Florida wants to throw a huge amount of money into the teacher salary picture -- with one condition. The state wants teachers to figure out a way to create a merit-pay plan. The state wants teachers' pay related to students' performance.
Why isn't that fairly simple to institute?
You need to first understand how teachers are currently paid in most school districts. They are paid according to a salary schedule that specifies the base pay for every teacher in the system based on years of service. Every first year teacher gets a certain amount, a second year teacher gets that plus an increment, a third year teacher an increment, and so on. If you have been in the school system for 20 years, you get the same base pay as every other teacher who has been in the system for 20 years.
I underlined the base pay part of the second sentence in the previous paragraph to draw your attention to the fact that teachers are normally paid extra for additional, i.e., out-of-classroom, activities or services. Coaches get paid extra. Sponsor the yearbook and you get paid extra. Chaperon a fans bus to an away game and you get paid extra. Part-time department chairpersons get paid extra. Teachers hired to write curriculum are paid extra. Extra responsibilities not part of your daily classroom responsibility earn you extra money in your paycheck. Most teacher contracts also call for teachers to receive a bump up in salary for additional college hours and earned degrees. Hence, not all teachers on the same salary step earn exactly the same amount.
For some reason, the present system doesn't bother most teachers. They prefer knowing that they will get a raise next year come what may. The salary increments (percentage increases) are generally negotiated, and teachers like looking at the salary schedule and knowing that next year or three years hence they will be making X dollars.
It does not bother them that an ineffective teacher gets paid the same as an effective teacher. (Well, it does bother some but not enough to want to change the system.) They don't seem to mind that a teacher who shows up at school every morning just as the bell rings gets paid the same as the teacher who comes in early and meets with her students who need extra help. They know who the hard working teachers are and they know who the lazy, ineffective teachers are. They know they don't want their own children in the classes of the ineffective teachers -- but they apparently don't mind that those teachers may be getting the same salary as the better teachers.
That last part bothers parents, school board members and state-level politicians though. It probably bothers administrators but they are generally powerless to change the salary system. Their job is to administer the teacher-school board contract, not change it as they may see fit. I know that their input is sought during contract negotiations, but only as advisers. After all, in many school systems administrators are paid on a separate but similar salary schedule.
One fly in the pay-for-performance ointment is the difficulty of defining performance. Teachers know that it takes a different level of teacher effectiveness to raise student performance in, say, a physics class than it does to raise performance in an art class. And how do you rate the performance of the two?
Teachers also know that even between two teachers of the same subject there can be a big difference in the students they have and, hence, any observable performance difference. Teachers do not get to choose their students; they have to take those assigned to them. Students can ask for a transfer (and usually get it) to a less demanding teacher but teachers cannot ask to have difficult, disruptive or "slower" students transferred from their class. The presence or absence of such students can, however, affect the overall performance of the entire class.
There is still another class of teachers for which student performance in almost impossible to determine. I speak of special education teachers, remedial teachers, guidance counselors, student assistance coordinators, or any other person on the faculty who is paid according to his/her place on the salary schedule but does not have a regular classroom assignment and/or meet with mainstream students on a daily basis. How, for example, do you measure the effectiveness of a remedial math teacher? If she starts the year with a lad who is working one or more years below grade level and she brings him along a full year in achievement (an exceptional accomplishment when it happens), the child is still a year or more behind his peers at the end of the year because they have also advanced a year in achievement.
And what about music teachers, physical education teachers and school librarians? How do you measure student performance for purposes of merit pay for these teachers?
A second concern for teachers is the evaluation process. An administrator or supervision who may or may not be familiar with your subject or appropriate classroom techniques observes you for several periods and then writes you evaluation. How is that supposed to equate with the subject matter content your students learned or other skills you develop that may be important to their personal or educational growth and development?
Finally, there is the matter of a limited pool of money each year from which to award merit pay increases. The size of the money pool available for merit pay increases is always limited, sometimes very limited. That means that only a few teachers each year can get merit pay increases. If you got a merit pay award last year you can bet that you will not be in the running for one this year. In short, teachers know that the pot is small and not every deserving teacher will get a merit pay increase every year, regardless of their students' performance. Kind of defeats the purpose of the merit pay notion, doesn't it?
I don't have a solution. I just thought you should know some of the problems that continue to thwart the good intentions of those who want desperately to see good teachers paid more than poor teachers. A workable system might improve education by encouraging poor teachers to seek employment in another field but few merit plans have servived beyond the first half-dozen years, so we don't know.
What do you think?
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
EVERY GENERATION HAS MORE THAN IT NEEDS - SO THEIR PARENTS THINK
I've been off line for a while because of buying a new laptop computer. My old laptop was getting as slow as me and I felt I needed something faster. I have a 14" Toshiba Satellite and as with any new piece of electronics, there is a learning curve. Then, of course, there is the need to personalize the desktop, home pages, and hardware. For instance, I don't like the tap feature on most mouse pads; they are too sensitive and I end up entering folders or programs I did not intend. Hence, I always look for a way to turn off the tap function.
Well, all this takes awhile. It takes awhile to learn where the various switches are and it takes awhile to learn what to turn off and what to leave alone. Added to all this is the fact that I am a slow learner -- or just cautious. Anyway, I think I have this mustang under control, ready to ride, so to speak, so I'm ready to resume writing my blog.
Why did I want a new laptop? Did I need one? Certainly not. I already had one and it worked. I wanted a new laptop because my old one (now five years old and by industry standards, obsolete) not only was slow but also incapable of running some of the newer (meaning, larger) programs. In addition, it did not have some of the bells and whistles of newer computers on the market and I was envious.
Prices on laptops have come down so much from five years ago that is seemed almost insane to not buy a new computer. This new laptop with double the speed, memory, etc. cost about one-third what my older laptop cost. And it has some of the previously mentioned bells and whistles missing from the other machine: webcam, multiple USB ports (one a high speed port), a memory card reader, built-in broadband capability, et al.
But the new laptop started me thinking about all the electronic "things" my children and grandchildren have that I never had at their age. They not only have these things, they have the latest version. They've gone through more cell phones, for example, than I have golf balls -- and I go through a lot of golf balls. (If my golf balls could sing the woods bordering the golf course would be alive with the sound of music, except for the balls under water going glub, glub, glub.)
Further thought on the subject made me realize that every generation thinks it just has to have the gadgets and conveniences available at the time, very quickly reaching the point of wondering how the previous generation got along without them. Who among us, young or old, hasn't wondered: "How did the world function with computers?" They are everywhere and in every part of our lives it seems.
But why stop with computers? How about cell phones, SUVs, color HDTV, electric blankets, microwave ovens, refrigerators with ice cube and cold water dispensers, tires that are guaranteed for 50,000 miles or more (When was the last time you changed a tire?), credit cards, EZ passes for quicker entry to toll roads, CD players, iPods, DVD players, Blue Tooth everything, automatic dishwashers and on and on.
My generation didn't have all those things. True. But we did have our at the time must-have creature comforts that many of our parents must have wondered about. What young couple setting up housekeeping in the 1950s gave any thought to having a car, maybe two. Some of our parents at that point still survived with just one car, and an older one at that. We had to have a television set, even if it was black and white TV. And we had a telephone, maybe two or three, while many of our parents still got along with one phone on the wall in the kitchen -- and it was a rotary dial phone. Our wives worked while our mothers thought a women's place was at home. And we bought things on credit!
Clothes? We had several pairs of dress shoes, several more pairs for sports or casual wear, several suits and jackets for every occasion. Meanwhile, my dad had one suit: a dark navy blue gabardine, dark enough to be suitable for church, weddings and funerals -- and he wore it winter or summer, always with a tie. Casual Friday hadn't been invented yet and church service, weddings and funerals always required a suit, no exceptions.
When my wife and I married we had little but we nevertheless took some of the money we received from relatives to buy a HiFi record player. It wasn't a stereo set, understand, just a state-of-the-art Sylvania HiFi record player. We both had a collection of 33/3rd long-play records of favorite artists and we felt it made sense to buy a good record player. Looking back, I am sure both our parents thought it a stupid waste of money since neither of them had such a fine piece of electronics in their house.
Looking back a bit farther, however, I decided that my parent's generation probably started their adult lives with some things their parents had done without: a car, a telephone, a washing machine (clothes driers wouldn't come along until much later), an electric fan, an electric toaster, and other gadgets that surely made their parents wonder.
I suspect now that every generation looks at the next generation as the "me" generation, the generation that has to have every new convenience and have it now. Well, I'm trying to not fall too far behind the current generation -- a battle I suspect I am losing -- by buying a new laptop with some of the current must-have features. I suppose that some day my grandchildren will look back and wonder how grandma and grandpa managed "in their day."
Well, all this takes awhile. It takes awhile to learn where the various switches are and it takes awhile to learn what to turn off and what to leave alone. Added to all this is the fact that I am a slow learner -- or just cautious. Anyway, I think I have this mustang under control, ready to ride, so to speak, so I'm ready to resume writing my blog.
Why did I want a new laptop? Did I need one? Certainly not. I already had one and it worked. I wanted a new laptop because my old one (now five years old and by industry standards, obsolete) not only was slow but also incapable of running some of the newer (meaning, larger) programs. In addition, it did not have some of the bells and whistles of newer computers on the market and I was envious.
Prices on laptops have come down so much from five years ago that is seemed almost insane to not buy a new computer. This new laptop with double the speed, memory, etc. cost about one-third what my older laptop cost. And it has some of the previously mentioned bells and whistles missing from the other machine: webcam, multiple USB ports (one a high speed port), a memory card reader, built-in broadband capability, et al.
But the new laptop started me thinking about all the electronic "things" my children and grandchildren have that I never had at their age. They not only have these things, they have the latest version. They've gone through more cell phones, for example, than I have golf balls -- and I go through a lot of golf balls. (If my golf balls could sing the woods bordering the golf course would be alive with the sound of music, except for the balls under water going glub, glub, glub.)
Further thought on the subject made me realize that every generation thinks it just has to have the gadgets and conveniences available at the time, very quickly reaching the point of wondering how the previous generation got along without them. Who among us, young or old, hasn't wondered: "How did the world function with computers?" They are everywhere and in every part of our lives it seems.
But why stop with computers? How about cell phones, SUVs, color HDTV, electric blankets, microwave ovens, refrigerators with ice cube and cold water dispensers, tires that are guaranteed for 50,000 miles or more (When was the last time you changed a tire?), credit cards, EZ passes for quicker entry to toll roads, CD players, iPods, DVD players, Blue Tooth everything, automatic dishwashers and on and on.
My generation didn't have all those things. True. But we did have our at the time must-have creature comforts that many of our parents must have wondered about. What young couple setting up housekeeping in the 1950s gave any thought to having a car, maybe two. Some of our parents at that point still survived with just one car, and an older one at that. We had to have a television set, even if it was black and white TV. And we had a telephone, maybe two or three, while many of our parents still got along with one phone on the wall in the kitchen -- and it was a rotary dial phone. Our wives worked while our mothers thought a women's place was at home. And we bought things on credit!
Clothes? We had several pairs of dress shoes, several more pairs for sports or casual wear, several suits and jackets for every occasion. Meanwhile, my dad had one suit: a dark navy blue gabardine, dark enough to be suitable for church, weddings and funerals -- and he wore it winter or summer, always with a tie. Casual Friday hadn't been invented yet and church service, weddings and funerals always required a suit, no exceptions.
When my wife and I married we had little but we nevertheless took some of the money we received from relatives to buy a HiFi record player. It wasn't a stereo set, understand, just a state-of-the-art Sylvania HiFi record player. We both had a collection of 33/3rd long-play records of favorite artists and we felt it made sense to buy a good record player. Looking back, I am sure both our parents thought it a stupid waste of money since neither of them had such a fine piece of electronics in their house.
Looking back a bit farther, however, I decided that my parent's generation probably started their adult lives with some things their parents had done without: a car, a telephone, a washing machine (clothes driers wouldn't come along until much later), an electric fan, an electric toaster, and other gadgets that surely made their parents wonder.
I suspect now that every generation looks at the next generation as the "me" generation, the generation that has to have every new convenience and have it now. Well, I'm trying to not fall too far behind the current generation -- a battle I suspect I am losing -- by buying a new laptop with some of the current must-have features. I suppose that some day my grandchildren will look back and wonder how grandma and grandpa managed "in their day."
Thursday, December 3, 2009
THE PROBLEM WITH BELIEFS -- THEY CAN TRAP US
I read in the paper this morning that the New York State senate rejected a bill that would have made that state the sixth to allow gay marriage. The measure needed 32 votes and only received 24, a wider-than-expected margin, but closer than many people might have feared possible.
