Intelligent

   

  It began when I asked a question regarding artificial intelligence. I was wondering how, in the future, we would know if the "intelligence" was real or artificial? I've heard that presently there is way to tell but what happens when that AI figures that out. Anyway, that sparked an exchange. Something to do with all our labor saving devices. I can't say I recall the conversation exactly, maybe I should start using "Prevagen", but I always forget to buy it. 

  So what is artificial intelligence anyway? I'm told it is, "a field of science that uses technology to create machines that can perform tasks that usually require human intelligence" Yes, and that response was generated by AI. A cold response, direct, to the point, and without any emotional component. Although if you think about it, including the adjective "usually" seems a little conciliatory, a bit less threatening. I wonder if that AI is learning about that. The nuance of language. The manner in which people express themselves certainly influences our thinking regarding that person. Just as clothes make the man, so too can language. Think the sociology professor teaching in college as compared to the rapper on the street. Both are speaking about the same range of emotions, perceptions and realities but use different verbiage. Yes, those action words matter. 

  We have to examine just what is human intelligence. If we are to say it can be created artificially, intelligence is simply the ability to recall facts and draw a conclusion based solely on those facts. One could say a stoic approach to the problems of life. In short, it is what it is. What machines have we created that can do that? A calculator is an example of artificial intelligence. Input the numbers, define the functions and get the answer, correct every single time. 

 Today however I see where AI is being used to perform many other functions, usually requiring human intelligence, and is being embraced. I suspect the largest area is in sales, and the selling of a product. I suspect it really has little to do with intelligence, but rather analyzing the wants of the people. We are told however that this AI will enable great strides and breakthroughs in all areas of our lives. It will create medicines in record times to cure all the ailments in the world. AI will replace human intelligence! There is some concern about that, and that concern is what I was asking about. How will future generation know what intelligence is real and what intelligence is artificial? Of course the big question being, does it matter. 

 I have encountered a program already, artificial intelligence, that will rewrite my paragraphs. I can then choose to use those words and phrasing claiming them as my own. Would the average person realize that when reading my papers? I highly doubt that. The majority of us will simply take all that at face value. It is only when there is something to be gained that a closer look would be taken. In my way of thinking if I used that, it is the same as plagiarism. It wouldn't be what I wrote, even if the meaning is exactly the same. The answer is correct, but I didn't give it. It is artificial. 

 I was thinking about this technology that creates machines to perform tasks that usually require human intelligence and drew a parallel to all the labor saving devices man has created. Those devices certainly have made everything easier, faster, more efficient and repeatable. As a result we all have more more leisure time. Time we spend doing what? Well, that certainly depends upon the individual doesn't it. It seems to me the majority of us spend that leisure time attempting to be happy. Isn't that the pursuit? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That happiness being exercising your own sense of morality and values. An expression of self.

  It is my thought that in years past we used to get that expression, that happiness, from whatever occupation we were engaged in. We expressed ourselves through our skill in performing that task or tasks. We received that positive feedback from our co-workers, family and neighbors. We created the product, whatever that product happened to be. It was work. Did that work require intelligence? Specialized intelligence, at the very least, was necessary. You were afforded the opportunity to excel in your field, no machine, no technology can replace that. Is that what the purpose of AI is to become? The simple production of a product. An intelligence saving machine? 

 It seems to me that the more labor saving devices we create the more dissatisfied with life we become. I realize I'm not the first person to think this way, it has been written about many times by those far more learned than I. They have the credentials to "prove" that I'm told. I wonder if we replace human intelligence with artificial intelligence where that will lead us. Human intelligence is tempered with human emotions. Sometimes that works to our determent. Can artificial intelligence learn that, human emotions? Can technology learn "common sense"  Common sense allows us to regulate our emotions. Technology will never achieve that level. Technology will always present the facts, like it or not, this is the answer. It is our frailty that makes us human. We should never forget that. For all our bravado, our accomplishments and achievements we are still subject to human emotions. You know even Spock was given that quality, artificial intelligence will not. The needs of the many and all that. Doesn't do much for the minority though, but it is just common sense. 

                                                                              

lesson learned

  For every generation there is a death. We are born into one generation and watch as the previous ones die. Most of us are completely unaware of any of that until we reach that age ourselves. When we begin to see our generation dying. In recent years we have begun talking about that, labeling each generation. My parents weren't aware they were the "greatest generation" and I certainly hadn't heard that I was a "baby boomer" until all that became mainstream. Now we have generation X, millennials, generation Z and generation alpha. It is estimated that about 66,000 members of the greatest generation are still alive, less than 1% of the population. I do believe the name is appropriate, they were the greatest generation. Some sources list them as "the builders" those born before 1946. 

 The discomfort I feel today is the realization that my generation is nearing its' end. Oh we've got a while yet, but none of us will see 2100. I didn't think about when I was younger, that I would see the turn of the century, and I met that with a bit of surprise. Today I see that we are a quarter of the way to another. I also never thought about the fact that my grandparents were born in a different century than I. I'm that generation now to my grandchildren and great granddaughter. Born in a different century! And we talk about history, the passage of time. George Washington, back in ancient times. He passed away 226 years ago. All at once that doesn't seem quite so long. 

  All the generations that came before my own have achievements to boast about. They gained independence and created the republic I live in today. They did build America, it's cities and towns, highways and bridges. They fought two world wars. Airplanes, automobiles, and rocket ships. I look back at my generation and wonder what contribution we have made. Computers and technology? Yes, we have done that. But I also feel like my generation will be known as the "complainers" more so than any boom. We are called that simply because of the economic boom following WW2. 

