Blog Archives

Help!

10/31/2018

I had a different posting planned for today. But in the last two weeks we’ve had bombs mailed to prominent enemies of our president, yet another mass shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh by an anti-Semitic nut, and a Republican headquarters in Florida violated by gunfire in an attack that just has to be politically motivated. It all made me recall the shooting of Republican legislators playing baseball, the hounding of folks as they are dining, the praise for neo-Nazis, the endorsement of violence against a reporter. I’ve seen moral preachings about the lack of due process for a Supreme Court nominee and the same folks chanting, “Lock her up!”

Is it any wonder the nation is going to hell?

Frankly, I’m tired of it.

I’m sick of our president who is so insecure he has to attack on a daily basis anyone who dares to disagree with him.

I’m sick of members of any political party operating with a tunnel vision that sees only good in their views and only evil in those of their opponents.

I’m sick of people who accept without question the crap spewed on social media.

I’m sick of those who spew it.

I’m sick of every single instance of intolerance, discrimination, harassment, bullying.

And I’m sick of all those who accept it as a norm, who spout about our great country and then adopt policies that violate the very principles upon which it is based.

Who are all these people who think they have the right to poison airways, internet, and conversation? They’re not worth much. They have lost all decency—if they had it to begin with. They are so sure they are right that I think they can’t even realize they might be wrong. It scares me to death.

I think some are power hungry and believe advancing their own goals justifies the hatred they expel.

For the most part, though, I think they are small minded individuals who feel the only way they can be important is to tear down someone else.

So, yes, I’m mad!

What can I do? I’m not sure. One thing is not to accept inappropriate comments in my presence. Those making them must be called out. I know it will make no difference in how they feel, but maybe they will at least shut up for a while, until they return to the relative secrecy and security of the internet.

And we all can attempt to vote out of office any politician resorting to the venom.

In a probably futile appeal, let me beg those fostering hate and division and prejudice to please stop. Recognize your words have consequences beyond what you can imagine. That they hurt, they infuriate, they transition all too often into acts of violence.

And if your station is high you have greater responsibility because your influence is so widespread.

Please, please change your ways.

As we all should, including me.

We can never justify words or actions with the excuse “the other side does it.” What we do is on us, nobody else.

So let’s disagree, sure. But let’s not fall into the slime that so many feel is their right.

I don’t have much hope we’ll change, but I have some.

0 Comments

Bombardment, Negativity, and Disgust

10/24/2018

0 Comments

It’s election season, and I hate it. It seems to go on forever, starting well before any primary and stretching through election day. The span can be six months or more, a full 25% of the time between congressional election cycles. I know of candidates who devote over a year in their search for office. I wish we could have limitations of the campaign period to three or six weeks as is done elsewhere.

The associated bombardment is many faceted.

I don’t mind yard signs, although I worry about neighborhood harmony. But they’re around because the property owner takes an interest in the elective process, and that’s something that should be fostered. Also, it’s a positive statement. I am for this candidate and I hope you will be too. Also, I admit to using them to help me decide how to vote. If I’m unsure about a particular office and I see a sign for one of the candidates on the lawn of someone whose political views I detest, I know to vote for the opponent.

What I find reprehensible is the stealing, defacing, or destruction of these signs by small people of little imagination from any political philosophy. There’s a tendency to be angry when action occurs against candidates you prefer, and delight when it goes the other way. Wrong thinking! All of us should speak against the practice which serves only to magnify the lack of respect rampant in our country these days.

Let me plead, though, to take down the signs on the evening of the election. Some leave the winners in order to stick it to the ones who voted otherwise, while some leave the losers to tell the world a stupid mistake has occurred. How can either action accomplish any good?

While signs are relatively benign, the rest of the bombardment, originated by candidates and those who favor them, is hard to take, no matter the source. Mailers and TV ads are galling, to say the least. I don’t watch much television, so I don’t see many of the latter. When I do, I realize why I don’t watch, especially during election time. I can turn off the TV, but I can’t turn off the mail.

