Diversity

  The watchword of the day is diversity. We need diversity, we have to have more diversity, there is a lack of diversity and that has to change. So, what is diversity? Well, simply put it is variety. And we all know that variety is the spice of life. That's because anything different is a bit exciting, or possibly scary. You get that feeling that you may be doing something a bit naughty. Doing something that you shouldn't be doing. In some circumstances engaging in that may be called cultural appropriation. That's generally a bad thing unless you are also embracing diversity while doing so. It can be a difficult road to navigate. Following the path or going your own way. What us old timers described as "doing our own thing." We weren't embracing diversity, not exactly, just trying something new. It didn't always work out though. We discovered we had to find a way to fit in, to get along with others. Yeah, it's a drag man. 

  You see that's the problem with diversity, a lack of a common method. The greatest achievements of man rely upon cooperation. Yes, you need people from a diverse background, those that can bring a variety of skills to the proverbial table. There is, after all, more than one way to skin a cat. The problems begin when everyone begins to insist their way is the only way. You simply can't have everyone doing their own thing and expect to reach a common goal. It is great to have a variety, a diverse selection but in the end you have to make that selection. This is the way we are going to do it! That is what the majority is all about, the basis for democracy. It's important to understand that democracy itself is diverse in its' application. That's why we established a constitutional republic that incorporated democratic principles. 

  It is something I was told as a child and came to understand later on. Doing something just to be different isn't always a good thing. All of us want to be noticed on some level. That is part of human nature. You hear a lot about that today as well. The need to be validated, recognized and valued. There are those that are the trend setters, the popular people, doing something different. Others will emulate them, adopt that style, fashion or whatever. Few of those people are considered, shall we say, academics. That perception is usually reserved for the "nerds." There are exceptions of course, there always are. Why some people can set the trend, be that popular kid, I haven't a clue about. I was never that, although at times it could be said I was different. But who gets the cool nickname and belongs to the "in" crowd is still a mystery to me. For the majority of us the advice is to not rock the boat. Ever notice how most social groups have that "diversity" member? 

  I'm just an observer. I'm the guy that watches what is going on, makes comments about it, and shrugs his shoulders. Always glad to offer advice or suggestions. That is kinda what I do best. I have witnessed any number of diverse social positions. I was raised on that "wrong side of the tracks" attitude. I spent twenty years in the Navy and believe me when I tell you, you will meet and live with a very diverse population in doing so. I've known just about every manner of person there is. I've worked in the private sector as well. Lots of personalities there. A very diverse workforce. And in all of that I have noticed a common thread. When everyone worked together, setting aside their differences, their diverse attitudes and perceptions, things went well. When they didn't, it didn't. 

  You see it is a singularity of purpose that gets the job done. That's how we gained our freedom from British rule 248 years ago. We had quite the diverse population back then, although that isn't what you hear today. What you hear about is the majority. Yes, we were Europeans for the most part. Europeans are quite a diverse group you know. But they shared that singular purpose, freedom from British rule, think taxes and tariffs mostly. Putting your greedy hands in my pocketbook will really make me angry!   That's true to this very day. And that is what is missing today, singularity of purpose. Far too many people focused on diversity instead of unity. Everyone has to be included in order for this to work! 

 Yes, that's true enough, not debating that fact. Still, everyone has to agree on that singular purpose, the goal. And that, that is where the problem lies. It seems to me that there has been a major shift in attitude. Somehow, somewhere along the line we have gone from, earning it to deserving it. To earn it you often have to set aside your preferences, your method in favor of something else. When you figure you deserve it, that no longer applies. See the problem? Instead of celebrating our differences, how about fostering unity. The truth is you can only choose one thing at a time regardless of the number of choices available. Or as my father would have said, either shit or get off the pot!  

What if

  If Trump wins. That is central to the campaign being waged by the Democrats. The impression I get is that they feel almost certain that he will. I'm certainly not hearing any great message about what the democratic party has to offer the voting public. All I'm hearing is, if Trumps wins. It's strikingly similar to what was being said when Abraham Lincoln was running for president. No, I wasn't around for that campaign, but I have read history books and know the story. Lincoln, the republican party and their designs for the future of America. Sure did upset the democrats back then, enough to start a war about! Although Lincoln had made clear he had no plans to abolish slavery, he never said that at any time, he did want to increase federal power somewhat. Didn't make any difference what Lincoln said, the die was cast. 