 Call it social justice, call it whatever you like, but the fact is we're complainers. And sadly we have raised a generation that struggles with the obvious. Consider our legislators that seriously consider you can just "select" your gender based on what you feel. Consider legislators seriously saying a pregnant woman is just carrying a clump of cells, a zygote, not a real person. We have passed laws for "gender affirming care" whose objective is to perpetuate a delusion. Yes, my generation is responsible for that.   The sad part being we have come to realize that; but it is just too late. Now we are simply those "old" people. Old fashioned, out of touch and grumpy. We aren't educated enough, empathetic enough or young enough to accomplish anything anymore. Some of us will be cared for, treasured like a favorite pet, and others simply forgotten about, dismissed as a burden. Just background noise. Yes, that what it is is when you get old. But I'm not complaining, there is no one to blame but myself. A lesson learned. I won't be around, but one day this generation will also learn that lesson. Might not happen until the next century, but it will. 

                                                                               

How it works

  If you are in my country illegally you are a criminal. That is the bottom line. It doesn't change if you evade arrest for one week or one hundred years, there is no statute of limitation on that. You are subject to immediate deportation. You may apply for a visa or refugee status from your home nation. There are policies and procedures in place for that. Of course, if you are a criminal that will carry weight on my decision to grant you permission to be in my country. Yes there really are standards to be met for entry. 

  Online nonimmigrant visa application (DS-160)

• Current, valid passport.
• Intended travel itinerary for your U.S. trip.
• Proof of funds to cover the entire cost of travel (bank statements, proof of assets, etc)
• Proof of strong ties to your home country (employment verification, school enrollment, property ownership, etc) 
• To obtain an immigrant visa to the United States, you must meet certain requirements, including: 
  • Documents: You must submit a passport, birth certificate, photograph, and other documents 
  • Petition: You must submit a petition with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 
  • Fees: You must pay any required fees 
  • Interview: You may need to attend an interview with a consular officer 
  Documents required 
  • A passport that's valid for at least six months after your intended entry date
  • A color photograph that's 2 inches by 2 inches
  • An original or certified copy of your birth certificate
  • Evidence of any prior marriages ending
  • A police certificate if you've lived in your current country for at least six months
  • Court and prison records for any convictions
  • Military records if you've served in the military
  • Deportation records if you've been deported or ordered removed from the United States
  Petition process 
  • You can file a petition electronically or by mail
  • U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents can file Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
  • U.S. employers can file Form I-140, Petition for Alien Worker
  Visa category
  The consular officer will determine the visa category that's best for your purpose of travel. Immigrant visas are for people who intend to live in the United States permanently. 
• These are the requirements. 
• 

  
  
  
• Starting with a passport 

Why

  I'm not a photographer but I take pictures. I began that in earnest with the emergence of digital photography. The reason is a simple one, cost. Buying a roll of film wasn't bad it was the cost of getting it developed that was prohibitive. Well, that and I had to remember to take it to the drug store to drop it off. I still occasionally find a roll of undeveloped film. I laugh as I realize it is now an artifact from a bygone era. Today, we can take a picture with our phones, I suspect more snapshots are taken with a phone than with a dedicated cameras these days. No doubt about selfies! Heck I've even taken a selfie. 

  I'm amused when I think about all of that. Back in the day the majority of pictures taken of people were posed. It was only the young and frivolous that went around just snapping pictures willy-nilly. I remember well my dad directing the scene, you stand in the back you're taller, smile, look at the camera. Everyone had to be ready. The camera only came out for "occasions." Birthdays, holidays and company. Wasn't much picture taking going on other than that at my house. I heard about other families having home movies and such, getting family portraits taken in a studio, but we never did any of that. School pictures was as close as I got. 

  It was the frivolous youth that took those candid shots. Well, even the candid shots weren't exactly candid as you generally were aware of the camera. Funny thing is, that hasn't changed all that much. You can't be much more aware of the camera than when you are taking a selfie! I've always liked the candid pictures much better, and still do. I get annoyed when I'm trying to take a picture and the person stops to stare and pose at the camera. That isn't what I wanted. It's my feeling those candid shots capture the essence of the person a lot better than any posed situation. I can't explain that, it's just a feeling. I even get that when I see old photographs of people I never knew, in places I've never been. 

  Now today we are taking pictures and video all the time. We have automatic cameras on our front porches, back decks, in various rooms in the house, on street lamps and city streets. Future generations will not have to guess about anything, it is all being recorded. And there will be lots of candid moments captured as we have become almost unaware of that recording. I know I don't often think about that as I'm shopping in the stores or walking down a street. The truth is, it is all being recorded. How much of that will be preserved for the future? I expect a great deal of the everyday stuff will eventually be deleted. You hear about facial recognition technology sorting through hours of video and pinpointing an individual. It isn't a concern to me as I'm not doing anything criminal. I also have no expectation of privacy when I'm in public, that's why they call it public. 

  It is an amazing thing the number of photographs I have taken personally. I wouldn't have believed it if I was told that in the past. I have pictures on compact discs, sd cards, external drives, hard drives and even in the clouds. Not exactly sure where the cloud is, or how to access that, but I'm told they are there. I pay $3.95 a month for that. I can download them if I want but I'm told they are far more secure in that cloud. I'm not sure why I'm concerned about that but I am. Well, I suppose it just falls under the category of my "stuff." We all have our stuff that we want to last, to be around, long after we are gone. I'm more concerned for the stuff I have inherited over the years, than the stuff I currently have, but still don't want my stuff to be thrown out. 

