quicker, in a more violent fashion. But, as I said, I'm no scientist. Apparently, there is no nuclear waste from this process to deal with. I haven't read extensively on this process but certainly it is radioactive in some fashion. The big deal here is the scientists say they can achieve "ignition" which creates fusion. It is ignition that makes a nuclear bomb explode. I'm thinking we should be very cautious about that. 

 Reading a little further I discovered that this "net gain" being reported is a bit misleading. Where it is true the actual power used by the lasers to create fusion was less than the power generated by that fusion, it still took far more power for the reactor to power those lasers. So, to me it would seem the scientists have put the cart before the horse so to speak. I get the excitement though; it is quite the accomplishment. How much did it cost to create that small amount of net gain energy? I haven't seen any estimates on that but I'm certain it is in the billions. 

  "For all of NIF’s success, commercializing this style of fusion reactor wouldn’t be easy. Betti, the University of Rochester physicist, says that such a reactor would need to generate 50 to 100 times more energy than its lasers emit to cover its own energy use and put power into the grid. It’d also have to vaporize 10 capsules a second, every second, for long periods of time. Right now, fuel capsules are extremely expensive to make, and they rely on tritium, a short-lived radioactive isotope of hydrogen that future reactors would have to make on-site." Scientists achieve a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. Here’s what it means. (msn.com) 

secret knowledge

 I have a collection of old photographs and artifacts handed down through the family. You could say those items are a legacy. It wasn't a deliberate action on the part of those ancestors. They are simply what has survived over the years. Their value lies in the memories, not the object itself. Not all of those objects are understood however, some memories are lost to time. I only know what I have been told or surmise. I have studied those old photographs for clues regarding the identity of some. There are also clues about the time the photograph was taken if you look closely enough. Often the occasion is unknown. What is known is that in the past getting your picture taken was a much bigger deal than it is today. For that reason, it usually accompanied some occasion or event. When I was young taking pictures was a common practice but getting them developed was a bit costly. There are lots of photographs alright, but I have surprisingly few today. I think that is because they became disposable. Unlike those old photographs from previous generations, they did become commonplace, an everyday thing. The result is they lost some of their value. 

 I have a wooden chest where I store my "archives" of pictures, pamphlets, papers and small objects. All of those things are important to me in some fashion. That's why I save them. My thought this morning is to begin to catalogue those things once again. I began that a few years back and set it aside. My thinking then was to provide a description and a story for the items, an explanation of sorts. I was thinking I could attach memories to them for future generations to understand and enjoy. I have come to understand the real motivation to do so involves more my desire to be remembered than the objects themselves. Honest objectivity can be a hard pill to swallow. It does change the narrative. It's a difficult thing to accept, even our heroes have flaws, make mistakes and are sometimes self-serving. It's even harder when you are that hero! 

 We all like to know stuff others don't. That's just a part of human nature. Secret knowledge is power. At least that how our psyche perceives that anyway. It's true even with the smallest thing. I know and you don't. Often it is the basis for conversation. Did you know? And so, I have the opportunity to construct an entire box of memories, of secret knowledge, to pass to the future. In the future I would be acknowledged as the authority. That is an appealing prospect. This is this and that is that because Ben said so, wrote it down, it must be the truth. That's what the future would think. You are not going to call your ancestor a liar without proof positive to the contrary. 

 Knowing this I am feeling a sense of responsibility. As I said earlier some of the things I have I can only surmise the story. It certainly wouldn't be honest to assign a story to those objects that isn't true. It does make a difference. The truth matters even when there is no one to dispute it. Lots of untruths and fabrications from the past have come back to haunt mankind. Today especially, the past is being rewritten. The reason for that is easy enough to understand. It benefits the present. Man has been telling the same old lies for generations for the same reasons. I have no expectation that will ever change.