I don't care about the vote. It's only a matter of time before gay marriage is approved nationwide. Gay marriage resistance will fade away and law makers will act just as they did to remove miscegenation laws, Sunday blue laws, and the 55 mph speed laws. As more and more gays become known (they were there all along, but "in the closet) and society begins to see that they are not devil-possessed sexual perverts (at least not anymore than some heterosexuals), society will adopt the same acceptance it has about casual sex, living together without marriage, drinking, card playing and dancing -- all of which have gone through an outstanding metamorphosis of acceptance that would have been unbelievable 50-60 years ago.
No, the New York vote did not surprise or disappoint me. What caught my eye in the article was the statement by Sen. Eric Adams, D-Brooklyn. He challenged his colleagues "to set aside their religious beliefs and vote for the bill." He might as well have challenged them to be honest.
We humans are generally incapable of abandoning our beliefs.
Beliefs are just that, beliefs. They are not fact. They are not even remotely based on fact. They are exactly what they name says: they are what we believe -- not what we know.
Now I am sure that some readers are objecting that -- regarding their religious beliefs, at least -- that they "know" Christ is king, that God exists, that the world is only 6,000 years old, that Jesus turned water into wine, that prayer works, and so forth. They know this because that's what they have been taught since early childhood and they never stopped, i.e., had no cause, to question these teachings. Or, they will argue, that these elements of their faith are substantiated by no less an authority than the Christian Bible. Or, they will refer for validation to a noted clergyman or televangelist.
It can be said with certainty that what any of us knows came from some authority. We seldom have the ability or the time to independently verify what we are taught as fact. (Would you be surprised to learn that 2+2 = 4 is not always true? It is true only in a base 10 number system.) Just the same, there are some things we must accept on faith, while other things are verifiable by direct observation or science.
We can believe the earth is flat. We know it is not. We can believe "our" political leaders do not lie. We know better. We believe our spouse is faithful. Regrettably, more than one spouse has found that to not be the case.
Religious beliefs are the hardest to deal with. If we see a frosted image on the window of a McDonald's and "believe" it to be the Virgin Mary, who or what will persuade us otherwise. Thousands of like believers will throng to the site to pay homage to and/or pray before the image. Nothing will change their belief.
Political beliefs are the next hardest to influence or change. We believe in the Democratic or Republican or Independent or whatever party philosophy -- often without ever actually knowing what it is we are supposed to believe -- and nothing anyone can say or do will change how we vote. We vote the party and any politician worth his/her salt will spend an entire campaign repeating the party line, since we are only interested in hearing those arguments that support what we already believe.
Hence, we listen to the president and believe, or not, that he is doing the right thing. We listen to Rush Limbaugh and believe, or not, that he indeed offers us excellence in broadcasting, i.e., the truth. We watch the ABC News (or any other network news) and believe the news people there are reporting unbiased accounts of events. We know better in each of these instances, but we still believe.
Our beliefs allow us to give meaning to the things in life we do not fully understand. Our beliefs allow us to enter the world of Harry Potter or Santa Clause when we are young. Our beliefs give us something to hang onto when the world we know seems to offer little of substance. Every so-called miracle (something we cannot explain) bolsters our belief/faith while, like children who first learn the truth about Santa Clause, we reject or ignore evidence that challenges our belief.
Change our beliefs? Don't be ridiculous. Most of us cannot change our beliefs any more than we can change the color of our skin -- Michael Jackson being an exception.
The senator from New York should know better than to ask his colleagues to set aside their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs, like political, social or patriotic beliefs change as the patriotic, social, political or religious climate changes. We just follow. Very few of us are willing to or capable of examining and rejecting long-held beliefs -- and certainly not because some politician asked us to.
I don't care about the vote. It's only a matter of time before gay marriage is approved nationwide. Gay marriage resistance will fade away and law makers will act just as they did to remove miscegenation laws, Sunday blue laws, and the 55 mph speed laws. As more and more gays become known (they were there all along, but "in the closet) and society begins to see that they are not devil-possessed sexual perverts (at least not anymore than some heterosexuals), society will adopt the same acceptance it has about casual sex, living together without marriage, drinking, card playing and dancing -- all of which have gone through an outstanding metamorphosis of acceptance that would have been unbelievable 50-60 years ago.
No, the New York vote did not surprise or disappoint me. What caught my eye in the article was the statement by Sen. Eric Adams, D-Brooklyn. He challenged his colleagues "to set aside their religious beliefs and vote for the bill." He might as well have challenged them to be honest.
We humans are generally incapable of abandoning our beliefs.
Beliefs are just that, beliefs. They are not fact. They are not even remotely based on fact. They are exactly what they name says: they are what we believe -- not what we know.
Now I am sure that some readers are objecting that -- regarding their religious beliefs, at least -- that they "know" Christ is king, that God exists, that the world is only 6,000 years old, that Jesus turned water into wine, that prayer works, and so forth. They know this because that's what they have been taught since early childhood and they never stopped, i.e., had no cause, to question these teachings. Or, they will argue, that these elements of their faith are substantiated by no less an authority than the Christian Bible. Or, they will refer for validation to a noted clergyman or televangelist.
It can be said with certainty that what any of us knows came from some authority. We seldom have the ability or the time to independently verify what we are taught as fact. (Would you be surprised to learn that 2+2 = 4 is not always true? It is true only in a base 10 number system.) Just the same, there are some things we must accept on faith, while other things are verifiable by direct observation or science.
We can believe the earth is flat. We know it is not. We can believe "our" political leaders do not lie. We know better. We believe our spouse is faithful. Regrettably, more than one spouse has found that to not be the case.
Religious beliefs are the hardest to deal with. If we see a frosted image on the window of a McDonald's and "believe" it to be the Virgin Mary, who or what will persuade us otherwise. Thousands of like believers will throng to the site to pay homage to and/or pray before the image. Nothing will change their belief.
Political beliefs are the next hardest to influence or change. We believe in the Democratic or Republican or Independent or whatever party philosophy -- often without ever actually knowing what it is we are supposed to believe -- and nothing anyone can say or do will change how we vote. We vote the party and any politician worth his/her salt will spend an entire campaign repeating the party line, since we are only interested in hearing those arguments that support what we already believe.
Hence, we listen to the president and believe, or not, that he is doing the right thing. We listen to Rush Limbaugh and believe, or not, that he indeed offers us excellence in broadcasting, i.e., the truth. We watch the ABC News (or any other network news) and believe the news people there are reporting unbiased accounts of events. We know better in each of these instances, but we still believe.
Our beliefs allow us to give meaning to the things in life we do not fully understand. Our beliefs allow us to enter the world of Harry Potter or Santa Clause when we are young. Our beliefs give us something to hang onto when the world we know seems to offer little of substance. Every so-called miracle (something we cannot explain) bolsters our belief/faith while, like children who first learn the truth about Santa Clause, we reject or ignore evidence that challenges our belief.
Change our beliefs? Don't be ridiculous. Most of us cannot change our beliefs any more than we can change the color of our skin -- Michael Jackson being an exception.
The senator from New York should know better than to ask his colleagues to set aside their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs, like political, social or patriotic beliefs change as the patriotic, social, political or religious climate changes. We just follow. Very few of us are willing to or capable of examining and rejecting long-held beliefs -- and certainly not because some politician asked us to.
Monday, November 30, 2009
COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS
Con Job - Joyce and I were approached the other day at Walmarts by a woman claiming to be stranded here. She had, according to her story, deposited her payroll check from Denny's at the Walmart customer service desk and had the total, $579.53 she said, giving the exact amount as if to make it seem more plausible, put on a Walmart Visa credit card. Then as she started to leave to do some shopping, they reminded her that she could not draw on the money for three days. She and her husband were effectively broke and stranded. They needed money for gas and for food. As she talked, she waved a Walmart Visa card back and forth for us to make her story more believable.
We listened, asked some questions. She had suspiciously ready answers for each of our questions, e.g., calling social services, contacting parents at home, etc. Then we refused her. It was just too slick ... and too suspicious. At that point she said thank you and quickly disappeared, probably to try and find a more willing or gullible sucker.
Walmart cashes payroll checks for $3. It says so on the giant sign behind the customer service counter. I later talked with a store assistant manager and told him of the incident. He said we did the right thing. There was no company policy about holding money from a check for three days. It was a con job pure and simple. Be forewarned.
Sandhill Cranes - The sandhill cranes are starting to pair up. It's fun to watch their mating dance. They crane their heads back, jump in the air and flap their wings. It must be a turn-on for them. I did a dance something like that awhile back when I hit my thumb with a hammer, but I don't remember Joyce being turned on by it. I also turned the air around me blue -- which is probably not a sexual turn-on for women.
I'm not sure why the cranes are "getting it on" at this time of year. Their chicks are not born until late February or early March. I'm sure it doesn't take that long for their eggs to hatch. But to tell the truth, I know very little about the procreation habits of sandhill cranes. I just know it is interesting to watch them this time of year.
They are all over the resort and golf course. They come into your yard as long as you leave them to their poking for whatever they are seeking under the ground. The golf course grounds keeper just loves them, as you can imagine, as they leave a sizable hole every time they poke and prod for whatever morsel they seek. Fortunately, through the use of pesticides, I suspect, they stay away from the greens.
Christmas Boycott - I notice that once again a great many, actually all that I've seen, merchants are posting signs in their windows and banners outside proclaiming "HAPPY HOLIDAYS." Christians, of course, resent this. They believe the signs and banners should say MERRY CHRISTMAS, this being the season in celebration of the birth of Christ. Christ, they believe, belongs in Christmas. One person I know goes so far as to complain if you refer in writing to Christmas as Xmas.
Merchants, of course, hope to appeal to a broader audience than just Christians, so they try to make their signs and banners a little more generic. Good Christians want no part of that, as you can imagine. Generic is an anathema to them every much bit much as the evil word "secular." Would you like to see a store sign that said HAPPY SECULAR SEASON? Of course not.
Still, the merchant who needs big sales this time of year to show a profit for the year is caught between acknowledging the origin and namesake of the Christmas season and not wanting to turn away non-Christians, of which there are many -- possibly more than their are Christian shoppers.
Nevertheless, a good old-fashioned boycott of those stores refusing to show proper respect for the King of kings might get their attention and compel them to change their signs and banners. So, why not encourage all good Christians to simply refuse to shop at stores showing a non-religious, secular sign this Christmas? If they all stayed away, refused to shop at such stores, merchants would surely notice and make appropriate changes.
Would it work? You know it would not. For, if they are nothing else, Christians are flexible. They have shown over the decades a willingness and ability to stretch and bend any rule of behavior or religious admonition that significantly interfered with their lives. They know full well that most such rules from the church are either man made or simply some man's interpretation of the scriptures and subject to change as society demands or world conditions dictate. Thus opening the way for the popular protestant belief that each individual is answerable only to God and can interpret the bible himself/herself without the benefit of clergy -- and in a manner appropriate for the moment.
Give up shopping at this time of year for presents? Don't be absurd!
Christmas Presents - Speaking of Christmas, Joyce today ordered my Christmas present: a new "Toshiba Black 14" Satellite M505D-S4970 Laptop PC with AMD Turion II M500 Dual-Core Processor & Windows 7 Home Premium." Boy, will I be surprised on Christmas morning.
In return, I got her two pair of sneakers and have ordered for her a brand new, 16.75 inch toilet stool. Wrapping it will likely be a bit difficult, but I know she will be surprised.
We listened, asked some questions. She had suspiciously ready answers for each of our questions, e.g., calling social services, contacting parents at home, etc. Then we refused her. It was just too slick ... and too suspicious. At that point she said thank you and quickly disappeared, probably to try and find a more willing or gullible sucker.
Walmart cashes payroll checks for $3. It says so on the giant sign behind the customer service counter. I later talked with a store assistant manager and told him of the incident. He said we did the right thing. There was no company policy about holding money from a check for three days. It was a con job pure and simple. Be forewarned.
Sandhill Cranes - The sandhill cranes are starting to pair up. It's fun to watch their mating dance. They crane their heads back, jump in the air and flap their wings. It must be a turn-on for them. I did a dance something like that awhile back when I hit my thumb with a hammer, but I don't remember Joyce being turned on by it. I also turned the air around me blue -- which is probably not a sexual turn-on for women.
I'm not sure why the cranes are "getting it on" at this time of year. Their chicks are not born until late February or early March. I'm sure it doesn't take that long for their eggs to hatch. But to tell the truth, I know very little about the procreation habits of sandhill cranes. I just know it is interesting to watch them this time of year.
They are all over the resort and golf course. They come into your yard as long as you leave them to their poking for whatever they are seeking under the ground. The golf course grounds keeper just loves them, as you can imagine, as they leave a sizable hole every time they poke and prod for whatever morsel they seek. Fortunately, through the use of pesticides, I suspect, they stay away from the greens.
