it's complicated

  A small time back I saw an advertisement for a "Cold War" certificate. It wasn't really an advertisement I guess more like a short story. Anyway, in the story was the link to apply for this certificate. I went there and it all seemed legit enough, you do have to check these things carefully. So, I filled the form out and a copy of my DD-214 was required. I did hesitate a bit before scanning that and including that information. The web address was an "https" indicating it is a secure site and it was a part of the department of defense. The other day that certificate came in the mail. It is a Certificate of Recognition for my service during the "Cold War" which lasted from 2 Sept 1945 until 26 December 1991. It states I was promoting peace and stability for this nation. Yeah, I did that. 

 The date of 2 September 1945 was chosen as the beginning of the cold war because on that day the Japanese signed the formal surrender onboard USS Missouri. WW2 was over but all wasn't well in the world. The soviets didn't want to play nice. The tensions began on that day. On the 26th of December in 1991 the flag of The USSR was lowered marking the end to that nation. The "cold war" was over. But, not really, only on paper it would seem. Today that nation is called Russia. It's complicated. New allies and alliances are being formed and tensions remain. Still, the lowering of the flag of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic was a milestone in history. It was the first nation in history based on Communism. It contained 14 other nations at its' height. 

 I requested that certificate for a simple reason. It wasn't because I wanted another certificate to put on my wall. I do have a good number of them from my twenty-year career. You just kind of gather them along the way. The vast majority just mark some milestone or achievement. And that is what this certificate is all about I suppose. I asked for it because its' my feeling they won't be as plentiful or as common as all the others I have. I admit I had to smile reading the article about the cold war and my entitlement to recognition. I got a "participation" award! I have to say during my time in the service I never thought I was in a war, a cold war. It didn't feel like a war.

 I was issued a National Defense Ribbon, with corresponding medal, while in boot camp. That was because the Vietnam war was still in progress at that time. On the 30th of April in 1975 that war ended. I was onboard Uss Yellowstone AD-41 at the time. There wasn't much of a fuss made about that. No parades, no celebrations, nothing like that. Just another day onboard ship. Later I would say, I ended the Vietnam war. Still later I was awarded the National Defense Medal for a second time for Desert Sheild/Desert Storm. Was there when all that ended too. The Gulf War.  Now, I'm saying I ended the cold war too! Three wars in twenty years time! 

 That certificate was first authorized in 1998. I had been retired for five years by that time. I had never heard about it until this year. I wonder if everyone in the service was issued that certificate. I would expect so. Perhaps another ceremony to present that certificate to the crew! Hated going to all those ceremonies, standing there, being bored while some officer ran his mouth. The only one I wanted to go to was my retirement ceremony. I did that. It was kind of neat getting just one more certificate, however. I got to post it to Facebook and everything. It wasn't until 2004 that Facebook even existed on the internet. Yeah, I participated and have the certificate to prove it! I'm amused. That certificate is suitable for framing, and I will do so. A piece of history. What war? The cold war! But wasn't that when everyone was concerned about global warming? Well yes, it's complicated. 

   

  

Limits

   Age and infirmity. Both are limiting factors in our lives. That is just a simple fact. No matter how much we would like to deny that it will remain. It's true that there are as many variables to that as there are in people. Some may suffer from infirmity early on in life. Others may live a good long life without much sickness. Both will grow old. If nothing else, old age will kill you! It's going to happen. In ancient times it was written that some men lived for hundreds of years, methuselah reportedly lived to be 969 years old! I think that is metaphorically speaking, however. But whatever the case was, he died from old age. There were a bunch of others that lived to their 900's. All are gone. 

  Now regarding the presidential debate Thursday evening, I believe it should be obvious to anyone watching or listening that Biden has an infirmity. That infirmity is the result of age. His mental acuity is in question. The mumbling and lack of focus are apparent. He struggled to answer the questions, was often lost and you could see it in his face. Like a deer in the headlights, he was startled and shocked at times. It should lead anyone with a lick of common sense to question if this man is really making "executive" decisions regarding our nation? He is the CEO like it or not. He took a week to prepare for this debate and didn't manage twenty minutes without folding like a cheap chair. 

  Now Trump looked at least physically up to the challenge and his mental awareness is certainly intact. You may not agree with and personally harbor hate or resentment for him, but that doesn't change that. Perhaps he is just a grumpy old man, arrogant, stubborn and set in his ways. Age is certainly catching up to him as well. Your problem with him would be that he is going to make those "executive" decisions! You already feel like he isn't going to make the decisions you want. That's why you voted for the other guy the last time around. An additional issue being he is gaining more support in the house and senate. The political tide is changing. 

  So, we have age and infirmity to deal with. Should we place an age limit on that position? We placed a time limit saying that no one should hold that much power for that long. The fear being a tyranny could be created. Did you notice that Congress didn't apply that same logic to their own positions? No term limits for them! That needs to be changed but that topic is for another day. Biden is old and showing signs of infirmity. Should he, and can he be made to take a cognitive test? Perhaps several to determine his ability to lead? Should Trump also be made to submit to such testing? It certainly seems fair and reasonable if both candidates did so. 

  One argument in opposition to that is it would be age discrimination. No one complains that age discrimination prevents children from buying alcohol or tobacco products. No one complaining a ten-year-old can't drive a car or fly airplanes. No complaints about the age to vote. It's only mentioned when something is being taken away. There have been discussions about that regarding driver's license. You can be required to pass an eye and hearing test in some states. No state can refuse your driving privileges based solely on age. As long as you can pass the required exams, you're good to go. Being a man of 71 myself I certainly don't want anyone telling me, you're too old! The truth is I am too old for some things. I can't compete with youth! Just about any child could outrun me over even a short distance. Yeah, I might be in great shape, jog everyday, whatever but I can't compete against youth. It's just a fact of life.

  The office of the president. The CEO of America. What is that job? It is to gather all the available information that you can to determine a course of action. It is behind that desk that Truman famously said, "the buck stops here." The person behind that desk must be able to take all of that in, sort it out, and make the best possible choice. That's what the job is. It isn't really to establish all the policies, all the plans and promises. It is to decide what is best for the nation. The CEO is responsible for the success of the corporation(nation) and is held accountable should it fail. That's the job. When the CEO is no longer capable of that should he/she remain in that position? Is it enough for the CEO to just do as he/she is directed by the board of directors (congress) or another outside influence? 

  Now it's true everyone loves the boss when things go the way they want them too. When they get more money, more time off, and more benefits. Few are worried about the stability of the company at that point. Things are great! Until they're not. Then workers have to be let go, salaries reduced and nose to the grindstones. The attempt to stay in business is made and the workers are unhappy. That's when you will hear those same workers blaming the CEO. Well, the boss should have known better. You'll hear things like, I would have taken a pay cut to keep my job. I would have been happy to work overtime! But then it's too late. 

  We have an opportunity to replace the CEO in November. You don't get that choice in your job most of the time. It's important to understand that the CEO (president) can and most likely will affect your job. It will show at the gas pump, at the grocery store and in those goods and services you need. Yes, it sounds wonderful when the boss makes promises. Everyone is going to be treated equally, fairly and without any bias whatsoever. All you downtrodden that have been struggling for so long will get relief. It doesn't matter if you are the best or worst employee! It doesn't sound so great when the boss says, we have a lot of work to do, and some things will have to be cut. It scares you to death when you start hearing things will be merit based! What, I have to do the right thing even when no one is looking? 

  Age and infirmity. They catch up to us all. Nothing we can do about that. Should there be an age limit on the presidency? It is a physically demanding position. That's obvious to everyone that is paying attention. The daily stress and pressure on that person is tremendous. It takes a physical toll. I'd suggest the mental pressure is equally as intense. It's my feeling both are necessary to fulfil the position.         

Acceptable risk

  The Supreme court declined to rule on Idaho vs the United States. The matter was left to the lower courts to decide. The case centers on whether Idaho can allow abortions to protect the life or health of the mother. In 1986 a law was passed to prevent hospitals from turning away patients that did not have insurance or sending them to a different hospital. They are required to stabilize the patient whose life or health is at risk. You could say it is mandated charity or mandated morality depending upon your view. That in itself was all well and good until Idaho barred abortions. The Biden administration immediately sued Idaho saying they are in violation of that law. And that is where the issue gets sticky. 