  I got thinking about this after seeing a picture of my father. He was in the Army Air Force during world war two. He was drafted into service and answered the call to duty. He was trained to be a flight engineer for B-24 bombers. The Army Air Force, yes there was no Air Force back then, it was just a part of the army. The did have there own song, Off we go into the wild blue yonder, the actual title being, The U.S. Air Force. How creative a title is that. In this picture he is sitting in front of the radio, leaned in and tuning in the station. What was he listening to? Was it the hit parade or news of the war. He is in a barracks setting, so probably still in training, but it could have been barracks somewhere else. He flew missions in the China-India-Burma field of operations. I don't think they had barracks like those anywhere over there. 

  But it is a candid photograph, he wasn't paying attention to whoever took that picture. All I know is that it was taken in 1944, that is written on the back. I can only guess that some buddy of his took that picture, later giving it him to send back home. When I was first in the Navy a scenario like that was common enough. Back in the 1970's we didn't have digital cameras, cell phones or any of that stuff. We just took pictures with our cameras and got the film developed. Sometimes the pictures came out, sometimes they didn't and sometimes we shared what we had with our buddies. Something to send home, in the mail, using actual stamps and everything. I have very few photographs from my time in the navy. The reason is simple enough, when you are there it is everyday, commonplace and nothing special about it. Why take pictures. In the future people will be wondering, why did they take all these pictures? 

                                                                              

Cognition

 Enclothed cognition. Now there's a fancy term for you. It took someone with several advanced degrees to come up with that one. I was made aware of that in a children's book written by Hans Christian Andersen. It was called the Emperors new clothes. Well, in the story it was the lack of any clothing that was amusing to me as a kid, he's naked. Something kids today wouldn't find all that unusual I suspect. But Hans had that story published in 1837 according to Google. That tells me this idea of Enclothed Cognition has been recognized for quite some time. I'm certain it was known long before Mr. Andersen wrote that tale. Clothes make the man has been around since the 15th century, also according to Google. Sounds right to me.

 I was thinking about this "enclothed cognition" as I watched the television. The ladies doing the news appeared to be wearing evening attire more suited to clubbing than to reporting the news. I understand that reasoning, visual appeal does attract viewers, although we certainly can't mention that out loud. I certainly haven't done any research into this, but my casual observation is there are very few "plus size" reporters, especially female ones. I guess that is the next big barrier to overcome. Or will it be the "openly gay" reporter to break that ceiling? I'll stick to this discussion of clothing however. It is something I have written about in the past. I view it all as just taking life a bit too casually. I mean, one should dress for the occasion. And daily life is an occasion. Enclothed cognition is a real thing, like it or not. It's real even when you attempt to deny it, ignore it or point it out to others. 

 Being a boomer, that is what I am often called because it is supposed to be an insult or disparaging in some way, I do remember when uniforms were prevalent. The gas station attendant wore one, the milk man, the post man., the store clerk, police men and any number of others. Today it will generally be a fast food worker that is wearing some uniform. The phycology behind that is they appeal to you as a chef; enclothed cognition. If you are dealing with anyone associated with the health care industry they are likely to be wearing scrubs. Scrubs of many colors and styles, enclothed cognition. Even the majority of doctors will be seen wearing those scrubs. Scrubs are associated with the operating room, the surgeons are the top dogs in the medical chain and by wearing scrubs we can create that illusion. Look at me, I'm important! 

 Yes I'm old enough to remember when professionals could be recognized by the clothing they wore. If you were a businessman, you wore a suit. If you were the working man you generally wore a uniform of some type, even if it was just "Dickies" work clothing. Green or tan the uniform was plain enough. If you were self employed coveralls or jeans were more likely, unless specialized attire was required, ie: a fisherman. I'm so old I remember when you met with your doctor he would be wearing a suit and tie. Doctors didn't walk around outside the operating room in their scrubs! Nurses didn't wear scrubs either, not unless they were actually in the operating room or delivering babies. Enclothed cognition. 

 The term enclothed cognition is defined as "the systematic influence that clothes have on the wearers phycological processes"  in other words how they make you feel. Don't we all feel a little better when we are all dressed up? The fashion industry worldwide is estimated to be between 1.7 and 2.5 Trillion dollars. That is how important clothing is to people, well I should say, what you want others to see is. Take the carrying of a purse worth thousands of dollars, what other purpose could that have other than to show off, to project that image of wealth and affluence. 

 Clothes are being used today to project our political and social ideologies. That wasn't the case years ago. I'm thinking that began with the sale of tee-shirts. During the 1970's "message" tee shirts became a big thing, selling in the thousands. It has spread from there to include all manner of clothing and dress. Take the example of Senator Fetterman. He defied the dress code of the Senate and it was changed to suit him. What does that really say about our society? It doesn't matter what you wear! Yes, that's what I tried to tell my mom when she wanted me to get dressed for church. But mom, in her wisdom explained to me about showing respect for others, and how God would appreciate the effort. And when that didn't work, I learned about corporeal punishment, tradition and respect for your elders. 