  In 1861 when Lincoln won the presidency, he told those southern states they were under no obligation to destroy to government, but he had one to protect and preserve one! The southern democrats fired on Fort Sumter, Lincoln called for 70,000 volunteers and the civil war began. It holds true to this day that the Democrats are under no solemn obligation to destroy our government, but the President is under one to preserve it. This time around the democrats are not seceding from the union, but rather attempting to keep the republican candidate from even being on the ballot. Well because, if Trump wins. 

  And what if Trump wins? To hear the democrats tell it our entire way of life will be forever changed. Democracy is lost! Yeah well, the truth is a constitutional republic will be saved if Trump wins. The Democrats have always championed this idea of a simple democracy. A government where a simple majority rules. And that works really well when you are the controlling party in government. Democracy, a simple democracy isn't so great when you aren't. That is when you launch your campaign of fear. And that is exactly what this campaign is.

  Remember in the early days of Covid? What was the president saying? Yes, it was Donald Trump. He was talking about alternatives, he was looking to identify the source of the virus and looking to hold people to account. There was no panic, no doomsday messages. All that took place after Biden gains office. Then we had the lockdowns, the loss of jobs, the masking, the social distancing the days of gloom and doom. Thousands of respirators were produced, we were told of trailers being used as morgues and storage for dead bodies. A vaccine was developed and distributed by federal mandates! Those refusing to be vaccinated were discharged from military service, ostracized and isolated. The campaign was underway, the campaign of fear! Booster after booster, warnings and regulations. You were told you were going to die if you didn't comply! That campaign continues. 

  But that isn't enough, what if Trump wins. Big business will get more tax breaks, the rich will only get richer. The climate stands no chance either, the republicans will destroy the planet. Immigration will be strictly controlled. Why existing laws on immigration will be enforced! And then where we will we get that cheap labor force we so desperately want? The republicans already took that away in 1863 with the emancipation proclamation! Not only that but the republicans passed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. All of that really hurt business for the democrats. What do you mean everyone gets equal treatment! Can't have that, we need to have a boss! 

  What if Trump wins? What if the government is run like a business. Now that scares the democrats more than anything else. Fiscal responsibility and accountability. Now that is scary. What do they do if they can't bribe the population with funds from the treasury? How are they going to get anything done like that. The democrats, those champions of empathy, diversity and inclusion. Well that became their policy following the civil war anyway. Sure, it took a hundred years or more following that loss to fully accept it but Johnson, good old LBJ, signed the civil rights acts of 1964. And today the Democrats only want the very best for everyone! Everyone that is a democrat anyway. 

  What if trump wins. Today if Trump wins the Supreme court needs to be abolished and disbanded, replaced by democrats. If Trump wins woman lose all control of their health! The government will not allow women to choose! If Trump wins people will have to work for a living! And what's even worse everyone gets treated the same way! You will be judged based on your performance, your history and your character. And not only that, the gender you were "assigned" is the gender you keep! You can play dress up, get surgeries, body modifications all you like, but the assignment remains. 

 If Trump wins people will have their feelings hurt. Some will no longer feel validated, feel included or valuable. Others will be forced to comply with the law and be held accountable for breaking those laws. But the scariest thing of all will be the patriots. Those people that are happy about Trump winning, happy about a return to business. People proud to be American, proud to defend the American values and traditions won against a tyrannical king! Those willing to take up arms to defend the nation. Those not afraid! That's the campaign of fear being waged. I, for one, am not afraid and will not be made to feel afraid. 

  Instead of being afraid, if Trump wins, you should be asking, what do the democrats have to offer? Biden? Does anyone actually believe he is making any important decisions. Does anyone actually believe he is presenting a strong leadership role to the rest of the world. Is anyone listening to him? You know that they are laughing at him laughing at America. There weren't laughing when Trump was in office. No, they took what he was saying dead serious. Can the democrats provide that? What candidate do they have other than Biden to offer the people. Harris. Would any other nation in the world listen to what she had a to say? And what do the democrats have to promise you. Socialism, that is what they are offering, socialism. Is that what you really want. I suppose if you are scared enough, any port in a storm will do. Are you that sacred, really? 