 Nothing I will write, or record will impact history in any significant fashion. That's a part of being objectively honest, accepting that as the reality. If I held a different station in life that would not be the case. The truth is I will pass from this world hopefully remembered for a generation or two and then slip into obscurity and oblivion. How many years my name stays on the stone is unknown. I can leave a legacy, however. It won't be in the way of wealth or property. My name is not famous, nor do I expect it ever will be. My legacy will be; secret knowledge. For the items and artifacts in that box I will be the ultimate authority, I'll have the final say. That appeals to my vanity I'm aware of that. I admit to it. I can write history! Yes, that's the real appeal there. I can write history as I know it to be, and that will be accepted as fact in the future. The only one that may contradict that would be an ancestor. And we all know, you should not speak ill of the dead. Well, it was that way in the past anyway, seems like that is something being overlooked today. 

a concern

  Hate. It's a term we hear a lot these days. It's even a crime. But what exactly is hate. According to the dictionary it is extreme dislike. It's a crime when some action is taken motivated by prejudice on various grounds. So, the reality is it is criminal to act upon your hate. Fact is, it has always been that way. That's not new. But what is disturbing is this notion that anytime I disagree with you that indicates I hate you. Sounds like your kids, doesn't it? Yes, it is quite the juvenile thought process. I hate you! Why? Because you won't let me do as I please. 

 We had a saying while I was in the Navy. You know you're doing your job well when you find your name on the bathroom wall. Saw mine there a number of times over the years, always good for a chuckle. Some of those "posts" implied I engaged in certain activities or had less than average intelligence. Others wished to engage me in their activities, if you get my meaning. They wanted to do something with me normally reserved for those you love! And others came right out and said it, they hated me. None of that ever bothered me in the least, it was amusing. I never hated any of those people, whoever they were. I have ideas about who they might be, you could say I had formed a prejudicial opinion about some, but I didn't hate them. I was only trying to help, set them on the straight and narrow, offering them the benefit of my knowledge and experience. They didn't always see it that way. 

 Today we are hearing that from politicians and activists. They should be allowed to do as they please and I should not be able to say anything in opposition. Silence is consent. That is what I was taught and what I have learned to be true. What is tolerated today will be the norm tomorrow. There are natural laws, the laws of nature. That cannot be disputed although man in his arrogance often attempts to do so. It never ends well. Nature wins every single time! We can label it, call it by different names, even attempt to alter it, but in the end nature wins. Volcanos still erupt, there is drought and famine, global pandemics and disease, all of those things. There is nothing we are going to do about that. There was a commercial on television years ago that stated it pretty plainly. "It's not nice to fool mother nature." Something bad always comes from that. 

 Natural law cannot be repudiated. It's a simple fact. Natural law is moral law based on human experience and human nature. Whenever you act contrary to the law troubles will ensue. It is what causes wars to begin! We have all read about those held in bondage since the beginning of time. Those in bondage have always ultimately rebelled. The reason is because it is unnatural to be held in bondage. It's why we imprison people too. If you speak ill of me, I will respond. Natural law. Using violence as a response is a criminal act, against good morals. Well, that's where it begins anyway, with the concept of morality. Morality is what is accepted without question. Also, why silence is consent. 

 One of the functions of government is to ensure domestic tranquility. That is to say, keep the peace. That cannot be accomplished by simply telling those that don't agree with you to shut up! It is only through discourse that a resolution can be reached. That is where domestic law enters the picture. A compromise is reached. It doesn't mean everyone agrees! Epictetus said, "all religions must be tolerated for every man must get to heaven in his own way." Tolerance is a compromise not acceptance. There are aberrations in nature that is true. That doesn't indicate they are normal. In fact, the very term aberration means it isn't normal or expected. Typically, it isn't considered a good thing. It is the normalization of aberration that concerns the moral man. It isn't hate, it is a deep concern. Always worth fighting for!  

No hurry

 When you are young you can't wait for tomorrow. When you are old you wish for yesterday. It's the irony of life. You spend your life trying to get where you came from in the first place. Even when you are unsure of where that was! Surely life is a gift from the divine. It doesn't really happen by accident; you don't get to plan it. It's true you can decide not to propagate through total abstinence. That is the only 100% effective method. Others may end your life that is also true. Life is a fragile thing, tenuous at best. We are all deceived by thinking it is a choice. It's a beautiful deceit however, it allows us to face the day. Without that, the belief that we have a choice, we would surely live a life of desperation. The acceptance of fate and faith are closely linked. 

