the bill

  No deal yet for a budget. Once again, we the people are being threatened with the government going broke. That's strange given the amount of taxes being collected every single day on almost every single thing. But I suppose when you give it away faster than you can bring it in that's what happens. But I'm certain a deal will be reached at the 11th hour. That seems to be the modus operandi. I have an idea on how to avoid that in the future. We make an amendment to the constitution that says, if no budget is submitted and approved thirty days prior to new fiscal year congress shall have all their pay and benefits suspended. They are then required to remain in session until such time as an agreement is reached. It could be included with the requirement for a balanced budget. No more spending more than you have! No congress you cannot write postdated checks! 

  Nearly half of the members of congress, 47% to be exact, are millionaires. It would appear that they have little trouble managing their own spending, in fact, increasing their wealth. Makes me wonder why they can't do the same for the nation, that is there job isn't it. We have elected these people to be the stewards of the nation's coffers. The purse strings are in their hands, and they aren't keeping them closed at all, in fact I think there is a hole in the bottom of the bag. But then again I get it, I'd be very generous with other people's money too, given the chance that is. Hey, you can afford it. If you can't I'll just some more from someone else. The rank and file members of congress have a salary of 174,000 a year. They average 147 legislative days a year. Their reported "hours" of working however are reported at a much higher rate, at least hourly. If we used the actual days they spent in session and said it was eight hours a day that equates to about 148 dollars an hour. Not bad eh. And that isn't taking into account all the perks that go with the job. But they will tell how they actually work 2940 hours a year. That's still fifty-nine dollars an hour. 

  Now those figures are just for the rank-and-file members. The leadership positions pay a good deal more. There are quite a few "leaders" if you look at the structure of the congress. The total payroll for congress is about 93 million dollars annually. So, we are paying our employees 93 million dollars a year and they can't manage a budget? Am I alone in seeing a problem here? Running the government should be no different than running your own home. The top priority has to be security! First, I need a safe place to live, then I need food on the table. After those needs are met, I can budget my remaining funds in any way I so choose. If I want to give it away that's my choice. That impulse to charity does not negate my responsibility to my family. The federal government has to operate in much the same manner. Take care of the citizens of this nation first and foremost. That is not happening! I think we need to "let go" of a good number of these non-productive members of congress. If they can't do the job, they're fired! No way should I a citizen and taxpayer of this land be threatened with the government shutting down because they can't pass a budget. The first thing on a spending bill should always be for the security of the nation. A spending bill isn't supposed to be a bill to be paid! And that is what we are seeing today. When you have to borrow money to pay the bills that isn't a spending bill, it's a bill. 

I remember listening to schoolhouse rock. I'm just a bill, on capital hill. That was in 1975. Today Bill is broke and homeless, probably being bussed to New York City. Heck Bill identifies as Jane and is worried about pronouns. Bill missed this episode of schoolhouse rock I guess.

                                                                        

just my opinion

  We all know that famous phrase, you can please some of the people some of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all the people all the time. A man named John Lydgate wrote that and he died in 1451. It's a testament to, things don't change all that much. There will always be haters. We all take turns fulfilling that role every now and again. We are not always happy campers. Yes, there are times when we just aren't pleased at all. It seems like the twenty-first century is going to be that way, at least in America it is. 

  I was thinking about that as I listened to the evening news. More specifically I was thinking about that when the reporters were asking their questions. The majority of the questions being asked were rhetorical. It is a method to display your displeasure with whatever you are asking about. Many of the questions remind me of when I was a child and would simply ask, why. But why? Drove my parents and siblings nuts with that. The usual answer was, because I said so, that's why. No one was pleased.

  I write and post this blog nearly every morning. It has become a part of my daily routine. Lately, according to Google analytics, I am enjoying at least a modicum of popularity. I admit I'm amused by that and surprised. As I said yesterday, I consider myself a skeptical person, that's just my nature. I have read what a blog is supposed to be, and it isn't what I'm doing. A blog is supposed to be centered on a specific topic or a hobby, some area of expertise. Thing is I don't consider myself an expert on anything other than myself. Even then I tend to alter the facts a bit, get a little creative with the story if you know what I mean. But I am the only one that knows the whole truth. I do choose what to share and what I choose not to share. According to Google analytics I must be pleasing some of the people some of the time. I've had times in the past when I didn't please anyone. I'm aware I'm not going to please anyone all the time. I know, even my wife isn't always happy with me, go figure. I'm a fascinating figure.

  How often does someone have to please you for you to remain speaking? What I mean is, before you block someone. That's what we do in the 21st century you know, we simply block those that we don't like or agree with. Sometimes we even "ghost" them. That's always been what I did, although I didn't call it ghosting, I called it ignoring. If I don't want to interact with you for any reason, I just didn't acknowledge your presence. That's what I usually do, but I have found some satisfaction in blocking some on social media. I'm adaptable, I'm a survivor. I read somewhere that we make friends with those that see the same truth as ourselves. That seems right to me. C.S. Lewis said that friendship is exclusive by definition. He did point out that it can be a dangerous thing as well as it can lead to excluding all others. Another way of saying into every life a little rain must fall. Every friend should tick you off every now and again. If they do not, they probably aren't being honest. 

  Just how honest should we be? Brutally honest isn't usually thought of as a good thing. Brutal honesty can hurt the one you are attempting to help. That is the reason you are telling the person that, right. Sometimes we use honesty as a weapon as well. Yeah, the truth hurts more than a lie but only if you share the same truth. Thing is, the only truth you can share honestly is your own. That's where those little white lies come into play. Heck, we even tell them to ourselves. Constructive criticism is another way of expressing brutal honesty. Others will support your position by saying that to the one injured, he is just giving you constructive criticism. Doesn't feel that way when it happens to you though. It could lead you to become "unfriended." 

  I looked that up and found that Thomas Fuller, an English clergyman, first wrote that down in his book The Appeal of Injured Innocence in 1659. In a letter to a friend of his he expressed his concern that they would become unfriended over a disagreement they had. He was talking about becoming an enemy. Whatever he had said or whatever the other guy had said was fighting words! I haven't read what the disagreement was all about, but I suspect it was based on opinion. A great deal of what we say is opinion, just because we believe it doesn't make it a fact. That's something that has led to a great deal of "unfriending" in today's world. Today we are supposed to share a common opinion as well as accept the facts, although in many cases the two aren't interchangeable. Yes, it is a binary world. Anything in between is just an opinion, a fabrication of man. 

  Well, all of this is simply my opinion. I give my opinions freely and without expectation of reward. It is one of the only things I have to give. That's true with all of us if you really think about it. I don't call many my friend, never have. I do enjoy the company of most people however, but as C.S.Lewis pointed out, friendship is necessarily exclusive. The reason for that is a simple one. If you are honest, share your opinions freely, there will those that are offended by that. They are the ones that will block you, ghost you, or just plain ignore you. In short, they aren't your friends. There are others that can still enjoy your company without adopting your opinions and views as their own. They aren't exactly your friends, but they aren't your enemies either. There are few that can take the whole monte. That's why you only have a few friends. Again, just my opinion.  

  

  

rights and expectations

 The hardest person to convince of anything should be yourself. That's my feeling. Call me a skeptic if you will but that is how I view things. I'm fully aware that no matter what I do, whatever talent I may possess, there is someone out there that can do it better. It's just a simple fact. Of that, I am convinced. It's not a bad thing, this skepticism, as skeptics are seldom disappointed. In fact, skeptics often find more to celebrate than others simply because they aren't expecting anything. I love surprises of a positive nature. I have said it more than once and it remains true, I love it when I can say, told you so. I believe we all like to be right, to be correct in our assumptions or conclusions. That is why we all sought that star on our papers when we were in elementary school. It's the reason for trophies, ribbons and medals. They are visible signs that we were right! Yes, it very satisfying to be able to say, told you so.