  Look I'm not so concerned if Trump wins, my concern is that Biden loses. That is what the nation needs. We need a return to the values and traditions that created this nation in the first place. Yes, in God we trust! Yes, you are free to worship your god, call him/her whatever name you like but we believe in a God. Our national morality is based in those Judeo/Christian principles taught to us by the bible. We believe you have to work for the things you need or want. 

 We believe in family! Yes, the traditional family structure that has shaped man since the beginning of time. We believe in defending our family first! We believe, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." That's what I believe.  The right to life, the right to live free from government oppression, and the right to make a living. That's what liberty means. Independence not dependence and fear. That's what I will vote for, regardless of party. 

  If Biden wins. I'll just have to wait for another four years and vote again. That's how it works in America. It's true I don't want him or the democratic party to remain in power. I do not agree with their agenda or their ideas. They are certainly entitled to them, but I don't have to agree with them. Like everyone else that has come before me and those that will follow, I am an observer of history. I have chosen my own path, carried the banner of whoever and whatever I support proudly. I'm an American. I support the party of Lincoln. I'm voting for that, not for Trump. Trump like everyone else will one day be gone, history, a distant memory. But our constitution will not! Not as long as there are Americans to preserve that. The constitution hasn't changed and that is what I'm voting to save. The only thing that scares me is the loss of that document. Only one party today insisting on "modifying" it, making changes. I can't vote for that. 

a lot to ask

  With the news that I was to become a great grandfather my thoughts once again turn to the family tree. Like the majority of trees there are branches and there are twigs. A new twig has formed. It is expected to bloom in January. I thought about how I knew my great grandfather Floyd as a child. I was sixteen when he passed. I admit I wasn't really aware of that at the time, him being a great grandfather I mean, to me he was just gramp. I'm aware that I may have the opportunity to talk to his 4th great grandchild! I also have photographs and some articles that belonged to him. His wife, my 3rd great grandmother held me once, but I don't remember her. I was three years old when she passed. All I know of her are stories, but I have some of her most treasured items. Namely I have her Bibles. 

  I have come to understand that each of us create our own treasure. Treasure is a personal thing. I often refer to that stuff as my artifacts and the paper products as the archives. Artifacts are those little items that have survived over the years and been passed down. I feel fortunate to have a good number of such things. That is mostly the result of coming from parents and grandparents that didn't throw anything away. We do live in a more disposable time, and I wonder how much will be saved. You can't really create a collectible. That sentiment was best expressed in the Childs book, the Velveteen Rabbit. We may retain things, hold onto them because we are urged to do so by our parents, but the real value is assigned by ourselves. Each one of us hold a piece of the past, a unique piece in the puzzle. That piece cannot be replaced. Which piece will you choose to save?

  That's something I have given thought to and continue to do so. For me it isn't a trivial thing but an obligation. For whatever reason, circumstance or plan, I have been entrusted with a piece of the past. I have to view that as a gift from my creator. Without a past one can't plan for the future. Each generation of mankind has had the obligation to improve, to make things better in the world. It is often said that all parents simply want better for their children. I can say I always did. And I did that by handing them the future. I was able to do that because of what was left behind by my parents, grandparents and every generation before them. Pieces of history, pieces of the puzzle.

  For well over a decade, I have been writing these blogs and posting my thoughts. I had thought about that when I first began. As I said then, it's pretty amazing if you really think about it. I can write down my thoughts and pass them into the future. I'm told they will remain in cyberspace somewhere, residing on a server forever. Somewhere there is a library larger than anyone can conceive. It's the stuff of science fiction really. I've seen episodes of Star Trek where they access that library of information and I'm guessing that will be a reality in the years ahead. Will it be another one hundred, one thousand years or more? No one knows that answer. Amazing that I will be indexed in that library somewhere, somehow. Who or why anyone will access any of this I can only speculate on. My thought it would have to be simple curiosity. This is what great grandfather had to say. 