The words that come to mind as I think of these attempts to influence are hypocrisy, nasty and lie, not traits I’d like to see in my elected representatives. While yard signs are a positive statement for a candidate, these ads are too often a negative statement against a candidate.

I do think there are honorable folk running for office. But even from them I learn little from ads. Often they pose with their spouse and the requisite 2.5 children, all looking so healthy and happy. I hope they are, but I can’t help wondering about family obligations when running for office is so time consuming and the desire to win all encompassing.

These ads at their most positive outline all the wonderful ideas that will be implemented if the candidate wins and all the volunteer organizations they have devoted their lives to. Lacking is how they will accomplish their goals in an environment unwilling to pay or even cooperate, or what they actually accomplished in the volunteer work while still being a wonderful parent to the 2.5 children.

The ads at their worst do nothing but attack the opponent with short bites that all too often attempt to assign to the accused the failings of the accuser. More often than not they flunk the fact check test. They are nothing more than additional poison for the atmosphere in which we live.

I think candidates have spoken negatively of their opponents for centuries, but with all the technology today the spread and vitriol has magnified beyond reason.

Why is this such a common trend? Because it works! Polls change after a barrage of attack ads paid for with the millions individuals and companies are willing to sink in order to elect a puppet loyal to them. And it’s our fault. Because we allow ourselves to be influenced by non-facts. Because we aren’t willing to dig into the merits of a candidate and demand he or she speak the truth. Because we live in a fantasy world.

Much has been written about good candidates not being willing to run. Lack of money is a major reason. I also think good people don’t want to subject themselves to the nastiness that will be aimed at them from the opposition, or feel they have to respond in kind.

In spite of the difficulties, some do enter the fray in the hopes of making a difference. I worry that the need to solicit money, make unsavory deals, and sling invectives will change them to being like all the others.

0 Comments

Facts

10/17/2018

1 Comment

Here’s a fact.

Hurricane Michael has blown through the Florida panhandle and raced across several southern states, causing immense destruction and tearing apart the lives of thousands. No such storm has hit the U.S. mainland for 50 years.

It got me thinking about some other facts
.
Last year hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria and Nate caused thousands of deaths and resulted in their names being retired because of the devastation inflicted in terms of damage costs and lives lost.

The global annual temperature has increased, on average, .13° Fahrenheit per decade since 1880 and .17° Fahrenheit per decade since 1970. That’s about 1.8° since 1880 with .8° of it from 1970.

The ten hottest global years on record have all been 1998 and later. The four hottest were in decreasing order 2016, 2015, 2017, and 2014.

The sea level rise averaged over all oceans from 1880 to 2013 is .06 inches per year while the average since 1993 is .11 to .14 inches per year. That’s almost 8 inches from 1880 to 2013 and 2.75 to 3.5 inches since 1993.

Ice losses from Antarctica have tripled since 2012.

The following question is of concern today:

Is the climate of our world changing?

One of the next statements is a fact. The other is a lie.

The climate of our world is changing.
The climate of our world is not changing.

That is, the answer to the question is either YES or NO. And that’s a fact!

The answer does not depend on what you think, what I think, what a Republican thinks, what a Democrat thinks. The answer depends only on the physical forces that control the climate.

Since it is not a political question, it serves no positive purpose for the governor of my state to forbid use of the phrase “climate change” or for the president of my country to say it is a “Chinese hoax.” Whatever they think or say, it does not change the answer to the question.

So, putting utterings of blowhards aside, how do we find the answer? The same way we have searched over millennia for understanding of the world and universe in which we live. We turn to science. A scientist will look at the facts listed earlier and many more in order to draw conclusions. A scientist will develop a theory, make predictions based on it, and observe whether the predictions are accurate. A scientist will report findings in peer reviewed articles that are open to objections from other scientists based on their own studies. That is, the scientist is subject to a high standard of fact checking that, unlike the political shadings of truth, cannot be ignored.