  It's a problem I see developing today, too many expectations. We are teaching our children to expect this or that, and indeed that they have a right to this or that. It's a far cry from the attitude of my youth. Freedom arrived when you were eighteen. That's the way it worked back then. I often heard this statement; as long as you live under my roof, you will live by my rules. It was a life lesson in independence. As long as you remained dependent, you remained obligated. You were obligated to comply with the rule. You didn't have to agree with the rule, like the rule, but you were obligated to follow that rule. You learned that when you did the right thing you could expect a positive result. Oh, it didn't always happen, there were disappointments, but for the most part if you were right, it went your way. Expecting others to change their views, their rules or conventions would definitely lead to disappointment. That wasn't happening. We weren't aware of it way back then, but what we were being taught was critical thinking skills. 

  I looked that up as I have heard of this skill, critical thinking, and became curious what that was. Here's what I found.  " Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation. " I'm not aware of who wrote that definition as no credit to the author is given by Wikipedia, but I had to smile when I read about being rational and skeptical. Yes, that is what I was taught as a kid alright. "If you think you're going out of the house looking like that you've got another think coming." If you had given any rational thought to that choice, you would have been skeptical about being allowed to wear it. In other words, you wouldn't be a bit surprised by the reaction you received. You wouldn't have any expectation that it would be allowed, but you would be pleasantly surprised if mom or dad let that slide. You reached that conclusion based on the available facts, evidence and observations and arguments. Yeah, it wasn't the first time you were faced with that situation. Didn't mean you wouldn't try, just that you did so with a measure of skepticism and no expectation of success. 

  There is definitely a lack of critical thinking going on today. If you believe that Bruce Jenner is now a woman, you haven't applied any critical thinking skills to the question. If you think your gender is fluid, you aren't using critical thinking skills. If you think Bidenomics is working, you surely haven't applied any critical thinking to the issue. If you believe the problem with gun violence is the gun, who really do need to take a closer critical look at that. If you think borrowing money from China to give to Ukraine while we have a debt of 31.3 trillion dollars is a good idea, you have failed the course on critical thinking. There are many other examples I could list taking place today that surely wouldn't have happened fifty years ago. A transgender person winning a beauty contest? That's critical thinking. No, that's nonsense. You don't like it, you wanna cry about that. I'll give you something to cry about. Now that thinking was critical to your survival. You just might want to reconsider your choice. 

the special people

  Things change over time, mostly what we call those changes is what changes though. I was remembering when I was in elementary school. At one end of the hall was the room for the special education kids. That is what it said on the door, special education. The kids in there were retarded. Yes, that was the official term being used at that time. I seldom saw or heard them, they just quietly came and went mostly unnoticed. It wasn't that anyone thought any less of them, no one was being mean or cruel to them, they were special. What you inferred from that designation was determined by whatever your parents told you, and by your peers. I've read were today they are incorporated into the regular classrooms, treated equally in all respects, whenever that is possible. I hear they are called challenged and have an intellectual disability. That is certainly a kinder, gentler way of describing their condition. The term was changed over time, but the meaning is exactly the same. Nothing has really changed at all. 

  Now back then those individuals were called special. They received special care and consideration due to their mental condition/capabilities. The objective of sending them to school was to educate them, teach them how to function in society. No longer were they to be locked away somewhere. It isn't simply accepting the fact that they have this condition, but an attempt to change that condition. It isn't a subtle difference between the two mindsets, it is life changing for those afflicted, as well as those who love and care for the person. The individual receives special treatment. The goal being to make it so they don't have to receive that special treatment in the future. Yes, that is the goal, not to be treated special but to reach a point where that isn't necessary.

  Yes, terms change over time and the way things are seen change too. I'm seeing a lot of folks that want to be special these days. They are demanding special treatment as well. You should call then by whatever gender or pronoun they choose regardless of reality. You should accept their behaviors as perfectly normal and natural even when they are most definitely aberrant behaviors. You should hire them, give them special privileges, change the rules of social convention and accommodate them in every way. They are the "special" people. The big change being the special people are now teaching the class! The way I see it this isn't going to work out very well at all. 

 Today we use terms like non-binary or gender fluid as though that were normal. It isn't and requires treatment. Yet the narrative is these folks are special. Yes, I agree, they are the special people. Not all are a danger, not all are a problem, but all are special. They require special treatment not simple acceptance. That was recognized when we took the special folks out of those closed rooms. We didn't just open the door however; we provided training and guidance. The hope was that one day they wouldn't be special. Yeah, let's go back to that.   

the context of time

  When we are our own heroes, there are no heroes. Something I bemoan a great deal in the last few years is how few understand that. Everyone is a hero. Every veteran, every police officer, first responder, or survivor of any disease or calamity. Every mother, father, aunt, uncle, friend, or casual acquaintance, heroes one and all. The result being, there are no heroes anymore! You don't think so, name one, just one today that everyone would agree is a genuine hero. Any one name come to mind? I didn't think so. I certainly can't think of any I would call a hero. I'm a veteran myself, served twenty years, but I'm no hero, not even close. I barely qualify for an honorable mention. I get annoyed when others attempt to convince me otherwise. Yes, it's flattering but I see it as virtue signaling on another level. Equivalent to those that say they wanted to serve but just couldn't, although they were world class athletes while in college. I've heard just about every reason imaginable, except for one, I didn't want to. 

 When I was growing up heroes were different from you and I, that's what made them heroic. In almost all cases we knew very little about the person or character beyond whatever heroic deed they had performed. They just didn't have any faults at all, that was the perception. I'd say that perception has certainly changed dramatically over the last few decades or so. And yes, I'm old enough to talk in decades. Been around long enough to miss things how they used to be. The excitement of the new has definitely worn off. You might say I've found my comfort zone, and it isn't today. Heroes of the past being disparaged as nothing but vile men and women, their memorials and memories erased. They are judged today for yesterday's actions.  There is no context of time with any of that. 

  Who do you hear being hailed as heroes? Men dressed as women reading books in the library to children. Men identifying as women competing in women's sports and becoming champions? Heroes? Anyone that chooses to buck any and all social convention, that chooses to offend others, to be "different" is now a hero. Well, that's what I hear all the time, along with everyone else who goes to work and does a job, they're heroes. It's part of the job description, hero. The truth is that is part of the problem today, we don't have heroes. It's rather an ironic thing if you really think about it. In years past we had our heroes, those that we all admired and wished we could be like. Any faults or flaws those heroes actually possessed were overlooked, set aside in the glow of their accomplishment. It was a bit of fantasy, the image of a hero. Today we entertain all sorts of fantasies and call those supporting them heroic. They are just like us. We're all heroes. 

 Mark Twain had this to say: “Unconsciously we all have a standard by which we measure other men, and if we examine closely, we find that this standard is a very simple one, and is this: we admire them, we envy them, for great qualities we ourselves lack. Hero worship consists in just that. Our heroes are men who do things which we recognize, with regret, and sometimes with a secret shame, that we cannot do. We find not much in ourselves to admire; we are always privately wanting to be like somebody else. If everybody was satisfied with himself, there would be no heroes.”

  It seems to me we spend more time exposing the faults in others than in examining ourselves. I'm ok, is the newest release on the best sellers list. Equality is the watchword. When everyone is a hero, there is no need to admire anyone else. And you know that's the thing about heroes. Heroes are what we wish we were. It doesn't take a lot of courage to follow the crowd, to join the mob. Heroes are made by the choices they make, not by what is popular at the moment. Being a hero isn't something you choose to do; it isn't anything you have a choice about. Heroes respond to the moment, even when that moment may last a lifetime. We need heroes to avoid being lost in obscurity. Today, more than ever. 

Randy Travis said it this way:  Your heroes will help you find good in yourself

                                                  Your friends won't forsake you for somebody else
                                                   They'll both stand beside you thru thick and thru thin
                                                   And that's how it goes with heroes and friends
                                                   And that's how it goes with heroes and friends

Today we make a list of friends based on what heroes they dismiss. That's the way it goes on Facebook and Twitter. A sad state of affairs I'd say. We need a hero. Just as sadly I just don't see anyone stepping up. But then again that's another thing about heroes, you never see them coming. You only admire them after the fact. 

threatened

 Once again, we the people are being threatened with a government shut down. The military won't get paid and social security recipients won't be paid, and the border guards won't be working either! Meanwhile legislation is being changed to allow sweatpants and hoodies to be worn in the congress because that is such a pressing issue. Hundreds of thousands of people are invading the southern border and congress is worried about a dress code. Seriously, think about that for just a few minutes. 