 My thinking is I would like to leave more than some words I have written. I want to pass down some treasures. Thing is, they are only treasures to me. That's why I say each of us will create our own treasure. The problem will be determining what treasure should go to what person? The problem there being most of us won't know what we treasure until the person holding that treasure is gone. What I mean is if I could go back in time and collect some things from my parents, grandparents or great parents I'm certain they would be surprised. None of those items would be anything they treasured or thought of in that way. 

 The truth is I am the only one that thinks of these things as treasure. My treasure. The thing is that your treasure is what will keep me alive! And what is disturbing about that? I don't really get to decide. The best I can hope to do is convince you to hold onto my treasure. All I can do is ask. I want you to not only hold my treasure for me but to hold all the treasure I have held from those before me. It's a lot to ask.  

a new world

  I was scrolling on my Facebook page when a picture of a clock appeared. This clock was an advertising piece issued by Snap-On tools. The main feature of the clock was the image of the woman on it. She was scantily clad and in a suggestive pose. Now I've never seen that particular piece before, but it brought back memories of when that sort of thing was commonplace in the workplace. Generally, it was calendars. I was working as a maintenance technician, well a maintenance man back then not having become a technician yet, and it seemed every salesman had one. Passed out around Christmas it served as a gift of sorts as well as advertising their product. The state of dress or undress varied from company to company. I recall one year when the salesman gave us a new calendar and it did not have any such picture on it. The salesman said, almost as an apology, that human resources determined those calendars were inappropriate and possibly offensive. It was a shock and puzzling; inappropriate, offensive, to whom? 

 Thinking back, I have to smile about all of that. I remember as a young guy Playboy magazine was like hard core stuff! I worked at a garage while in high school and one of the mechanics there had a magazine that was called nudist life. The pictures in there were all taken at a nudist colony and showed naked people doing things like playing tennis or volleyball. He kept those magazines in the bottom drawer of his tool chest. I knew of another garage where the men's room wall was covered with the centerfolds from Playboy. All of that was common enough in the world of men or where men were expected to be. And the reason for that was easy to understand, it is what is normal and expected of the male species. Nothing offensive about any of that. 

 Ah, the days of the pin up girls. There wasn't any confusion about any of that. Everyone knew that is what guys wanted to see and what guys wanted to brag about. You were judged upon the remarks you would make regarding all of that. Discerning the popular female form was an important skill. It was the art of stating the obvious. Now none of that was supposed to be where the ladies could see it, that wasn't cool, but in the domain of men. Most men would even deny any such stuff existed in their workplace or insist it wasn't theirs. All of that was done tongue in cheek. It was really no secret at all. 

  You could say we have come a long way since those dark ages of sexism and exploitation of the female form. The pin up girls are all hidden from sight. No longer is that sort of thing tolerated. No sir, today there are literally millions of websites that depict every single aspect of human sexuality imaginable. You don't need to use your imagination, no fantasy required, it is all there, readily available to everyone and anyone! A great deal of that can be seen in movies and on television with unlimited access. Many of the female singers of today wear the same outfits I saw on those calendars years ago on stage today. It's wrong to have them on a calendar but not in front of 100,00 fans. Now that's progress. 

  Yes, I have reached that age where I can look back and see the changes in society. No longer having any desire to change myself, to adapt to whatever the latest fad or fashion happens to be, and free from societal pressure. I don't really care what others think. I've been around long enough to see, firsthand, what has been good and bad, what has worked and what hasn't. I understand that each generation has to discover all of that for themselves. That doesn't prevent me from making sarcastic remarks or scoffing at some of the ideas these younger folks have. And by younger folks I mean those 35 or forty years old, they have a lot to learn. I smile knowing that life will teach them sooner or later. One day they will sound just like me. Good thing we got rid of those pin-ups and stopped exploiting women like that! We've made progress. Now instead of oogling the girls on the posters we have guys turning themselves into those girls! Hey Bruce even posed topless! I read that somewhere, but I'm hoping it is fake news. It's a new world. 