Christmas Boycott - I notice that once again a great many, actually all that I've seen, merchants are posting signs in their windows and banners outside proclaiming "HAPPY HOLIDAYS." Christians, of course, resent this. They believe the signs and banners should say MERRY CHRISTMAS, this being the season in celebration of the birth of Christ. Christ, they believe, belongs in Christmas. One person I know goes so far as to complain if you refer in writing to Christmas as Xmas.
Merchants, of course, hope to appeal to a broader audience than just Christians, so they try to make their signs and banners a little more generic. Good Christians want no part of that, as you can imagine. Generic is an anathema to them every much bit much as the evil word "secular." Would you like to see a store sign that said HAPPY SECULAR SEASON? Of course not.
Still, the merchant who needs big sales this time of year to show a profit for the year is caught between acknowledging the origin and namesake of the Christmas season and not wanting to turn away non-Christians, of which there are many -- possibly more than their are Christian shoppers.
Nevertheless, a good old-fashioned boycott of those stores refusing to show proper respect for the King of kings might get their attention and compel them to change their signs and banners. So, why not encourage all good Christians to simply refuse to shop at stores showing a non-religious, secular sign this Christmas? If they all stayed away, refused to shop at such stores, merchants would surely notice and make appropriate changes.
Would it work? You know it would not. For, if they are nothing else, Christians are flexible. They have shown over the decades a willingness and ability to stretch and bend any rule of behavior or religious admonition that significantly interfered with their lives. They know full well that most such rules from the church are either man made or simply some man's interpretation of the scriptures and subject to change as society demands or world conditions dictate. Thus opening the way for the popular protestant belief that each individual is answerable only to God and can interpret the bible himself/herself without the benefit of clergy -- and in a manner appropriate for the moment.
Give up shopping at this time of year for presents? Don't be absurd!
Christmas Presents - Speaking of Christmas, Joyce today ordered my Christmas present: a new "Toshiba Black 14" Satellite M505D-S4970 Laptop PC with AMD Turion II M500 Dual-Core Processor & Windows 7 Home Premium." Boy, will I be surprised on Christmas morning.
In return, I got her two pair of sneakers and have ordered for her a brand new, 16.75 inch toilet stool. Wrapping it will likely be a bit difficult, but I know she will be surprised.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
REGRIPPING GOLF CLUBS - EVEN A CAVEMAN CAN DO IT
It's official. I have re-gripped my first golf club. Actually, three of them so far.The grips on my Florida set of clubs had grown stiff and hard. If at home, I would have turned to a friend who re-grips golf clubs. But he's in Rotterdam, NY and I am in Florida. Well, I could probably find someone down here at Clerbrook Resort who does club re-gripping, but why should I? If one old retired codger can do it, surely I can.
I went online and settled on Golf Works. When I called I asked them if a hillbilly from the Ozarks could learn to re-grip golf clubs. They hesitated a moment and then said yes, sure. Okay, I said, how about a left-handed hillbilly. They hesitated a bit longer but finally said they were sure I could do it. All right, I said, feeling more confident, how about a left-handed hillbilly who moved to upstate New York? I guess they figured that showed a level of intelligence somewhat below what they usually considered as necessary for the job. However, after some deliberation (and, I believe, some snickering in the background) and since they obviously wanted to make a sale they reluctantly agreed I could do it.
I placed my order and waited anxiously for the grips to arrive, which they eventually did. I already had a vise and a utility knife so all I needed was some grips, some double-sided tape and some solvent. Just to be on the safe side (figuring I would screw up at least one, probably the first one) I ordered extra grips.
The Internet is a wonderful place for getting information and I found plenty on how to re-grip golf clubs. Before I grad-yoo-ated from the eighth grade, I learned to do some simple research and I put them smarts to work. I reviewed a half-dozen articles (some with pictures, which I greatly appreciated) on how to re-grip golf clubs. It seemed simple enough -- even for a doofus.
I started with my 3-iron, since that's the club I use the least. If I totally screwed it up, it would be no big loss.
IS GLENN BECK STARTING A THIRD PARTY?
The headline in the Orlando Sentinel this morning read: "Glenn Beck sets sights on political organizing." Glenn Beck is best known, perhaps, for his political rants (mostly against the Obama administration) on Fox News television. He is, to say the least, a little over the top sometimes.
He knows how to gather a crowd, which in this case means gather TV ratings. That's what any respectable television personality, liberal, moderate, conservative, news reporter or otherwise, is after. No ratings, no job.
Well now, according to the Sentinel, Beck hopes "to transform his personal celebrity into political action and has begun to assemble a movement to 'change America's course.'" While in Florida recently promoting his new book, "Arguing with Idiots," Beck said "America, we cannot wait for a leader anymore. The people must lead, and the leader will follow."
We know he has already discounted the president as a leader, but this statement suggests that he is admitting that the opposition party, the Republicans, lacks leadership as well. That seems clear to most Americans since he, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham seem to be the major spokespeople for the Republican Party these days. Indeed, the Sentinel article states, "Beck's announcement is the latest in a series of attempts by well-known, right leaning figures to fill a leadership void in the Republican Party, which has no clear nationally popular standard-bearer and has seen a schism arise between moderates and the conservative flank."
Conscientious voters across the nation should be encouraging Beck's success. Republicans made a big deal of Obama's lack of leadership experience and disparaged his community organization background. But, they had to notice that that very background led to one of the most skillfully crafted and organized campaigns in recent history. Beck seems to have taken notice, at least, and wants to organize Conservatives in a similar manner. Regardless, any attempt by any person to get Americans off their duffs and actively participating in the process of nominating, electing and monitoring our government officials has to be a good thing. We should all hope Beck succeeds.
Democrats will have another reason for hoping he succeeds. If the Glenn Beck Conservatives become united and decide to split from the lackluster leadership of the Republican Party, they will by such action assure the Democrats control of Washington for the next several elections cycles. Third-party movements invariably weaken the voting strength of one party. (Do I need to mention Ralph Nadir or Ross Perot?)
There are rational, reasonable conservatives in both the Democratic and Republican Parties, albeit more of them have, in recent years, gravitated to the Republican Party. The problem for Republican leaders is not the conservatives in their midst. Hell, they are happy to have them as it adds to their voting strength. The conservatives, however, give them a broader base to which they must appeal, and John McCain found it nearly impossible in the last presidential election to appeal to that very broad base and remain true to his own principals.
Why? Because the conservatives represent such a broad range of expectations and ideologies, partly, I suspect, because of far right religious groups who have found a voting voice in the conservative movement. They are not just social conservatives or financial conservatives or political conservatives, they are radical conservatives. There is no middle ground on anything. Their view is the only view.
Americans are by and large moderates. We are a sort of live-and-let-live bunch of people. Not so the religious conservatives. They march to their own drummer and by god you will too -- if they have their way.
Glenn Beck may do the country a favor if he successfully gets more Americans to organize their block, their neighborhood, their town and state and become actively involved in our political process. He should be wary about the tiger he is letting out of the bag, however. He may find it hard to control that cat once it is let loose.
He knows how to gather a crowd, which in this case means gather TV ratings. That's what any respectable television personality, liberal, moderate, conservative, news reporter or otherwise, is after. No ratings, no job.
Well now, according to the Sentinel, Beck hopes "to transform his personal celebrity into political action and has begun to assemble a movement to 'change America's course.'" While in Florida recently promoting his new book, "Arguing with Idiots," Beck said "America, we cannot wait for a leader anymore. The people must lead, and the leader will follow."
We know he has already discounted the president as a leader, but this statement suggests that he is admitting that the opposition party, the Republicans, lacks leadership as well. That seems clear to most Americans since he, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham seem to be the major spokespeople for the Republican Party these days. Indeed, the Sentinel article states, "Beck's announcement is the latest in a series of attempts by well-known, right leaning figures to fill a leadership void in the Republican Party, which has no clear nationally popular standard-bearer and has seen a schism arise between moderates and the conservative flank."
Conscientious voters across the nation should be encouraging Beck's success. Republicans made a big deal of Obama's lack of leadership experience and disparaged his community organization background. But, they had to notice that that very background led to one of the most skillfully crafted and organized campaigns in recent history. Beck seems to have taken notice, at least, and wants to organize Conservatives in a similar manner. Regardless, any attempt by any person to get Americans off their duffs and actively participating in the process of nominating, electing and monitoring our government officials has to be a good thing. We should all hope Beck succeeds.
Democrats will have another reason for hoping he succeeds. If the Glenn Beck Conservatives become united and decide to split from the lackluster leadership of the Republican Party, they will by such action assure the Democrats control of Washington for the next several elections cycles. Third-party movements invariably weaken the voting strength of one party. (Do I need to mention Ralph Nadir or Ross Perot?)
There are rational, reasonable conservatives in both the Democratic and Republican Parties, albeit more of them have, in recent years, gravitated to the Republican Party. The problem for Republican leaders is not the conservatives in their midst. Hell, they are happy to have them as it adds to their voting strength. The conservatives, however, give them a broader base to which they must appeal, and John McCain found it nearly impossible in the last presidential election to appeal to that very broad base and remain true to his own principals.
Why? Because the conservatives represent such a broad range of expectations and ideologies, partly, I suspect, because of far right religious groups who have found a voting voice in the conservative movement. They are not just social conservatives or financial conservatives or political conservatives, they are radical conservatives. There is no middle ground on anything. Their view is the only view.
Americans are by and large moderates. We are a sort of live-and-let-live bunch of people. Not so the religious conservatives. They march to their own drummer and by god you will too -- if they have their way.
Glenn Beck may do the country a favor if he successfully gets more Americans to organize their block, their neighborhood, their town and state and become actively involved in our political process. He should be wary about the tiger he is letting out of the bag, however. He may find it hard to control that cat once it is let loose.
Monday, November 23, 2009
THINGS YOU NEVER FORGET
They say you never forget how to ride a bike. I think it must be true.
We have two bikes here in Florida that I serviced this afternoon by adding air to the tires. Everything else seemed in order. Soon after, I decided to go to the post office here at the resort to check today's mail. (There was none of any interest.) Even though I have not been on a bicycle since last March, I stepped on the left pedal, threw my leg over the seat like a 20-year-old and started peddling down the street. It was only after I had gone a block or so that I realized: no wobble, no hesitation, no thought to what I was doing. You just don't forget how to ride a bike.
I could think of only one other sport in which this is true. I suspect that once you learn to swim, you never forget. Once you learn to trust the buoyancy of the water to hold you up and learn to kick you legs while pulling yourself through the water with cupped hands, you probably don't forget it. You may lose some of your speed or power if you don't swim regularly, but you don't forget how to swim. You may have to stop and tread water (another skill I doubt you forget) if you try to swim very far, shoulder impingement or some other age-related infirmary may prevent you from swimming well or far, but you will remember how to swim.
In most individual sports, golf comes to mind, you may not entirely forget how to do it, but you surely lose some of your strength, your rhythm and your skill. You can no doubt still hit the ball, but maybe not as far or with the accuracy you once had. Of course, that can be said of biking: you can still ride a bike, but maybe not with the speed or skill you had as a youngster.
Still, I will stick with my original assertion: you never forget how to ride a bike.
We have two bikes here in Florida that I serviced this afternoon by adding air to the tires. Everything else seemed in order. Soon after, I decided to go to the post office here at the resort to check today's mail. (There was none of any interest.) Even though I have not been on a bicycle since last March, I stepped on the left pedal, threw my leg over the seat like a 20-year-old and started peddling down the street. It was only after I had gone a block or so that I realized: no wobble, no hesitation, no thought to what I was doing. You just don't forget how to ride a bike.
I could think of only one other sport in which this is true. I suspect that once you learn to swim, you never forget. Once you learn to trust the buoyancy of the water to hold you up and learn to kick you legs while pulling yourself through the water with cupped hands, you probably don't forget it. You may lose some of your speed or power if you don't swim regularly, but you don't forget how to swim. You may have to stop and tread water (another skill I doubt you forget) if you try to swim very far, shoulder impingement or some other age-related infirmary may prevent you from swimming well or far, but you will remember how to swim.
In most individual sports, golf comes to mind, you may not entirely forget how to do it, but you surely lose some of your strength, your rhythm and your skill. You can no doubt still hit the ball, but maybe not as far or with the accuracy you once had. Of course, that can be said of biking: you can still ride a bike, but maybe not with the speed or skill you had as a youngster.
Still, I will stick with my original assertion: you never forget how to ride a bike.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
TIS THE SEASON: CRECHE OR CURSE
It's that time of year. Actually, "that time of year" is a week into the season and about two weeks ahead of when most folks expect it. I speak of the Christmas season.
Most retail stores have had their Christmas decorations out for a week or more. They, along with some of the radio stations, started playing Christmas music this past week, at least here in Florida. Some have tried to be politically correct by referring to this as the "Holiday" season, but others have simply given up and just call it the Christmas season.