 There is no talk of Ukraine not receiving the millions of dollars promised by Joe Biden, budget or not, that money is being sent to fuel a war. A war, by the way, that is quite profitable for Russia. The price of oil is almost a hundred a barrel, Putin is making a killing. The vaccines are free right? No, we are paying the pharmaceutical companies for the manufacture of those vaccines, we the people. Doesn't matter if you can't feed your family or yourself because your social security payments have stopped, big pharma will get paid. Our government is backing the unions, especially the UAW. Their demands are for a four-day work week and higher wages. More money, less work and the eventual banning of the very product they are manufacturing! Yeah, what a plan. All electric within a few decades. No way to support that however, no infrastructure to deliver the needed energy and indeed, the reality is we don't have the technology to even produce that much electricity, let along deliver it! About 20% of the energy produced today is from green sources, about 11% globally. 

  I listened as a democratic senator, the name escapes me at the moment, explained that if we didn't pass the budget the border would be unprotected. His warning was, if you think it is bad now, just wait until the government shuts down! He was saying that would be the fault of the Republicans! The Republicans are not concerned with the border, they just want to cut funds to social programs and hurt the middle class. Yes, that was his dire warning to Americans, pass the budget or illegals will flood the country. That's the threat I heard him utter. And it was just that, a threat. We will, of course, have to feed, house, give medical care and educational opportunities to every one of them. No turning back if that happens. They will receive a cash stipend to help them, we'll just use your social security benefits to fund that. Yeah, you will just have to take a cut, you know, because that is only right. We will redistribute your social security benefits. They're refugees!

  The budget crisis is real. We know that we need to get government spending under control. Everyone knows that! You don't have to be a politician to understand that. We have the largest debt in history, 32.6 trillion dollars! The news outlets outline all the government services that would be suspended if the budget isn't passed. The warnings include affecting your travel plans. The air traffic controllers would not receive training, they will short staffed. Your holiday plans ruined. But the dress code has been changed, a new office has been established, one whose function is to repeal the second amendment. I'm certain their funding won't be affected by any of this though. The vice president has been charged with overseeing this new office. I'm guessing she will be able to find it, more than can be said for the southern border, a place she hasn't been! 

  If the government shuts down and all those federal workers aren't paid, they still have to work. The essential workers that is. Those workers will receive backpay after a budget is passed. The worker bees that are necessary must show up and do their job without pay. Border patrol isn't essential. They don't have to go to work. That's strange, federal agents will still be protecting every single congressperson, their security won't be compromised or affected. Their "borders" are fully protected. All the page boys or whatever they call them these days will be paid. All the assistants to the assistants will continue to be paid. Every member of Congress continues to receive their pay! Yes, they won't have to wait for backpay or anything else, their pay and perks continue on unaffected. The reality is, the only ones that get hurt by this is you and I, the average Joe taxpayer. Not the lawmakers, not the ones on welfare and not the ones entering the country illegally. Nope, none of those groups will be affected. They will continue to be funded no matter what! 

 Don't plan on taking a vacation. Don't plan on even driving your car to visit grandma. The availability of parts to repair your vehicle will be affected by this. The price of gasoline will soar as well. And, unless you have a large amount of savings you won't be able to afford any of that. Forget the holidays! You think things are bad now, just wait. 

After posting this some errors were pointed out to me. I apologize for the misinformation. Social Security and Medicare payments will continue in the event of a government shutdown. The verification and issuance of benefits would be affected however, those already enrolled will continue to receive their checks. Thank You Mr. James Divine for getting me straight.  

trending

  You can't get people to see what can't be seen. That's what I think whenever I see these ladies that are a size 22 wearing a bikini to show how beautiful they are. Hey, I get it but that's like me doing a painting and insisting it is a masterpiece. It isn't what others are going to see. I make no apologies for that but I'm aware of the truth. Regardless of our inner feelings there are standards for such things, although I think standard is the wrong choice of word, to describe that. Perhaps accepted and expected are better choices. Both of those will change over time and within society. We often call that fad or fashion. Beauty is certainly viewed differently according to culture. 

  There is no way to explain it really. I mean how did Twiggy become such a sensation? Now you have to be a certain age to remember her, but she is responsible for the current standard as far as body sizes for women. Before Twiggy the ideal woman was certainly more curvaceous and less fragile than what is generally accepted today. I'm not sure what the deal with the Kardashians are and the big booty craze. I'm thinking that might be desirous with a certain crowd but will never be the mainstream thing. It is interesting to note that the government established the sizes we are familiar with today. They were established for manufacturers of clothing. Prior to the 1930's there were none. Most clothing was made at home and so it was just made to fit. Later on, shirts were made with one length for the sleeve and pants were not hemmed. That is why you saw men wearing sleeve garters. That was how you adjusted the length of the sleeve. 

  It's a funny thing though, this sense of beauty. Beauty, it is said, is in the eye of the beholder. I don't believe that is the truth of the matter however, acceptance is in the eye of the beholder would be a more accurate way of expressing that sentiment. Body size has certainly changed for women over the centuries. Marilyn Monroe wore a size 12 dress, larger by today's standards. But according to Google size inflation has taken place and that dress today would be a size 6. I wouldn't know anything about any of that, but I do know this. For most of my adult life I wore a medium size shirt, then it went to large. Today I noticed a x-large fits much better. And it isn't because of my waistline! My height and weight haven't changed in the last ten years, but the size of my shirts have! Coincidence that x-large is usually a bit more expensive? As far as being attractive that hasn't changed much for men. Tall, dark and handsome still rules the day. A natural and normal body shape is just fine. Other than that, you are either buff or overweight. Or what's worse, scrawny. Sometimes called wiry. Not much you can do about that though, doesn't do a bit of good to wear a muscle shirt and insist that you're buff. No one is going to see it that way. 

  You know those saying I don't care are really saying they do care, they care a great deal. That's the reason they say that. I'm like everyone else. I've said it myself when I'm mad that others don't see what I see. Hey Barney said sharing is caring and I'm sharing! It hurts when it isn't accepted. It just seems unfair at times doesn't it. Vanity is what we are talking about. Vanity can mean several things. I read where it came from the word vanitas, Latin for empty. You are left feeling a bit empty when others do not recognize you. Marginalized is a popular term used today, also prejudiced. The whole issue being others aren't looking through your eyes. So, like I said in my opening statement, you can't get people to see what can't be seen. 

  It is something I have wondered about. How do these standards change? Why was Twiggy such a sensation? What's the attraction? That is the heart of the matter when it comes to all of this, what is the attraction? Who is setting the trend today. I'm not aware of that as I have little interest in any of it. I'm guessing having a huge butt is the thing today, I don't know. Tattoos are certainly a fashionable choice  for the ladies as well as the men. Yoga pants, leggings and what appear to be PJ's are quite the popular choices for ladies of all ages. Still, a slender build is desirable. 

  It isn't just in fashion or dress sizes. How did abstract art become a thing? It goes by many names these days but I'm talking about those "paintings" that have no shape to them, just splatters of paint, a few lines maybe and a title. There are those that will pay millions of dollars for them insisting they are masterpieces but that isn't what I see. My genuine feeling is that I could do the same thing. I also know that no one would recognize that as "art" and make a big deal about it. The question I have is, why not? When I look at it, it looks just like a Pollack. I can spill and throw paint around. For me it remains a mystery. If I did one of those paintings, I would be aware of one thing, you aren't going to see what I see. I'm not going to enter them into any gallery setting to be judged by those that feel those things are wonderful pieces of art. All that will get me is rejection. I get it, I understand that. I'm just wondering about those folks that do. What makes them think that way? Just how do these standards get set? How did so many get convinced that they are works of art? I don't know, Twiggy wasn't very attractive in my book. Just how do you convince others to see what you see? Just how do you get others to "buy" it? 

