Mon, 15 Dec 2025 18:25:22 -0800WeeblyWed, 10 Dec 2025 19:52:32 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/december-10th-2025On December 10, 2017, I issued my first posting. Eight years ago to the day! It was titled Hi There!
 
This is my 300th submission and it probably is my last. I don’t say that with great assurance because I have waivered in the past, but this time I think I mean it.
 
So why am I pulling up stakes?
 
Definitely not because I fear being unable to come up with subject matter.  Early on I did worry about that, but I found no problem in finding topics, and the future certainly will continue to present plenty of possibilities.
 
Just think of the wealth of potential subjects produced hourly by the horrors of the current national administration. Or by similar wannabee actors in red controlled states, including my very own Florida.
 
Furthermore, there are the nostalgic memories of how great life was when I was a babe, 90 years ago. And recognition that life back then wasn’t so great for a lot of people.
 
And, of course, observations of how things have changed over the decades of my existence, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.
 
So lack of subject matter was never a problem in the past, and it would not be one in the future.
 
Alright then, what is motivating me to quit?
 
There are a couple of reasons.
 
A big one is I have other interests I want to pursue, including another book no one will read. It has a tentative title of Tenure Track. Don’t hold your breath waiting for it to appear at your favorite bookstore.
 
And don’t for a moment think I can tell you much about it. I have only a broad outline, so there is an almost infinite (remember that post on infinity?) amount of detail to be created.
 
But the big reason for quitting is I’m tired of the pressure of putting out blogs. It has stopped being fun. Even with the reduced frequency I have recently adopted. It has made me admire and respect the many columnists who produce work every day, or at least several times a week. Especially someone like Heather Cox Richardson who writes a daily column and creates online discussions a couple of times a week.
 
During these eight years I have been extremely lucky. I have had you as readers.
 
You have been enormously faithful over the years, putting up with the thoughts of someone unknowledgeable about the subject being discussed and yet still willing to expound, working through his ignorance.
 
Thank you for bearing with me over this time. I feel lucky to have had your support and comments.
 
May you have a joyous holiday season and wonderful future.
]]>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 18:48:08 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/celebrity-death​Reports of the death of celebrities over the years got me reflecting on the widespread response they elicited. I noticed it following the tragic death of. Kobe Bryant back in 2020. And Dale Earnhardt’s whose fatal accident hit those in the auto racing community especially hard.
 
It isn’t only in the sports area where a death elicits headlines and expressions of love. Diane Keaton’s recent demise and the deaths of two of the Beatles come to mind. A Pope dies and the world mourns. Famous authors, long time politicians, humanitarians.
 
The intensity of the grief is not always the same. Earnhardt’s death received much more publicity and public words of grief than did Mother Teresa’s.
 
Much much more than the demises of Frank Harary and Paul Erdös. Who? See what I mean? You may recall I devoted a posting to Professor Erdös. They were mathematicians, and their loss was just as significant to the math field, my field, as Earnhardt’s was to racing.
 
My first instinct was to question this sense of loss regarding someone the vast majority of the mourners have never met. At least I did know Harary and Erdös. But for most celebrities, very few of us have ever had face-to-face communication.
 
I kept asking myself, why do people care. We give little thought to the deaths of lesser individuals, like a baseball player who never made it big or the guy down the block you nodded to on the rare occasions you passed him.
 
And I wondered why the death of a celebrity should be any more important than the death of a wife, a child, a sister, a parent, or any other significant person in one’s life.
 
Finally, it struck me. And it’s not very deep thinking. I just wasn’t wise enough to realize it before.
 
Someone upset about Earnhardt’s death wasn’t lessening the significance of Harary’s or any personal member of one’s family. Because we mourn those who are close to us. And close doesn’t have to be physically close. But it does have to be emotionally close.
 
For many who came of age with the Beatles, they found comfort in the music. They became entranced with the four young men who burst into the United States on the Ed Sullivan show. They grew up with them. Is it any wonder they were shocked, devastated, and felt the need to mourn when John Lennon was murdered?
 
As a result of these reflections I have altered my views. It isn’t that a celebrity’s death is any more important than another person’s, certainly not more important than family.
 
Rather, the extent we mourn anyone reflects the closeness of the emotional ties we have with that person. For racing fans, Dale Earnhardt was a part of their life for many years. For mathematicians it was Paul Erdös. For most, it is a family member or close friend.
 
And for all, the loss of someone dear is an emotional nightmare.
]]>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 19:24:20 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/how-can-anyone-hurt-a-dogMy wife and I spend most of our time in our home. We haven’t been alone. Our rescued border collie/basenji/whatever mix has been our constant companion. He places his trust in us to feed him, walk him, and protect him. He returns unlimited love. He oscillates between us. He senses when one of us is upset and cuddles up. As I type, he is lying beside me at my desk.
 