 There are two ways of looking at the past. You can remember it with sadness for it is gone or be happy because it was. I tend to choose the later. I go back to the past often, it is a comfortable place. I don't live there however, just visiting. All the memories of the good times are there. The bad times have faded away, lost to time and that's fine with me. There is nothing to gain by reliving those. The lessons have been learned. There are those, especially so today, that feel the past owes them something. The past gave you exactly what you took from it, if you were shortchanged you have no one to blame but yourself. You can't change the past.

 It's a funny thing. I'm not looking forward to tomorrow nearly as much as I used to. It's a difficult thing to explain to others unless those others are at the same place in time. Sometimes we call that time and place, getting old. But you can arrive at that place at any age. It's hard to explain to others that you were once young, anxious, and in a hurry to get "there." You need to understand that tomorrow isn't promised to you. Don't be too anxious for that to happen, you might get disappointed. Or you may get that reward you have been seeking since your birth. Death is surely a return. That is what we are taught through our religious training but only learned in our hearts. A beginning or an end? Neither? A circle? Tomorrow is uncertain. What is certain is this, tomorrow will come, until it doesn't. The question I always find myself asking is, will I know that? Not anxious to know the answer to that one, I'll just wait until tomorrow to think some more about that.    

unchanged history

  I saw on the news that a school named for Dr. Ben Carson has voted to change the name. Yes, Dr. Carson is being canceled. No specific reason was given in this report, but the reason is quite obvious to anyone paying attention. Dr. Carson was interviewed as a part of this report and handled himself with dignity and grace, as he always does. I had forgotten that he was the HUD secretary in the Trump administration. That's the reason he is being erased from history. And make no mistake about that, that is the reason for it. Never mind that this black man from Detroit rose to become the preeminent pediatric neurosurgeon in the nation, he associated with Trump. That's all we need to know. 

 When a school, park, street or whatever is named for someone what is the purpose of that? It is to commemorate them. To commemorate is to cause to remember. That's the sole purpose. Now if you are a medical student, you will most likely hear of Dr. Ben Carson and his accomplishments. By naming a school after him the purpose was to let the students there know his name. It may be the only way they would ever hear of him. That's true with a great number of people that are commemorated in such fashion. Generally speaking, we want to remember those that had a positive impact in the world. That's the commemoration we most often think of, a celebration of whatever that individual accomplished. Authors, artists, athletes, politicians, and heroes from all walks of life. Sometimes they are national heroes and sometimes just the local person. I know of Colonel Richardson high school right here in Caroline County Maryland. Do you know who Colonel Richardson was? Most likely you do not. Your first thought may be a civil war veteran. No, he served in the revolutionary war. Later he was a judge. My point is simply that he is remembered in Caroline County because his name is on the school. In Greensboro, where I live, there is Stonesfifer drive. He was the doctor in Greensboro for over fifty years, commemorated by the naming of that street where his office was located and a monument in the park. 

 So, what did Dr. Carson do to deserve having his name removed, basically an action saying, forget about him. There was no official reason given just the results of a vote held by the school board. This is the Detroit school board. The vote was 6 to 1. You would think the school board would be proud of the accomplishments of Ben Carson. Remember he did run for President as well. Much to do was made about Hillary being the first woman to run for president, Harris being the first whatever ethnicity she claims this week, as vp, Obama being the first black president but Ben Carson is a Republican.

 Detroit is a Democratically controlled city. Interesting to note is that 79% of the population of Detroit are blacks. So, the black Democrats are now canceling black Republicans. What could be the motivation for that? Well call me whatever name you like but it is pretty plain to see. The Democrats are all about "social " programs, free everything and reparations! That is what has secured their votes since 1865 and there are no signs of that changing anytime in the future. The reality is it is all about control. 