  I attended a course in sales that explained the steps to follow. It begins with a conversation. Then you have to create curiosity in the person. Once you have established that you need to create the desire in them to have whatever it is you're selling. It doesn't really matter what you are trying to sell as long as you convince them they need it! This product, style, trend or whatever will do this for you. It will make you popular, rich, famous, handsome, beautiful, smart or whatever. You will be cool! Once you create the desire, they will buy it. Selling a bikini to a size 22 woman takes quite the salesman. It can be done though; the proof is out there. Caveat Emptor. Just don't be mad at the salesman.  

The ORSA

  The Office of Gun Violence Prevention. A brand new office established by President Biden to accomplish what purpose? Preventing gun violence? Hey Joe, guns aren't violent just the people using them. In fact, guns are controlled violence, that what causes the projectile to leave the barrel, same principle as an internal combustion engine, a controlled explosion. Maybe we need an Office of Automobile Violence Prevention. Oh, we already have programs attempting to eliminate that, we are calling it green energy. The plan is to get rid of internal combustion engines altogether. And let's be clear about this new office of gun violence prevention, that is the purpose of that office, to get rid of guns. It's really an amazing thing if you think about it, a government office established for the sole purpose of removing your constitutional right to bear arms. The only way you are going to stop people from using guns to shoot each other is to take away all the guns. The fact is, that is impossible! It is estimated that there are over 434 million guns in America. That's just our best guess. 

  Currently we have 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States. They include everything from the FBI to your local cop shop. What do you suppose their job is? Prevention is just as much a part of their function as apprehending the criminals in society. We do tend to think there only job is to catch the bad guys but that isn't all they do. They investigate the source of whatever "wrongdoing" is going on. It could be drugs, booze, pornography, stolen goods or guns, both illegal and legal. Yes, a sort of gun violence prevention thing. There are about 800,000 sworn law enforcement officers serving today. Do we really need a new office? The Vice-President will oversee the office. It will have a director and two deputy directors. There has been no announcement on the number of employees. So, we have three people leading the way without anyone to lead. The stated mission: to end the scrouge of gun violence in America. In other words, make people stop shooting each other. No statements about how they intend to accomplish that, however. The reason for that? It's pretty obvious really, they can't just come right out and say they want to ban all guns. 

 But, that's the only way you are going to stop that and anyone with a lick of common sense knows that. We tried the 18th amendment. The results were amazing! It lasted about twelve years before a democrat called for its' repeal. That would have been FDR. The official line was it had led to the decline in alcohol consumption, but it also increased crime. You don't have to be a government analyst or professor to understand why. People have been consuming alcohol since the dark ages. People want their booze. The people will have their booze. 

 The proverbial horse is out of the barn and there is no putting it back. It is the same with guns. Since the nation was formed it has been our constitutional right to bear arms. You cannot take that away and reasonably expect everyone to just stop using them. The result will be about the same as banning alcohol manufacture and consumption. They will still be manufactured, and they will still be sold, and they will still be used by criminals. Oh, you may see a decline in their use but not by the criminal element. The thing is, criminals don't care about the law. The reality is, it is only the criminal element that is "fueling the increase in gun violence" it isn't the sport shooter or the homeowner protecting themselves from the little street thugs. Consider this one simple fact. Switzerland remained neutral for over two hundred years because of one thing, an armed citizenry. They have about 2 million guns in a population of eight million. 

  We don't need an Office of Gun Violence Prevention. What we do need is to enforce the laws as they are currently written. Use a gun in the commission of a crime and you are doing time! You are not getting home detention, plea deals, or probation! You are going to jail. You will be locked up awaiting your trial and locked up right after your trial. You don't even need to bring a toothbrush; one will be provided by the court. When it is known and understood by the would-be thugs that being caught with an illegal gun will also result in jail time, no exceptions, that will curb some of this nonsense. Taking the guns out of the hands of the people that abide by the law isn't going to do anything to the ones that don't! It's just that simple. An Office of Gun Violence Prevention, give me a break. The real name should be, The Office for the Repeal of the Second Amendment. The ORSA 

Casual governance

  Heard on the news that the dress code has been relaxed in the congress. Apparently, that was done to satisfy some senator named Fetterman. I admit I don't know much about him. A democrat from Pennsylvania that likes to dress casually is about it. I don't want to form an opinion about him based solely on that bit of information. He's a democrat and that alone tells me something, not all democrats are bad people. The majority of them are just misguided in my opinion. But the interest in that story is the changing of the dress code. Whether it was done simply to satisfy this one person or not what remains is that it was changed. I see it as the dressing down of America.

  Remember when you were a child, and your mom would dress you? She did so for whatever occasion or activity you were going to be involved in. It was a mixture of practicality and decorum. Deportment is what we called that. Knowing how to properly dress for the occasion or event was important. It wasn't about how comfortable you felt, it was about the image you were projecting. Clothes make the man! That story stated the obvious, you are judged by your appearance. It doesn't matter how much you scream and holler about that being unfair, silly, ridiculous or provincial, the fact remains, you will be judged in that way. Yes, yes I know, it's true you can put lipstick on a pig but that won't change the pig. Thing is, if nothing else, it will attract attention. Wearing shorts or sweat pants in the Senate chambers will do the same thing. Perhaps he feels "empowered" by doing that. It is all about feelings these days isn't it.

  What this does is speak to discipline. Personal discipline.  ( “Why is discipline important? Discipline teaches us to operate by principle rather than desire. Saying no to our impulses (even the ones that are not inherently sinful) puts us in control of our appetites rather than vice versa. It deposes our lust and permits truth, virtue, and integrity to rule our minds instead. " ) John McArthur, Jr wrote that, and I couldn't say it any better than that . By changing the dress code, lowering the standard, it degrades the office. Governance is a serious occupation. It isn't a football game or a tennis match. One should be dressed appropriately. The truth is there shouldn't be a need for a dress code at all! Those in that position shouldn't need to be told how to dress, they should have enough common sense and sense of dignity to do that without rules.

Now I'm aware that what you wear has little to do with your abilities. Fashion is a matter of choice. But what I'm talking about is showing respect to others. That's why we dress appropriately. I have written several times about all of this as it occurred in everyday life. The wearing of casual clothing at funerals and other situations like that. Go to Walmart on any given day if you have any doubts about any of that. Yes, perhaps wearing your Sunday best to go grocery shopping was a bit much but it was a sign of respect for others. That was true in the manner of dress and of speech. With the lowering of the standard, both have been lowered is my feeling. That is what John McArthur, jr. was talking about with discipline. It is about doing what is right, what is appropriate to the occasion regardless of your personal feeling.

This man Fetterman is a Senator of the United States. He was elected to that office to represent the people of his state. Is that a reflection of the way the entire state of Pennsylvania feels? Does that represent you? And how does that look to you? I just wonder what is the point? Why is the Senate changing its' rules to suit Fetterman. Is it because he said he doesn't want to wear a suit and tie? What is the reasoning behind this decision? Is being a Senator just a casual thing? I mean, just something he does when he feels like it? I don't feel like getting dressed today. Sounds to me like he has no self-discipline, no self-respect. He is just acting like a spoiled little brat. But I don't want to. And the leadership, Chuck Schumer to be exact, acquiescence to this shows me he is no leader at all.

That's the way I feel about that. I don't care what your political affiliation happens to be. I don't care how you personally feel about a dress code. I do care about your personal integrity. If you can't even put forth enough effort to comply with some basic rules of decorum, of professional behavior, your integrity will be called into question. If you can't exercise enough personal discipline to get dressed in the morning, how am I supposed to trust you with legislating critical policies? There are only two senators that represent each state. In Pa, one of them doesn't want to even get dressed for the job. Yeah, that's the guy that is going to fight for me right. Hey, he is only taking a casual interest in doing that, that's my view anyway.

regression

  I hear a lot of talk about mental health these days. Apparently, it's a big problem for many people. I personally believe it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you are constantly told that you have issues and should seek therapy that is exactly what you will do. It is also a convenient way to explain the actions of others that we don't understand. A means to gain some measure of solace or closure. They must have been suffering from a mental health crisis. At the same time, we are seeing mental health issues manifesting themselves in others and insisting that it is normal behavior. We justify that by calling it tolerance or inclusivity. The reality is it is abnormal behavior. All of that can lead to confusion and cause others to develop a mental health crisis of their own. A crisis that will surely be mislabeled as prejudice or some form of phobia. Hate will often be associated with that. 