Could I whip him or hit him or burn him or cut him? Just saying the words sickens me. I can’t imagine doing such things.
 
But some people do. Or they train them for dog fights on which money is wagered. Or they force them to live in cramped crates. Or on a lesser cruelty scale they make dogs, even small ones, live in back yards.
 
When greyhound racing was in vogue, the large dogs spent more than 20 hours per day in their small crates. The sole purpose of these wonderful animals was, for certain people, to move fast and make owners and trainers money. I do think the dogs loved the running—until they were injured. I was able to observe them at the starting gate and they couldn’t wait to get moving. We rescued four over several years and they still liked to run. But they didn’t return to a crate.
 
And they lived for 11 to 14 years. Early on the racers often didn’t. Their work was over at age three or four, and then they were euthanized! Can you believe that? Fortunately, rescue groups emerged, and the dogs were saved and became loving pets. But how can you deliberately kill a four-year-old life just because it’s inconvenient to have it continue?
 
Why do humans think they have the right to be cruel to “lesser” beings? And we are. It’s not just dogs.
 
Imagine training roosters to fight. As a sport! A money sport.
 
Imagine hunting, not for food but for the pleasure of killing an animal. Theodore Roosevelt had many fine attributes, but his desire to kill big game wasn’t one of them. Now our “brave” hunters often face their poor enemy with assault rifles! So it’s no longer even possible to pretend it’s a sport.
 
Imagine the fox hunt where people on steeds accompanied by trained dogs chase a released and terrified fox with the sole goal of killing it.
 
Imagine taking a wild beast built to roam the forest and enclosing him in a cage for the enjoyment of circus or zoo attendees. Most zoos, finally, are taking a more humane approach and allowing further movement. But it’s still only acres, at most, rather than square miles.
 
Imagine being willing to cause the extinction of any number of species in order to build homes on environmentally sensitive lands resulting from sweet deals between legislators and developers.
 
We humans think we’re so superior to all the wonderful species that inhabit our planet (fewer and fewer every year). That means we don’t appreciate the amazing characteristics they possess from the smallest insect to the largest mammal.
 
In all fairness I have to admit I’m a bit of a hypocrite because I eat poultry and fish. PETA would not approve. But I approve of PETA. Not always with their methods, but with the desire to protect animals from human superiority and cruelty.
 
My wife just came through our front door, so our dog, tail wagging, has trotted off to welcome her.
 
We both love him and will always do our best to care for him, to let him have a happy life. I think he does. I hope he does.
]]>Mon, 27 Oct 2025 16:40:09 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/the-dignity-of-the-presidencyWe are living at a time where the dignity of the office of President of the United States has been reduced to a distant memory
.
Trump has convinced himself and his legion of followers that being a boor is a boon to our country. Being the laughing stock of the free world is all right, because it’s nastiness that’s respected by the really great leaders of the world. You know, Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and Kim Jong-un.
 
I don’t feel the same way. I want my president to make me proud of the country. Sure, I expect him to be tough when necessary, but I want our citizens and the world to look on the presidency with respect, with the knowledge we are operating from strength. Bullies do not operate from strength. They operate from fear.
 
Having said all this, I now move to the trivial contribution to presidential dignity which most will find impossible to take seriously. And you shouldn’t.
 
Let me give a couple of lists of some presidential names.
 
The first is Harry S. Truman, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden.
 
The other is Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon, Gerald R. Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald J. Trump.
 
See any difference in the lists?
 
I wouldn’t be surprised if you said no, because there is nothing anyone but me would think was significant.
 
In the second group the presidents used their full first name. All references in the media used them. I suspect all formal documents used them.
 
In the first group nicknames were always employed. I don’t know how documents were signed, but I suspect it was the informal appellation.
 
Is this important? Not really. It is just a small indication that the office of president can be trivialized when it is politically expedient, and I’m sure that was the reason.
 
We have to excuse Truman. Turns out Harry was actually the name given him. It wasn’t short for Harold or Henry or anything else. What was interesting was the S as middle initial. He didn’t have a middle name, but his parents supplied the initial presumably to honor his two grandfathers Anderson Shipp Truman and Solomon Young.
 
Aspiring politicians also take the informal route, trying to sound real when in truth they are fake. Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis come to mind to this Florida dweller.
 
There seems to be no correlation between employing a formal name and outstanding leadership.
 
Jimmy Carter was a poor president but was a superb human being and probably the best ex-president ever.
 