 On the surface you can use the supremacy clause of the constitution. Federal law always overrides state law. But it isn't that simple. That's why we have legal scholars, debates and arguments over just that almost daily. The Democrats are certainly more focused on States rights historically. That's why we had a civil war, remember that. With the overturning of Roe V Wade the constitutional right to an abortion is no longer valid. That means it is up to the individual states to decide. And that is what Idaho has chosen to do. It appears we are once again at an impasse regarding states' rights. The court refused to rule. Idaho does allow for abortion to save a life. The circumstances in which an emergency abortion may be performed is a narrow one. That determination is based on risk.

  That is what needs to be decided upon. How much risk is acceptable? The law is specific in saying that abortions may be performed to save a life. That is when there is no doubt that the life of the child or the mother is in immediate danger of death. The law also says that "stabilizing" measures must be taken to protect the health of the patient. How do you gauge between life threatening or simply a threat? I would say a great deal of that depends upon the attending physician. Just how to measure acceptable risk to a individual? It is well known that smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol are all health risks. They even come with warnings about that, yet no federal law banning that activity in the interest of protecting health. All pregnancies come with risk. The vast majority are successful, however. Is the cure for every complication to be an abortion? 

  The question becomes a basic one. Is a pregnant woman one person or two? If you want to say a woman remains as a single person until the birth of the baby, you treat the woman only. The baby doesn't count, and you don't need to provide stabilizing health care to that baby. You can simply terminate, abort and discard that baby thereby eliminating the risk to the woman. But if there are actually two living beings there don't they deserve equal treatment? Shouldn't the child receive stabilizing, lifesaving care as well? How much risk would you take to protect the life of your child? 

  So just what is the Biden administration suing for? They are suing say Idaho must allow abortions for every risk associated with pregnancy. Remember Idaho already allow abortions for emergencies to save the life of the mother. What Idaho doesn't allow are abortions for the sake of convenance or instances where the life of the mother is not in immediate danger. Basically, Idaho is saying that abortions are an emergency measure only and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. What Biden wants is to reinstate Roe V Wade. Should the federal government say abortion is a constitutional right? Personally, I don't see how, when it clearly states we all have a right to life! 

 The eighth amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment but does not prohibit capital punishment, that being left to the states to decide. Why shouldn't the states also decide on who gets to live? Should the government mandate death on demand! That is what this administration is proposing. An abortion should be performed anywhere, anytime, on demand. The only criteria being a risk. Does being pregnant makes you anxious? It's a risk to your happiness so you just abort! Uncertain about the future? Terminate. That's what the left wants. Anytime, anywhere for any reason. How much risk is acceptable? Does that change once the child is born? How much would you risk to save the life of your child?  Think about that. 

upgrading the past

  And the nonsense continues. Just heard where Biden issued presidential pardons to all those convicted of violating article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. That article expressly prohibited consensual sodomy. It was later removed and made "legal;" by Barack Obama. Biden proclaiming, he is "making right a historic wrong." And that is nonsense. You cannot change the past. The fact remains, it was an illegal act at the time the act was performed, in direct violation of Article 125 of the UCMJ. You can't change that! The question isn't whether it was right or wrong. The law is the law, until that law is changed. As I ask, if the speed limit sign were changed today but I got the ticket yesterday does that mean the ticket is invalid? Try to convince the judge of that.

  Yeah, I get it, it's pride month and we have to ensure we secure that voting block. We are, after all, running out of minorities to pander too. Also, the reason this administration is allowing the influx at the border, a new group of potential voters! If you have been here illegally for at least ten years the past will be rewritten as well, that crime forgotten about and rewarded. And the plan is to reward those that were discharged from the military because they violated the law. Yes, Biden says they may apply and receive back pay and benefits equal to those that served their time without breaking the law! Certainly seems equitable, doesn't it? 

  Look the deal is this. You signed the papers, took an oath and should be held to that. As to article 125 regarding homosexuality, that is what it was called back then, that question is specifically asked by the recruiter. I know that because I was a recruiter! If you answered yes, you were disqualified from service. If you were and said no, you lied! If it was later discovered that you did so you were discharged for that! You were discharged for lying, that was the crime. That hasn't changed and will never change. A lie is always a lie! In a court of law, it is called perjury! The reason you perjured yourself doesn't matter, the fact that you did does. 

  It seems to me if this is going to be the case, just forgive and forget, it should apply to everyone. Everyone that was discharged from the service for breaking the law should be given back their pay and allowances, awarded an honorable discharge and receive all the benefits. If we don't then we are saying this law matters and that one doesn't. Selective enforcement of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? I'm not cutting my hair because it is how I feel, and it doesn't matter. I can still do my job! I don't serve on the Sabath or Christmas or Eid-Al-Fitr because it goes against my firmly held religious beliefs. I'm a male, but feel like a female, so I should be in the Wins not regular navy with all those guys. I'm betting I could be the strongest and fastest Win (women in naval service) ever! And if I am not allowed, I should definitely be compensated for that. 

  The violation of the law was the crime. Whether it should have been a crime in the first place doesn't matter. It was! I fail to see why anyone should be compensated for breaking the law. They were well aware of the restriction, the prohibition of that action and agreed to abide by the rules. They did not! End of story. This is just more liberal nonsense, the denial of reality. It is also a slap in the face to all of those that served our time, fulfilled our obligations and obeyed the rules. It is the reason we were awarded an "Honorable" discharge. What honor lies in lying? That's what those folks did! What honor lies in breaking the rules? That's what they did. The punishment for committing that infraction was well known, published, and explained. You could say it was their body, their choice. And they have to accept the responsibility for that choice! That's how the law works. 

 There are certain requirements that must be met in order to receive this pardon. You have to apply for it. It isn't just a blanket pardon I understand that. It's a process. But the proclamation doesn't really say all of that. No, the big statement is a pardon for being in the LGBTQ+ community. A presidential statement saying that is just fine, we are sorry you broke the law. We are sorry we enforced the law. It's a pandering to a specific group of voters. It's just another chip in the wall of law and order. Another exception to the rule. You can break the law and that's alright as long as we later decide to change the law. Then when we do, all is forgiven, compensation is awarded, and you are declared a survivor. You can, in this case, even receive an upgrade of your discharge. Yes sir, quite the honorable service. Service you can be Proud of. Rather ironic if you think about it. 

choice

  The "gun violence" is once again in the news. First off, no gun was ever violent, only the people using them. That needs to be understood before any intelligent discussion could take place. As long as the gun is blamed its' impossible to hold people accountable. If we didn't have alcohol there wouldn't be DWI's either. Makes as much sense as blaming the gun. The surgeon general released a rather lengthy paper on this, and I did attempt to read it. I didn't get far. All the studies and statistics. It reminded me of a ball cap I once owned. On that cap it said, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. A lot of that was contained in the few paragraphs I managed to get through. One conclusion the surgeon general reached was he thought the increase in gun violence was increasing mental health problems. I just had to say, I think it is the other way around! It's the mental health of people that is leading to people shooting each other! The gun is simply the tool of choice. 

  Now I realize I don't have any advanced degrees; I realize I'm old and not a "professional;" anything. But I do know something about people. I've been around a lot of people in my lifetime, being in the service I had to live closely with those of many different cultures and mindsets. For the most part people tend to follow the trends. In short, they pretty much react to things the way they have been taught. And yes, the lessons are different today from when I was a kid. I grew up in the fifties and sixties. The boomers. It was the time when boys were boys and girls were girls. No confusion about any of that. A time when a man stood his ground and fought like a man. We didn't pull out knives or guns! That was the stuff of movies. We didn't do it because we had enough sense to know you could get seriously injured in that way. And not only that, but it was also the coward's way. 

  The mental health of the nation is in jeopardy. For me it's due to a lack of accountability. Ever since I can remember I was told, you do that, and you'll go to hell for certain! Killing someone was one of those things. Not only were you going to hell, but you probably will also get the electric chair! It's not going to be good. You were going to be to account for your misdeeds criminally, civilly and socially. No, we don't hire troublemakers here. No, we don't hire criminals and felons! You will not be counseled, placed in special programs and given any advantages because you are recovering. Not happening. The objective being don't screw up in the first place! And if you do, try to keep it as quiet as possible, and never repeat that mistake. 

  Know why more people are using a gun to settle their differences or act out? The answer is simple. It's personally safer to do that. In that way I can harm others without too much risk to myself. It is certainly a lot safer than just punching you in the face. Sometimes the other person punches back, harder and faster than you! They are choosing guns for that reason and that reason alone. That's the reason there are mass shootings as well. Quite difficult to have a mass beat down unless you're Bruce Lee or Arnold the terminator! So, it is a choice. I'm choosing the tool for the job. Wanting to do the job is the issue, not the tool. At one time in America a man would call another one out because they had impugned their honor. A duel would ensue, you choose the weapon. Today, a semi-auto rifle or pistol is the weapon of choice. It's the person doing the choosing! 