The City Council of Orlando is apparently among that latter group. They announced earlier this past week that there would be no Christmas tree at City Hall this year. This is the first time in memory for many residents and, in fact, it is, according to the Orlando Sentinel, the first time since 1950 that "Along with the Christmas Star that ... hung above Orange Avenue ...," the City Hall tree will be missing this year. Mayor Buddy Dyer and the City Council decided that both were a luxury the city could not afford in the current economic circumstances, thus saving the city $22,000.
Predictably, some folks were upset. They were concerned with the loss of another Christmas tradition and some viewed this as another attempt to remove Christ from Christmas. I did not specifically read or hear that, but it seems reasonable in light of past expressions of frustration.
Regardless, some good folks came through and did what more of us should do. They donated the money and the tree so the city could have its Christmas tree. Warren Brown and Co., a North Carolina tree farm, donated a 31-foot blue spruce and AirTran Airways and WFTV-Channel 9 in Orlando donated $6,800 for transporting and installing the tree. Further, Jack Ewing, owner of Santa's Christmas Tree Farm in Eustis, FL donated a 20-foot sand pine. So now the city has two Christmas trees.
Although we don't hear as much about it as in the past, this story reminded me of the concern some citizens had when they learned their City Council would no longer allow a creche on the Court House lawn. Call it a creche, manger scene or nativity scene; it was a religious symbol, a purely Christian religious symbol at that, which violated the law regarding separation of church and state.
The manger scene was a long-standing tradition in many communities and one that evoked warm memories for many local citizens. It was unfortunately also against the law. City attorneys advised against such displays.
As with so many other forms of Christian religion expression, it did not matter that it was traditional, had a long history in the community or, for that matter, enjoyed the support of a majority of the community. The creche on the Court House lawn or any other public land was illegal. Secular, non-religious, decorations were all right, which, of course, rankled the devout so much that they stormed City Hall in protest.
We need to recognize two important facts: First of all, it doesn't matter how many Ten Commandment depictions were engraved over Court House entrances in the past the Supreme Court had determined in recent years that such expressions of the Christian faith violate the separation of church and state. The phrase "separation of church and state" is a metaphorical reference first made by Thomas Jefferson to the "establishment clause" of the Constitution that states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Second, citizens are still free to express their religious views in any way they want that does not violate local zoning or display laws.
So I came up with this idea. If every citizen, even half of them, who want to see a creche on the Court House lawn were to put such a creche on their OWN lawn there would be more manger scenes depicting the message of Christmas for the people of town to see than would ever be seen by the lone creche at the city square.
Instead of spending hundreds of dollars for lights, trees, blow-up lawn Santa Claus balloons and such, just install a nativity scene of whatever size you deem appropriate your front yard. Put a couple of spot lights on it and proclaim the Christian message of Christmas for everyone to enjoy.
What is that adage? You can curse the darkness or light a candle. Well, you can curse the law, the secular humanists, the non-believers or the commercialization of Christmas ... or you can put a spot light on an appropriate, lawful, expression of your faith on your front lawn where neighbors and many others will see it. And I assure that if you and your like-minded neighbors do this, the TV crew with cameras rolling will be on your block before you can say Merry Christmas.
Most retail stores have had their Christmas decorations out for a week or more. They, along with some of the radio stations, started playing Christmas music this past week, at least here in Florida. Some have tried to be politically correct by referring to this as the "Holiday" season, but others have simply given up and just call it the Christmas season.
The City Council of Orlando is apparently among that latter group. They announced earlier this past week that there would be no Christmas tree at City Hall this year. This is the first time in memory for many residents and, in fact, it is, according to the Orlando Sentinel, the first time since 1950 that "Along with the Christmas Star that ... hung above Orange Avenue ...," the City Hall tree will be missing this year. Mayor Buddy Dyer and the City Council decided that both were a luxury the city could not afford in the current economic circumstances, thus saving the city $22,000.
Predictably, some folks were upset. They were concerned with the loss of another Christmas tradition and some viewed this as another attempt to remove Christ from Christmas. I did not specifically read or hear that, but it seems reasonable in light of past expressions of frustration.
Regardless, some good folks came through and did what more of us should do. They donated the money and the tree so the city could have its Christmas tree. Warren Brown and Co., a North Carolina tree farm, donated a 31-foot blue spruce and AirTran Airways and WFTV-Channel 9 in Orlando donated $6,800 for transporting and installing the tree. Further, Jack Ewing, owner of Santa's Christmas Tree Farm in Eustis, FL donated a 20-foot sand pine. So now the city has two Christmas trees.
Although we don't hear as much about it as in the past, this story reminded me of the concern some citizens had when they learned their City Council would no longer allow a creche on the Court House lawn. Call it a creche, manger scene or nativity scene; it was a religious symbol, a purely Christian religious symbol at that, which violated the law regarding separation of church and state.
The manger scene was a long-standing tradition in many communities and one that evoked warm memories for many local citizens. It was unfortunately also against the law. City attorneys advised against such displays.
As with so many other forms of Christian religion expression, it did not matter that it was traditional, had a long history in the community or, for that matter, enjoyed the support of a majority of the community. The creche on the Court House lawn or any other public land was illegal. Secular, non-religious, decorations were all right, which, of course, rankled the devout so much that they stormed City Hall in protest.
We need to recognize two important facts: First of all, it doesn't matter how many Ten Commandment depictions were engraved over Court House entrances in the past the Supreme Court had determined in recent years that such expressions of the Christian faith violate the separation of church and state. The phrase "separation of church and state" is a metaphorical reference first made by Thomas Jefferson to the "establishment clause" of the Constitution that states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Second, citizens are still free to express their religious views in any way they want that does not violate local zoning or display laws.
So I came up with this idea. If every citizen, even half of them, who want to see a creche on the Court House lawn were to put such a creche on their OWN lawn there would be more manger scenes depicting the message of Christmas for the people of town to see than would ever be seen by the lone creche at the city square.
Instead of spending hundreds of dollars for lights, trees, blow-up lawn Santa Claus balloons and such, just install a nativity scene of whatever size you deem appropriate your front yard. Put a couple of spot lights on it and proclaim the Christian message of Christmas for everyone to enjoy.
What is that adage? You can curse the darkness or light a candle. Well, you can curse the law, the secular humanists, the non-believers or the commercialization of Christmas ... or you can put a spot light on an appropriate, lawful, expression of your faith on your front lawn where neighbors and many others will see it. And I assure that if you and your like-minded neighbors do this, the TV crew with cameras rolling will be on your block before you can say Merry Christmas.
Friday, November 20, 2009
HOW SHALL WE DIE: SWINE FLU OR SWINE SHAPE?
The news announcement got my attention. It should have gotten everyone's attention, particularly the Obama administration people responsible for monitoring the nation's physical health. We are one of the fattest nation's on the earth!
I suppose I shouldn't throw in the Obama administration that way. For all I know they are aware of the statistics and doing all they can. The problem is, I don't know. I'm not hearing much out of Washington except some hand-wringing about the numbers. Where are the Republicans on this matter? Let's hear their proposal for dealing with the nation's blubber butts and pot bellies.
Here are some of the numbers, in case you missed them:
It's not fair to pick on Walmart's. They are not the cause of the problem. We are!
We eat too much. We eat too much of the wrong foods. We have too much soda, ice cream, snack chips and other junk around the house in easy reach.
And we do not exercise enough. We will sign up for exercise class and then drive over someone to park as close as possible to the front door of the exercise room. We will drive around and around the parking lot waiting to find a parking space right up near the entrance to the store we plan to shop. And then we will come out, start the car and drive a half block to the next store in the mall. In every way possible, we avoid getting off our fat butts and moving.
Here are some suggestions:
I suppose I shouldn't throw in the Obama administration that way. For all I know they are aware of the statistics and doing all they can. The problem is, I don't know. I'm not hearing much out of Washington except some hand-wringing about the numbers. Where are the Republicans on this matter? Let's hear their proposal for dealing with the nation's blubber butts and pot bellies.
Here are some of the numbers, in case you missed them:
- 43 percent of Americans will be obese by 2018 (That's awfully close to half, folks.)
- 10 percent of people who are classified medically as obese believe they have a healthy body size and do not need to lose weight (Don't they ever get naked in front of a mirror?)
- 32 percent of kids and teens from 6 to 19 years of age are overweight and 17 percent are obese.
It's not fair to pick on Walmart's. They are not the cause of the problem. We are!
We eat too much. We eat too much of the wrong foods. We have too much soda, ice cream, snack chips and other junk around the house in easy reach.
And we do not exercise enough. We will sign up for exercise class and then drive over someone to park as close as possible to the front door of the exercise room. We will drive around and around the parking lot waiting to find a parking space right up near the entrance to the store we plan to shop. And then we will come out, start the car and drive a half block to the next store in the mall. In every way possible, we avoid getting off our fat butts and moving.
Here are some suggestions:
- In the 1960s, President Kennedy created the President's Council on Physical Fitness. The president publicly encouraged physical fitness and the council published a book of age-appropriate exercises for adults and children. We need that again.
- Park at the far end of the parking lot from any store entrance and walk that 100 yards or so. Do that every shopping trip and you will add miles to your shoes over the next year. Strive for 10,000 steps a day.
- Get the junk food snacks out of your kitchen cabinets, if you and your kids cannot otherwise control your cravings. If it's not there you won't eat it. If you want it bad enough, get up, make it or bake it yourself, or do without.
- Let's have enabling legislation that allows insurance companies to hike the rates (health or life insurance) on overweight people. Overweight people already cost companies millions each year in missed days work, excessive health care costs and physical accommodations for their "plus" sizes, and they put a strain (literally) on our medical facilities. Let's start charging overweight individuals and maybe if they have less money (because of higher insurance premiums) they will eat less.
- Let's stop making fools of ourselves by making a fuss when our porky-sized child cannot get the swine-flu vaccine. Deal with the health problem you can see, Mom, and stop harassing health officials over the one you worry about.
- If you or your kids have emotional issues or self-esteem issues, then get help for the problem. Don't avoid the issue by eating and creating a physical condition that adds to the problem. Eating is not a cure!
- And, let's stop making excuses. We are out of shape, physically. We are fat and getting fatter. Just look around. We created the flabby mess we are in and it's up to us to change it.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
THE CARDINAL WAS OUT OF LINE
I saw this article by Ellen Goodman the other day and could not believe my eyes. Has the religious divisiveness in this country become such that we have lost all sense of propriety? Are the secular humanists the only ones we can count on to be decent and civil toward all men.
Ellen Goodman
BOSTON -- It was one of those small shocks that come unexpectedly in the wake of a death. Just days after the country had buried Ted Kennedy, Cardinal Sean O'Malley took to his blog to defend himself from critics attacking him for presiding over the funeral of a pro-choice senator. Ellen Goodman
The cardinal called for civility and then went on to explain how he'd used the occasion to lobby one of the mourners: the president of the United States. He told Barack Obama that, yes, the Catholic bishops wanted universal health care but "we will not support a plan that will include a provision for abortion or could open the way to abortions in the future."
Is there an etiquette for lobbying at a funeral? Unseemly is too mild a word. This politicking during a national outpouring of loss for the last of the Kennedy brothers, a time when tens of thousands of Americans of every religion lined up to say their farewells, was a warning sign.
I have only included the first few paragraphs of Goodman's article, but you can get the gist of the article. "The cardinal called for civility and then went on to explain how he'd used the occasion to lobby one of the mourners: the president of the United States." The cardinal called for civility? There is no civility in using a funeral to lobby anyone for any reason. There is no explanation.
I thought we had gotten rid of the mean-spirited religious fanatics of the 1990s who thought they could say and do anything as long as defended it with their narrow religious views. If it was all right with god -- in their opinion -- then it was all right.
Such religious fanatics, folks, are the stuff from which terrorists are made. Those who would blow up themselves along with countless people in a crowded bazaar are cut from the same cloth as those who will blow up an abortion clinic. Yes, it's that simple, and that scary.
Oh, I know what you're thinking, Muslim fanatics are the problem, not Christian fanatics. Nonsense. Religious fanatics of all stripes march to their own drummer. They feel they can do what they want because it is in God's cause. God commands them. They cannot refuse. They cannot be denied.
I must ask the question: Can an all powerful God only promote His agenda by killing innocent people? I have a problem with that, if true.
Zealots, fanatics for any cause should concern us all.
Fanatics would overturn the Constitution. Zealots will have you believe that this country was created as a Christian country. Not so. Check the Declaration of Independence.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
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,...
No reference to the Christian church or any church there. I've taken the liberty of highlighting some phrases you might focus on.
The Declaration states that we may assume the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's god entitle us. Not the Puritan god, not the Christian god, not the Muslim god, but nature's god, however you choose to interpret that.