  Okay so just what is mental health? Traditionally you have mental health problems when your behaviors run contrary to the expected behaviors in a society. That is how we used to know if you were nuts. Off your rocker was a common term used to describe that. People were confined to institutions for that. And yes, abuses occurred quite frequently. The reason for that was attempting to cure what can't be seen. No one really knows what to do. Mental illness can be a sort of addiction, that's my thinking. I also believe no one is cured of addiction or mental health issues unless they do so themselves. Any of these programs, institutions, therapists and interventions that don't succeed share one thing in common. The official line will be, it isn't a failure of treatment, it's a relapse, the fault of the individual. Credit is only taken for success!

  The problem with this concept of mental illness is that it can't be seen or diagnosed by someone outside of the individual. Oh, there are many trained professionals with their college degrees that have studied the problem. There are many that claim to know what to do but the truth is, it is all guesswork. If you were to examine the big book, the DSM you can see where opinions have changed over time. What was a mental issue no longer is, and what wasn't, is now. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is what is used to determine mental disorders. In Europe a different publication is used called the ICD. The two manuals don't necessarily agree. The "experts" argue about that all the time. In America the DSM is the standard and the ICD rarely used, the opposite being true in European nations. Both manuals are written by a consensus of mental health professionals and other "experts" in the field of mental health. Thing is, they don't all agree and periodically change the diagnosis based on current societal expectations. A man wearing a dress and wanting his organs surgically removed because of the way he feels certainly wasn't the normal thing not that many years ago. What changed?  Is that normal today? Many will tell you so, including the DSM. Quite the rewrite in my opinion.

  But the thing is simply that mental health is something that can't be seen or diagnosed with clinical certainty. It is a very convenient tool or crutch to learn upon, a way to shift responsibility. It's not my fault, I have mental issues. As is the case with a lot of things these days claiming to have a mental problem is a sign of courage and should receive special treatment and consideration. It's not your fault. It's okay because that is the way you feel. It can easily be validated by mental health professionals. Yes, and your car has issues, ask any mechanic. I can certainly look up all the symptoms, learn what to say to those mental health professionals to obtain whatever diagnosis I want. As long as I have the ability to pay, I will get treatment. Yes, I will have a diagnosis. You can bet in it.

  I do believe we need to quit telling everyone that every time something doesn't go the way you think it should it is someone else's fault. We need to quit telling people they have mental health issues whenever they aren't happy. If they aren't satisfied with their lives, their jobs or their personal relationships that doesn't mean they have a mental health problem. All of that falls under the category of life. It is what it is! If my father had never let go of the bicycle, I would never have learned to ride it. I needed to experience that fear, fall down and get back up to learn. I didn't need counseling to overcome my fear of falling down, I needed to fall down. When little Johnny got that coveted gold star on his school paper, and I didn't, it wasn't unjust, unfair or discriminatory. I just didn't earn that star, simple as that, I learned to get over it. Yes, we should be teaching our children to deal with disappointment, with failure, and with the expectations of society. We need to return to the time when we were taught to respect authority. Oh, I was taught I could question that authority, that was my absolute right, but only after I had complied with the law. I have the right to redress. That is written in the first amendment to the constitution. What is redress? To remedy or set right. Before you can do that, the wrong has to be committed. 

  All I'm saying here is that we need to knock it off. It's an old adage and one that holds a great deal of truth. You can please some of the people some of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. I'd add this; you aren't going to be happy all of the time, get over it. Only one person can really ensure your happiness. That person is you! Therapy isn't going to do it, medications aren't going to do it, you have to do it. Do not look for happiness outside of yourself. You have to regulate your emotions. That's on you. When you allow your emotions to get out of control you get crazy! It's that simple. Just because you feel a certain way that doesn't make it right. Calm down, think rationally. I was born a man, assigned that at birth. How I feel about that makes no difference, the fact remains. It is what it is. Yeah, let's start teaching that once again. Attempting to normalize what isn't normal isn't progressive, it's regressive. And guess what; regression leads to mental illness. Even I know that, and I haven't been to college, gotten a degree or a PhD. I learned that somewhere around the fifth grade.   

worth a shot

  I was going through some old photographs the other day, and a few caught my attention. Those caught my attention not because of who was in the picture but rather the composition of the picture. It came as a sort of revelation to me. Not being one that has any artistic talent of my own or any special appreciation for art in general it is new to me. Could this mean that I'm maturing? Nah, I'm just getting older every day is all. But I have been inspired by seeing photographs taken by some of Facebook friends. One lady in particular takes wonderful shots of the ocean and bay. They are the areas of my youth, the place where I grew up and often a sense of nostalgia sweeps over me when I see them. Just shots of nature that capture a moment in time but are timeless. The scene could be as easily from the seventeenth century as from the twenty first. There is something timeless about the shore. 

  I enlarged a few old pictures and posted them to Facebook. Others were very kind in complimenting me on those pictures. It does appear that others genuinely enjoyed seeing them. It is always satisfying when that happens, a guilty little pleasure. We all like to get those likes, loves and emojis. I've heard for some it becomes an obsession. The pictures I enlarged were of my great grandfather, a man I knew and loved. One shows him sitting with an old friend just having a chat. It is that picture that inspired me a bit, awakened this idea of my pictures as a form of art. To be clear that particular picture was taken by a professional photographer and the vast majority of mine certainly wouldn't be. I just have the family photographs taken by family and friends. The cameras used would range from the Brownie box camera to a 35MM Nikon. The thing is, by far, the bulk of those photographs are in black and white. 

  It's one of those things I had never given much thought to. I went to the internet for a brief bit of research on the topic. It says color photography was available to the general public as early as the 1930's but generally reserved for the wealthier people for the obvious reason. It wasn't until the late 1960's color photos hit the mainstream and became the normal thing. That made me realize something, my childhood was in black and white. That was true with photographs and television. I'm no expert on such things but I have older photographs that are on tin, ones on cardboard, and various types of photograph papers. My computer asks questions like is the picture in black and white or is it greyscale? I'm uncertain what all that means. I have digitized a great number of those old pictures, along with some documents of interest. The hope there is that they are preserved for future generations. But I have some doubts about that as the technology changes. Our eyes work the same way they did since the beginning of time, but the method of decoding digital images is constantly changing. Could you play an eight track tape today? That's what I'm thinking about. Yeah, it is possible if you really make an effort. Having the band play the song live is far easier, like holding the picture in your hand.

  I got to thinking about this and an idea formed. As I said I have zero artistic ability I'm aware of that. It doesn't prevent me from trying occasionally, however. I feel like I do better with words than I do with paints, pens or pencils. I type almost everything these days because my penmanship has never been a strong point. It's insurance that others will be able to read whatever it is I have written. This artistic project I have in mind is to use those black and white images to record my youth. My idea is to simply print select photographs and assemble them in some order to tell a story. The people in the picture will not be the center of focus. As with most family photographs from those "dark" ages of black and white they almost always have a person or a group of people in them. You didn't waste film just taking pictures of stuff, not unless you were wealthy or trying to become a professional photographer. The objective back then was to capture family events or moments of some significance. So, I'm looking at this plan as a challenge. I want to shift the focus from the people to the background. 

  I'm thinking that is what the artistic people would call the composition of the picture. I'm thinking it will be challenging simply because of the way those photographs were taken. Almost always posed with a background as plain and simple as can be. There weren't many spontaneous pictures taken. The early cameras made that a necessity, you had to stand still! My parents would yell at us kids about that, stand still while I get this picture, look at the camera, smile. It is something that is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, these posed photographs. I much prefer photographs taken without the knowledge of the one being photographed. I want to capture them the way they look. The candid shots are the best ones in my book. Those are the ones I will be looking for in my collection of old pictures and they are scarce. Those are what I hope to create. I'm thinking of a photo book with footnotes. The picture itself is on the page but you have to go to the footnotes if you are interested in learning more. A picture is worth a thousand words, that's what I've been told. If I can manage that with the selection of my photographs the footnotes shouldn't be necessary. I'm setting my sights a bit high perhaps but it's worth a shot, no pun intended. 