2025

 Project 2025. What is it really? It is a long list of proposals compiled by a conservative coalition and proposed as a platform for the Trump campaign. It is really the same thing as what Obama had, " the liberal center for American progress" called Obama's idea factory. There are any number of "think tanks" that make proposals and attempt to push their agendas. The Bilderberg's are one we hear about every now and again. They meet yearly and it is supposed to be a secret what they discuss. They are plotting the New World Order. Yeah, okay.

  But project 2025, as it has been labeled, has four main objectives. The first one being to reestablish the family as the core of American society. Yes, the traditional family unit that has been the core of all civilizations since antiquity. The purpose being to restore balance in society. Children need a father and a mother, children need that stability, that balance in order to develop properly. The family teaches children basic values like loyalty and respect for authority. Structure. Project 2025 would seek to shrink the size of government. The plan is to eliminate a good number of government positions and replace them with appointed individuals. A plan to reduce the administrative state that has grown so bloated as to be ineffectual. Other goals are to secure our border, defend our sovereignty and defend our God given rights to live freely. 

 That is what project 2025 is really all about and it scares those on the left to the core. It would mean a reduction in their power and control. And that is why you will be hearing about how terrible that it is! Why it is a plan to make Trump king! You will lose all your rights and property. You will be subjected to persecution. OMG it must be prevented at all costs! That is what you will hear from the mainstream media outlets. It is the lefts' campaign of fear. That is how they are going to attempt to sway the voters to their candidate, Joe Biden. Unless you vote for Joe Trump wins! If Trump wins, it's all over. the democracy is lost. No more can you just insist that, this is how I feel, and have government support that. No more governance by emotion. Can you imagine?

 It isn't easy but it is possible to read the actual documents yourself. It's a shame that you can't simply Google it or ask the internet and get an unbiased factual article concerning project 2025. The powers that be don't want you to know that to be informed. One of the biggest issues with project 2025 would be the proposed defunding of all this "climate change" research and legislation. In those papers there are two competing ideas about tariffs and trade. 

 It isn't a simple straight up manifesto as the left would lead you to believe. It is a collection of "ideas" by a group of over one hundred conservative minded scholars, politicians and business leaders. It does not propose abolishing abortion! It does propose stopping the sale of mifepristone. It would also ban pornography and shut down all sites that distributed such. And yes, it also proposes the removal of such terms as, sexual orientation, diversity, equity, and inclusion, gender equality, and reproductive rights from all laws and federal regulations. Very upsetting to those on the left. 

  It's important to remember everything in there are simply proposals, ideas, and not a new constitution or bill of rights. It does not propose making the president a king or granting him/her unlimited power. It doesn't call for the dismantling of Congress or the court. None of that! What it does propose is a return to what those documents actually say. We the people, we are the majority, not the politicians defending their jobs or positions. The family is the core of America, and our traditional values should be upheld. That's what they propose. Truth is, it is nothing new, just a new tool of fear being used by the left! Remember all those proposals would require a majority vote. If the majority scares you, well, there are nations where you can go and not have to worry about that. If it isn't covid or climate change project 2025 will kill you. 

The choice

  Today being the fourth my thoughts naturally turn to history. A day to celebrate our independence from oppressive British rule. Over the years the history has been modified in keeping with current sentiments. The "truth" of the matter is often cited for these modifications. Much of history is being labeled as "fake news" in this modern informational world. A world of data, surveys and opinion polls. The majority of patriotic speeches are more of an apology than a retelling of great deeds or ideals. That is the world of today. Our constitution is under constant attack, the words and their meanings called into question at every turn. Many times, we hear how the 'founding fathers" those that composed those documents could not have known anything about the world today. They couldn't imagine anything like what we have today. And that somehow is supposed to change the nature of man? I disagree. They were writing about the very nature of man and that is what those documents address, not the physical things we have today. Not new inventions or technological advances in science or medicine. They were talking about the very nature of man which I submit has not changed one bit. 