  Systematic influence that clothes have on the psychological processes. I was influenced! I'm not  certain all this systematic influence is having a positive phycological effect on the population. It appears to me that society has grown more aggressive, less civil in their demeanor than in years past. Could be that it is time to put on our best bib and tucker, straighten up and fly right! Time to shut up and listen!     Enclothed cognition is a veneer, nothing more than that, but the importance of that lies in getting the attention you want. Dress for success is a well known phrase that expresses that idea as well. Today it is a non-profit organization for helping women secure economic independence, according to their website. This can be achieved by wearing the proper outfit! Professional attire is how they describe that. Well there is nothing new about any of that. We have all known it for many years now. The only issue now is in putting forth the effort. Heck a tee shirt and shorts is good enough to represent my constituents in the senate, what's the big deal. Yeah, it is a casual affair isn't it. Good enough. Hey, look at me. But I have an advanced degree so I comprehend the intuitive influences that propagate this thought process. It is merely enclothed cognition. Yeah, clothes make the man. 

                                                                                    

Apologetic

  When I was a young kid living on a dirt road bordering northwest woods in East Hampton, yes the Hamptons, I didn't have any neighborhood child to play with. I had an older sister and two older brothers. Most of the time that was the gang as visitors were few and far between. For reasons I really can't explain our friends didn't come to our house, we always went to theirs. But we had the woods to play in and explored them endlessly. The woods were our refuge. I'm not going to tell you how we became expert woodsmen and learned about all the animals, plants and secrets of the woods. No, we just played in them and occasionally hunted a few pheasants or a squirrel. Deer hunting was very restricted and we had no part in any of that. We did pick "Lady Slippers" for mom, they were her favorite. The thing is they were supposed to be a protected species and against the law to pick. At least that is what we were told. We picked them anyway, watching carefully for anyone that might get us. Never got caught.

  At the far end of that dirt road, Hunting Lane I later learned was its' name, there was a home owned by a man named Pablo. He was some kind of artist and was only there during the season. Back then the season was a real thing, lasting from memorial day to labor day. He would come with his family and paint these rather large art pieces on what appeared to be plywood. I had never seen any artist canvas that big so I figured that what it was. Besides canvas is flexible and folds up, that stuff wasn't doing that. I met him a few times and watched as he splashed his paint on those boards. He explained what he was painting and I just nodded in agreement. Back in my day that is what you did with adults, you just nodded and went along with whatever they said. When labor day was approaching he would pack those things away in a little shed. I have no idea if they were finished works and not, no telling with those things. I couldn't tell which way you were supposed to look at them either, was it a portrait or a landscape? I'm thinking Pablo suffered from vertigo.

  I recall one year when my brothers and I decided to build a tree fort. Dad was a builder and so had some 2x4's and the like laying around that we could take, he wouldn't miss them. So, we built the framework for a tree house about six foot off the ground or so. Those old scrub oaks don't grow all that big and so we were limited by that. We had some good sturdy boards of various sizes to use for flooring and built that but what we needed was some walls. Well, we knew where there were some sheets of plywood, already painted and ready to go. Yes, we raided that little shed of Pablo's. Those sheets were about four foot in height as I remember and maybe six foot long or the other way if you want to look at it that way, we used the shorter side for the vertical portion of the walls. It was the only way we would have enough to go all the way around. We did put the painted side facing in so as to hide the crime. At a later time we came to get some carpeting from someplace and run it on the floor and up those walls. We spent quite a few hours inside our fort doing what boys do. Yes, we had a few cigarettes, beer and some literature secreted there as well. 

  I don't remember when we abandoned it or what became of it in the years that followed. I imagine it was discovered by some other kids playing in the woods. I have thought about it often over the years, the theft of that art I mean. At the time we never gave that a thought figuring Pablo wouldn't know what happened. I have no idea what that mans' last name was or if he was an established artist or not. Where those works valuable? I still have no idea about that. I don't recall ever hearing anything about it so I'm guessing it wasn't a big deal. No report to the local authorities or anything, otherwise I'm certain I would heard about that. It would have been a topic of conversation at the dinner table for certain given he lived on my road. 

  At some point Pablo quit coming and that house was rented. It was controlled by what we called welfare back then, section eight housing today. A family named Hulse was there for a short time and they had kids. I remember a kid named Teddy and his sister Peggy. Then they moved away, I remember being quite sad about that. Hard to believe all of that was over sixty years ago. I'm sorry Pablo that we took your artwork that way. I hope it didn't cause you too much grief. Never did figure out what the picture was supposed to be but that paint sure was thick. I remember sanding it down some before we got that carpet. Hoping I didn't sand a few thousand dollars away.

 Maybe his name wasn't even Pablo. It could be that is just what my dad called him. You know Pablo Picasso. I certainly wouldn't have called him by his first name, just yes sir or no sir. You didn't call adults by their names! Still, I think his name was Pablo, he looked like a Pablo. He wore round glasses, was bald on top and had bushy black hair on the sides. A little overweight, paunchy is what we called it, and looked like a Mexican. Didn't know about Latinos back there, they were all Mexicans. He wore baggy white pants and a pullover shirt, also white. The big tell was that he wore sandals! Yes he wore those  "curararchas" , that's what we called them but I've learned the real name is huarache. All I knew is they weren't like anything the men I knew wore. Only one I saw wearing them was Speedy Gonzales. I figured all Mexican people wore them. Well, whoever he was, I apologize. My bad. 

                                                                               

Looked like this. Can you identify the artist? My dad did some plumbing work for him back in the day. He didn't live in that house though. 

                                                                               

My way

  Does the motivation define the action? It's a question I have given a great deal of thought to over the years. Usually that happens following some perceived transgression. Today we hear a lot about "gaslighting", it's the modern hip way to say, you lied to me. A form of deception designed to make me second guess my own perception of things. It may indeed be your point of view (pov) but that doesn't always make it correct or mine. See that preface a great deal today as well, (pov) as though that excuses the action. Semantic are playing a pivotal role in society today, more so than ever, in my point of view. See how that just slides right in there? It's almost a mandate that you have to accept that as a fact. It's a fact I said that, it isn't necessarily a fact. 