 Control the people, control the vote. When you make the people dependent upon you, they will vote for you. It's a simple strategy that has worked well for the Democrats. It began with just holding others as slaves, then sharecroppers, and finally factory workers and common laborer's. Race really had little to do with that ideology. It was simply that the white Europeans had the money to get that ball rolling. There were blacks and others holding slaves, exploiting them for labor and profit. The Democrats fought a war in an attempt to continue that control but lost. So, they created the sharecropper model. That was once their President (Andrew Johnson) the one replacing Lincoln after being killed by a Democrat, rescinded General Order #15 granting forty acres of land to the head of the household of every freed slave. Yes, it was a Democrat that did that. The control continued through denying those people education, opportunity and the right to vote. As that control was lost new avenues had to be developed. The ghetto was built to provide housing, dependence once again disguised as a helping hand. And today it is all about "social justice, equity, and getting what you deserve! 

 Someone like Ben Carson doesn't fit the model. He believes in hard work and bettering yourself through education. He even has the audacity to tell other blacks that they can change their circumstances! That they can do that on their own. Remember when Obama, a black democrat, spread the message, "If you've got a business, you didn't build that Somebody else made that happen" What was the message being sent? You can't do it on your own, you need help! In short, you are dependent. 

 And so, the Detroit school board has decided to erase Ben Carson. Hopefully he will just be forgotten about. We certainly wouldn't want those students to emulate him. Imagine the problem that could cause. Kids, studying hard, working, doing the right thing, and not claiming to be victims of the system. Why before you know it, they will be Republicans! Can't have that, it must be stopped. 

 And finally this what I find the most amazing fact of all. "Dr. Crockett was a Black woman from a poor family who was able to go to college and then to medical school so that she could pay it forward for Detroit residents. There is to this day an annual scholarship provided to a deserving medical school student from Jackson Junior College, the first college attend by Dr. Crockett. Dr. Crockett passed away in 1979. " This school was originally named for her. Now she will make a comeback. I agree that she should never have had her name removed from the school in the first place as her accomplishments were many. She was a Democrat. So now, it's all good. She is good black model for the children to emulate, not like that Ben Carson! He's just too uppity! 

the gift

  It being the Christmas season my thoughts just naturally turn to the past. I was trying to remember the last Christmas I spent with my immediate family. As near as I can recall that would have been Christmas 1965, give or take. I, of course, wasn't aware of that. We are seldom aware of the last of anything is my thought. Even when we know with almost certainty that it will be so, we cling to hope that it will not be so. That's true with the good stuff, not the bad. It's the nature of man I suppose; hope does spring eternal in the human breast. "Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; remember that what you now have was once among the things you only hoped for." (Epicurus) Your memories can never be taken, relived upon demand. Still in what may be a mercy our memories often only hold the good, the bad becomes blurry, gray and eventually disappear altogether. And my thinking is should I lose those memories I won't know that; another mercy bestowed by a greater power than man.

 It should be remembered that Christmas is about a birth. The gifts are in recognition of that gift. It is what was given to man that we celebrate. As with all gifts we are free to accept or reject that gift. As the years have gone by, I have had to say goodbye to those I shared that celebration with. Only their memories remain with me today. Still, they are all here, gathered in my memories. Yes, I try to recall the last time we all were around the Christmas tree together on that special morning when we celebrated the gift that was given. How little attention we paid to that is a bit shameful when I think about that, the celebration appeared to be centered on myself, on what I wanted. Of all the gifts I was given, only the one remains. It is the only gift that endures. It has endured for millennia! It is the gift of love, pure and simple love. 

Explaining

 Leaving an explanation. There are times that is what I feel like I'm doing in writing all these blogs. But then again that isn't really true at all. There is much I don't mention that is integral to the story. I have thought it would make a book; a life explained. Ah but the life would have to be far more interesting than mine to capture the attention of others. And if you are not writing to capture the attention of others what's the point? I have tried to convince myself otherwise over the last decade but have been unsuccessful at that. It's just a reality. Writing is a vanity, no doubt about that. 

 I'm not really a very pious man but believe in a higher power than my own, and for that matter, all mankind. This universe didn't just happen by accident, no one will ever convince me of that. It takes intelligence to create order out of chaos. I also believe each of us are here to serve a purpose. You can call it destiny, fate, or whatever you like but you are here for a reason. Doesn't mean you have to like the reason. I figure the wheel probably isn't too happy about having to carry all the heavy loads but that is what they are designed to do. 