   

in principle

  From George Washingtons' farewell address to the nation " And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

George Washington resigned his commission as Commander in Chief of the continental army in 1783 after the treaty of Paris was signed. The revolutionary war was over, we had won our freedom. It became official when the paperwork was done. Five years later Washington would be elected to become our first president. He would go on to serve two terms. It was his decision to step down from the presidency, he established that as a tradition, only FDR didn't honor that tradition. In 1951 the 22nd amendment codified that tradition into law. George Washington delivered his farewell address to the nation to the American Daily Advertiser, a newspaper in Philadelphia. It was published in that paper on the 19th of September in 1796. That was two hundred and seventy-seven years ago today.

I have copied a portion of that speech and began this blog with that. Washington, in this passage, is talking about a national morality. Washington and indeed the majority of the founding fathers would be horrified at the state of our national morality today. Washington speaks of religious principle. He isn't advocating for any one religion, any denomination or sect, just stressing the importance of religious principle. All the major religions of the world share common principles. The number one principle being accountability for your choices. You will be held to account by a higher power than anything on this earth. It is that principle that should guide you and guide the nation. Religion doesn't define morality. Morality are the values and principles of conduct established within a society. That was understood by those writing the declaration of independence and the constitution. That alone was the very reason there was no "national" religion established nor any "religious test" required to hold office anywhere in the land. Still Washington pointed out a simple fact, maintaining national morality without religious principle is a slippery slope indeed. National morality can only be maintained by the people, by those we the people elect to fulfill those offices. In his elegant way of expressing his thoughts he points out that whatever you may concede to education (think trust the science) should not exclude religious principles.

What is our national morality? Having no moral compass, no conscience, simply calling every behavior acceptable in the name of inclusivity and diversity, isn't moral at all. In fact, it is just the opposite of moral behavior. The basis for morality is accepted standards of behavior. The lack of a standard does not indicate a moral position. Our national morality should be a reflection of the moral values, traditions and principles of the citizens. That isn't what I'm seeing today. What I'm seeing today is a representation of political power. Moral principle isn't the force driving legislation. And that is exactly what George Washington feared. It is as he said, national morality cannot prevail. That is the issue we face today. If we strip away all the distractions, all the petty side issues, all the finger pointing and blaming of the other party, the real issue is a moral one. We have to do the right thing, the moral thing. That includes establishing standards and adhering to those standards. We need to return to an understanding of consequence. We will all be held to account, personally held to account! The excuse everyone was doing it will not grant you amnesty. You will be held to account.

ephemera

 Old books, papers and photographs. That is what I used to see at my grandparents' home. Occasionally one would be taken down and shown to me. An explanation was given. This is what this is, or this is who that person was. Mostly it was the latter, who that person was. They were usually deceased! As a kid I would look at them and think it was a little creepy. In those photographs those folks were seldom smiling, as was the custom back in the day. The pictures were always black and white, posed and stiff. The thing is, and I wasn't aware of that at the time, the pictures were lifeless. It is something I have come to understand. If you never knew the person, saw them when living, a picture doesn't bring them to life. What that picture does is bring alive is a memory. 

  Today I look around my home and what do I see? Old books, papers and photographs. They will be the things left behind, the objects whose fate will be decided upon. I do my best to make them familiar to my children and grandchildren in the hope they will continue on. When I think about it I have amazingly little from my parents home to remind me of that time. Perhaps that was the result of me having joined the Navy. While I was in the service my parents sold our home and everything had to be moved out. A great deal of that ephemera was lost at that time, especially the things that were mine. To my parents there were just objects, stuff or junk. To me some of that stuff stored memories, memories discarded now. Well, you can't keep it all can you. No, and you can't take it with you either. 

  Today much of what I have is stored on a computer or some form of storage device. Literally hundreds of photographs, a good number of videos, and all sorts of files. Very little of what I have is protected by passwords and could be accessed easily enough by anyone. I'm thinking the only challenge in the future will be in knowing what to use to open those files. Compact discs are slowly fading away and I have a good deal of stuff stored on them. SC cards and flash drives also hold a great deal. Will those in the future understand the technology needed to open them? I'm certain they will be able to if the interest is great enough but that's the real issue, the interest. Would you buy a record player to play a single record? I have already purchased some equipment like a cassette player because I wanted to transfer that information to a digital format. But I knew what was on that tape, I knew I wanted to save it, had it been some random tape I wouldn't have done that, then it is just trash. 

  I do have some things I have written by hand in books. Yes, actual handwritten documents. They are getting to be a rarity if you think about that. The best you can hope for today is a real signature. But, even now, you can digitally sign some documents and that is as legal as doing it in person. Imagine if the founding fathers had simply digitally signed the Declaration of Independence. It sure wouldn't seem as personal as it does today. I have a few, a precious few in fact, cards, letters or even examples of my parents handwriting. I have nothing that they ever wrote directly to me as I discarded the letters my mom would write to me while I was in the service. I haven't saved any cards either. I do have a postcard written by my grandmother to her father. Every time I look at it, I feel a close personal connection although she passed long before my birth. I did know her father and from that card know she called him papa. I have a photograph of her when she graduated from grammar school. That was in 1912. Her life was half over at that point as she passed at age 24, after giving birth to my dad. That little postcard with her handwriting upon it survives. 

  Ephemera or communication from the past? Isn't that the point of old books, papers and photographs. The caveman scratching at the walls was hoping just for that. The desire was to leave a record. All we can do is speculate about that; we really don't know the motivation behind all that. Eventually man devised a method to write it down, to convey what their thoughts and feelings were to others. To pass information down through the ages was certainly one motivation. The desire being to make it a little easier for the next generation, to make it easier for their children and grandchildren. It most likely began with family stories around a fire. I expect much information was closely guarded as well. Information is power. And now we are told we are living in the information age. All information readily available to anyone at anytime, anywhere. The internet making the great library of Alexander seem insignificant in comparison. The only regrets we have about that is what information was lost, the unknown. 

  I think that is what all of us want to avoid, the loss of information. I often put that as, being forgotten. We all want to be remembered. What we want remembered is the information we shared while we were here. That's the connection to the past that is most binding. There are times when I am conscious of that, when I realize I was taught this by my father, my brother or someone else. It's my hope that one day someone will say that about me. I learned that from my dad, my brother or this guy named Ben. That is how I want to be remembered. This is what he did, and this is what I learned from that. I began writing some of my blogs in a notebook, in cursive, for my grandchildren to have. I do believe handwritten documents of any type will be saved more readily than any printed material. The only question being, will they be able to read it. My cursive writing does somewhat resemble hieroglyphs more than the English language. But I tell myself that will be the charm in it. What is this book Dad? Well, that was written by your great grandfather in some secret code that has never been cracked. One day technology will be developed to decipher it.   

                                                                                 

                                                        Grandmother Clara, aged 12 The year is 1912. 

Now

  My new percolator is perking away in the kitchen, and all is right in the world. There were some tense moments yesterday, some consternation and fraying of nerves. All that has passed now with my Amazon prime delivery. The twenty first century is amazing! I was up early just to put on a pot. In my house a pot is still something you put water in, you hope it doesn't start smoking. I plugged that in, and a bright red light came on indicating it was heating. When it had finished perking the light turned a bright blue, a miracle of twenty first century technology. I saw that switch and memories of the blue light special at K-mart flashed before my eyes. I rushed toward the light. It's almost a religious experience, I knew salvation was close at hand. The aroma, the sight of that dark brown liquid with just a wisp of steam rising up brings joy to my heart and my world. Drawn like the proverbial moth to the flame it is irresistible. 

  Pouring a cup for my wife and for myself I am satisfied the crisis has passed. I tell her about the blue light. Then I'm thinking that Walmart or Target any of the big stores should bring that back. I quickly realize what a bad idea that would be in today's world. Turn on that light and surely a mass of people would turn into a pitchfork and torch bearing mob bent on getting the deal! Like the crowds that fought for the Cabbage patch kids, chaos would surely follow. What with online shopping, and all the apps for that, luckily the blue light isn't a necessity anymore. It's all sales, all the time.  There are browser extensions scouring the web for the best deals every time you log on. It wasn't that long ago when the blue light was turned on to attract the browser! The times they are a'changin'. I received my new percolator about 14 hours after I ordered it. I could track when the order was placed, when it was shipped, out for delivery, and was notified when it was delivered! Reassurance was at hand every step of the way. 