  I read where gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse. Well, okay then. In my world emotional abuse will usually result in a physical reaction. The struggle for me is to control that emotional response. I didn't know I was being gaslighted as a child on the playground, I did know when I was being bullied. I also knew how to respond to that! Depending upon the situation, the person doing the bullying and a few other circumstances or situations, I would respond in my own best interest. I could either handle it myself or request backup. I wasn't questioning my sanity, reality or memory. I still don't. It's true that any gaslighting I may be subjected to today is mainly on social media and I can simply block that, that is the benefit of living in your own little world behind a keyboard. Lots of folks doing just that. The bandwagon has a new name, social media.

  I was thinking about motivations however and what motivates a person to act in the way they do. It's my feeling everyone acts in a way to benefit themselves in some fashion, and that is the simple truth of it. Many would "gaslight" us wanting us to believe otherwise, that they are being empathetic. They very well may be experiencing empathy, feeling what others feel. That isn't an action however, it's an emotion. The true motivation is in having others recognize that, that is why it is so important to those folks to insist you should be doing exactly the same, feel the same way. If you don't, you are a bad person. It's emotional abuse. You can see the response, it is quite obvious. An emotional response sometimes accompanied with a physical one. The physical response either being a "protest" or a "riot" depending upon your motivations for doing so. 

 What I'm thinking about, the question in general, is do motivations matter? Does it make a difference what the intent was or are results the only thing of importance? A line from a song says the road to hell is paved with good intentions and I get that. When good intentions create bad outcomes should you still be held accountable? Well, that's the official line isn't it, forgive and forget. Isn't that the ultimate goal of gaslighting? I want you to respond in the fashion I dictate. The motivation being, I get my way. That's what we really all want. We all want it our way. "For what is a man, what has he got, if not himself, then he has naught, to say the things he truly feels, and not the words of one who kneels, the record shows I took the blows and did it my way." I wasn't gaslighted. That's what I'm talking about! 

                                                                               

Understanding

 For years now I've listened to those explaining why the constitution needs to be updated, revised and revisited. The main reason being those old people back in the old days couldn't have foreseen any of what is taking place today. Take the second amendment as an example, they couldn't have imagined a scary black rifle that fired bullets in rapid succession. If they could have they surely would have prevented citizens from owning anything like that, only the government could own them! All these lives would have been saved. Also how could those people have known that it wasn't a baby in that woman's belly, it was just a zygote, a clump of cells, and has a right to life. That only applies to people already born. The constitution says, everyone has a right to life, it doesn't say anything about a zygote.

 And now the 14th amendment is being misunderstood as well. If I sneak into your house, set up living in your backyard, I'm a resident! I'm residing in your yard. And the 14th amendment says birthright citizenship applies to those born and residing in America. I could have you arrested for trespassing though, and you receive the full protection of the law under the constitution. 

 Now that amendment shouldn't be changed in any way shape or form. Sure, in the past it was amended to say that black people weren't 3/5 of a person but counted as one whole person, but there were laws following that opinion to keep all that in check, for a while anyway. It was the same group, the democrats, that were upset by all of that. About 87% of the republicans voted in favor of the civil rights act of 1964 and about 64% of the democrats. That act enforced the equal protection under the law guaranteed by the 14th amendment. 

 Very upsetting stuff indeed. But I'm hearing today that the whole thing has been settled, the final meaning and intent of the 14th amendment has been established and should never be questioned again! In fact, I keep hearing that it would take an act of congress to change that! That is incorrect, you missed that question on the civics exam. The supreme court of the United States may issue an opinion on that. Precedent was established in 1898 in the case of United States vs Wong Kim Ark. That was 127 years ago, surely those old people couldn't have known what was going to happen today. 

 So what did they say back then? Citizenship was granted to a child born on American soil if their parents are immigrants, regardless of their immigration status. Well, if you are crossing the border illegally is that immigrating? No, that is criminal trespassing. If I sneak into your house does that make me a resident of your house. No, I'm just a trespasser. I'm an illegal. I'm not an immigrant. If I drive a car without a license I'm not an undocumented driver, I'm driving illegally. That's how it works. The legal definition of an immigrant is: "a foreign born person legally admitted to the United States." Crossing the border without authority is not legal. Those people aren't immigrants and neither is that child born in the United States. 

 Now I agree that there are many things the founding fathers could not have foreseen. I'm certain they would be amazed that the President had to actually say, there are only two genders. Incredulous to them would be the concept of a marriage between people of the same sex. And that is only two examples, there are many more. I'm certain they couldn't imagine anyone having to appear before the supreme court because they refused to bake a cake! I'm just as certain those founding fathers and the members of the court in 1898 understood exactly what an immigrant was. They understood the legality of that. It isn't a simple declaration but legal documents are required to establish that. Just as I'm not legally married without the paperwork to prove it! I'm quite certain the court will review all of this and overturn precedent, it won't be the first time. It is what the court does, reach an understanding. 

                                                                   

This is what that word means. 