 The deal is this. Until we start holding those using a gun accountable for their actions it will continue. That accountability needs to be swift and sure. It also needs to be very public! Do this and this is what happens! And it happens quickly! No more of this waiting twenty years on death row, you got until tomorrow! You may not believe in heaven, but I will make you believe in hell. You'll believe it because you will see it before you expire. I'll make sure of that.   "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Just substitute gun for sword. I'd practice what I preach! Those guns will become a lot less violent in short order. 

    

what you sow

  Saw a short expose on a man that is a motivational speaker. When he was in school, he had issues with learning. He was diagnosed with IED (intermittent explosive disorder) a mental disorder. It is pretty much as described. Fits of anger bordering on rage occur over the littlest of issues. It is treatable by medications and therapy. He received the help he needed and finished his schooling and wrote a book about that. Now he goes school to school talking to the kids about how he was treated differently on account of that, the stigma associated with it, and how he overcame it all. A story of survival. 

  All of that is all well and good and I'm glad he made the best of a bad situation. Whatever medications and treatments he received appear to have everything under control. What was disturbing to me however was this proclamation. One in five children suffer from this disorder. That's what the professional are saying, one in five! So, they are saying what we used to call "tantrums" are really a mental disorder. Not only that but 20% of the population have it! And the cure is medications combined with mental health counseling. Better living through chemistry? 

 The Dupont company had a slogan "Better things for better living through chemistry" the "through chemistry part was dropped in 1982, however. The promise was a better life and the ability to solve any human problems through science. Well at least mask the problem, if not correct it. It's my thinking that is what is going on more so than any solutions being offered. Science may indeed be able to offer an explanation for the behavior, but that doesn't mean they can eliminate it. Still, like I said, if whatever they are doing works and helps others that's a good thing. Timothy Leary also thought a better existence was possible through chemistry. 

  I listened to the story and thought about what was being said. One in five people, at least school age children, have this disorder. But if you are treated for it and succeed, that's a feather in your cap. And that is where I begin to have a problem with all this better living through chemistry stuff. It appears to me that the more issues and problems you have that you can later say you overcome, the better it is for you. These circumstances being called the removal of stigma. 

 What is stigma? It's a sign. Stigmata in the Christian religion is when the marks of crucifixion appear on a person. But we think of stigma in a different way. We think stigma is a bad thing. It's a false belief or health condition. Often thought of as prejudicial. If you have behaved in a certain fashion, contrary to the norm, the expected response, or hold beliefs that do not agree with reality, but change your behavior later, none of that should be held against you. In fact, you should be rewarded for that very action. It should never be mentioned again unless you don't get your way, then you can use that as a badge of entitlement. Should I not acquiesce, I can then be accused of perpetuating stigma! 

 I suppose there are those that will simply say I'm a grumpy old man, out of touch with the world and set in my ways. I've heard that before and I admit, I've even said that before to others. I have been around a while and seen a lot of things change socially and politically. It is a constant topic with me, morality, ethics, and common sense. I did come from a time and place where God helps those who help themselves was often the advice of the day. I heard, "buck up" a lot as well. That was accompanied with, I'll give you something to cry about. All intended to impart some sense of maturity. I soon learned the world doesn't revolve around me. I learned to cope with the world, how to conduct myself in a civil fashion and I didn't feel like a victim. A far cry from what I'm hearing from an awful lot of "professionals" these days. 

  Emotional cripples abound surviving on that "better living through chemistry" mentality. And yesterday I heard one in five will require some form of medication and therapy for their lifetimes just to get along with others. Without it they will throw a fit, have tantrums and create all sorts of problems. But they have a mental issue. And the thing is, from my point of view, a good number of the "causes" today concern mental health issues. I'm being told all of that is just fine, it's normal behavior and completely natural. A good number of those behaviors where in the DSM not that many years ago, they were diagnosable mental health issues. Well, another old adage says you reap what you sow. That is certainly the truth, the long and short of it. Today we sow the seeds of doubt. You can't do it on your own. You need help! Today we are told, trust the science. Better living through science. Just trust the science, you can't do this on your own. 

excess

  Like a lot of us I have a lot of stuff I don't use anymore. Things like cd's, vhs tapes, books, papers and bric-a-brac. You don't really want to throw them away, you think about donating them but realize probably no one else wants them either. A good deal of this stuff holds memories to a varying degree. The memory only belongs to you though, to someone else it is a mystery. Just what the heck is this? But I really do need to start cleaning things out. I don't want to think of it as Swedish death cleaning. That just doesn't sound good. Not planning on dying anytime soon. I did read where there is a business in Japan that cleans out people's apartments after they pass. It's called the "lonely" death. Kodokushi is the Japanese term for that. It happens when the elderly die alone in their apartments or homes and aren't discovered for a long time. Apparently, it happens quite frequently in Japan. But I'm getting off track here.

 I did grow up in a home where the philosophy was waste not, want not. Little was discarded as you might find that useful one day. I have to say often times that was true; back then. In this more modern world that doesn't appear to hold as much truth as it once did. Things change so rapidly, mostly technology, that your stuff is outdated and of little use. I certainly have discovered that to be the truth many times over. I began the process of digitizing some of my old video tapes I had taken of the grandkids. It was quite the tedious process as the technology doesn't always want to cooperate. I realize it is a lack of skill/knowledge on my part. I became frustrated and set it aside. Never had that problem with photographs! Today I have an assortment of digital cameras and recording devices. Presently I just use my phone 90% of the time. Pictures or video makes no difference. 

 I do have much digital media in the cloud. Still not sure where it is, or how to access it. But I'm backing my stuff up to the cloud nonetheless, I think it costs about ten dollars a month. I wonder sometimes if anyone else could access that. I mean, like your family members after you are gone. Doesn't seem to make much sense to maintain a permanent record if they can't. I'm not permanent.

  Now all this digital media stuff is certainly more convenient. Gone are the days of film and having to wait to get it developed. Gone are the days when the picture you have is the picture you took. Lots of programs to enhance, correct and create pictures of your own adding or removing whatever you like. And now there is AI a whole new ballgame. Is it true or false? Have to have computer software that can decipher it and tell you if it has been altered. Can you trust the computer? I don't know if I do. But convenience leads to excess, that's my thought. Just how many photographs (images) do you take? I still remember when 36 exposures were a lot! There are those taking that many selfies every day! The thing is however, viewing those digital images are not so easy. They are when using the device that took them but in just a short time it can become challenging. I know, it happens to me all the time. There are five major formats for images. Do you know all five and what they are? Do you know what is different about each one? I certainly don't. You need to go to a class to begin to understand all of that. I'm not going.

 So, I'm left with boxes full of digital media in several formats. I'm left with several devices for playing these things back. There are various methods for transferring this media and companies that specialize is doing so. I think about the money I spent to be able to record this stuff and now I have to spend more money to look at it. As I said, with a photograph you didn't have that problem. I'm looking at an image right now taken prior to 1889! And I don't require any tech to do so, just my eyes.

  I still have some of the tech necessary to play back those tapes, cd's and vhs tapes. Not all of it is compatible with my computer. Well, you know computer programs get updated and changed seems like almost monthly. I have a computer running windows 10 but it isn't capable of running windows 11. I still have the installation disc for AOL! Do you know anyone using a dial up modem? Yes, they are still around, like a digital dinosaur. Seems like a great deal of my media has become fossilized! Get the right scientist with the right equipment and it could be decoded I suppose. But is it worth it? Well, I keep saying, I might need that one day, could come in handy. I better hold onto it. It is difficult letting go of your memories, even the littlest ones. I do think that one day my grandkids or whoever will discover that stuff and perhaps become curious. What secrets are on those disc's, tapes or little sd cards?  

  I did a little reading, what some love to call researching these days, and it was an eye opener. Turns out all that tech isn't nearly as permanent as we have been led to believe. A ssd has a life span of about ten years, that's it. All our little cards, tapes and cd's are subject to degrading rather quickly. It led me to think I had better start printing those images I most want to be saved. It's rather ironic if you think about it. The images that have lasted the longest are paintings on the walls of caves! We don't have anything comparable as far as longevity today.  