 The ancient philosophers spoke of the same things as we speak of today. Morals and ethics. All the wars, all the treaties, all the compromising, conceding and surrenders, have revolved around one of those two actions. History, no matter who tells the tale is filled with all of that. It is always man's quest for freedom or for power. And that pretty much depends upon which side you stood. Its why men die for their country, die for their Gods, and die for their beliefs. The nature of man has not changed. Governments have formed, empires forged and fallen based on those motives. The greatest of them have fallen, relegated to history as lost causes. From the ashes of those great empires new nations formed building on the past. And throughout history the nature of man has not changed. 

 Where are the great orators today? I haven't heard any grand speeches to inspire men in quite some time. I heard a lot of name calling, see a lot of fingers pointing and blame. Today a patriotic speech will be met with jeers and derision. Those sorts of orations are not in style. Consider these words: "You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down - [up] man's old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course." Who spoke those words? Ronald Reagan He also went on to say,  "The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."

 This speech was called a Time for Choosing. It was given Oct 27, 1964. It was a tremendous success and inspired millions. Does any of that sound familiar to you? Much of the same is being said even today, by the same parties that were saying that in 1964. Human nature and motives have not changed since then either. We are faced once again with a time for choosing. Choose wisely is my best advice. Are you willing to trade liberty for security? I for one will not. God Bless America.  Happy Independence Day. I would add the words of Benjamin Franklin when asked "what do we have, a republic or a monarchy?" A REPUBLIC, if you can keep it. That's the choice you have to make. 

what they want

  Just what did the Supreme court rule? They ruled that the office of president of the United States comes with some protections. What they didn't say was the president is immune from all prosecution. They didn't say the office was above the law, similar to the immunities afforded congress. The President is free to carry out his function as the CEO without fear of arrest! The real issue here is in defining just what the core function/actions are. It is like attempting to make a list of right and wrong, or writing a tax code. Everyone will have a different opinion, a different idea. The tax code covers 70,000 pages and is constantly being changed. How many pages on morality and what is moral and ethical are there? Has to be in the millions of pages. The task of writing down every action the President may or may not take is an impossible one. 

  Why has this come about at this point in time? It's a response to the weaponization of the justice department by the Biden administration. That's the underlying cause. It's the Trump must not be allowed to run for office mentality. It sure seems to me the Democrats are convinced he will win given all the effort to exclude him from the race. The events of Jan 6 are in the center of this storm of litigation. Despite the media calling it such, despite what anyone on the left has to say, it was not an insurrection. In legal terms, by any legal definition it was not an insurrection. Not one arrest contained that word. No one has been charged with insurrection. No court of law has ever declared it as such. I don't care if you like it or not that is just the simple truth of the matter. 

 I really have a hard time understanding why there are those that support Biden given his mental condition. How could anyone possibly want that man to have access to the nuclear codes? Well because the truth is the president can actually do very little on his own. He does have to have support from congress. The really big decisions aren't simply left up to the president. What is left up to the president is taking responsibility for those decisions. That responsibility doesn't include being criminally charged when things don't work out the way a certain party wanted them too. That applies to republicans and democrats equally. Should Kennedy have been charged for the Bay of Pigs fiasco? Almost got into a nuclear exchange with Russia! Should Clinton have been charged for Mogadishu? 18 dead American soldiers and 73 wounded. He ordered all of that. Or are they just "core" decisions being made by the president.

 Why isn't Biden being charged with all the deaths occurring as a result of his border policies? We all know the stream of illegal drugs and illegals are driving those numbers. There is no doubt his policies are allowing this to happen, one might say encouraging it with the promise of "sanctuary" in the United States. How often do to hear his proclamations about a path to citizenship? I'd say that was enticing others to "come on down" and see if you can win the prize. Oh, that's right it is his decision, and he has every right to do that. No issue with any of that. It's a core function of the presidency. Why shouldn't he be arrested and charged for any of that? 

 No matter how you feel about this decision by the court the reality is, the president is afforded some immunity. I can see this becoming a constant state of litigation. Each party will now begin to challenge every decision made by the president whenever it doesn't suit them. Thing is the president really doesn't get to simply decide on anything without the other branches of government having input to that decision. Even executive orders issued under the authority of Article Two of the constitution has limitations, they can be overruled, nullified by congress. The vast majority of executive orders are proposed to the president by various agencies, including the congress. He isn't just sitting there thinking those things up, he just decides whether he agrees to that action or not. Really not that much different then you getting permission from your mom or your wife. Can you get the president to agree? 