Getting real

  I'm hearing a lot of complaining, moaning and groaning coming from the left. The big problem? The government will now acknowledge and support reality. Yes, the official position of the United States government is that there are, in reality, only two genders. We have decided to trust the science on that one. It's like the whole witchcraft thing. For a period in history that was thought to be a real thing. People were accused and prosecuted for practicing witchcraft. We have all heard about, read about and seen movies about the Salem witch trials. There were others across the land as well. In 1693 all remaining prisoners on witchcraft charges were pardoned and released. In 1957 the state of Massachusetts formally apologized for all of that. Yes, even back then there were apologies for the past. Finally in 2001 the last eleven people convicted of witchcraft were fully exonerated. Witchcraft isn't real. The idea that there are more than two genders isn't real either. Trust the science on that one, although you could argue I feel like witchcraft is real and play dress up.

It isn't only that reality that has those folks so upset. Imagine calling someone an illegal alien just because they entered your sovereign nation illegally. Migrants? If I set up a tent in your backyard, move into your basement or live under your front porch I'm just a migrant right, not a trespasser. I haven't done anything illegal! I simply migrated to your property. If I drive on the left side of the road I'm just migrating. Nothing illegal about that. And then there is the problem of equality. Why this new administration is proposing treating everyone equally! No more special programs, benefits, entitlements or programs specific to any one group. Well, the only way people can be equal is when the minorities get preferential treatment. Now that's equality.

To further upset those on the left another reality is going to be exposed. There is government waste! A special office is being established to increase government efficiency. Now that is upsetting. No more money for studying monkeys drinking vodka and tequila. Having your employees actually come into their offices, in buildings being maintained and paid for by your tax dollars only makes sense. It is more efficient that way. The only problem being, you are being watched and have to actually work the time you claim you are working. The "honor" system doesn't really work very well. Not only that, but this administration wants to have things merit based. That means you have to earn it!

Wait a minute, I have ancestors that were wronged a hundred years ago or more. I have family members that have had bad things said about them, names have been called and feelings hurt, surely I should receive compensation for all of that. It's only fair. And I don't feel like a woman, or I feel like a women but I'm really a guy, but you should pretend along with me, I changed my pronoun. And now you're going to tell me I can't use the ladies room.

All of that is pretty upsetting and I should receive mental health services, for free, because you are adhering to reality and facts. Are you really going to say that there are only boys and girls, that everyone should be treated exactly the same way and I have to work for a living. And not only that the rich people get to keep their money, they don't have to give it to me? Well, that's not fair.

The truth shall set you free! Did you know that is a Bible verse? Yup, quite upsetting to some, especially those that attempt to deny it.

nothing personal

  I'm guessing the TikTok people didn't go broke after the shut down. I sure heard a great deal about that possibility. Just how were these social media influencers going to survive? I still don't quite understand how they make so much money and exactly where that comes from. I guess TikTok has taken the place of the circus side show, people willing to pay to see freaks. I thought that was frowned upon these days but apparently that isn't the case at all. But they have ninety days to sort all that out, I'm certain there will be a "sale" and new management will take over. Nothing will really change except for that. When there is money to be made it will continue until it is no longer profitable. Hey I remember when they were selling pet rocks. 

  From what I'm hearing AI is the biggest thing going as far as investment. It isn't so much the technology as the promise of a great profit to be made. Imagine what you could charge for a cure for cancer? I heard testimony that with AI individual vaccines may be produced to stop cancer in its' tracks. I'm thinking that individual vaccine will cost far more than one mass produced. The promise however is a cure, not a treatment. An ounce of prevention? So it will be a one time cost, in theory anyway. It all sounds great but I remain skeptical. There are talking about mRNA vaccines. Chemicals designed to trigger a response from your immune system, to "trick" the body into believing something that may or may not be present. I still think it isn't good to fool mother nature. I just hesitate to fix anything that isn't broken. 

  I have never really understood how a state agency can refuse to cooperate with a federal agency. I can only assume the law allows for such to take place as it certainly does. The sheriffs office refusing to work with ICE officials, sanctuary cities and all that. Just seems to me if you broke the law you are subject to prosecution no matter which agency is involved. I've thought the same about this supposed legalization of marijuana. It is still a federal crime to possess that stuff. Federal law takes precedence over state and local law, at least that is what was taught in civics classes when I went to school. Now Trump is saying the federal government may withhold funding from those agencies/states that do not cooperate. I'm expecting that will change some minds real fast! 

  Setting aside all the ideology, the political theories and humanitarian intentions, the deal is this; it all comes down to dollars and cents. It is all about the money folks, like it or not. Those that control the purse strings control the world. It has ever been so and will never change. Those controlling the money determine what you and I get. The idea that we can work hard, do the right thing and be prosperous is an illusion. We are all dependent upon those with the money. Whether we have to work for it, provide entertainment or some goods and services isn't the important part. 

  We have to get money from somewhere and guess where that is? From the ones that have it. What a surprise. The ironic part in all of this is you have to give whatever money you do get, back to the ones you got it from in the first place. That is what you are really voting for. Taxes, fees, levies, whatever, the money goes back to those that provided it to you in the first place. You are paying them to tax you! You are choosing how you want your money spent. Well, that's the hope anyway. That's where the ideology part comes into play. Are we doing business, or running a charity? "It is just as important that business keep out of government, as that government keep out of business.' (Herbert Hoover) It's nothing personal, just business. 

                                                                            

Equal under the law

 “The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.”

 That is an excerpt from the supreme court opinion in the case of Ex Parte Garland. (1866) The preemptive pardon find its' root in that opinion. It has been interpreted to mean a pardon can be given at any time. I read it as, at any time either before legal proceedings have been started or have taken place. But, I also read that portion that says, "it extends to every offence known to the law" indicating to me an offence has to have been committed or, at the very least, known. So, in my untrained; read uninitiated, unprogrammed mind, granting a pardon clearly indicates a crime has taken place. No crime, no pardon necessary. Simple as that. That's why it says, "at any time after its' commission."  