  What a world we live in. Every product imaginable is literally at your fingertips. A few keystrokes and it can be on the way. The browser searches for the best deal, you can earn points, cash back and even apply those savings to future purchases. There are offers to just finance everything too, easy payments plans where you can choose the duration of the loan. Just press the button and it's yours! It's only a matter of time before the government will have a program to pay off your Amazon loans. Hey, it would be discriminating to only pay off student loans, the working class people need help too! And you certainly shouldn't have to pay for that laptop or big screen television, you are entitled to them. It is just basic human dignity. Why it would be social oppression if they didn't. We'll have the rich people pay for all that. 

  Yes, we sure have come a long way since the day of mail order. Montgomery Ward was the very first one. It was a single sheet of paper and included clothing and household goods. With the advent of the modern mail system others soon followed. Sears and Roebuck and J C Penney among the leaders. Smaller outfits still operate today with those little catalogues you get in your mailbox. Fingerhut leads the pack in that department. Booklet sized pamphlets offering all manner of goods and all easily financed. All the stuff you used to find in the 5&10 stores right in your mailbox. That stuff can also be found in every Dollar General and Family Dollar store in America. You have to go to Walmart or Walgreens for the "as seen on tv" products, generally speaking. Chia pets have endured over the decades and remain a staple in any of those catalogues. I still have my Obama chia, a true collectable. 

  I can't imagine my Christmas as a child without mail order. I knew that Santa didn't really live at the north pole, he lived in Chicago. Chicago was the headquarters for Sears and Roebuck and J C Penney was in New York city. Macy's in New York City paid for Santa to be in their store. Even Santa needed a side hustle. He sent the orders back to Chicago. The rest of the year I'm not certain what he was doing but Sears delivered year-round! It was exciting to thumb through the pages circling the things you wanted hoping mom or dad would see that. I remember well sitting at the kitchen table and choosing school clothes. The latest styles were always available. Sometimes I got to pick the color, seldom did I get to pick the style. I did hear, you ain't going to school looking like that! But the catalogue did provide hours of enjoyment and it never crashed. And of course, there was the revolving credit plan. I would point out how little that new bike was going to cost, only a few dollars a month! I could get a job and pay that, really, you wouldn't have to pay a thing, trust me. I can't remember a time that ploy actually worked but I do remember trying. 

  It sure is easier today to run up the bill. Without delay you can order a product and it is on the way. No time to reconsider. It was different when you had to write it all down. You had to fill out the form, filling in the product number and description. It made you pay closer attention to just what you were doing. No problem with that today, just click and go. Just defer that payment until a later time. Next payday is fine, it will be automatically withdrawn so you don't even have to think about it. How convenient is that? Want a reminder though, no problem, there's an app for that. Yes, it is a wonderful world indeed. Like Christmas every day. No need for Santa or a magic sled, we have Amazon prime. 

                                                                             

 Like Christmas magic, my new pot is here. Step aside Santa, I needed it now.  

    

unexpected

  The unexpected. It happened when I got up this morning. No, I wasn't surprised that I woke up even at my age, I fully expect to wake up. It may or may not be unexpected one day. I won't know that until the time comes. But anyway, I got up and went out to get my coffee. My wife is usually up before I am and the coffee is ready. I walk out to the living room to greet her with my customary good morning greetings only to see a look of sadness on her face. She looks up at me and says, the news is bad. Oh no, what happened? The coffee pot is broken! Wait, what, the coffee pot is broken. I immediately head for the kitchen.

  Now being a man known for fixing just about anything that breaks, I just naturally begin the diagnosis. First thing is checking the electrical source. Yup, we have power in the receptacle. Now is the cord alright. Yes, nothing wrong with the cord although it does have a slight smell of burning but no evidence of that beyond that. The heating element is of course sealed into the base of the pot and cannot be accessed. It is riveted together, no user serviceable parts. That's a label that always irritates me! I'll be the judge of that! And yes, I take the tags off of mattresses and pillows! Under penalty of law my foot. But I can put a multimeter on the heating element and determine continuity. The circuit is open! That's bad, very bad in fact, it shouldn't be an open circuit. The pot is officially dead. 

  Okay, so the coffee pot is history. We do have an automatic drip still in the pantry; right? The wife reminds me we donated that to Goodwill a while back when we were cleaning up the pantry. A brief moment of panic sets in. Then with a flash of brilliance I suggest we can just make coffee the cowboy way. All we need is boiling water and coffee grounds. As I prepare to build a fire, I remember we have an electric stove, that would probably be easier than a campfire. I could just put the grinds in the water and boil it but how am I going to strain that? I don't have coffee filters because you don't use them with a percolator. You do however use a basket in the percolator, and it occurs to me I could just place that in the pot of water. I'm on a roll now, the panic is subsiding and I'm beginning to think more clearly. 

  The water is boiling now, and I let it go for a few minutes or so. Turning back the heat a bit I allow the coffee to brew. I figure it is done now and I need to remove that basket of coffee grounds from the pot. Only a small portion is sticking out. I can't simply reach in with my fingers and get that. Hmm, let's see, oh I know a pair of pliers will work just fine. Having removed that basket, I now have room to dip a ladle in there and fill up my cup. I'm feeling pretty good about all of this at this point, but I haven't tasted the coffee yet. The coffee tastes great! Might be the best coffee I've ever had. Maybe I should just make it this way all the time. By the end of my second cup the panic and excitement has died down. The coffee is still good but that was a lot of hassle. I need to get another electric percolator. So, it is off to Amazon. They have just what I want, and it will be delivered today between 5PM and 10PM if I order right away. With just a few keystrokes my pot is on the way! I wasn't expecting to order a new coffeepot this morning but the unexpected happens. I hate to admit it, but Amazon is better than the pony express! Jeff Bezos made some money off me this morning, maybe .0006 cents but I don't begrudge the man that. I'm getting a new pot.    

targeted

  Heard on the news this morning the auto workers are going on strike. It's being called a stand-up strike. It's supposed to be similar to the sit-down strikes in the 1930's. Like most everything else the Democrats have anything to do with the name has to be changed. The strike works exactly the same way though, not everyone goes on strike at the same time, just some targeted areas. Rashida Tlaib was shown standing on the picket line. The demands are for a 40% pay increase, a four-day work week and increased medical and dental benefits. Currently the average worker in the UAW is paid thirty dollars an hour. UAW presidents, yes there are more than one, average over 107,000 dollars a year in salary. That's a bit over fifty-one dollars an hour. They aren't going on strike. The workers on strike can receive five hundred a week if they are eligible. Well at least until the money runs out, that is estimated to last eleven weeks unless they also continue to pay cobra and health care costs then it won't last that long. Of course, you still have to pay your 2.5% dues out of your paycheck.

  The average cost of a new American made automobile is 46,000 dollars. If labor costs increase by 40% as the union is demanding that cost is certainly going to be much higher. Rashida Tlaib in her brief statement on the news proclaiming the companies are making record profits. It isn't right that the company is making a profit! Well Rashida I've got news for you, you can raise the salary, the hourly wage, the cost of materials or whatever else you want, and those companies will sell the product for a profit. That's what they are in business for! How much profit they make will determine whether they stay in business or not. If you increase labor costs by 40% the price goes up 40%. Now the average cost of a new car will be 64,000 dollars. You're going to need a raise to afford that. 

  The big complaint is that the CEO's of the auto companies have seen a reported 40% increase in their salaries. They aren't members of the union, they are employees of the corporation. The union workers however complain that they have only seen a 6% increase in their pay. The unions feel like they should get the same as the CEO's. It has always been my feeling that counting the coins in your neighbors' purse doesn't do anything for yours. What the governing board of a corporation decides to pay their executives shouldn't be the worker bees' concern. If you want that salary, get that job. It isn't reasonable or logical to believe that the worker should make the same as the CEO. 