God's laws (your god, my god, anyone's god) has equal station with the laws of nature, which, I must point out seldom differ from one country or culture to another. The sun comes up in the east, apples fall, water freezes, hot air rises, and so forth. It's only the "laws of god" that give us trouble because there seems to be a multitude of gods and, in this country at least, a multitude of ways to recognize, worship or secure the blessings of god.
The framers of the Declaration had it right. Let the governments secured among men derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, period.
Cardinal Sean O'Malley has the same right as any ordinary citizen to lobby the president or any member of our government with his views on abortion or any other strongly held view, at the appropriate time and place. But to do so, he needs to remove his cardinal's hat and assume the posture of an ordinary citizen. With his cardinal's hat firmly affixed at the Kennedy funeral, he was not an ordinary citizen, and we acknowledge and honor him accordingly.
As much as it rankles some people to admit it, we are a secular nation founded on the belief that men can govern themselves. We do not need a king, real world or other world. How men arrive at their individual judgments about who to vote for is up to them, but it is their collective judgment that we rely on to determine those who will lead the government.
That government may not use our church services or other religious ceremonies to promote its agenda. Likewise, church leaders like Cardinal O'Malley should refrain from using church ceremonies to promote a religious or private agenda.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
FLORIDA - DAY 2
I have to report on last night before moving on to reveal the adventures Joyce and I experienced Day 2 of our trip.
Last night was a more exciting venture than we expected. Who would have thought that we would encounter traffic backups at 6:30 in the evening. We did. Three lanes of traffic sometimes came to a complete stop. Don't know why. We missed our seven o'clock reservation at the Corner Stable Restaurant by 30 minutes because of the traffic. Why don't people stay home on Friday night?
The Corner Stable Restaurant is, reportedly, Baltimore's best BBQ rib and crab shack. I know that because it said so on the menu. Besides, Mike Sellers, my granddaughter's boyfriend likes it, and he likes to eat, so it must be good. It was good and we left with at least as much food as we consumed. Could not eat all they brought on our plates. (And, yes, I got to play sugar daddy and pick up the bill.)
Mike and Alyssa are shown at the far left, below. Both are students at Towson College. Mike is majoring in marketing and Alyssa is majoring in mass communications. The picture on the right is of Alyssa at her apartment. She is holding an original Chuck's Chips bark carving she requested I make for her.
We had to take Alyssa's camera shy, socially awkward sister, Laura, along because she doesn't get out much. You can see why. Her mother, our daughter, is hiding behind her.
This is what made paying the dinner bill worthwhile. Just being seen in public with these four beautiful ladies -- Joyce (not shown), Cheryl, Alyssa and Laura -- is more honor than I deserve.
Last night was a more exciting venture than we expected. Who would have thought that we would encounter traffic backups at 6:30 in the evening. We did. Three lanes of traffic sometimes came to a complete stop. Don't know why. We missed our seven o'clock reservation at the Corner Stable Restaurant by 30 minutes because of the traffic. Why don't people stay home on Friday night?
The Corner Stable Restaurant is, reportedly, Baltimore's best BBQ rib and crab shack. I know that because it said so on the menu. Besides, Mike Sellers, my granddaughter's boyfriend likes it, and he likes to eat, so it must be good. It was good and we left with at least as much food as we consumed. Could not eat all they brought on our plates. (And, yes, I got to play sugar daddy and pick up the bill.)
Mike and Alyssa are shown at the far left, below. Both are students at Towson College. Mike is majoring in marketing and Alyssa is majoring in mass communications. The picture on the right is of Alyssa at her apartment. She is holding an original Chuck's Chips bark carving she requested I make for her.
We had to take Alyssa's camera shy, socially awkward sister, Laura, along because she doesn't get out much. You can see why. Her mother, our daughter, is hiding behind her.
This is what made paying the dinner bill worthwhile. Just being seen in public with these four beautiful ladies -- Joyce (not shown), Cheryl, Alyssa and Laura -- is more honor than I deserve.Actually, Day 2 consisted of Joyce, Cheryl and I straightening up the back porch, bringing in some lawn furniture, doing some shopping, and watching football. Maybe something more exciting will happen tomorrow. If so, you will learn about it first right here.
Friday, November 6, 2009
FLORIDA - DAY 1
Yesterday seemed like Day 1 because we spent all day packing the car and making sure everything in the house was the way we wanted it upon our return. Hence, we were pretty much exhausted last night when we went to bed.
Nevertheless, we awoke this morning at 6:00, which is normal for us, and started getting all those last minute things done that couldn't be taken care of the night before. There was morning coffee, of course, and our individual routines of getting dressed -- Joyce has to shave and I had to apply my makeup. While Joyce finished up in the bedroom, I started on the basement routine: turn down the water heater, turn off the water to the water softener and ice maker, and make a sweep of the place to make sure everything is turned off and/or unplugged that should be.
Believe it or not, we were on the road by 7:00. Without the motorhome to provide some laughs, or aggravation, as the case may be, our trips now are generally without incident. We ran into a little snow as we approached the higher altitudes (above 1,200 feet) around Cobleskill, but traffic was light and we cruised along with the cruise control set at 70 for most of the trip to Binghamton. We ran into more traffic once we got to Wilkes Barre and beyond, but nothing that slowed us much or gave us any concern.
You sure get to see more of this great country when driving and, in this case, we couldn't help but notice the gradually changing tree color as we wandered south through Pennsylvania. The leaves are now nearly all gone around Schenectady, but in Pennsylvania and here in Maryland there are still leaves on the trees and loads of color. You can tell that the peak color is past, however. Many of the farms we passed had not yet combined their corn or soybeans. I'm not sure what they are waiting on, but then, what do I know? I'm just a passing observer.
Anyway, we made it to our daughter's house in Walkersville, MD around 2:30. Our daughter got home from work around 3:30 and informed us that we are driving to Baltimore this evening to have dinner with our granddaughter and her boyfriend. They both attend Towson College there. Guess who will get the honor of picking up that bill.
Nevertheless, we awoke this morning at 6:00, which is normal for us, and started getting all those last minute things done that couldn't be taken care of the night before. There was morning coffee, of course, and our individual routines of getting dressed -- Joyce has to shave and I had to apply my makeup. While Joyce finished up in the bedroom, I started on the basement routine: turn down the water heater, turn off the water to the water softener and ice maker, and make a sweep of the place to make sure everything is turned off and/or unplugged that should be.
Believe it or not, we were on the road by 7:00. Without the motorhome to provide some laughs, or aggravation, as the case may be, our trips now are generally without incident. We ran into a little snow as we approached the higher altitudes (above 1,200 feet) around Cobleskill, but traffic was light and we cruised along with the cruise control set at 70 for most of the trip to Binghamton. We ran into more traffic once we got to Wilkes Barre and beyond, but nothing that slowed us much or gave us any concern.
You sure get to see more of this great country when driving and, in this case, we couldn't help but notice the gradually changing tree color as we wandered south through Pennsylvania. The leaves are now nearly all gone around Schenectady, but in Pennsylvania and here in Maryland there are still leaves on the trees and loads of color. You can tell that the peak color is past, however. Many of the farms we passed had not yet combined their corn or soybeans. I'm not sure what they are waiting on, but then, what do I know? I'm just a passing observer.
Anyway, we made it to our daughter's house in Walkersville, MD around 2:30. Our daughter got home from work around 3:30 and informed us that we are driving to Baltimore this evening to have dinner with our granddaughter and her boyfriend. They both attend Towson College there. Guess who will get the honor of picking up that bill.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
THE CAR IS PACKED, IT'S TIME TO GO
The car is packed. I mean really packed. I thought we were just going to Florida for a few months. Looking in the car, one might think we were moving there permanently.
It's amazing how much stuff you think you need for an extended stay; probably twice as much as you will actually use. Regardless, we have sorted, sifted and discarded all we think we can and we still have the back of the Santa Fe packed. There is the travel bag with clothes we will need on the trip to Florida, the larger bag with clothes we will need while in Florida, a small bag for toiletries and such, another bag for the medications that keep us alive and healthy and then clothes on hangers, my laptop computer, tools and on and on. I can, however, still see out the rear window, so I guess that means there is room for more. Egad! That thought scares me.
It's amazing how much stuff you think you need for an extended stay; probably twice as much as you will actually use. Regardless, we have sorted, sifted and discarded all we think we can and we still have the back of the Santa Fe packed. There is the travel bag with clothes we will need on the trip to Florida, the larger bag with clothes we will need while in Florida, a small bag for toiletries and such, another bag for the medications that keep us alive and healthy and then clothes on hangers, my laptop computer, tools and on and on. I can, however, still see out the rear window, so I guess that means there is room for more. Egad! That thought scares me.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
FALL LEAVES
I just finished my fall leaf routine. No, not raking and bagging. That's for suckers who either are pathetic creatures of habit, desperately in need of exercise or are woefully uninformed.
Raking a bagging strains muscles and strains the local landfill. Those bags of leaves become large clumps of leaves that take forever to decompose. The smart way is to mulch them and leave them on your lawn. This feeds the lawn with valuable nitrogen and other nutrients and provides important weed control next spring.
I recommend this article to you.
New Market, Va. — Mike Goatley is the kind of guy couch potatoes appreciate most on football-rich fall afternoons. The Virginia Tech extension turf specialist preaches the gospel of "leave them alone" lawn leaf management.
There's nothing wrong with blowing, vacuuming or raking downed leaves -- especially if you're trying to spot errant golf balls or keep your grass from being matted down over winter. Disposal is the problem.
"One of the biggest things we're trying to get away from is putting these things in bags and dumping them in a landfill," Goatley says. "At the same time, you're improving the organic matter in your soil." The technique has been used for years, he says. But "there's quite a bit of data out there now (from Purdue, Michigan State and Cornell universities) indicating this is the way to manage those leaves." In other words, crank up your mulching-capable lawn mower first when the leaves start piling up in autumn.
A Purdue University report details the responses of a perennial ryegrass lawn to the addition of as much as two tons of maple leaves per acre per application. Mowing the leaves into fine pieces and filtering them through the turf doesn't degrade lawn color or quality, introduce diseases or weeds, the report says. Over time, the shredded leaves decompose, enriching the topmost soil layers. Mower mulching also saves time and money that would be unnecessarily spent on bagging and dumping. Composting leaves directly into the turf doesn't mean you should stop fertilizing, however.
"I don't think leaf recycling is a substitute for a sound fertilizing program," Goatley says. "Mother Nature has already removed a lot of nitrogen from those leaves. The microbes needed to further break them down also need some nitrogen.
You can read the entire article at: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2004/nov/18/mulching_leaves_into/?print
Now, aren't you glad you checked in today?
Raking a bagging strains muscles and strains the local landfill. Those bags of leaves become large clumps of leaves that take forever to decompose. The smart way is to mulch them and leave them on your lawn. This feeds the lawn with valuable nitrogen and other nutrients and provides important weed control next spring.
I recommend this article to you.
Mulching leaves into lawns better than raking them
November 18, 2004
There's nothing wrong with blowing, vacuuming or raking downed leaves -- especially if you're trying to spot errant golf balls or keep your grass from being matted down over winter. Disposal is the problem.
"One of the biggest things we're trying to get away from is putting these things in bags and dumping them in a landfill," Goatley says. "At the same time, you're improving the organic matter in your soil." The technique has been used for years, he says. But "there's quite a bit of data out there now (from Purdue, Michigan State and Cornell universities) indicating this is the way to manage those leaves." In other words, crank up your mulching-capable lawn mower first when the leaves start piling up in autumn.
A Purdue University report details the responses of a perennial ryegrass lawn to the addition of as much as two tons of maple leaves per acre per application. Mowing the leaves into fine pieces and filtering them through the turf doesn't degrade lawn color or quality, introduce diseases or weeds, the report says. Over time, the shredded leaves decompose, enriching the topmost soil layers. Mower mulching also saves time and money that would be unnecessarily spent on bagging and dumping. Composting leaves directly into the turf doesn't mean you should stop fertilizing, however.
"I don't think leaf recycling is a substitute for a sound fertilizing program," Goatley says. "Mother Nature has already removed a lot of nitrogen from those leaves. The microbes needed to further break them down also need some nitrogen.
You can read the entire article at: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2004/nov/18/mulching_leaves_into/?print
Now, aren't you glad you checked in today?
Thursday, October 29, 2009
CAN ANY OF US TRUST THE MEDIA?
I suppose at one time or another we have all complained that the media never presents any good news. We fail to realize (or refuse to acknowledge) that WE are the reason for that. We are the problem. We don’t really care to learn that 147 eighth graders went to school today and behaved themselves. We do, however, really want to hear about the fight at the middle school in which two kids got hurt, with one having to go to the hospital. In other words, we want the newscasters on the six o’clock news to tell us about the bad things that happened today. That's human nature and both the print and broadcast news media know it.