A theory becomes “accepted” when scientific opinion of experts in the particular field of interest overwhelmingly solidifies. That agreement has been achieved for our question, and the answer is YES, the climate of our world is changing.

Oh, those who don’t like that conclusion will pull out a couple of tired easily refuted arguments.

1. Not every scientist in the field does agree. Why shouldn’t we accept this other view? The answer is simple. Because the massive evidence produced by well over 90% of the scientists in the field says they are wrong. We should also question why such “researchers" have gone against the vast majority of experts. Often it is the result of arrogance. Sometimes there’s a more unsavory reason. I have a former friend whose views I can no longer tolerate who pointed to an MIT professor who was a strong advocate that climate change is not a reality. An MIT professor! Surely that must mean something. But a little research showed this particular MIT professor was a highly paid consultant to the oil industry! One wonders where his loyalty lies.

2. Science has been wrong before. Certainly true. Once it was held that the sun and all heavenly bodies revolved around the Earth. But the current scientific environment, with its high level of peer review and independent research, makes errors far less likely to endure, and to be rectified if found.

So how come there are those who view climate change as a political question when we’ve seen in reality it’s a scientific question?

It’s because politicians have a loose association with the truth and a strong desire to remain in office. They will answer the question YES or NO depending on how they consider it will enhance their political career, including benefits to their financial backers. Many people of means who attempt to buy politicians are in businesses that would be affected negatively by attempts to bring sanity to the discussion. They would have you believe that a truth is a lie, that YES is NO.

It is up to us not to be played for fools. Don’t take a stand based on political persuasion. However, if you honestly believe there is no climate change, are you willing to risk what would happen if you are wrong? Why not assume it exists as a fail-safe position and take every possible step to combat it? Such action wouldn’t hurt, and who can predict the benefits that might ensue?

One of those benefits could be a vibrant Earth offering untold riches to your grandchildren and great grandchildren and beyond—if it isn’t too late already.

1 Comment

Two Minor Irritants

10/10/2018

0 Comments

The modern world offers much I enjoy. Every once in a while, though, I wonder if there isn’t a cost in order to “improve” life, a loss of excitement that variety offers.

I’m going to try to illustrate what I mean with a couple of examples. In all honesty they are of trivial concern, especially in view of the major world and national problems we face today.

Let’s take the first of these: the scheduling of holidays.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday is January 15.
Abraham Lincoln’s birthday is February 12.
George Washington’s is February 22.
Decoration Day, now Memorial Day, was May 30
Columbus Day was October 12.

In 2014, a year I selected because it illustrates my point better than most, Martin Luther King Jr. Day was January 20, Lincoln’s and Washington’s birthdays lumped into Presidents’ Day was celebrated February 17, Memorial Day was May 26, and Columbus Day was October 13 (This year it was October 8!). Not one of the year’s celebrations matched the day giving rise to it.

We all know why. The dates all were changed to Mondays, a delightful concept providing three-day weekends. Who doesn’t love a three-day weekend?

However, a price has been paid. Two prices, actually. I believe the meaning of the holidays has been lost for most folks. Of course, there are many who choose to pay proper respects to the memory of Martin Luther King Jr. on the day set aside to honor him. And whatever day is assigned to Memorial Day, ceremonies and tributes to our fallen abound. However, the participants involve only a small percentage of the populace, and I bet most of us just think of the long weekend. And I wonder how many dwell on the lives of the two presidents honored on Presidents’ Day, or consider much about Columbus on his day.

Would it be better if we celebrated on the actual days, as was the case when I was a child? I don’t know, but it seems to me we tended to pay more attention then to the meaning behind them.

What really motivated these words, though, is I think we’ve lost an element of variety. The excitement of holidays springing up on any day of the week. Holidays always falling on Monday seems kind of dull to me, compared to the adventure of a day off in the middle of the week. I remember thinking how great it was we were going to have a Thursday free from school. An off Monday was just another weekend. Think about the Fourth of July, which is always celebrated on the actual date, and see if this makes sense to you.