Bill Clinton was a pretty good president but a little low on the decency scale.
 
Barack Obama was a good president.
 
Donald Trump is as bad as you can get.
 
So, is this much ado about nothing?
 
Probably.
 
Should I use Robert instead of the Bob I prefer? I do when signing anything.
But more significant: Who cares?
]]>Mon, 13 Oct 2025 15:42:52 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/an-introduction-to-infinityHe says, “I love you more than a billion!”
 
She says, “I love you a trillion much!”
 
He says, “I love you a billion raised to the millionth power much!”
 
She pulls the clincher. “I love you an infinite much!”
 
And there’s the word. “Infinite” and its cousin “infinity.” What do we mean when we say them? Big. Really big. Perhaps a number larger than the largest number we can think of. Maybe a place further away than any other place.
 
Funny things can happen when one discusses infinity, and we’ll look at just one of them.
 
Fortunately, we don’t have to deal with infinity in our daily lives. When we go shopping we don’t ever need an infinite amount of cash. We just hope that the finite amount we have will pay for the finite amount of groceries we need. When we take a car trip we are going only a finite distance. That’s a good thing because otherwise we would need an unlimited amount of gas which would cost an unlimited amount of dollars. And an unlimited amount of time to make the trip.
 
So infinity is a vague concept for most of us.
 
Mathematicians don’t like the word “vague” and have discovered concrete ways of dealing with the concept. And one of the. weird things that can happen is this.
 
Suppose I give you 100 pieces of paper and on them I write each of the positive integers from 1 to 100, one on each piece of paper.. If I asked you how many positive integers were written you’d reply 100. If I said how many of these were even—you know, 2, 4, 6, etc.—you’d correctly say 50. If I gave you a million pieces of paper your answers would have been a million and 500,000, respectively. The number of even integers written is half the total number of integers written,
 
Now here’s the weirdness. Suppose I gave you an infinite number of pieces of paper, something I can’t do, of course. Then I claim the number of positive integers, and we know there are an infinite number of them because I can always find one bigger than any you can name, maybe by adding 1 to yours, is the same as the number of positive even integers! Mathematicians talk about equal cardinality instead of numbers, but that’s not necessary here.
 
Pick any positive integer you want, say 17. Then multiply it by 2 to get 34. Multiplying it by 2 always gives you an even integer. So, for any positive integer, there is a unique positive even integer associated with it. If you start with 26, for example, you get 52 after multiplying. And if you start with different integers you will wind up with different integers after multiplying. And this is always possible no matter how large the starting integer is because there is no limit to the integers so the one twice as big will always be available. Thus, for every integer there is an associated even integer so in some sense there must be at least as many positive even integers as there are positive integers. If so, this means the positive even integers are at least as many as the positive integers.
 
Now go the other way. Start with a positive even integer. Then there is a unique positive integer that is half of its value. Hence, there must be at least as many positive integers as there are positive even integers.
 
Think about those two conclusions. Doesn’t it mean the number of integers is the same as the number of even integers?
 
And that’s what we mean when we say the set of all positive integers has the same cardinality as the set of positive even integers.
 
And that concludes our introduction to the concept of infinity where weird things happen.
]]>Mon, 29 Sep 2025 15:47:20 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/who-am-iThere are social situations which can be uncomfortable, especially if you are not naturally outgoing.
 
At a party, for example, where you are familiar with only a few and suddenly find yourself standing with a group of strangers discussing things unknown to you.
 
Or after a move to a new neighborhood and you meet those living close by.
 
I used to be one of those misfits. In the party situation I would smile appropriately, nod sagely at a statement being made, and swivel my head in a desperate search for the location of my wife so I could join her and dwell in the safety of her aura.
 
With a new neighbor I was better. I would smile, say “Good morning,” and hurry on. A bit like a teenager who can’t even see an adult being passed on the sidewalk.
 
Then something happened. I got older. There definitely are disadvantages to aging. But there are advantages too. One is that you care less than before if someone thinks you’re a nutcase for opening your mouth and initiating a conversation. So I no longer hesitate at doing just that. The question was what this newly freed mouth should emit.
 
I came to realize that there is one topic of conversation almost everyone likes.
 
Themselves.
 
And that topic was easy to initiate.
 
With pauses for appropriate responses, my input might go something like this. “Hi, my name is Bob and it’s nice to meet you.” “Do you live near here?” “How do you know (inert name of host/hostess)?” Now the real question.. “What kind of work do you do?” And suddenly there is immense enthusiasm for a true conversation with shy little me, including all those in the group where I made my bold interrogation.
 
And it’s interesting for me, because I enjoy learning about what interests others and that usually inspires follow-up questions.
 