So they oblige us. Bad news sells newspapers. Bad news sells television time. Bad news, the more bloodier, more graphic the better. It shows up well on our HDTV screen and gets our attention. And our attention is what gets advertisers.
It should not surprise us that in his October 12, 2009 interview with Jamie Gangel on NBC's Today Show, Rush Limbaugh confirmed that his show is mainly about making money: "I'm doing my show for ratings. I want the largest audience I can get because that's how I can charge the highest advertising rates, which means what else do I want? Money." You can be sure the same is true for Glenn Beck or any other independent print or TV commentator, regardless of whether he or she has a liberal or conservative leaning. Controversy sells just like bad news sells.
Does it make any sense then to switch from one news outlet to another? Probably not. Although, by switching you do get to choose the type of biased reporting (translated that means: not getting news you don’t want to hear) you receive. I guess in a way that its the same as screening out the bad news and only getting, what for you is, the good news. One-sided news is still biased news, whether liberal or conservative.
Blatantly biased reporting aside, our free press, the fourth estate is crumbling and badly in need of an overhaul. The house is still there but the insides have been gutted. For another view, Samuel Clairborne makes the argument that we no longer have a free press in this country.
He says in his blog piece titled, Don’t Piss In My Pocket And Tell Me It’s Raining, “But the average American looks to the mainstream media for their information, and the mainstream media is no longer free. It is bought and paid for by the same corporations that have bought our congress through lobbying – those that comprise the military/industrial/penal/
“Far from being an objective, inquisitive force, our media have become cheerleaders for much that is rotten in America – because their paymasters profit from our inhumane health insurance system, our centralized energy production and distribution monopolies, our leadership as the world’s number one weapons dealer, and our imperial rape of both human and natural wealth the world over.”
I encourage you to check out his entire piece at: http://samuelclaiborne.
Whether you agree with him or not, you will find his comments thought provoking. His comments underscore the fact that our numerous news outlets are hard pressed to come up with enough objectively gathered and reported news to fill all the hours they are obligated to fill. Hence, they go for the easy stories and play them over and over again. They eschew what used to be considered good news reporting -- get the facts, check the facts, corroborate the facts, report the facts -- in favor of being first to break a story. The important thing is be first and be sensational. The facts can come later.
Can you really trust your favorite news outlet? Can you trust any news source that advertises that it is the anti-news to the other guys? Our fourth estate is apparently up for sale to the highest bidder. Can we trust any of the media anymore? I don't think so, but I'd like to hear from you.
Whether you agree with him or not, you will find his comments thought provoking. His comments underscore the fact that our numerous news outlets are hard pressed to come up with enough objectively gathered and reported news to fill all the hours they are obligated to fill. Hence, they go for the easy stories and play them over and over again. They eschew what used to be considered good news reporting -- get the facts, check the facts, corroborate the facts, report the facts -- in favor of being first to break a story. The important thing is be first and be sensational. The facts can come later.
Can you really trust your favorite news outlet? Can you trust any news source that advertises that it is the anti-news to the other guys? Our fourth estate is apparently up for sale to the highest bidder. Can we trust any of the media anymore? I don't think so, but I'd like to hear from you.
Friday, October 23, 2009
WHY NOT GIVE THE MONEY TO CHARITY?
According to what I read, the Obama administration has asked Congress to allocate $250 for some 57 million Social Security recipients who, this year, will not receive a cost-of-living allocation (COLA) in their monthly Social Security check. There is no COLA this year because the cost of living decreased this past year.
I have several problems with that. The first problem being that many of us retirees DO NOT need the $250. Yes, our income is fixed. (During any given year most people's income is fixed.) But since the cost of living decreased, the value of our fixed income actually increased. Not by a lot, I agree, but we should not be experiencing financial hardship.
The second problem I have with the $250 "government bailout" is that while we are all happy to get our COLA when prices increase, we seem less than happy to accept no increase when they decrease. In fact, shouldn't we graciously accept a decrease when prices go down? Are we just greedy or what? Are we like the labor unions that want a piece of the action when the company shows a profit but don't want to talk about give backs when the company hits some lean years?
We seniors are supposed to be the wiser for our years of experience. Shouldn't we then be wise enough to have put a little aside for those possible years when there would be no cost-of-living increase? No decrease, understand, just no increase.
Now before you jump down my throat for being insensitive to those senior citizens out there who are just barely getting by on their Social Security and, maybe, a small pension check from some previous employer, let me say that I am well aware of their existence -- and their difficult financial circumstances. I know some of these people, but I ask that you reread the second paragraph above in which I said that "many of us retirees do not need the $250." Just the same, some people absolutely need the extra money, any extra money.
I feel obligated, however, to add that anyone paying attention has known for over 50 years that one cannot live very well on Social Security alone. If you go into retirement having only your Social Security check to live on, you are going to live in a world of financial hurt. An extra $250 will certainly help you, but it will only postpone for a while the return of your desperate financial condition.
So, if Congress approves this senior citizen bailout (bailouts are popular this year, you know) and we all receive our $250, what should we do? We can spend it. That would help the local economy. We can sock it in the bank. That would help bank profits and, presumably, those struggling bank CEO’s who had to take 50-90 percent pay and/or bonus cut. (Some, I understand may see their pay cut from $38 million a year to $19 million.) Or, we can donate the money to charity.
Why not? You don’t need it and lots of others do.
The Salvation Army food bank is running out of food and the Thanksgiving and Christmas seasons are not yet upon us. The regional food bank in eastern New York
Just think of the reaction across the nation, if not the world, if, say, 40 million of us who don’t really need that $250 donated it to our local food pantry, the Salvation Army, City Mission or some other local program that will directly benefit local families in need. If we did that, we could turn this government program into something worthwhile, something that will directly benefit people in our community who need the help.
Yes, you may have to pay taxes on the $250, unless you have enough in the way of charitable deductions to affect your tax payment next April. But think of the people you are helping who wish they had enough money on which to pay taxes next spring.
Let’s show the world that senior citizens are not a bunch of me-first, greedy old geezers. We already get discounts at most restaurants, some department stores (on selected days) and nearly all theaters. We have earned the right to these discounts. We’ve paid our dues, for sure. But many of us do not need this government handout! Donate your $250 to the local charity of your choice and stand ready to be interviewed on the six o’clock news. You will surely be recognized as a citizen of note.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
I'VE LOST CONTROL
I have lost control ... of my garden that is. I still have a garden in the sense that there is a plot of ground back behind the garage that is tilled and planted with my perennials: rhubarb, horseradish and green onions for next spring. There also are the remains of this year's tomato and pepper plants. Frost the last couple of nights took care of them.
Friday, October 16, 2009
POLITICS AND RELIGION -- BUT MOSTLY POLITICS
You might think from the title that this is going to be tirade about the religious right and how they have inserted their religious dogma into political thought and, for reasons unfathomable by me, largely taken control of the Republican Party. Not so.
I am not saying none of that is true; that would be wrong. And like my media hero, Rush Limbaugh, I never lie. (How do you know that? Because, like him, I told you so.) No, what the "not so" statement above refers to is how we arrive at our political and religious beliefs -- and the consequences of that.
I am not saying none of that is true; that would be wrong. And like my media hero, Rush Limbaugh, I never lie. (How do you know that? Because, like him, I told you so.) No, what the "not so" statement above refers to is how we arrive at our political and religious beliefs -- and the consequences of that.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
ANOTHER EMAIL ALERT TEST POSTING
By Farhad Manjoo
Posted Friday, July 24, 2009, at 7:05 AM ET
It's tempting to blame the victim. In May, a twentysomething French hacker broke into several Twitter employees' e-mail accounts and stole a trove of meeting notes, strategy documents, and other confidential scribbles. The hacker eventually gave the stash to TechCrunch, which has since published notes from meetings in which Twitter execs discussed their very lofty goals. (The company wants to be the first Web service to reach 1 billion users.) How'd the hacker get all this stuff? Like a lot of tech startups, Twitter runs without paper—much of the company's discussions take place in e-mail and over shared Google documents. All of these corporate secrets are kept secure with a very thin wall of protection: the employees' passwords, which the intruder managed to guess because some people at Twitter used the same passwords for many different sites. In other words, Twitter had it coming. The trouble is, so do the rest of us.
Posted Friday, July 24, 2009, at 7:05 AM ET
It's tempting to blame the victim. In May, a twentysomething French hacker broke into several Twitter employees' e-mail accounts and stole a trove of meeting notes, strategy documents, and other confidential scribbles. The hacker eventually gave the stash to TechCrunch, which has since published notes from meetings in which Twitter execs discussed their very lofty goals. (The company wants to be the first Web service to reach 1 billion users.) How'd the hacker get all this stuff? Like a lot of tech startups, Twitter runs without paper—much of the company's discussions take place in e-mail and over shared Google documents. All of these corporate secrets are kept secure with a very thin wall of protection: the employees' passwords, which the intruder managed to guess because some people at Twitter used the same passwords for many different sites. In other words, Twitter had it coming. The trouble is, so do the rest of us.
STILL TESTING MY EMAIL ALERT PROGRAM
This is very funny!
I GOT THIS NEW DEODORANT TODAY. THE INSTRUCTIONS SAID REMOVE CAP AND PUSH UP BOTTOM. I CAN BARELY WALK, BUT WHENEVER I FART, THE ROOM SMELLS AWESOME! |
Monday, October 12, 2009
AN INTERESTING ARTICLE
Here is an interesting article that everyone should read, especially some radical conservatives who, I fear, live in an alternative universe. Unfortunately, they are exactly the ones who will not read it, and if they do, they will not understand it. They're not too bright, you know.
Chuckwagon Journal
Tom Teepen: Alternate reality confronts Obama and his yes-we-canners
ByIn CrazyWorld, Barack Obama is a foreigner who has unconstitutionally usurped the presidency of the United States.
In Actual America, Hawaii-born Obama was elected president by his fellow citizens.
And so it goes on both sides of the mystic curtain.
In CrazyWorld, that recent Tea Party rally in Washington drew 2 million people and the failure of the ever-despised mainstream media to admit as much was one more example of their perfidiousness. An aerial photo, eagerly circulated on the political right, indeed did show a monster crowd, surely a million and more.
In Actual America, the photo turned out to be of the 1997 Promise Keepers rally. Old hands at guesstimating crowd sizes figure the Tea Party turnout at about 75,000. Most media skipped the numbers game, put the crowd in the "tens of thousands" and characterized it as "impressive" or words to that effect, hardly a negation.
In CrazyWorld, the federal government is being insidiously infused with "czars" and in the academies of right-wing arcana, the movement's scholars argue over whether there are just 32 or maybe as many as 140-plus, a parody of medieval monks bickering over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.
In Actual America, the president has assigned various appointees to oversee a number of projects or programs — nuclear nonproliferation, the bank bailout, faith-based activities and so on. All modern presidents have done much the same. The appointees have standard-issue bureaucratic titles. "Czar" is the invention of fairway barkers at the right-wing carnival like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.
In CrazyWorld, Obama is surrendering to terrorism.
In Actual America, he has sent 21,000 additional troops into Afghanistan, home turf of terrorism and wellspring of 9/11, and seems likely to send more. He has increased the military budget.
In CrazyWorld, Obama is bankrupting taxpayers and the nation.
In Actual America, he proposed and Congress enacted a tax cut good for up to $400 per person for 95 percent of taxpayers and a $2,500 tax credit to offset college tuition costs. The Treasury calculates it will save 5 million families a total of about $9 billion.
The record deficit that he's presiding over is overwhelmingly a projection of previously committed entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and so on), of leftover Bush debt and of revenue losses from the recession, which recovery will largely make up.
In CrazyWorld, Obama — when he's not a fascist — is a communist, recently morphed from Marxist to Stalinist, pursuing an alien agenda.
In Actual America, Obama is a moderate-to-liberal Democrat carrying through on the platform he openly espoused to win election just 10 months ago.
In CrazyWorld, the fact that the House health care reform bill is 1,018 pages long somehow shows its hopelessness.
In Actual America, the format for congressional bills is about a third or more white space — 25 double-spaced lines per page, about six or seven words per line. President Bush's 1997 budget bill was 1,482 pages. So?
You know, we would be able to hear one another a lot better here on Earth if it weren't for all the static coming from outer space.
Tom Teepen is a columnist for Cox Newspapers. E-mail: teepencolumn@earthlink.net.
Friday, October 9, 2009
TRAVELING BY CAR ACROSS THE U.S.
OK, so my "out of commission for a few days" turned out to be almost four weeks. Sorry about that.