 Now this notion of a preemptive pardon for a crime that has been committed hinges on the fact that a crime was committed. In the case of Ex Parte Garland his crime was being a Confederate. He was on the side of the confederacy during the civil war. Lincoln granted pardons in an effort to foster unity. Ford pardoned Nixon using the same thinking, a fostering of unity in the nation. Nixon was guilty, everyone knew that, and he resigned the presidency. Ford believed the humiliation of having to resign was punishment enough. Bush issued pardons to six individuals involved with the Iran-Contra affair. He said it was to prevent unjust prosecutions based on political motivations. And Jimmy Carter issued a blanket pardon to all the draft dodgers. His reason for doing so? Reconciliation, to bring the nation together again following the great division created by the Vietnam war. In all of these instances it was well established crimes had taken place. 

 That brings us to today and the sweeping pardons issued by Biden. He has pardoned not only those known to have committed crimes, but those that might have. They aren't pardons, they are "get out of jail free cards."  I do not believe that is what the supreme court had in mind when writing that decision. If that is indeed the case one can only surmise one thing; the department of justice is being used as a tool for political prosecution. Are we not all innocent until proven guilty? Is not our justice system blind? If you are innocent of the charges against you will you not be exonerated of those charges? Those actions are the foundation of our republic. Are we now to say, well, that depends upon which political party is in charge? 

 I read this in a legal briefing regarding preemptive pardons and why they should or shouldn't be used." Preemptive pardons can shield individuals from politically motivated prosecutions. In cases where charges appear to be driven more by partisanship than genuine legal concerns, a pardon might serve as a safeguard against misuse of prosecutorial power." Would you not have to know the charges in order to determine the legal concern? Certainly seems reasonable to me. Even then should the president have the sole authority to determine that? I mean, is the president now to replace the entire judicial system, to determine the motivation of the prosecutors?  

  Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants the president the “Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” The key word being offenses. But I'm no legal beagle, just a simple citizen of the United States of America that can read a document. And that means an OFFENSE has to have been committed in order to be pardoned. I don't say pardon me before I belch, only afterwards. There is a reason for that, no need to ask for a pardon if I haven't. Yeah, it's pretty easy to understand. Presidential pardons apply to federal offenses. All those individuals that have received pardons are still subject to the laws of the states. They are still subject to prosecution. They are still subject to federal prosecution for any offense they commit from noon yesterday forward. They are all still subject to civil prosecution as well. 

 All the pardons issued in the past where for crimes known to have taken place. Whether those guilty where ever charged or not doesn't matter. Those preemptive pardons shielded the individuals from prosecution because it was known they had committed a crime! The only thing preemptive about that was keeping them out of prison! They had all committed the crime. And that's the bottom line on all of that. Nothing has changed, all those given preemptive pardons where given for that reason, they have committed crimes that require a shield. Period. Well Biden did set a new precedent. The "get out of jail free pardon" No crime need to have taken place at all. You get a pardon whether you need it or not! Now that's progressive! You can't get any more equal under the law than that! 

                                                                           

blinded

  Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. day and inauguration day. I have heard some complaints about Trump being inaugurated on this holiday. The thing is, it isn't optional, the constitution mandates when that event takes place. Reference the 20th amendment. So, there is no discussion required. We are just obeying the law of the land, no disrespect to Dr. King. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were inaugurated on Martin Luther King day. The next time this will occur is 2053. Inauguration day can not take place on a Sunday. If the twentieth is a Sunday inauguration takes place on Monday the 21st. There is also the additional situation where the flag is at half staff in memory of Jimmy Carter. It isn't the first time this situation has arisen. The flags were at half staff for Truman when Nixon was inaugurated. They remained that way for the entire ceremony. This isn't addressed in the constitution but is a matter of tradition. They will be raised again on Jan 28th ending the mourning period for President Carter.

 It has been 57 years since the assassination of Martin Luther King. Jr. I was fifteen years old when that happened. I remember hearing about that on the evening news. Riots followed with the national guard being called in to restore order in several cities. I admit to not being very socially and politically aware of just what all that meant. Having been born and raised in the north, living in a small rural community, I was really quite unaware of just how much prejudice existed in other areas of the country. I recall my father showing me some snapshots he had taken while in Florida. In these photos were signs saying "colored" and "white" on water fountains and restrooms. My father couldn't believe it. It's true he was no activist, no freedom fighter for social justice and equity, but he let me know just how wrong all that "shit" was. Yes, that is how he thought about that. 

  And here we are fifty seven years later still battling prejudice and injustice. Today the division stems more along political lines than racial ones. That isn't to say that prejudice has been erased, we still have a long way to go, but progress has been made. Dr. King had a huge role in that progress. But today the prejudice exists more on ideology than any theological/moral basis. It isn't black and white, it is right and left.  “Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. " Do you know who said that? It was King. Today we keep hearing, trust the science. Science without the control of wisdom is a very dangerous thing. Pandemics are created in such fashion. "Science without philosophy is blind." That is the "prejudice" we all face today in America. We are becoming blind; exchanging wisdom for power. Wisdom is believing in what you can't understand. 