 The bottom line is this ruling by the court does not open any door for anyone to become a dictator. It doesn't eliminate the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or anything else. The Republic is still intact and will remain that way. The only party wanting to disarm the citizenry is the democrats. It's worth noting that the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens! 

 Makes me think, and it should you as well. Disarm the population, create a dependence on government for basic needs like food, medicine and housing and you are well on your way. Overwhelm the resources of the people to gain control. Soon rationing becomes necessary. You do that by not restricting anything, not limiting anything, just allow the people to dig that hole for themselves! Control the president and you can control the nation. Joe is easy enough to control, give him an ice cream, keep him from wandering off and he'll do and say whatever he is told. 

 With Biden the trouble is in understanding what he is saying! The trouble with Trump is knowing exactly what he is saying! Those are the left really hate that. That could ruin all their plans. Well because if trump gets elected, he becomes dictator! And we all know that Trump is just mean, hurts people's feelings and doesn't always play nice. And what's worse he will try to do exactly what he says he intends to do. What kind of politician is that? He's out of control! The only thing stopping him now is the Constitution, the legislative and judicial branches of government. Well, unless we can keep him off the ballot that is. He must be disqualified at all costs, even if that means losing the republic! Socialism can take its' place. That's just fine with the left. It's what they want anyway.  

getting the deduction

  The city of Baltimore purchased two empty hotels for 18.5 million dollars. They have hired a management firm to run them for the next nine months. The purpose being to provide rooms to the homeless. It was reported there are 258 rooms available. That means it cost the taxpayers 71,705 dollars for each room. That's just for the room. The heating, cooling, water and electrical are not included in that expense. How much will that cost the taxpayers? Haven't heard any discussion about how they intend to fund all the maintenance. Oh, this purchase was made using Covid money. Yes, the relief funds that was intended to help all of those that were working and lost their jobs due to covid, those businesses that suffered due to covid and all of that. But instead, the city of Baltimore decided to go into the free hotel business! 

  Now who gets selected to occupy those units and for how long hasn't been talked about much on the news. I think we can all figure out who that will be. I don't need to speculate. How long can you remain homeless? That's a big question I have. Without some limiting factor why would I ever move out? If I'm getting everything for free, why would I want to pay? But if you make me leave, I'll just start suing the city for discrimination! Are you going to have the police forcefully remove me? What a public relations nightmare that would be. I might start suing when the laundry service doesn't do my bedding to my satisfaction or there aren't enough washer/dryers to go around. Certainly, there has to be minimum standards for cleanliness. Housekeeping should be provided as well. Or are you going to say I have no right to privacy and authorities can enter my space whenever they want? That doesn't seem right.

 The way I see it the taxpayer just paid over 70,000 dollars for a room for a homeless person, or perhaps two, if they can be made to share a room. What about families, can they share a room, or do they require a suite? We do have to be concerned about their dignity don't we. Of course, we do, and they should receive nothing but the best. That cost is just the beginning. All the plans for "services" to empower the homeless and provide them opportunities for job placement, training, medical and mental health services are going to quite the expense as well. The "free" money from the government will soon be expended and then where do those funds come from? Taxpayers. 

  The deal is, and you I both know that, these hotels will wind up being mini-ghetto's. They will morph into tent cities without the tents! They will be filled with the same issues as those living on the street because, duh, it's the same people. Drug use, alcohol use, prostitution, all matter of vice. The only thing different will be business can be conducted 24/7 regardless of the weather and with an increased degree of privacy. A prison without bars! That's what you are going to have. It isn't going to be pretty! There is no way the taxpayers should be involved in any of this. Charity isn't the business of government! Especially when that government will begin to impose that charity! Oh, they will call it by another name, a fee, a tax, or whatever, but it will be forced charity. Failure on your part to comply will result in you facing additional fines and prosecution under the law. Your property, your income will be taxed to provide for those "shelters." 