We did spend several weeks traveling from Colorado to Las Vegas, NV to Phoenix, AZ to Walkersville, MD, and that kept me from adding to my blog. Aside from the time spent traveling, I failed to take into account how much time I would spend tending to other matters upon my return home: unloading the car, putting things away, yard work, garden work, getting caught up on local news from the neighbors, and so on.
Everything we had carefully packed in the car when we left the ranch in Colorado had to be unloaded and we had to put all of it away somewhere in the house. Garbage couldn’t be picked up until I called the waste disposal people and let them know we were back in town; the same with newspaper delivery. We had to stop by the post office to get our accumulated mail that the postman had been saving since we asked him to stop forwarding it and to ask that our regular mail delivery start again. There was no food in the house, so grocery shopping was high on the list of things to do first. And so it went. Everywhere we turned we came up with another "do me first" job.
The lad I had hired to do the lawn had not kept up with the mowing because of the multiple rains they had in our area this summer, so the grass was way too long. When I finally got to it (the first dry day) I had to stop repeatedly to empty the grass catcher. A job that usually took 45 minutes or so took over an hour and a half!
On to the garden. Some of the weeds there had developed stems over one inch thick -- and an attitude. It takes a brave man to tackle weeds that big. They are tough and stubborn – and resist being pulled from the ground with, literally, every fiber of their being. (I should apologize for the pun but, actually, I’m rather proud of it.)
But that’s enough about my home chores. The title of this piece is about car travel and I want to tell you about our travels … by car.
Car travel for many of us conjures up those days from our youth when we sat strapped in the back seat of the family car and whined – because that was the only thing that would get out parents’ attention – “Are we there yet?” Our parents played silly games with us to keep our minds off our leg cramps and numb butts, or our endless need to pee. The games worked for a while, but we really wanted to get out of the car and move around. Car travel was not our favorite mode of travel.
Planes and trains are nice. Planes get you there faster. On trains, at least, you can move around a little. But cars? Too slow.
Well if you have vertigo, as I have, or claustrophobia, as my wife does, plane travel is out of the question. Besides, we have learned to relax and enjoy the countryside we are traveling through. Car travel allows us to do that.
All that being said, we find that car travel offers additional things that other forms of transportation do not. We could stop when and where we wanted, for one thing. When we saw a road sign, country market or anything else that caught out attention, we could pull over and investigate it. We stopped in Kansas , for instance, when we saw one of those brown government information signs that said “Pawnee Village
Alas, I am out of time and space. More on some of the special aspects of our drive across country in the next blog. I try to keep these personal accounts brief so you don't get bored (well, too bored) reading them.
Monday, September 14, 2009
PACKING TO LEAVE
Chuckwagon Journal will be out of commission for a few days, maybe a week or more. We are packing the car in preparation for leaving tomorrow and I don't know when I will have time to post anything for the next week or so.
Well-heeled bloggers may have a staff to maintain their blog site when they are en route to a speaking engagement or some other destination. I have to get my computer out of the trunk of the car, set it up so I can get on line with my Verizon broadband card and prepare my post from scratch. Sorry, but you will just have to endure without my wit, wisdom or sarcasm for a few days.
Well-heeled bloggers may have a staff to maintain their blog site when they are en route to a speaking engagement or some other destination. I have to get my computer out of the trunk of the car, set it up so I can get on line with my Verizon broadband card and prepare my post from scratch. Sorry, but you will just have to endure without my wit, wisdom or sarcasm for a few days.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
"If the current effort to reform American healthcare ends in frustration, much of the blame rests on our political culture's empowerment of deception and ignorance. Fake erudition is revered, every hoax is deemed brilliant, and prejudice is presented as knowledge -- while actual expertise is disregarded or devalued." (Joe Conason)
Ain't it the truth. What or who created the political culture's empowerment of deception and ignorance? We did. That's us, folks. Not some liberal, not some conservative, not some radical. We created the current political culture of deception and ignorance.
A pundit is, according to Wikipedia, "someone who offers to mass-media his or her opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences or sport) on which they are knowledgeable." I guess the key phrase there is "on which they are knowledgeable," or presumed to be knowledgeable. But political pundits always have a bias. That's why, at least in the case of those invited to appear on talk shows and television shows such as Meet the Press, Face the Nation, Fox News or other such shows.
They have a bias and are happy to express it, with or without supporting facts. They have written a book or two, maybe worked in the White House of a previous administration or have "distinguished" themselves in some other way. Maybe they were an adviser in the campaign of some successful, prominent candidate. Whatever, they have established their credentials to someone's satisfaction and, hence, get invited to be on a show and speak their mind.
How good (accurate) are they?
If you noticed, in the weeks leading up to the 2004 election all the pundits for the Democratic Party predicted a John Kerry win. They pointed out with absolute clarity all the things George Bush had done wrong, how low was his popularity with the public, how costly the war in Iraq was, how disenchanted the public was with that war, and on and on. Not one of them predicted he would win the presidency again. Not one, to the best of my knowledge, even suggested that he might win.
They were wrong!
That is just one instance in which we, the American public, should have learned a lesson. If we are looking for biased news or biased pundits to support our views, they are out there and will be glad to accommodate us. That is, they will be happy to tell us what we want to hear.
Make no mistake, we are at fault. Paraphrasing Joe Conason, we have empowered deception and ignorance. Fake erudition is revered, every hoax is deemed brilliant, and prejudice is presented as knowledge -- while actual expertise is disregarded or devalued.
The people who listen to Rush Limbaugh know what they are going to hear. They know it is more misinformation than information, but Limbaugh tells them what they want to hear. One person I know listens faithfully every day to three hours of Rush Limbaugh. My friends, listening to three hours from any single person is brainwashing, not education.
I'm not picking on Rush Limbaugh; he is very entertaining at times. But the same criticism holds for those folks who only listen, say, to MSNBC. They know that the various hosts on this network will have a liberal bias and can be counted on to take to task Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly or any other conservative spokesperson with whom they have a disagreement -- which is all of them. And like their conservative counterparts, they will cherry pick the items they want to attack and gloss over everything else. In other words, they will present their prejudice as knowledge and disregard or devalue any actual facts.
We not only encourage these people by buying their books, listening to their shows and, sometimes, following their advice, but we are guilty of a greater crime: allowing the press to become openly biased and lazy in its reporting. Reporters, both print and television, go out to FIND the story they were sent to find. Remember that.
Editor: Let's do a story on the people unhappy with the proposed healthcare plan.
Reporter: Gotcha, boss. (And the reporter proceeds to find such people and do a story on them while failing to mention, perhaps, that he had to interview 20 people to find the three he highlights in his story.)
Send a television reporter and a cameraman out on the street to find people who do not know who their local congressman is and guess what? The reporter will find five or six such people for the six o'clock news under the teaser headline: Do New Yorkers (or whatever state) know their local congressman?
We tolerate this cheap and lazy form of news because it entertains us. But it does not inform us. We need start thinking about calling the local TV station every time we see such sloppy, time-filling nonsense passing as news!
When news reporters start doing their job, i.e., start reporting, we won't have to depend on radio and television talk show hosts or Sunday morning news show pundits for clarification of what's happening in Washington or our state's capitol. We're intelligent. We're educated. We can figure it out for ourselves if they will just give us the facts.
In the meantime, we all need to heed the advice our our high school English teacher who admonished us when we were quoting some source to support the theme of our essay to "Consider the source." We need to think for ourselves, insist on facts, and champion honesty and transparency in news reports and press releases from our elected officials.
We can then be our own demagogues and ideologues -- after we get the facts.
Ain't it the truth. What or who created the political culture's empowerment of deception and ignorance? We did. That's us, folks. Not some liberal, not some conservative, not some radical. We created the current political culture of deception and ignorance.
A pundit is, according to Wikipedia, "someone who offers to mass-media his or her opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences or sport) on which they are knowledgeable." I guess the key phrase there is "on which they are knowledgeable," or presumed to be knowledgeable. But political pundits always have a bias. That's why, at least in the case of those invited to appear on talk shows and television shows such as Meet the Press, Face the Nation, Fox News or other such shows.
They have a bias and are happy to express it, with or without supporting facts. They have written a book or two, maybe worked in the White House of a previous administration or have "distinguished" themselves in some other way. Maybe they were an adviser in the campaign of some successful, prominent candidate. Whatever, they have established their credentials to someone's satisfaction and, hence, get invited to be on a show and speak their mind.
How good (accurate) are they?
If you noticed, in the weeks leading up to the 2004 election all the pundits for the Democratic Party predicted a John Kerry win. They pointed out with absolute clarity all the things George Bush had done wrong, how low was his popularity with the public, how costly the war in Iraq was, how disenchanted the public was with that war, and on and on. Not one of them predicted he would win the presidency again. Not one, to the best of my knowledge, even suggested that he might win.
They were wrong!
That is just one instance in which we, the American public, should have learned a lesson. If we are looking for biased news or biased pundits to support our views, they are out there and will be glad to accommodate us. That is, they will be happy to tell us what we want to hear.
Make no mistake, we are at fault. Paraphrasing Joe Conason, we have empowered deception and ignorance. Fake erudition is revered, every hoax is deemed brilliant, and prejudice is presented as knowledge -- while actual expertise is disregarded or devalued.
The people who listen to Rush Limbaugh know what they are going to hear. They know it is more misinformation than information, but Limbaugh tells them what they want to hear. One person I know listens faithfully every day to three hours of Rush Limbaugh. My friends, listening to three hours from any single person is brainwashing, not education.
I'm not picking on Rush Limbaugh; he is very entertaining at times. But the same criticism holds for those folks who only listen, say, to MSNBC. They know that the various hosts on this network will have a liberal bias and can be counted on to take to task Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly or any other conservative spokesperson with whom they have a disagreement -- which is all of them. And like their conservative counterparts, they will cherry pick the items they want to attack and gloss over everything else. In other words, they will present their prejudice as knowledge and disregard or devalue any actual facts.
We not only encourage these people by buying their books, listening to their shows and, sometimes, following their advice, but we are guilty of a greater crime: allowing the press to become openly biased and lazy in its reporting. Reporters, both print and television, go out to FIND the story they were sent to find. Remember that.
Editor: Let's do a story on the people unhappy with the proposed healthcare plan.
Reporter: Gotcha, boss. (And the reporter proceeds to find such people and do a story on them while failing to mention, perhaps, that he had to interview 20 people to find the three he highlights in his story.)
Send a television reporter and a cameraman out on the street to find people who do not know who their local congressman is and guess what? The reporter will find five or six such people for the six o'clock news under the teaser headline: Do New Yorkers (or whatever state) know their local congressman?
We tolerate this cheap and lazy form of news because it entertains us. But it does not inform us. We need start thinking about calling the local TV station every time we see such sloppy, time-filling nonsense passing as news!
When news reporters start doing their job, i.e., start reporting, we won't have to depend on radio and television talk show hosts or Sunday morning news show pundits for clarification of what's happening in Washington or our state's capitol. We're intelligent. We're educated. We can figure it out for ourselves if they will just give us the facts.
In the meantime, we all need to heed the advice our our high school English teacher who admonished us when we were quoting some source to support the theme of our essay to "Consider the source." We need to think for ourselves, insist on facts, and champion honesty and transparency in news reports and press releases from our elected officials.
We can then be our own demagogues and ideologues -- after we get the facts.
Friday, September 11, 2009
ON THE LIGHTER SIDE
This joke from the pages of The Mountain, a Woodlawn Park, Colorado publication. It was just too good not to share.
Three old ladies named Gertrude, Maude and Tilly were sitting on a park bench having a quiet conversation when a flasher approached from across the park. The flasher came up to the ladies, stood right in front of them and opened his trench coat.
Gertrude immediately had a stroke.
Then Maude also had a stroke.
But Tilly, being older and more feeble, couldn't reach that far.
Bless her heart.
Three old ladies named Gertrude, Maude and Tilly were sitting on a park bench having a quiet conversation when a flasher approached from across the park. The flasher came up to the ladies, stood right in front of them and opened his trench coat.
Gertrude immediately had a stroke.
Then Maude also had a stroke.
But Tilly, being older and more feeble, couldn't reach that far.
Bless her heart.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
WHY AREN'T REPUBLICANS HAPPIER?
I am not a political pundit for one party or the other nor am I, for that matter, one who even favors one political party over the other. I find honorable people in both parties; I also find mean-spirited, thieving scoundrels with the morals of a dog holding positions of high esteem in both parties. I can't figure that out but I guess that's politics.
That said, I do listen to the various news programs and recently while without television I have had to lean more and more on talk radio for entertainment. Notice that I did not say I listened for enlightenment or for the news. There is no news on talk radio. There is entertainment ... if you don't take what they say too much to heart and can laugh at the absurdity of some comments.