It matters

  There was an episode on Seinfeld that I recall. It was concerning "worlds" and how we all live in our own little world. George was talking about worlds are going to collide. It was hilarious because it was so true. It is what we are all witnessing today. We are dividing it between liberal and conservatives, almost as though they were different races. The truth is it different cultures. A great deal depending upon where you were raised and what education you have received. Having never attended a college or university I really can't speak to that except from observation. I noticed that those attending such usually get indoctrinated to more liberal thinking. It's an air of superiority. I expect it is justification for the money spent to receive that degree. Of course, today many expect someone else to pay for that, it has gotten that liberal. 

 But I was thinking about that episode and worlds colliding. It does happen.  In today's world of social media more of our world is exposed to anyone that cares to look. I'm still in the mindset that it is a bit creepy to go looking at your profile page, scrolling down your page and looking through your photographs. I seldom do that unless I have a good reason. True, a good reason in my mind but yours may differ. I have yet to understand how anyone could form an "online" relationship beyond an exchange of thoughts and ideas. Are our worlds really online? I'd suggest that they are not, everyone keeps secrets, things to themself. It's true however that today many want to portray themselves as the survivor. Yes, they were victimized, but they persevered, they are survivors! A world of warriors.

 I would say I have lived in several worlds. After high school I joined the Navy. Now that was a different world. It was a world where I never really fit in all that well, I didn't get caught up in it. What I mean is, become the consummate sailor. What is sometimes called being gung-ho. No, I did my job as best as I could, followed the rules and regulations to the best of my ability and stayed long enough to retire. I didn't become a "lifer" as is the frequent term used to describe those that stayed beyond their initial enlistment. I left that life behind as soon as I was eligible to do so. After that I entered the world of the workforce. Just another guy on the job. No ranks, no ratings, just doing what I knew how to do. There was no "chain of command" per se, just the boss. I wasn't the boss. Today I live in yet another world.

 I would say that I have never strayed far from my conservative upbringing. I still believe in the truths I was taught by my parents and grandparents. If asked I'm betting none of them would agree with that last statement, however. There were many times when I butted heads with them. Worlds within worlds colliding. Now some folks will simply leave. That is their answer to conflict. Others will stay and fight to the death. Personally, I will stay and continue to express my beliefs, my truths and understanding until such time as I conclude it is fruitless. I don't give up easily. I am not easily swayed from my opinions. I do believe that silence is consent. For that reason, I will tell you what I feel even when I'm aware that you may not like it or agree with me. 

 There will be those that you never make a connection with and that is fine. It really isn't one big happy world. History has certainly borne that out. A lot of talk these days about global humanity. We have formed various organizations in an attempt to share our worlds with one another, The most obvious being, the United Nations. There are only two nations that do not belong to that, Vatican City and Palestine. Worlds outside of all the others. Even with all the treaties and agreements reached when it comes down to brass tacks, each nation does its' own thing. Think weapons used in wars, the treatment of prisoners and basic human rights. There are different views regarding that, and no one is changing their mind on that basic stuff. That's why we say things like the Arab world, or the third world. 

 You see, in the end you really do have only two choices. It is one way or the other. The world is a binary place whether you like it or not. It will remain so forever. Like darkness and light. On the first day God said, let there be light. And he divided it from the darkness. No matter how you wish to view that, either as a literal thing or a symbolic one, it does delineate the binary function. And yes, we all operate in that fashion no matter how liberal we proclaim to be. Just proclaiming yourself a liberal does that, just as saying I am a conservative does. It's one or the other. No one is 100% that much is true, but everyone is 100% certain that their answer is the correct one. Never met anyone that didn't think that way, although some will refuse to answer the question. 

 All are welcome to visit my world. I will tolerate just about everyone to a degree. I don't expect anything from anyone other than courtesy and honesty. The amount of interaction we have will be dependent upon that. I don't hate people for their beliefs, unless their beliefs harm others. If we find common ground that is always a good thing. It doesn't mean however we should set up camp. It's what we used to call getting along with one another. Not sure what they call it today. I did learn to get along with others as a child and that continued into adulthood. I can still get along with just about anybody. I am less willing to change my world that I was in years past. I have learned that change isn't always a good thing. Sometimes you just have to decide, make up your mind and stick with it. And that's true because in the end everything matters! That's the biggest error, the most common mistake people make, thinking it doesn't matter. It all matters. It is what makes up your world. Only you can decide on that.  

Belief, behavior and belonging

  A few days back I wrote about the Governor of La. mandating the ten commandments be posted in classrooms. Yesterday I heard that the Governor of Texas intends to do the same. I expect it will spread until the court rules it unconstitutional. But I was writing about that and how the founding fathers wanted our government to be completely secular in nature. A noble sentiment. I'd suggest that is the heart of what has been called the great American experiment. Can a government be totally secular and serve all the citizens? It's my feeling that it can't. I've said it many times, and still believe that you can't legislate morality. 

 We are seeing this play out before our very eyes. How much legislation has there been in support of religious freedom? That's what we call it when we support beliefs that we personally may or may not hold. It's an appeasement. To be truly secular we would have to eliminate all of that, all those protections. We are calling a portion of those protections' antisemitism and Islamophobia. A direct religious reference to the non-secular folks in the nation. Religious beliefs are moral standards. It is that simple. It gets complicated when you attempt to defend those religious beliefs (morals) without referencing the religious texts or documents. And that is what a secular society must do. 

 Laws are instituted among men to establish peace, settle disputes and create a sense of unity. We all want to belong to something, be a part of something. In the last decade or so many are reaching to the past for an identity. Calling that, celebrating their culture. The reality is that culture, to them, is just a fantasy, an imagining of what it would have been, and mostly based in stereotypes. You cannot know the culture of a people unless you have lived with those people! All you know is what others have written about that. Every culture had their moral standards. It is an ever-changing thing culture, changing with the times and sensibilities of the people. Remember it was perfectly normal to have human sacrifices at one time in history. A cultural thing or a religious practice? It's neither, it's a moral thing.

 Throughout history people have looked for something more. We call them migrants today, wanderers in ages past. They went looking to discover what was over that hill. If they found something they desired, they would attempt to trade for that commodity. If it came to property they couldn't bargain, buy, or trade for, they took it by force. They did so often in the name of some religious inspiration. It provided the justification needed to satisfy their moral code. In short, they belonged to something. They were a part of something. The something itself began to take a back seat to the justification. It's where we get that adage, "by all means necessary." It's a proclamation, the removal of morality!

  After the battle is over, the victory won, a new system of morality is established. In the 1950's in America about 98% of the population believed in God. Today that number is down to 81%. A definite shift toward the secular. And make no mistake about it that is what is required for a secular society, the absence of religious beliefs. Those under the age of thirty that believe in God has fallen to just 61%. Belief, behavior and belonging, as it relates to religious institutions are at an all-time low. My feeling is the results are before you. Increased crime, unrest, mental health issues, the destruction of the nuclear family and a general degradation in society. Without the promise of reward people tend to wander off, to justify their choices, by all means necessary, and chaos and confusion is always the result. More and more people today are abandoning that promise, forgoing what may be, for the immediate satisfaction of the moment. It's a mistake. I do believe we belong to something more, something bigger.        

needs

   I see a lot of comments from people telling others how to spend their money. They should do this or that. Usually whatever they are urging others to do will benefit them. Isn't that surprising? I even saw a person online that says she offers a service to lottery winners. She will tell you how to manage your winnings. The first step being paying her fee. I wonder just how many lottery winners there are that would require that service? How much money would you have to have won before you figure you can't handle it. Personally, I don't think there is any amount I couldn't deal with on my own. If I won it, I can spend it too.

  I realize that the narrative is to invest that money, increase your wealth even more or to give it away to charities, charities recommended by who? The ones wanting your money is the answer. But we are urged to hire a professional to manage our wealth. In my way of thinking if they are so professional, so informed and capable, what are they do working for a living. Seems like they should have enough wealth to retire. Their income comes from telling others what to do with their money. It's true that the best money to invest is someone else's. It's also the best money to spend. 

  I've read where a good number of lottery winners wind up going broke. Nearly 1/3 of them will declare bankruptcy within three to five years. The reasons are many. I'm willing to risk it. I don't want anyone telling me what to do with my winnings though. I'll ask for advice concerning matters I don't understand but that's as far as that goes. I will not allow anyone else to spend my money, you are not doing that. It's a lot to expect of your closest friends, will you give them your checkbook or atm card and say, just take what you need? Could you do that? My wife would have access but that's it, sorry best friends but we aren't that close! And I'm certainly not allowing any financial managers in there either. 