  This strike could affect those that aren't union workers as well. Other union workers that aren't striking will almost certainly be affected as well. If there is no product, no work to be done because of an upstream strike, what are they to do? Some states will allow them to collect unemployment because of a strike, some will not. The companies may also hire outside workers. The companies can decide on lockouts as well. This whole strike could blow up in the face of the union bosses that are making these demands. These targeted strikes are being used because the fund to pay the strikers just won't support a mass strike. The roughly 825 million in the fund would quickly be exhausted. In fact, Shawn Fain has been saying how in the past the workers went on strike without getting paid! And if that is what is required, he is certain those union people will fight the good fight! He's not saying he won't get his salary though, no, in fact he'll probably need a bit more for expenses, you know, as he fights for you.

Yes, this targeted strike will certainly benefit some folks. Or cost them their jobs but it's a chance the union bosses are willing to take. Everyone should make the same amount of money that is also part of the argument. There are those in the union that get paid more simply because they have been a member of the union longer. Well, that needs to change as well as part of this proposal. Just remember that only applies to the workforce, not the leadership. Makes me ask one question; who is the target? 

  

professional opinion

  Was listening to the medical reporter on the news this morning and her closing remark is what really caught my attention. "Make your doctor prove to you that you don't have ovarian cancer." I heard that as make your doctor prove to you that your diagnosis is wrong. That was because of the way the story was presented. A lady had been going to her doctor for years and had undergone numerous tests. The issue was eventually determined to be ovarian cancer, but she felt like that should have been diagnosed sooner. She had, after all, told her doctor all the symptoms of that disease. Well, that is after she learned she had ovarian cancer and listed all the symptoms she had experienced. 

  We go to doctors because they are experts in medical issues. Seems quite obvious to me. I go to experts for almost everything. Today we even have relationship experts! Are we now to go to the experts for verification of our own diagnosis? To have them prove I am right or wrong. I read this or that on the internet; prove to me that I'm wrong! I should go to the experts and tell them what to do. I don't know about doctors but as a mechanic I never liked it when the person tried to tell me what was wrong, or how to fix it. Tell me what the problem is, and I'll figure out what needs to be done. If you already know what is wrong and how to fix it, then my suggestion to you is, fix it. If you don't have the time or equipment necessary, take it to a professional who does. But when you do that, don't attempt to tell the professional their job! And that advice comes from someone who believes if you want something done right, do it yourself. I understand what that really means is, if I want it done my way, I need to do it.

  The story was about a missed diagnosis. I get it, the individual was upset that happened, I would be too. The thing is it wasn't just one person, one doctor or one test. According to the story this had taken years to come to light. The thing that bothered me is the proclamation that I should make my doctor prove his diagnosis to me. I wonder just how he or she is supposed to do that! That individual attended many schools, has many hours of "on the job" experience and is the expert. How are they to prove to me, a person that most likely has only a rudimentary knowledge of the subject, that they are correct. I either believe them or I don't. For me I'm taking a calculated risk. That's my view of it anyway. Currently the CDC insists I should have a covid vaccine along with all the boosters. I have chosen to have none. So far, I'm right as I have never gotten covid, I'm still alive! But okay, that's prevention not a diagnosis. If I go to my doctor insisting that I have a medical condition, just how does that physician prove otherwise? It's all a matter of trust. Either you trust the doctor, or you don't. If you don't, find one you do. If you don't trust any of them become a doctor yourself! 

  I don't know it just seems to me that when it comes to experts you just have to trust in them. As for doctors it has to be tough these days what with all the advertising and the internets' WEB MD. Everyone feels like they are an expert nowadays. I should be prescribed this drug or that drug. I googled my condition and checked all the blocks. According to that, I definitely have that disorder! Prove to me that I don't. What you are asking is that the doctor prove his opinion. You know, doctors are like the supreme court in that regard, what they give you is their opinion. An opinion based in knowledge and experience. In cases when something happens contrary to the prevailing medical opinion, the patient makes a recovery and survives, it is called a medical miracle! 

  Stories like that irritate me because they have no redeeming value. They are sensational, no doubt, and make some folks feel better about themselves. I told you so. That was one person out of thousands that had that experience. The story would have you believe it is a regular occurrence. If the doctor doesn't give you the diagnosis you are expecting, he/she should have to prove otherwise. You should insist that they do. My advice to you is simple enough, get another opinion. In my experience you can find an "expert" to agree with just about any opinion you want. There are "experts" saying Bruce Jenner is a woman! There are experts proclaiming there are multiple genders. If you are willing to pay, there is an expert that will agree. All experts share one thing. They have "credentials" of some type to prove they are experts. That's what gives them the power to say, "in my professional opinion." Sometimes, it is wrong. 

protocol

  It happens in real life, and it happens on Facebook. Someone has passed away. Someone you may have been close to, or someone that was a casual acquaintance. You may or may not be aware of their passing. In person, when you mention that person it creates an awkward moment when you receive that news. It's a mixture of shock and sadness. You are never quite sure what to say. What is there to say? On Facebook however you receive notifications of birthdays. At least I do with a number of people. I suppose all that depends upon what others are willing to share and the settings chosen by each person. Then I go to say Happy Birthday to that individual. For those that have passed a Happy Heavenly Birthday is posted. At other times I may not be aware that person has passed, or I may have a feeling that they have but I'm unsure and so I hesitate. I see that posting as a sort of remembrance of the person. It is a signal to others that you haven't forgotten about the person. I don't believe anyone in the afterlife has a Facebook account. I feel a bit awkward as it seems a bit patronizing. I mean if it were an in person social interaction, I wouldn't be saying that to anyone. The posting of that on Facebook or any social media platform does seem a bit strange. 

  Perhaps it does serve a purpose, however. I have read and agree with the idea that when we lose someone, we still want to hear others speak of them. I know I'm always pleased when someone remembers one of my family members or friends. I'm always talking about my ancestors, even ones I never knew personally, ones born centuries before myself. It's a comfort when others remember too. Growing up I was always told you don't speak ill of the dead. It wasn't anything I ever questioned, the meaning behind that I mean, but was simply an accepted thing. If you didn't have anything nice to say you were admonished to not say anything at all. All of this does speak to being remembered. I believe that is something all of us wish for, to be remembered. It's a personal thing. Perhaps that posting will bring some measure of comfort to others. 

  Social media is a world of its' own. It's a difficult world to navigate. We are provided with some measures to defend ourselves though, we call it blocking others. A Police Department has been established by Facebook to monitor your speech. That's a bit different than the way our system of government was designed to work. It is a world full of pitfalls. Sarcasm rarely works well and neither does blatant honesty. Your profile will often be "browsed", and opinions formed based on that information or misinformation depending upon the author. You could say your profile page is a sort of background check. It's one you compose, however. In this world you will encounter complete strangers and close personal friends. Perhaps the most dangerous people to encounter are those that feel they know who you are from having known you fifty years ago. Perhaps that knowledge is nothing more than you attended the same school. You didn't speak to them then, but today they want to act as though you are old friends. Yes, it can be a very tricky world to navigate.

  What we remember. In our personal lives it is fairly easy to remember details, especially major ones like someone having passed away. On social media however that task becomes far more difficult. Now my friends list is quite small when compared to many others that I know about. I interact with just about the same number of people each day. Facebook may call them followers, according to that I have 26. LOL. Whatever name you wish to apply the number of interactions I have on Facebook are far greater than what I have in my real life, in the real world. I can get confused about facts and events. And the thing is when posting to social media it isn't an interaction with just one person it may be to hundreds! I wouldn't call it an audience, but many are listening! I often get "feedback" on my comments. Sometimes I respond to that feedback and other times I simply ignore it. 

  I don't know it just seems a bit strange to me the posting of Happy Heavenly Birthday. The person I'm wishing happy birthday to is no longer here to receive that wish. The belief is they will somehow know that I wished them a happy birthday. Those that are still here will know I remembered. Is that the point? Yes, I guess that it is. Maybe I just think about these things too much. It's a wonder. What is the social protocol for this? We went from mourning death to celebrating life. I'm guessing Happy Birthday is in order.