It’s easier meeting new neighbors, especially when you have a cute dog to win hearts. Almost everyone likes dogs, and many will initiate conversations so they can pat my dog or introduce him to their dog. For those not enamored with my pooch, I simply tell them my name, that I just moved in, and I really like living in the area they do. And almost uniformly everyone is welcoming.
 
But one thing I’ve noticed is that while almost everyone loves telling me about themselves, very few want to really learn anything about me. For example, very few of my neighbors have any idea what I did for a living.
 
Which is okay. I don’t have a need to discuss my career, or my life for that matter. Although, if I’m honest, I probably am like everyone else that way.
 
But whether others learn of my history or not, I find them fascinating and feel lucky to know them.
]]>Wed, 03 Sep 2025 22:08:10 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/the-craziesWhere did all the crazies come from?
 
Two of today’s news items brought the question to the forefront, one on the national scene and one related to “The Great State of Florida.”
 
Let’s take the national one first. It all began with the January 6 occupation of the Capitol in 2021. A lot of people weren’t happy with the election outcome. In the past they would have complained to their family and friends about the election loss of their incompetent candidate. But now things are different. The first step was to deny there was a loss at all. The second step was to attack the Capitol and destroy much of it. Bad idea, and many were identified and felt the effect of the law.
 
Until January 20, 2025 when a new president pardoned each and every one. And the crazies cheered.
 
But here’s the clincher. Some of these criminals, well whatever you call them now, are complaining about all they have lost. So they have decided to sue the federal government for compensation. What do you think the odds are of their being successful? With Trump in the White House. Another crazy by the way.
 
It’s interesting that a disproportionate number of the occupying crazies reside in Florida. So maybe it’s not surprising about what has happened in that increasingly nutty state.
 
Florida has a governor who seems to hate a large portion of its citizens. He bolsters this hatred by appointing like minded individuals who are willing to throw intelligence aside. One of the appointments is our Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo, a man who seems to have a loose connection to common sense.
 
This was demonstrated by his decision that there will be no mandates for vaccines in the state of Florida. This means that no longer will children be required to be protected in order to attend public school. Which I’m pretty sure means that disease will flourish.
 
Measles is already making a comeback as more and more crazies, encouraged by political leaders, opt for a religious exemption. At least now they won’t have to lie to do the stupidest thing.
 
What other diseases will make a comeback? Should we hunt up old iron lungs and get them polished? Will smallpox once again flourish?
 
When Ladapo held a meeting explaining his decision, he was asked which vaccines were included. All of them, he said.
 
The crazies applauded.
]]>Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:41:12 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/be-kindIn small letters it says, “IN A WORLD WHERE YOU CAN BE ANYTHING.”
 
Then in much larger font, “BE KIND.”
 
The source of this directive is a small, embroidered cloth displayed on a metal support. In front of the home of an extremely nice neighbor.
 
Such simple words of advice.
 
So why are these words so hard to follow? It doesn’t require much observational skill to find evidence of little adherence. Think of a food store’s parking lot to find instances.
 
It doesn’t mean, “Be kind if you like someone’s political view.’
 
It doesn’t mean, “Be kind because you’re speaking with a relative.”
 
It doesn’t’ mean, “Be kind because someone can do you a favor.”
 
It does mean, “Be kind.” Period.
 
Some, a very few, individuals can adhere to the suggestion and apply it to all. I am sorry to say I cannot. I can’t find it in my heart to have kind thoughts about murderers, child molesters, wife beaters, animal torturers, and more. I cannot find kindness in any part of my body for those evil men and women who through power and innate cruelty are transforming our nation into autocracy.
 
So, from a practical point of view, what does the admonition mean? There is no simple answer for all. We each have to decide how to treat the various folks we encounter in our daily lives.
 
For me, it is to be kind when I feel I have a choice.
 
For example, I try to be kind to those in my neighborhood I know or suspect voted for the current administration.
 
I try to be kind when someone is rude to me in a store.
 
I try to be kind, not always successfully, when there is domestic discord.
 
But what’s the big deal by being kind? Why even bother, especially if you recognize there are situations, perhaps many situations, where you definitely are not going to be kind?
 
Well, it’s probably unrealistic dreaming, but what if each of us just expanded the circle of our kindness a little? Would that effort by all of us combine to affect the world we live in in a significantly better way?
 
I like to think so.
]]>Wed, 23 Jul 2025 15:40:26 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/a-writers-bitter-truthI need a break from the horrors of the time in which we live. So let’s talk about writing.
 
A few months ago I discovered Ann Patchett. You may be familiar with her. She’s an author who has written several novels, essays, and works of nonfiction. She has received many awards. I became hooked on her work.
 