  The bottom line as far as I'm concerned is this, it's mine to do with as I please. That's true if you are Elon Musk, some Saudi Prince or the guy next door. You are under no obligation to give any of it to anybody. You can't make too much money! You can make money that I wish I had, in fact a number of people do just that but haven't shared any with me yet. Could be they will, but that's their choice. That's how my choice actually works, I get to choose. I think I could handle a fortune without any issues. And I think that is because I have always been more concerned with what I need, rather than what I want. Some call fulfilling their wants as being goal oriented. I just want to fulfill my needs. Although I admit I would likely have a lot more needs if I had a few million dollars. Thing is I don't need millions that's why I haven't actively pursued that goal. I'll just take a chance on it. In the meantime, I'm working on keeping my needs taken care of. That is no one else's responsibility. How I spend my money is also my business. 

 

Secular

   I was surprised to learn that the governor of Louisianna signed legislation mandating the posting of the Ten Commandments in every classroom from K through College. I'm quite certain that will be challenged in court. I can hear the cries of separation of church and state right now. I can't see this legislation withstanding the onslaught and it will be overruled. All the inclusive, equal rights, right fighting folks will be up in arms! Imagine the results if our children were somehow influenced by those commandments. What could be the result? Could those children grow up and start following them? No murdering people? No committing adultery! Don't steal stuff or tell lies about your neighbors! It's a slippery slope for the left alright, ruins all their plans.

  As I said I'm certain it will be repealed, overturned by the highest court in the land. Naturally, as a Christian I support the posting of such, why wouldn't I? I can't see why a person of the Jewish faith would object either. The Muslim people believe in them as well, except for number four, can't see why they would object. Yes, there are satanic cults, Hindu's, and various other religious groups in the country, they don't hold any majority though. Last I knew, majority rules. I just don't understand what the problem is. The ones demanding they be removed support Pride flags, Drag Queen Story Hour in the library, Abortion on demand, the redistribution of wealth, and a host of other moral issues. But when Christians want to display their moral code, that's just wrong! Funny how that works isn't it. All at once those folks are completely secular! 

  The separation of church and state. Once again, I find myself explaining what that means. It doesn't mean the abandonment of moral values, which are what religious texts and beliefs are concerned with, it simply means the church isn't making the laws. That is what the founding fathers meant. Can't have the Catholics and Protestants at odds with one another and expect government to run smoothly. But you do have to have a basic understanding of history to appreciate all of that. There were serious issues with the Pope, his power and influence and then there was the protestant reformation. Problems arose there. Best to leave religious governing policies out of it. The morality part is good, it's the administration that has the protentional for harm. 

  I'm always amazed at the hypocrisy of the left. They rant and rave about their rights. They should be allowed to do whatever they like, without question. It's their body, their choice. They demanded and received "marriage" equality, They have forced their beliefs upon a nation. We are currently celebrating, for an entire month, their "moral" choice. But, I'm not supposed to display mine, no celebrating that. Well, because we have laws against that. It's just fine to hold parades celebrating men dressed as women, women dressed as men, others proclaiming there are neither, some dressed in leather gear walking on all fours while being whipped and that's all just fine. All of that is just love! But, don't be telling children about those ten commandments. Can't have that. 

 And sadly, they will win that fight. And they will win because, it's the moral thing to do. That was written into the founding documents those people would rewrite. From my point of view all this pride stuff shouldn't be displayed anywhere but in their private homes or clubs (think churches). It is all morally offensive to me and why should I be subjected to that? You are saying the displaying of the Ten commandments, the display of any religious object is offensive to you. I can't do that! But you should have a right to do that. And you will use my moral values against me. You are using my moral values for the removal of morality! Can a nation or a people live in a completely secular society? I don't think so. It's a pipe dream, an ideal but will never be a reality. 

Injustice

  Is injustice ever fully compensated? That's what I have to ask as I hear all the cries for reparations, concessions, recognition, apologies, and awareness. All of the injustices of the past that have been corrected, eliminated as best as possible and litigated being used again and again as justification for whatever is perceived today. Yes, there were injustices in the past and yes, those wrongs have been litigated and corrected. I agree we should never forget about that but that doesn't mean they should continue to be used as a club! That is doubly true when you were never a party to any of that, on either side of the coin. Mans' inhumanity to man is well documented. No race, creed, color, or religious affiliation has ever been excluded from any of it. All humanity has been subject to that.

 Do we ever really forgive? I don't think so, we just accept the reality and move forward. We may indeed be willing to give that person another chance, allow bygones to be bygone, but we don't forget. If you can't forget about it entirely, you can't forgive entirely either. There is always that knowledge, that little piece of information tucked away. It is the stuff of judgement. We have learned something of another's capabilities or willingness to, shall we say, bend the rules a bit. We don't forget about injuries, we overcome them. Are you ever fully compensated for that injury? That is entirely up to you. Do you use the past to justify the present? 

 What is justice? Justice is rooted in morality. It is treating others fairly within the confines of the law. Justice isn't receiving monetary compensation. That's not justice although in todays' world that appears to be the narrative being proposed. Something happened and I got justice, my lawyer got justice. I got a settlement for x amount of dollars. But that isn't justice at all.

  Injustice is what we are talking about. When we have been treated unfairly, denied our human rights and dignity. We have been treated unjustly. Justice may only be received by the one that was wronged. Laws can be repealed, rewritten or implemented in an effort to establish justice. That is, after all, their purpose. The law establishes the morality of the group, whatever that group may be. The laws of the United States of America are an attempt to delineate the morality of the nation. That is what the constitution is all about. It is really quite obvious if you are paying attention. We are now celebrating, for an entire month, a shift in moral values. Your personal feelings about that aren't important, it has been decided. The legalization of marijuana, same sex marriages, Roe V Wade, whether or not an artist has to produce their art on demand, are all moral issues. The law of the land.

 Once the law has been established, justice is established. That is what is just. The injustice of the past has been eliminated. Once those that were affected have been "made whole" as the courts decide, justice has been served. The injustices of the past are in the past. I do know that as long as you use the limitations of the past as your foundation you cannot expect much growth. Even though those limitations were artificially imposed upon your ancestors and injustices done it does not justify the actions of today. Amends have been made, reparations have been paid, and injustices corrected. There is nothing more to be done. 

 How many generations are responsible for the wrongs of the previous generation? The idea of that is presented in the Bible with the "sins of the father." But that is often taken out of context. What it means is that "sin" will exist as long as we keep teaching that sin to our children. It doesn't mean the children are responsible for what their parents did. God isn't going to punish you for what someone else did. Neither should the law! Now that is justice for all. Justice isn't the receiving of compensation, justice is the removal of wrong.  

A rewrite

  And the rewriting of history continues in Maryland. The governor of Maryland, Wes Moore, just pardoned 175,000 convictions from what he calls, low level crimes. I guess he means those crimes where you only break the law a little bit. Citing the fact that having a record is detrimental to your employment opportunities and educational ones too. The only fair thing to do is to pardon them, remove them from the record and rewrite history. You broke the law, were tried and convicted of that but now, no you weren't we are rewriting the book. He did go on to explain that all those convictions were motivated by racism anyway and those individuals had been unfairly targeted. 

  This was in response to the recent "legalization" of recreational marijuana. It wasn't legal when they were arrested and convicted but we are forgetting about that. I wonder if they change the speed limit sign if I can get a refund on my ticket. I just don't understand it. You broke the law. It's that simple. You were given a trial, found guilty and that's that. What happened after that doesn't matter unless it is something to prove your innocence. Changing the law doesn't make you innocent! Yes, there are consequences for breaking the law. Sometimes those consequences will be felt for years. 

  Having a record speaks to your character. That's the long and short of it. It is why employers, the TSA, the FBI, CIA, and employers want to know about that. Often it isn't so much about what crime you committed, but your willingness to do so that influences decisions. It's one thing to have broken the law unaware, or possibly in some emergency, as an emotional response to something, and quite another to just break the law. And that is what all 175,000 of those people did, they made a choice. No one made them possess marijuana or paraphernalia. No, they decided they wanted to do that. It speaks to their character. I have a right to know about that. Arrest records are public records. That is the law of the land although there may be some restrictions on that in certain jurisdictions. Still, they are public records because I do have a right to know. 