The subject of Daylight Savings is an equally insignificant area occupying my thoughts. It was instituted to provide more light in the summer evenings. I understand Ben Franklin was an early proponent. I remember during World War II we were told it was to benefit citizens working on victory gardens in the evening, which is what my family did.

I like daylight savings—during the summer. But in the cooler weather I like the dark evenings with extra light in the morning. So do parents who have children waiting for buses in the early hours.

There’s a push now to eliminate standard time, staying always on daylight saving.

I’m against it for the same reason I dislike most holidays being on Mondays. It’s just more exciting to have variations in our lives, even minor ones like this. More than half the year it’s light in the evening, sometimes until after nine, depending on where you live. Suddenly, when the first Sunday in November rolls around (and that’s coming up soon), it’s dark.

I love the difference. During the summer one can do things outside, chat with neighbors, and sweat. During the winter one can huddle in front of a fire, read, watch TV and have quality time with family.

Let’s not let life get boring by always being the same.

0 Comments

Eighty

10/3/2018

1 Comment

The nurse shouted “Robert,” perused the room, looked confused, seemingly unable to locate the named individual. When I stood to follow her into the medical inner sanctum she, and I kid you not, said, “I can’t believe you can walk so well by yourself.” She repeated this thought at least twice more before we reached the examining room where I would hold a lonely vigil.

Often, in a novel, those over 70 are “elderly” or “still sharp,” said with an implied tone of amazement and the realization the condition is temporary.

If you join a running group at age 75, people half your age are shocked you can keep up with them. In a recent age dependent award ceremony at a foot race, the emcee kidded, “Hey, someone check their IDs.” Of course, he was issuing a compliment, but it was one based on the expectation of what old is. Now that I’ve gotten a bit slower, some running buddies say they want to be like me when they grow up. Why do they think I’ve grown up?

How often does the description of an individual include the phrase “of a certain age?” I’m pretty sure everyone’s age is “certain,” but of course it means “old” in this context.

So what is old?

A number usually answers the question. But what number?

Well, it depends on the years you have on you at the time. A five-year-old considers a teenager ancient. In the sixties anyone over 30 was known to be out of touch and could not be trusted. If you reach 60, questions abound about your retirement plans.

As one progresses along the age timeline, markers reinforce the advancement of life. Students who used to think of you as “hip” start calling you “sir.” I perhaps don’t help by describing to them the conversations Pythagoras and I shared. Businesses that believe older people are loaded with money offer enhancements to attract your patronage, such as senior movie discounts and early bird specials at restaurants, the latter because supposedly the older set has to get to bed early. Correspondence and publications appear with the four capital letters A, A, R and P on them. Warnings flash reminding you to sign up for Social Security on time or you’ll lose benefits.

Today is not 50 years ago, or even 20. If we can get used to an internet of infinite resources; a tiny box that provides access to games, driving instructions, dictionaries, and, oh yes, incidentally permits phone calls; and the possibility of self-driving cars, is it such a stretch to think people previously thought of as “old” can actually have a fulfilling and interesting life?

Oh, indeed the aches are more frequent. Entering and exiting cars no longer occurs with dexterity. More and more often a familiar name eludes, or a room is entered for a reason suddenly absent. Doctors of an amazing variety play increasing roles. Small bottles with phrases such as “2 per day,” “40 mg,” and “take with food” proliferate.

However, be on the lookout for more and more at advanced ages executing a three-mile constitutional, or working out at the gym, or swimming laps for an hour.

Realize how many keep their minds active by playing card games, working crossword puzzles, solving Sudoku puzzles—or doing mathematics.

A sometimes wise man once said to me, “If you want to know what old is, it’s a person with 10 more years of age than you.” That’s worked for me for most of my life.

As the problems of age creep up, I like to think the following: If things in my life could stay exactly as they are now, I would be content.

1 Comment

Help!

Bombardment, Negativity, and Disgust

Facts

Two Minor Irritants

Eighty

Author

Archives

Categories