 And the only ones being "sheltered" are those people, not you or me. Are you getting free electric, free water, free housing? Do you have a lineup up people begging you to take advantage of their services? Agencies that just can't wait to help. Well, that's their job and they have to show they are doing something I suppose. And chronic homelessness isn't their fault, it's just a relapse and you get a do over. Maybe you just need some more help. We'll do our best to raise some more funds! Governor Moore signed legislation increasing fees and taxes with 132 separate bills. They took effect yesterday. That money is already spent though. If the taxpayers are going to fund all of this charity, we should at least get to deduct that as a charitable donation on our tax returns! I figure at least 30% of my taxes are being used in that way. Seems like I should get the deduction.         

A pivotal moment

  Following the debacle that was the presidential debate the rhetoric is ramping up. Rumor has it that serious talks are going to take place at Camp David regarding the future of old Joe. It is shaping up to be an intervention. It is blatantly obvious he is no longer fit to lead. Despite every effort made that can't be hidden any longer. It's quite the quandary for the Democrats. No one believes Kamala could win the presidency. Fact is, even among the Democrats no one wants her to be the president. She was useful for securing the female vote, useful for the black votes, but her usefulness is over. 

  The problem now is getting Joe to agree to a new plan. He certainly isn't willing to quit. I get it, as much as I dislike his politics, I understand the position he is in. No one wants to admit to being mentally incapable. It's one thing if something physical happens, no shame in that. But to have to admit to a mental issue is quite another. As I said, I get it. I know what I'm talking about it's others that are confused. It is a sad thing to witness but it has to be acknowledged. What to do? You begin by having his wife talk to him. You have to get Jill on board this train. If she can get him to agree, what then?

  Who could the Democrats offer as an alternative? You know as far-fetched as it sounds Michele Obama could conceivably run. Just who could they choose? At this late a date I can think of no one with the recognition necessary. Newsome or Buttigieg? Those are possibilities if Biden just chooses not to run. What the Democrats need to have happen is Biden resign the office. In that way Harris becomes president and the party loyalists gather around her. She could carry the torch for poor old Joe who tried his best but family matters and failing health betrayed him. But he's a survivor, Harris is a survivor, and the party will struggle on! It's all for the common man, the minorities, the downtrodden, marginalized members of our society. It's free everything for everyone! We mustn't allow the bad orange man to win! 

  I'm not much on conspiracy theories. I do think if I were Joe, I would be a bit nervous though. Unfortunate things have been known to happen. Should something occur that forces him to resign that would be the easiest path. Joe leaves with dignity, Harris fills the space and takes her directions from the powers that placed her there. Being the first female president is certainly a giant feather in your cap, a place in history. It would be worth just playing along for certain. Two Kennedys were removed from the picture, it isn't unheard of. These are powerful people after all. A little slip up with the medications perhaps? Things happen. 

  It is a pivotal moment in history, as cliche as that sounds. We the people are between the proverbial rock and a hard space. No way should Joe Biden continue as president, it's plain to see, he can't do it! The will may be there, but in this case where there is a will there is still no way. The sad reality is the election is all about winning. Winning for the party, not for the people. The Democrats have a big problem on their hands. The Republicans have Donald J Trump. That isn't the ideal position for them. Trump certainly isn't going to quit. Perhaps Marco Rubio will be chosen as his running mate. Would you want him as President? Not sure about that one. 

  Well, we have to get through the summer. Time is closing in on the candidates. Events in the middle east are heating up rather than cooling down. Can a war be inevitable? It is inevitable that we will be further involved no matter what happens. Those events in the middle east are tearing at the very fabric of America! Each day we are looking more and more like some third world nation unable to care for our own. The ship isn't on an even keel, and someone needs to right the ship! We need a strong leader! I'm just not certain we have anyone up to the task. At the moment the choices are Biden and Trump. No other candidates stand any reasonable chance at winning the election. Like it or hate that is the reality. Biden isn't capable of the job. He can't even pretend to be! We are left with Trump. And that's the bottom line, like it or not. That debate was a pivotal moment in history. No turning back from that. All the Democrats can do is pivot!  

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.