  To hear Governor Moore speak about this his claim is minorities were unfairly targeted by law enforcement. The result being those individuals were denied employment, have trouble getting housing, they suffer from educational opportunities being denied to them, not sure why, and it created a racial wealth gap! But now the law has changed, and all those things should be forgiven and forgotten about. The character of those involved has been reset. They are now upstanding citizens. That's all that is required you know, a reset. Just forget about it, erase it from history. Well, don't forget completely because they will probably be entitled to reparations within the next year or so. You know because they were arrested for committing a crime that is no longer a crime except on the federal level. Yes, it is still a federal offense to possess marijuana. So, they only committed a felony, a low-level crime according to the governor. 

 I expect all of that will bode well for the politicians in the state of Maryland. It will be especially welcome and applauded in the city of Baltimore. The political power is held by the Democrats and the majority of those in office are a minority. The mayor, the majority of the city council, the States attorney, the governor all of them. They have the majority at the polls. It's the way our system works. This is nothing more than an effort to retain that position. Politics by appeasement. It's important to keep in mind there is nothing racial about any of this. The only thing racist was arresting them in the first place. That's what I am supposed to believe. Same thinking from that party about the border. No need to vet anyone, no need to know anything about their backgrounds either, just let them in. As long as they vote Democratic, it's all good. I'm certain their character is stellar as well.   

Trespass

  I'm hearing a new slogan being thrown around in Baltimore political circles. It concerns the handling of illegal immigrants as they interact with law enforcement agencies. This slogan is "Dignity not Detention." Well because if someone has entered your country illegally you certainly wouldn't want to injure their dignity. There are those saying you have to wait until they commit a crime. The fact is, they already did that when entering the country! Yes, they are criminals and should be detained! You can call that action by any name you desire, illegal immigrant, undocumented, migrant or refugee and it doesn't change the action, you entered my country illegally. You will be detained until a disposition of your case is reached. Should that offend your dignity that's just too bad.

  I often find myself on the opposite end of these arguments, and that's alright I can take it. I get annoyed with all of this nonsense. They are the ones breaking the law, not me. The reason for doing so does not always justify the action. If I rob the bank to feed my family that doesn't mean I should be treated with dignity, I should be arrested and detained. As long as we keep removing consequence for doing these things they will continue and multiply. It's just common sense. We have a penal system to punish, not reward. Dignity not Detention? What are you really saying? If you break the law we won't punish you, we will treat you are a dignitary! You will be welcomed. 

  Look all I'm saying is this. If you enter my country illegally there are consequences for that. You will be detained and given a chance to present your arguments for why you should be allowed to stay. You will be treated fairly, given the same facilities as everyone else. That's what happens. 

 But the argument for this dignity not detention is based solely on economics. The complaint being having to house, fed and care for them as inmates. I guess they are overlooking how much it costs us to fed, house and care for them as they live illegally in my country. Yes, illegals receive more benefits than the average US citizen! Then there is the argument that there aren't enough Judges, the wait is too long. And they don't have legal counsel that we the taxpayers are expected to provide. It's just easier to let them roam free doing whatever they like as long as they retain their dignity. No, cross the border illegally and you will be detained, then deported. Enter again and that detention just became a whole lot longer. I will build more jails, and you can retain your dignity within those walls. I'm calling it Dignity with Detention!  

 This legislation that passed in Maryland in 2021 needs to be repealed. It was passed, of course, by those wanting the same illegals to have the right to vote. The same people giving felons the right to vote. The same people allowing anyone living or dead to vote. A group of people with little too no dignity of their own in my opinion. Makes a great campaign slogan doesn't it. Well, I was told and subsequently learned through personal experience that the old adage is true, give them an inch and they will take a mile. Allow one and a thousand more will follow.

  If any of that hurts your feelings, injures your dignity that's just too bad, I am not sorry for you. You chose to enter my country illegally I didn't invite you. You are trespassing! To trespass is to commit an offense against another. I'm offended! And if I'm offended, I get to cancel you. That is what the same people proclaiming Dignity not Detention will tell you and are actively involved in doing just that with cereal boxes, statues and the names of elementary schools. And that, is how I feel about that. 

cause and celebration

   On June 16, 1858 Abraham Lincoln gave his famous speech where he said a house divided against itself cannot stand. That was one hundred and sixty-six years ago. He was talking about slavery as the dividing factor. He didn't say he would abolish slavery; he was saying how the people would have to decide on that issue. He just believed, correctly, that eventually it would have to be all one way or the other. It was a moral decision to be made by the citizens of the United States of America. A morality that was very offensive to the majority of the population. Only those that could afford to "own" that commodity of human labor or profited from such dismissing the moral issue altogether. To them it was just business. It was an accepted practice, a part of everyday life and everyone was doing it.

 Lincoln lost some support by making such a statement. He lost his home state of Illinois in the election because of that. Still, in the big picture he won election, in part, because of that as well. Slavery existed in the northern states at that time and continued to exist until January of 1865. Yes, it wasn't abolished everywhere in the nation until the passing of the 13th amendment. Reconstruction had begun. A building back of a nation, better than it was before. It was a triumph for morality! We had declared that "all men are created equal" and this was another step in defining just what that meant. There were those, even then, declaring that yes, all men were created equal but that didn't guarantee all men's circumstances would be equal. And being enslaved was just a function of circumstance. 

 The fight began due to economic and political control. The moral issue was secondary to that. It was a great motivator to get the common man to join the fight, to do what is right for the moral fabric of the nation. That is still being used as a motivator to this day and will continue into the future. That is part of humanity. Even in our imagination that exists. Consider the "prime directive" in Star Trek. We aren't to interfere with the development of alien worlds, it's a morality thing. Following our civil war the idea was separate but equal. They weren't slaves anymore that had been lost in the economic and political battlefield. The morality of those supporting slavery hadn't been changed by their defeat on the battlefield. It wasn't until 1954 that the Supreme Court struck down that doctrine in Brown vs the Board of Education. Once again, a defining of a moral precept. That doctrine is morally wrong! 

 We are seeing a fight for moral values today. That is what "Pride" month is all about. An attempt to define morality for future generations. What "Pride" represents is morally offensive to the majority. That is what I believe to be the truth of the matter. But there are economic and political forces that benefit from all of this, and that is the sole reason it is being "celebrated." It's what's best for business. There have been and always will be those that react to an offense with violence. 

 At one time in America, one could be challenged to a duel for making an offensive remark. That was considered an honorable reaction. Those "celebrating" today are also the ones removing characters from cereal boxes, burning and banning flags, destroying statues and renaming schools and military bases because, they are offensive. They are doing so based on their definition of what moral behaviors should be. They believe that parading your moral behavior, forcing it upon others, is the moral thing to do. The list of those behaviors grows almost daily and indeed a plus sign was added to include anything other letters do not mention specifically.  Fighting for the "cause." 

  Those states succeeding from the union wrote their "declaration of causes" supporting their right to "property" as slaves were called. Today we are hearing a declaration of causes for the establishment of a new national morality. A fundamental change to what we teach our children regarding moral behaviors. It begins with mocking those that hold religious beliefs in contradiction to that cause. It has progressed to the point where even some of our churches are adopting this new "moral" code. I'd suggest that has to do with more with "business" than it does morality. You can't expect people to donate to your cause unless you are supporting theirs. Seems rather obvious to me. It's an old story. Didn't Jesus throw the money changers out of the temple? 

 I don't hate anyone for their moral choices. I will attempt to redirect them, however, offer guidance and encouragement to act in a more moral fashion. Still, what you do in the privacy of your home is your business. What you attempt to present in public, what you encourage my children to embrace is my business. I will speak out in opposition. I am an American and In God I do trust. I believe John Adams was correct, out constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. When my moral values are questioned and challenged, I will respond. That is the stuff of wars. Wars are lost one battle at a time. I'd suggest morality is degraded one rationalization at a time. Is the moral thing to do the acceptance of what is immoral? That's the purpose of this "celebration." 

Opinion

  I was surprised by the opinion of the supreme court regarding bump stock devices. The court has decided that they cannot be banned. They do not turn a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic one. I understand the reasoning, the logic behind that, but remain surprised, nonetheless. I agree that the device does not make a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon. It does not increase the rate of fire just perhaps making it a bit easier to accomplish. How fast is your trigger finger? The number of rounds fired is totally dependent on the size of the magazine or clip. But the court has issued their opinion on that very narrow distinction and on that distinction alone.

  I read where there are already those proposing a ban on assault weapons once again. Biden has stated he would sign that legislation if put on his desk. What is being proposed is a ban on semi-automatic weapons. There is no such thing as an assault weapon. There are weapons designed to be used in an assault and they are capable of fully automatic firing. As long as you hold the trigger back the guns keeps firing. It's a proposal and an argument that has been made for years now. Fully automatic weapons have effectively been banned from public sale since 1932. We have been using semi-automatic weapons since the invention of the revolver. 