                                                                     

           

keeping the faith

 Some years back I wrote, "domestic tranquility can only be achieved through cultural commonality" a statement I still support. When I wrote that line I was thinking domestic tranquilly as mentioned in the preamble to the constitution. The authors of that document where talking about peace at home, that home being this nation. It is true that the United States was formed from a diversity of cultures, the proverbial melting pot. It needs to be understand however that whenever something is "melted" ingredients combined, a new alloy is formed. The objective being the creation of a common formula, a repeating of the process to produce a consistent result. To become an American, to share that cultural commonality.

 The constitution of the United States of America is that formula. That was the intent, the purpose and the desire of those composing it. That was explained in that preamble. The constitution itself, the body of that document, sets the "rules" for cultural commonality. This is how things are going to work in this government. The first ten amendments were to ensure individual rights. The fear being too strong a central government could lead to tyranny. A condition those men were quite aware of. Those amendments become a part of the constitution in 1791. The majority of amendments following those concern the administration of government. Further efforts to create a commonality among the people. The rights of the individual states were to be protected as well. Efforts to establish a commonality of purpose. It is recognized that there is "more than one way to skin a cat." The goal however, remains the same. And the goal of the constitution is to establish domestic tranquility. To create a commonality of purpose. 

 So what is culture. Culture is the shared beliefs, moral values, ethical standards, language and way of life in a society. It may be an isolated group of people or a nation. Whenever any of those things are in conflict within the society there are social issues. In general, people fear what is different. Yes there are those that are curious and will explore that. Rarely however do they adopt a new culture, preferring the familiar. Even when they remain within that group, either by choice or by force, they seldom assimilate completely. There is that desire to retain our past, to embrace it. It is the "shared beliefs" that is the greatest stumbling block to cultural commonality. The authors of the constitution where well aware of that. That is the reason no state religion was established, indeed the reason it was clearly stated in the establishment clause. You can not legislate belief. 

 The constitution does indeed have lofty goals. It is the basis of the American dream. It is what every man wants, to live free. But man lives within a society and always has. Our constitution says, to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty. Those are the goals. In order to achieve those goals we must share a culture of commonalty. In short, we have to all believe the same thing! When we don't, that's when the argument begins. We can not live free of cultural norms. In fact it is by abandoning those cultural norms that societies collapse. Then we are faced once again with the need to form a more perfect union. Or we can just preserve the one we already have. It really is as Franklin said when asked, "well Doctor, what have we got, a republic, or a monarchy?" He replied, " a republic, if you can keep it." 

                                                                                   

Same old thing

 It was reported that the fact checkers have been removed from Facebook. No more Facebook jail! Well, the opinion people haven't gone anywhere as one of my remarks was removed. I was informed I couldn't say that! I was given the option to appeal that decision instead of being banned from commenting. I didn't appeal as what I was saying is of little consequence just being my normal charming self. There are a block of people on the left that just don't like me, or my opinions. Okay, the feeling is mutual. I was just amused by that, I was told it was insensitive. At least that was their opinion, my opinion is that I just stated a fact. Sometimes the facts are insensitive I suppose, but it doesn't change anything. The truth shall set you free.

 I haven't heard any more about TikTok going dark. That's a newer phrase I hear used quite a bit, going dark. I remember when we just operated in the shadows. It's not really dark when you shine a light on it. I expect TikTok will continue as usual. There is too much financially to be lost if it doesn't. Remember when those on the left were screaming at the sky. That was nothing if TikTok goes dark, there will be a meltdown of epic proportions. Talk about temper tantrum. I'd like to see it personally, I'm certain it would be quite entertaining. Are the baristas still on strike against Starbucks? All that surely made a great impact, didn't it? No double caffeine latte with foam for you! Pumpkin spice, forget about it.

 The inauguration ceremony has been moved indoors. I'm guessing that global warming has taken a break. The news said Ronald Reagan did the same thing, moved it indoors. Seems like a reasonable thing to do given the forecast. I've heard you can watch in some stadium or dome something like that. The news has been going into all the details for security measures. Leaving no stone unturned is the phrase they are using. There will be agents on the rooftops, even if those rooftops are slanted! Drones are being deployed as well. Three miles of anti-scale fencing is being erected. 

 In other news a ceasefire has been established between Israel and Hamas. We'll have to wait and see how long that holds up. Personally I have no confidence in that at all. I think the best we can hope for is  a pause, an exchange of hostages and prisoners, time to catch their breaths before starting all over again. If you know anything about history that is the most likely scenario. Israel was attacked and they responded to that attack. Now I keep hearing how bad that is, that Netanyahu is the bad guy. All I can say about that is, you attack me and I will respond. All is fair in love and war. Any notion that war can be waged in a "civilized" fashion is just nonsense. That isn't the nature of war and never will be. 

 The state of California is on fire. The rush is on to place the blame on someone or something. The fires rage on and daily I hear reports that progress is being made. Then I hear another fire has begun. The devastation is unbelievable. Firefighters are coming from all over the world to help. Some are blaming the climate and some are blaming the politicians. Still others insist the fires are being set by arsonists. Illegal aliens are being blamed as well. I can see no reason why anyone would want to do any of that, how would it benefit them? But then again I have seen entire neighborhoods destroyed by those living in that neighborhood protesting perceived injustices. So, I guess you just never know.

 Lots going on in the world and it can get overwhelming if you allow that to happen. The best thing you can do is accept the truth for what it is. You can't change the truth, rewrite history or heal the past. No, all you can really do is cause no harm in the future. Just keep moving is my advice. Don't get overly excited, stay calm. It'll be alright. All this will pass, replaced by something new that became old. Remember when X was twitter. LOL The more things change the more they remain the same.