At the time of discovery, I had just finished slogging through several books that failed to hold my interest. One was a normal length novel that felt longer than War and Peace. The story advanced at a pace rivaling a turtle attacking a marathon.
 
With gratitude I set that one aside and read Patchett.
 
When I was approaching retirement, I thought it would be fun to write a mystery. I had read mysteries from the time I was a kid. Having heard the adage “write what you know,” my first two books were set in a university like the one where I had spent more than three decades and the third was about the running community of which I’d been a member for at least as long.
 
In my naivete I forwarded a synopsis of my first book to an agent who responded she would take a look at it. Feeling smug I sent the manuscript. I got it back within days along with a note wishing me luck. It was sometime later that I returned to it and then the realization hit. It was awful!
 
I fixed it up and self-published it and eventually four others.
 
Have I become rich? Ha! In a good year my royalty check might hit three dollars. Maybe 10 people have read one of the books and I believe most are friends. My latest was published through Amazon Publishing and my first three royalty payments were: $0.00.
 
Since that first debacle I’ve read books and comments by Stephen King, Pat Conroy, and Patchett about writing. Certain themes run through all three.
 

1. Each of those authors had a burning desire to write, a desire that began in their youth.
2. Each wrote and wrote and wrote, even when they were unrecognized.
3. Each willingly submitted their material to others for criticism.
4. Each read a wide assortment of works by others.

 
So, is there hope for me?
 
Not a prayer.
 
I have never had any desire that declared I had no choice of activity other than writing.
 
I have not written a lot. I have not written in a variety of formats: novels, reviews, essays, short stories, etc.
 
I have been terrified to show my work to others and have studiously avoided doing so.
 
I have read mysteries and several other books, but nothing comes close to the variety and quantity consumed by the aforementioned authors.
 
Writing good fiction doesn’t bear the slightest resemblance to writing a good mathematics paper, which I have done from time to time. In a math paper you simply don’t discuss what the symbol Pi is wearing, or how she is feeling, or her concerns about being a mother.
 
So, the bottom line is I am not currently a popular author, and I will never become a popular author.
 
But so what?
 
I enjoy the challenge of conceiving a story and trying to express it on paper (or computer).
 
And I am getting better at it.
 
Very, very slowly.
 
Uh oh! I’m feeling the urge to write another book.
]]>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 12:39:15 GMThttps://www.robertbrigham-books.com/fluff--tough/the-questionnaireA possible scene occurring on or about January 20, 2025?
 
The newly inaugurated president turned to his Chief of Staff and said, “First thing I want to do today, Susie, is fill some cabinet positions. Do you have the application for candidates to fill out?”
 
“Yes, sir. Different versions for different positions. We’re using ones that have been employed in the past, with appropriate modifications.”
 
“All right, let’s start with the Secretary of Defense.”
 
She let in the first candidate and gave him the form. She told him, “Just put your answers to the requests in the space provided.”
 
He took the form and after a glance seemed confused, not sure how to answer some of the statements. Seeing and understanding his confusion she clarified, “Oh, don’t’ worry about the ones that have an ‘(X)’ in front. The President isn’t interested in those. Just respond to any others.”
 
With this advice, it didn’t take him long. When he was done, the Chief of Staff took it to the President. He glanced at it, returned it to Susie, and issued the order, “This satisfies all my criteria for a Cabinet appointee. We’ll take him.”
 
Interested in what had so pleased her boss, she took a look at the submitted questionnaire. And here it is, along with the candidate’s responses. Remember, he was not asked to comment on the ones with an ‘(X)’ in the front.
 
____________________________________________________________________________

Name Pete Hegseth
 
(X) What is your experience in leading an organization having millions of employees?
 
(X) Explain how you would handle a presidential decision you felt would endanger the United States or violate the Constitution.
 
(X) How would you build armed forces that involved all who wanted to serve their country, including women and those with nonstandard lifestyles.
 
(X) How would you best protect the armed forces when questioned by the press?
 
(X) How would you ensure that all communications involving national security are carried out on secure equipment?
 
How would you work with the President?
 
I believe my job is to accept without question whatever view the President has. I promise to do no original thinking. When he is nasty, I will adopt the same tone as his against individuals or the Press. I will rid the armed forces of all deviants as well as women. While I have not ever directed a unit anywhere near as large as the defense department, I am not worried because I will simply follow the orders of the President. In short, I promise to be a complete toady.
 
____________________________________________________________________________
 
Just as she finished glancing at the questionnaire, the President again popped out of his office and said, “Okay, Susie, now let’s get us an equally qualified Attorney General.]]>