  I'm a firm believer in the second amendment. I often point out one statement it makes, "shall not be infringed" as the definitive meaning of that amendment. A disarmed populace is vulnerable to government control. We the people are that government and should remain armed, that well-armed militia mentioned in the legislation. That being said I have to say I question the need for a bump stock device. I can see no legitimate purpose for that. Perhaps if you don't have any fingers to pull the trigger it would be handy, but that seems unlikely as it will continue to fire until you remove the weapon from your shoulder, or the ammo runs out. 

 That is all the bump stock does, eliminate the need for a finger to pull the trigger. So, I'm saying it isn't anything with a practical purpose. I think that perhaps the ban on manufacturing such things should be revisited. It doesn't change a semi-automatic weapon into a "machine" gun, that is a fact. That is what the court ruled upon. In my way of thinking it is simply a gadget, a toy, something used for amusement with no real practical application. I'm thinking it may prove to be a safety issue. But that argument is tenuous at best. All objects can be dangerous, present a safety issue if used by inexperienced people or misused. So maybe there can be no restriction on them. That's what the court is saying right now. Does the addition of a bump stock make the weapon less safe? I don't know, is a self-driving car less safe than one with a person behind the wheel? Same concept, you pull the trigger or activate the car and just hold on. It's all a matter of opinion. 

   

Respect

 Today being Flag day my thoughts just naturally turned to Old Glory. That is what I often heard the flag called when I was growing up. It has been sixty years or more since I was in elementary school. I Believe that we said the pledge of allegiance every morning, but because of the years I can't be certain of that, maybe I only think we did. I know the pledge of allegiance however and have always known it, it seems. I also know to put your hand over your heart when reciting that pledge. I'm certain that every classroom did have a flag mounted on the wall, usually at one end of the blackboard. Yes, I'm that old, we had blackboards, chalk and erasers. 

 I'm not certain what is being taught these days in school regarding the flag and flag etiquette. I was told that the flag was never to touch the ground! That was very important back then and to be avoided at all costs. The flag was not to be used as a piece of clothing, thrown around and used for anything but flying on the end of a flagpole. I was taught to stand at attention, remove my hat and place my hand over my heart when the flag passed by in a parade. When our national anthem was played you did that as well. I remember well everyone doing that as we watched the parade go by, parents snatching the hats off their kids and hollering at them. Respect for the flag was to be shown! 

 Somewhere along the way however all that has changed. I question how many of the kids today could even recite the pledge of allegiance correctly. I'm certain that many have no idea about proper flag etiquette or just choose to ignore it altogether. I see it all the time at parades and ballgames. The flag goes by unnoticed, unrecognized. At the ballgames people aren't paying attention to any of the ceremony too focused on having a beer or a hotdog to be bothered. And don't get me started on the whole kneeling thing! And today the flag is on everything, used for everything from napkins to headbands. The flag is an advertising tool, used to virtue signal, but not too much virtue, have to be careful of that you might be a MAGA American. 

 On this day in 1777 the Congress did adopt our flag. It is a symbol of our national identity. The flag tells the world, we are the United States of America. There have been many verses written about that flag and what it stands for, verses written by those far more capable than me. For me the flag is a manifestation of respect. That is why it should be treated with the utmost respect. Respect for the past and all those that fought and died to create this nation. Respect for tradition. Respect for the Republic. The Republic "RESPUBLICA" in Latin meaning from the people. Respecting that flag is respecting all the people of this nation. To pledge allegiance to that is to pledge allegiance to your fellow Americans. That is what it represents. 

 The Flag is a symbol of our values as a nation. Those values were summed up with these words, " we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. " That is dependent upon the virtue of the people. That was summed up by John Adams when he said, "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people." He was talking about virtue there. We should be teaching our children about that beginning in kindergarten. The lesson begins with teaching respect! Respecting the values declared in our Declaration of Independence and enshrined in the constitution. That is how you raise virtuous citizens. God Bless America.  

                                                                              

Deserving

 I 'm seeing more and more advertisements for military medals and awards on my Facebook feed. I suspect it is because I am a veteran, and they all know that information. Well, that's probably a part of it. It's no secret that businesses have been collecting that sort of information for years now. There are even businesses where that is their business. They collect information and sell it. It's just business. It's quite obvious if you are paying attention to what shows up on your page. But these latest ones about all the medals and awards rub me the wrong way. They all come across as "virtue" for sale. They are offering medals and awards that are not authorized or endorsed by the United States military branches in any way. They are just making them up! 

 First and foremost is the idea that you would have to buy them. All medals and awards awarded to you will be provided to you by the branch of service that awarded them. They are free! Always have been free and remain that way. If you have lost or misplaced your military medals just go to the VA website and fill out a form. Replacements will be mailed to you. If you earned it, you will receive it. It's that's straightforward. 

 There are some vendors advertising they will mount and display your ribbons and medals. That isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but I wonder. Do these vendors require proof that you are entitled to whatever ribbons and medals you are requesting be mounted? If they are not, virtue is for sale. I think that those vendors should be required, by law, to request that proof. You can't just buy a Policeman's Shield that is the genuine thing without having proof that you are entitled to that badge. Yes, you can buy replicas. That is also stolen valor or virtue if you attempt to use that replica in place of the real thing. If you are paying someone to mount ribbons and medals in a shadow box, ones that you earned, the intent is to display them, to have others believe you earned those. The real deal. If you are doing that to deceive, you are despicable. 

 Now not all of those vendors advertise their products as the genuine article. They don't say anywhere that any of that has been authorized by the DOD. They are selling imagined awards. Like all salespeople that can be misleading. They aren't exactly lying to you, but they aren't pointing out the truth either. The objective is to prey upon your emotions. Appealing to either sentiment or pride that is the method to stimulate sales. It is especially effective at this time in America as we are all so busy signaling our virtues. We do so with Flags, banners, signs and symbols! Displaying our virtue for all to see! It isn't important to actually practice those virtues, just support them. Virtue is for sale at every turn. 

 Virtue is now tied to entitlement. That's the underlying psychology in all of this. No longer is virtue viewed as something you practice even when no one is looking. The objective today is to ensure that everyone sees your virtuous nature even if you don't have one. All that is necessary is to say the right things, display the proper symbols and support the correct causes. 

 The importance lies in everyone knowing that! What you actually do when no one is looking isn't important at all. If you display the proper virtues, you are entitled. You are a hero! Should any of your past missteps, choices or actions be exposed, it is shown that you perhaps were not as virtuous as you portray, there is a way out. You're a survivor! Surviving is a virtue, perhaps the greatest virtue of all. No matter what I did in the past, I have survived! I should be applauded and receive accolades for that accomplishment. Maybe even buy yourself a medal. They have some real nice ones, and you can get them on a payment plan as well. You deserve it.   

celebrating

  We have all said at one time or another, doesn't that person have a conscience? How do you get a conscience? Well, according to the experts one method is through training. We do get our foundational conscience from our parents, siblings and peers. As we grow and gain experience and our circle of influence expands, we build upon that. The majority of us will begin to reject the original precepts learned from our parents. We begin to believe, we know better. That's simply because we start to feel a bit smarter. We feel that way because we are told that. You have to get a good education! That is the mantra we hear since birth. It follows that we believe the more education you have, the smarter you become. And that notion is reenforced at every turn. Our conscience becomes whatever we have been taught "trained" to believe is the correct response.

 Our conscience is our morality. Our schools are not designed to teach morality. That is the function of those Catholic schools or other faith-based institutions. When I was small it wasn't uncommon for us to say a prayer in school at the beginning of the day. The acknowledgement of God was a common thing. It was a time when it was recognized that Christianity was the majority religion in the country. We also knew of our Jewish friends and neighbors, and they recognized the same God. The Muslims weren't really discussed much until we got to the point in history about the Barbary pirates. But even those people recognized God. 

 I wouldn't say we were trained to be Christians in our schools, but we were certainly expected to at least be familiar with the Bible and its' teachings. Oh, there was no doubt that the different denominations held different ritual practices, but we all believed the same thing. We did share a common conscience, a stricter view of what is moral. We certainly weren't pressed to go beyond those established moral guidelines as a matter of acceptance. That wasn't a part of the lesson plan! That was usually made clear with a simple declarative sentence, you know better. It was your conscience that restrained your reactions. Today we are seeing a removal of restraint because of the lack of acknowledgement for moral teachings. 