Talk radio hosts spend most of their time picking to pieces some tiny bit of news with which, they hope, they can provoke people to call in and help them fill a half hour of broadcast time. After exhausting their listeners' patience with that non-topic-of-interest they will move on to another bit of trivia taken out of context and manage to worry it to death with the same enthusiasm of a dog with a terry cloth doll.
When they (both liberal and conservative talk show hosts) can find nothing about the opposition to pick to death, they turn to attack the comments of fellow radio talk show personalities. It is a demanding job: filling three hours of talk every day. So demanding, in fact, that listeners quickly learn that it cannot be done without resorting to a lot of double talk, a lot of self promotion and a great deal of the nonsense mentioned above.
So, any intelligent listener realizes after a day or two that the hosts are not commenting on or providing any insight into the workings of Washington or any level of government, nor on any of the political figures of importance there. They are simply arguing among themselves -- to fill their allotted daily three hour time slot or whatever time slot they have. All but the brain dead (or truly indoctrinated ditto heads) tune them out after awhile, maybe to tune in later to see what they are ranting about today.
The time it takes to realize that these conservative and progressive talk show hosts offer only entertainment (and precious little of that after a while) and no real information or insight depends directly on the intelligence of the listener.
I notice that several of the conservative talk show hosts seem to spend much of their time getting angry, even shouting as if the person of their discontent was in the broadcast booth but not paying attention. One of the things they have been shouting about lately, as you might expect, is the president's health care reform proposal. And, interestingly, they seem to be in agreement that (1) it will destroy the nation, (2) it will ruin Obama's political future, and (3) the Democratic Party will shrink into oblivion after the mid-term elections.
Well, if you were a hard-core Republican that would make me happy, wouldn't you think? Of the three predictions only the dire prediction about about destroying the country would be cause for concern. I suspect that many people do not believe that, regardless of their party affiliation, because they hear the same song every four years from the party currently out of power. But the other two predictions it would seem should make any Republican or conservative very, very happy. Obama is destroying himself and the Democratic party. What more could you ask for?
You didn't want Obama in the White House in the first place. You are convinced he is leading the country down the wrong path (the assumption being, always, that there is another path and you know where it is). So why not rejoice? He is going to self-destruct according to the Republican party Minister of Propaganda.
Still, so many of the Republican and conservative talk show hosts seem angry and unhappy about the way things are going. I don't understand why.
Cheer up Republicans. President Obama is going to lead you back into control of the country and you can straighten out the mess created by him during the last eight months.
That said, I do listen to the various news programs and recently while without television I have had to lean more and more on talk radio for entertainment. Notice that I did not say I listened for enlightenment or for the news. There is no news on talk radio. There is entertainment ... if you don't take what they say too much to heart and can laugh at the absurdity of some comments.
Talk radio hosts spend most of their time picking to pieces some tiny bit of news with which, they hope, they can provoke people to call in and help them fill a half hour of broadcast time. After exhausting their listeners' patience with that non-topic-of-interest they will move on to another bit of trivia taken out of context and manage to worry it to death with the same enthusiasm of a dog with a terry cloth doll.
When they (both liberal and conservative talk show hosts) can find nothing about the opposition to pick to death, they turn to attack the comments of fellow radio talk show personalities. It is a demanding job: filling three hours of talk every day. So demanding, in fact, that listeners quickly learn that it cannot be done without resorting to a lot of double talk, a lot of self promotion and a great deal of the nonsense mentioned above.
So, any intelligent listener realizes after a day or two that the hosts are not commenting on or providing any insight into the workings of Washington or any level of government, nor on any of the political figures of importance there. They are simply arguing among themselves -- to fill their allotted daily three hour time slot or whatever time slot they have. All but the brain dead (or truly indoctrinated ditto heads) tune them out after awhile, maybe to tune in later to see what they are ranting about today.
The time it takes to realize that these conservative and progressive talk show hosts offer only entertainment (and precious little of that after a while) and no real information or insight depends directly on the intelligence of the listener.
I notice that several of the conservative talk show hosts seem to spend much of their time getting angry, even shouting as if the person of their discontent was in the broadcast booth but not paying attention. One of the things they have been shouting about lately, as you might expect, is the president's health care reform proposal. And, interestingly, they seem to be in agreement that (1) it will destroy the nation, (2) it will ruin Obama's political future, and (3) the Democratic Party will shrink into oblivion after the mid-term elections.
Well, if you were a hard-core Republican that would make me happy, wouldn't you think? Of the three predictions only the dire prediction about about destroying the country would be cause for concern. I suspect that many people do not believe that, regardless of their party affiliation, because they hear the same song every four years from the party currently out of power. But the other two predictions it would seem should make any Republican or conservative very, very happy. Obama is destroying himself and the Democratic party. What more could you ask for?
You didn't want Obama in the White House in the first place. You are convinced he is leading the country down the wrong path (the assumption being, always, that there is another path and you know where it is). So why not rejoice? He is going to self-destruct according to the Republican party Minister of Propaganda.
Still, so many of the Republican and conservative talk show hosts seem angry and unhappy about the way things are going. I don't understand why.
Cheer up Republicans. President Obama is going to lead you back into control of the country and you can straighten out the mess created by him during the last eight months.
IRRITATING SPEECH MANNERISMS
Have we become so inarticulate a nation that we cannot speak without resorting to the irritating speech mannerisms of a sixteen-year-old valley girl? I refer to the annoying habit by some, both young people and adults, of inserting the phrase You know between every other word they speak.
"I think, you know, that the president, you know, should drop all this, you know, crap about, you know, a universal health plan. No one, you know, really wants it. He is, you know, destroying his, you know, political future and that, you know, of the Democratic party, you know."
I may have exaggerated a bit, but you get the point.
The same people, like, have to, you know, insert the word like between, you know, the other words they, like, speak.
Good god, if you don't know what you want to say and cannot say it without all these oral pauses, then you might consider just not saying anything. At the very least wait until you have gathered your thoughts and can speak in coherent sentences.
As Abraham Lincoln said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
"I think, you know, that the president, you know, should drop all this, you know, crap about, you know, a universal health plan. No one, you know, really wants it. He is, you know, destroying his, you know, political future and that, you know, of the Democratic party, you know."
I may have exaggerated a bit, but you get the point.
The same people, like, have to, you know, insert the word like between, you know, the other words they, like, speak.
Good god, if you don't know what you want to say and cannot say it without all these oral pauses, then you might consider just not saying anything. At the very least wait until you have gathered your thoughts and can speak in coherent sentences.
As Abraham Lincoln said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
MOUNTAIN EXERCISE PROGRAM PROGRESS
That title is a mouthful -- and a lie. There is no progress. But there is a program and I am doing it.
Exercising at this altitude (8600 feet, according to my Lowrance GPS) takes a lot more effort and burns a lot more oxygen than at lower altitudes. Hence, for people like me with coronary problems that extra demand for oxygen is hard to satisfy. Nevertheless, I try to do the exercises I recommended to you last week three times a week. Today was the first time this week.
Today was the first time this week because we were away on vacation visiting family in Denver over the Labor Day weekend. I don't usually exercise when visiting at other people's houses. It's embarrassing when you vomit on their carpet or fall exhausted on the floor. (That doesn't actually happen, but I sometimes feel as if I might collapse on the floor and I would rather do that in my own house.)
To report: I managed to get through 20 minutes of the program before running out of steam. I could not go on. The demand for oxygen on my lungs was more than I could supply.
Plus, I add some exercises to the program I hope you printed out. Year before last I had a problem with my left shoulder. My orthopedist suspected a torn rotator cuff. After several weeks of therapy we settled on surgery as the final option. My cardiologist, however, vetoed that option because I was on Plavix due to having recently had two coated stents installed. So, we went back to an exercise regimen designed to help strengthen the shoulder muscles and, hopefully, allow the shoulder problem to heal with surgery.
I still do those exercises as they seem to be helping; I have almost full range of motion in my left shoulder.
After 20 minutes of exercise this morning my body said, "Enough!"
I must share with you, however, the joy of doing exercises on the deck of our mountain retreat. On clear, crisp dry mornings like this one (sunny and 59 degrees), I prefer to do my exercises out on the deck in the fresh mountain air. Below is a view of the valley I get to enjoy when looking to the southwest.
And, yes, we are starting to see some "color" in the Aspen trees. Fall is rapidly approaching here in the high country.
Yesterday after arriving home from Denver we found ourselves house bound for a while when an afternoon shower raced through the area dropping large and very cold drops of water. I was outside re-loading the bird feeder when the rain started and I was chilled to the bone before I could get inside. Fortunately, though, I got inside before the hail started. We were pelted with marble-sized hail (some smaller) and, I swear, a few snow flakes.
True to life in the mountains, the storm passed and 30 minutes or so later the sun was out. The temperature, unfortunately, remained cool through the evening and I was compelled to build a fire in the fireplace this morning to take the chill off. I can't get my wife to run around the house naked when the outside temperature is below 40, as it was this morning. (I can't get my wife to run around the house naked anytime, regardless of the temperature, but it's one of several fantasies I harbor.)
NEWS FROM THE BIRD FEEDER: The stellar blue jays continue to be frustrated in their desire to get to the bird feeder trays and gorge themselves on the seeds there. That they find plenty of seeds on the ground -- the other birds flip out the larger seeds such as sunflower seeds that they can't eat -- does not sway them from wanting to feed at the trough. To this end one jay we have name Jake has found that he can fly up to seed tray from underneath the shelter ledges I added to keep the jays out and then by gripping the tray, while hanging upside down, he can arch his head over and grab a few seeds before gravity forces him to let go and drop to the ground. He is determined even though he could, no doubt, get more seeds easier on the ground. He is also comical to watch.
The stellar jays were joined this morning by three mountain scrub jays. Don't know where they came from, but they are welcome.
Exercising at this altitude (8600 feet, according to my Lowrance GPS) takes a lot more effort and burns a lot more oxygen than at lower altitudes. Hence, for people like me with coronary problems that extra demand for oxygen is hard to satisfy. Nevertheless, I try to do the exercises I recommended to you last week three times a week. Today was the first time this week.
Today was the first time this week because we were away on vacation visiting family in Denver over the Labor Day weekend. I don't usually exercise when visiting at other people's houses. It's embarrassing when you vomit on their carpet or fall exhausted on the floor. (That doesn't actually happen, but I sometimes feel as if I might collapse on the floor and I would rather do that in my own house.)
To report: I managed to get through 20 minutes of the program before running out of steam. I could not go on. The demand for oxygen on my lungs was more than I could supply.
Plus, I add some exercises to the program I hope you printed out. Year before last I had a problem with my left shoulder. My orthopedist suspected a torn rotator cuff. After several weeks of therapy we settled on surgery as the final option. My cardiologist, however, vetoed that option because I was on Plavix due to having recently had two coated stents installed. So, we went back to an exercise regimen designed to help strengthen the shoulder muscles and, hopefully, allow the shoulder problem to heal with surgery.
I still do those exercises as they seem to be helping; I have almost full range of motion in my left shoulder.
After 20 minutes of exercise this morning my body said, "Enough!"
I must share with you, however, the joy of doing exercises on the deck of our mountain retreat. On clear, crisp dry mornings like this one (sunny and 59 degrees), I prefer to do my exercises out on the deck in the fresh mountain air. Below is a view of the valley I get to enjoy when looking to the southwest.
And, yes, we are starting to see some "color" in the Aspen trees. Fall is rapidly approaching here in the high country.
Yesterday after arriving home from Denver we found ourselves house bound for a while when an afternoon shower raced through the area dropping large and very cold drops of water. I was outside re-loading the bird feeder when the rain started and I was chilled to the bone before I could get inside. Fortunately, though, I got inside before the hail started. We were pelted with marble-sized hail (some smaller) and, I swear, a few snow flakes.
True to life in the mountains, the storm passed and 30 minutes or so later the sun was out. The temperature, unfortunately, remained cool through the evening and I was compelled to build a fire in the fireplace this morning to take the chill off. I can't get my wife to run around the house naked when the outside temperature is below 40, as it was this morning. (I can't get my wife to run around the house naked anytime, regardless of the temperature, but it's one of several fantasies I harbor.)
NEWS FROM THE BIRD FEEDER: The stellar blue jays continue to be frustrated in their desire to get to the bird feeder trays and gorge themselves on the seeds there. That they find plenty of seeds on the ground -- the other birds flip out the larger seeds such as sunflower seeds that they can't eat -- does not sway them from wanting to feed at the trough. To this end one jay we have name Jake has found that he can fly up to seed tray from underneath the shelter ledges I added to keep the jays out and then by gripping the tray, while hanging upside down, he can arch his head over and grab a few seeds before gravity forces him to let go and drop to the ground. He is determined even though he could, no doubt, get more seeds easier on the ground. He is also comical to watch.
The stellar jays were joined this morning by three mountain scrub jays. Don't know where they came from, but they are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