 Our lives are a gift, something given. We don't do a thing to get it, it is just given. So, for that reason I feel a need to explain the expenditure of mine. Seems like I should explain the why of it to someone. But then again, the one who gave me that life already knows the reason I was given life. The question remaining is, does that entity know what I'm going to do with it? The answer has to be yes. Still, there is more than one way to skin a cat as the saying goes. It's the whole free will question. I can do whatever I like, but the result will be the same? That's the way I see it anyway. 

 How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live. (Henry David Thoreau) That sums up the way I feel at times. What have I done to write about? I agree with the majority of what Thoreau wrote in regard to philosophy and government. His discourse on civil disobedience is a major source for many political activists. Thoreau certainly enjoyed far greater popularity than I ever will. He was foremost a teacher, and his teaching was his road to fame and notoriety. Little of his works were published during his lifetime. Most people know him for Walden woods, that period in his life. 

 The question I struggle with is, do I owe an explanation? A gift given requires no compensation, only recognition. That is to say, a true gift does not expect anything in return. With life, it is a gift we are given. We are also given free will to do with that life as we will. We will fulfill whatever our purpose is, in whatever manner we choose. The choice will not change the outcome. But we are taught to seek the reward of eternal life. That will be gained if the explanation satisfies the one who gave us the gift in the first place. So, there is an expectation after all. Therein lies the enigma of life itself. Belief is your reality. It's all any of us really have. It's all there is. 

cultural deceit

 Crime and culture. It's obvious to me that the two are interrelated. I haven't heard any of the experts talking about that though. The reason for that is also quite obvious to me. If you do point that out in any form whatsoever, even a scholarly paper backed by statistical facts you will be labeled a racist. The usual reason for crime is given as the people are struggling, not through any fault of their own, but by being suppressed. That suppression can come in many ways, race, creed, color, gender, political party, wealth or lack thereof. Still the primary cause, culture, will not be mentioned in any of that, not directly anyway.

 Culture is what defines people or a nation. A national identity is of primary importance. It's my feeling that we are losing that national identity today, distancing ourselves from that. Just what is the American culture? It was those people that created a new nation, a Republic. Certainly not the first group of people to have formed a Republic, that form of governance had existed before, most notably by the Romans. We all know what happened there. A shift in the culture destroyed that Republic. Corruption, greed, excess, an ever-increasing number of those dependent upon that government for the most basic of needs all led to that downfall. Many of those dependents were brought into the empire against their wishes that is true, but it doesn't change the dependence one bit. The problem is the dependence, not the person.

 Today all you hear about is our Democracy. We don't have a Democracy; we have a Republic. A Republic contains some democratic principles, like a cake has different ingredients, it isn't solely flour. A Democracy favors stricter rule by government. That is simply because all that is required is a simple majority to enact legislation. The fifty-one overrule the forty-nine. It is far more difficult to gain a 2/3 majority. All you have to do is listen to the politicians talking today about "control" of the house and senate. Yes, it is about control! 

 How do you gain control? The surest way to accomplish that is through dependence. That is the most effective way. If you can do that while convincing others that you in reality are supporting their culture, supporting them in their struggle, you can get the votes necessary. Of course, it is also necessary to convince the others that their culture is the true cause of all the problems. You can certainly see that plain enough if you are paying attention to what is going on in America today. A culture that is systemically racist thereby fueling others to commit crimes! But not just racist anymore, also homophobic and misogynists. It is the American culture that has caused all this unrest. White Europeans! They are the root cause.

 I disagree with that premise. I believe culture is the breeding ground for all of men's actions, good and bad. At its' essence, it is about dependence.

 The uncomfortable truth is crime and culture are closely related. Is there such a thing as a criminal culture? No, I don't think so. There are criminals endorsing a culture, attempting to justify their criminal activities. Enticing the poor is certainly the easiest way to do that, convincing those folks they have no other option. Convincing them they deserve so much more! The ultimate goal is to gain control, to be the one holding the purse. The truth is there is never enough for everyone, only a few will gain that power. They are not concerned with the methods, only with results. 

 Want to reduce crime? Look to the culture, change that. Culture, in essence, is the soul of the people. It is the conscience of the people. It is what is accepted. No law, no legislation can change cultural norms. Only the people themselves are capable of that change.