 In some cases, we are seeing the complete dismissal of all references to a God removed from the curriculum and completely secular in nature. I went some years ago to a high school graduation ceremony and noticed there was no invocation or benediction. That caught me a bit by surprise. It is true that, by law, all public schools in America are secular. That is because of the separation of church and state. But it is my belief that the dismissal or acknowledgement of God was not the intent of that legislation. The founding fathers made it clear that a firm reliance on God was paramount. Our constitution was only sufficient for a moral and religious society. 

 All religious teachings center around correct moral actions. Every religion comes with the promise of reward in the next life. The goal in life was to live your life in accordance with the moral guideline provided in your religious documents, regardless of what that religion was. Today we are seeing a rewriting, a new interpretation of those documents, to conform to our lack of moral guidelines. The message today becoming, the only moral choice is to allow immoral behavior, indeed, to support and defend those immoral choices. The new morality being completely nonjudgemental. 

 Judgement is the basis for justice. In our legal system, a secular institution, judgement lies with the judge and/or the jurors. We are instructed to not utilize our conscience in this instance. Justice is blind. Justice is free of conscience. The mercy of the court is exercised through the sentencing guidelines. Mercy is certainly considered a virtue. Virtuous behavior is moral behavior. Our judges are empowered to exercise that virtue, to act upon their moral judgement. With the absence of morality what option will be left to a judge? 

 It could be argued that our schools are now eliminating morality altogether. No longer allowing a simple prayer, no longer displaying any sentient of a higher power, what basis for conscience is being established? The churches are rewriting the book! Morality is about restraint. That is expressed by a very old instruction: "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" If there is no restraint, if all behaviors are simply allowed, there is also no basis for conscience. You act indiscriminately. Celebration should follow the reward. Celebrating the dismissal of reward may provide immediate gratification but certainly lacks that eternal peace we all seek. I don't care what anyone says, when faced with your mortality you will question what comes next. My advice being, don't celebrate too soon. It is also prudent to carefully examine just what it is you are celebrating! 

from the past

  I posted the news of my becoming a great grandparent. I had known for a short time but was sworn to secrecy. That's a part of this digital new world order. I received instructions to not post anything on social media concerning that. I'm certain the "gender" reveal will be next. That's another new tradition being practiced these days. I'm quite certain it will be revealed to be a boy! I'm thinking Ben is a good strong name. I am brother Ben, Uncle Ben, Grand Uncle Ben, Grandfather Ben, and soon to be Great Grandfather Ben. It does seem only right my great grandson should share that name. Now should a little girl be the case that would require more thought. Well, like we say, as long as the baby is healthy. 

 Growing up I was fortunate to have known my great grandfather. I wasn't really that aware of that fact at the time though. You know when you are a kid you don't think much about that sort of stuff. He was just this old guy that my father called Gramp. Never really occurred to me that was because he was my father's grandfather. Years went by and I took an interest in the family tree. That is when it became clear to me. That is also when I began to regret never having asked Gramp about a lot of things. It sure would clear up a lot of questions I have today. There are answers I'm certain I'll never get. 

 I thought about that after getting the news from my grandson that they were expecting. I thought my great grandchildren will only have to read my blogs to know just about everything. I thought also, if I live long enough for them to get old enough to take an interest, I can simply tell them. My thought was, I'll be able to tell my great grandchildren that I knew my great grandfather. That is five generations of separation! I knew their 5th great grandfather! Holy cow! I'll be able to tell them of seeing color television for the first time, the first cell phones and rockets to the moon. The invention of the internet. Then I can tell them I heard firsthand from their 5th great grandfather about the invention of radio, automobiles and indoor plumbing! He cooked on a coal stove! 

 If all goes according to schedule, I will be 71 years old when the baby arrives. That's kind of young for a great grandfather don't you think? Great grandfathers are supposed to be old! I know I believed mine was ancient! He had things in his house from the civil war! His wife's father had fought in that war. He was born in 1878. That was just two years after Custers last stand. My great grandson will have relics from WW2 that his 2nd great grandfather fought in. His great grandfather was involved with Vietnam and the cold war era. All of that will just be history to him. I'm feeling an obligation to inform him about all of that. Those that fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it! I'll be teaching him, so he doesn't make the same mistakes as I have. 

 Man, I don't know this being a great grandfather is pretty stressful. I'm thinking I had better increase my exercise schedule and remember to buy Prevergen! I don't want to forget anything. I do have a lot to tell him. I want to make sure I do so he gets the story right. You know how other people can change the story, like a game of post office. That isn't happening! This great grandchild will get the straight scoop. This child will understand that yes, I was a "grand" father, but I am a "great" grandfather! I've always thought mine was. It's a lesson from the past. 

the honor system

  Biden has limited asylum seekers to 2500 a day. So, I have to ask the question, is everyone crossing our southern border now an asylum seeker? If that is the case when did that happen? In prior years there were those that simply entered the country illegally. They weren't seeking asylum from anything, they just wanted to come to our country for a variety of reason. The majority would say they were just looking for a job, a method to make some money to send back to their families. I'm certain some were fleeing the law. But not everyone was seeking asylum. 

 What are the requirements for seeking asylum? First you have to be physically present in the country. You have to have crossed the border in some fashion and not be a United States citizen. If you aren't in the country legally, you are here illegally. Seems fairly obvious to me. You have to have suffered persecution or fear persecution due to race, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Exactly how you are supposed to "prove" that I have no idea. You have to file form I-589 asylum application within one year of arriving in the United States, unless an exception applies. You can't have previously applied or been denied asylum. Biden says no more than 2500 asylum seekers per day! Doesn't say anything about those not seeking asylum though, they can still sneak across the border. They have a year to file for asylum, so what's the rush? 

 People from as many as 75 different nations have been apprehended crossing our southern border. If they are all seeking asylum that means at least 75 other nations are persecuting their citizens or their citizen fear that they might be! Sounds like something the United Nations should be addressing to me. I just wonder if the same would hold true if an American were seeking asylum in any one of those nations. There are those in this country, American citizens that complain about being persecuted all the time. A great deal of the time it is because of political opinion. That is listed as one justification for the granting of asylum. 

 I'm old enough to remember when those crossing the border were considered illegals. That is what they were, in the country illegally. They were, in short, a criminal having broken the law. Then they became illegal immigrants. They were still illegal but immigrating. After that moniker become too clumsy, too difficult to attempt to justify they started calling them migrants. They were just migrating. Migrants do not recognize any borders, like birds in flight or whatever. Migrants just go wherever they like. Of course, that too became a bit of a problem. We had to recognize that there was indeed a border. So, we arrived where we are at the moment, asylum seekers. 

 How do you distinguish between an illegal and an asylum seeker? The purpose of the form is to apply for asylum, it takes an immigration judge to approve that request. Now, you have a year to apply according to the guideline. So, what is really going on is the Biden administration has decided to allow 2500 illegals in the country every day. I'm guessing the thinking is we will sort out the good guys and bad guys later on. Call me skeptical if you like, but I'm thinking blanket amnesty will follow this. Our immigration policy is now on the "honor" system. No need for paperwork, we'll just take your word for it. 

 To enter legally I need a passport or permanent resident card (green card). There are provisions for those working in temporary or seasonal occupations. Everyone else is crossing the border illegally. Could be they are seeking asylum. If that is a legitimate claim asylum may be granted. Things is we can't grant asylum to entire nations! And that is what is going on. You can also file for asylum because you are a refugee. You need to prove that to an immigration judge though. In order to be considered a refugee you have to show that you were persecuted in your country and cannot return there. If you can't be considered an asylum seeker, you can still seek refuge. You are a refugee. But the thing there is you have to have received a referral from the USRAP through the United Nations. Even if you are considered a refugee by that referral, you may be given refugee status in any country belonging to the United Nations. Probably the reason you don't hear much about that anymore. Other nations have to cooperate, take in refugees. And that ain't happening.

 2500 asylum seekers a day. That's over 900,000 a year. Remember this is only on the southern border. Don't look to the north, that doesn't count. Pay no attention to the record-breaking numbers attempting to enter illegally up there. It was only a little over 12,000 last year, well the ones that were caught anyway. Less than a weeks' worth down south. But we will run our border on the honor system now. Just show up, be one the first 2500 and you're in! Yeah, you might have to wait a few days after arriving, hang out in the queue, but you'll get in eventually. Well, that's only if you try to get through the gate that is. If you just sneak across someplace else that's cool, apply for asylum. How valid is your claim? Well, we'll just take your word for it, it's on the honor system.