R E S P E C T

We have all had it happen.  We write a post with the best of intentions, with no harm intended, then BAM!  Out of the clear blue, commenters are blowing up our email boxes, chat pages, Facebook pages and blog comments. It can get ugly. Most of my writing is about politics, both domestic and international, and social issues such as bigotry, racism, gun regulation, education, etc.  Those are the things that interest me and the areas that I have the most knowledge about.  I also try to inject a humorous piece once or twice a week, because we all need to remember to take a deep breath and laugh sometimes.  Of late, a large portion of my writing has pertained to the U.S. political scene, because it is an election year, and frankly the craziest one in the history of our nation.  That said, it is inevitable that I will sometimes strike a nerve, step on a toe. Yesterday, I published two posts, both of which stirred volatile emotions, disrespect and the loss of at least one long-time friend, not here on WordPress, but on my Facebook page, on private chats, and via e-mail.  So, I am taking this opportunity to briefly put forth my thoughts on that.

Popeye-2First, I do not ever write with the intention of hurting the feelings of a reader or friend.  In fact, I am very cautious about that and always try to be respectful, use facts and keep emotions to a minimum.  It is why I generally try to avoid religion in my writing. When I do rant, and yes, sometimes I do, I tag the post as a rant, and have even been known to put a comment on my Facebook page to that effect.  Still, the nature of the topics I write about tends to be controversial.  The majority of readers of this blog share many of my thoughts and beliefs, though a few do not.  I welcome all comments, pro, con, or neutral, and I do try to consider all sides.  That is the best I can do, folks. In the words of the immortal Popeye the Sailor Man, “I yam what I yam …”

I write about things I care about and things I believe in, and I will continue to do so.   I realize I will not likely change the world, but I will not give up trying. If anybody is ever offended by what I write, I would like to hear about it, hear the other point of view, but in a calm, thoughtful and respectful manner. This election season has been divisive, and with another 90+ days is going to get a lot crazier than it already is.  We each have our own ideas and opinions.  When I ask a person to clarify or expound on an opinion, I do so because I am trying to understand, not because I am belittling that person.  I will never intentionally belittle anybody nor hurt another person’s feelings, but inevitably it happens from time-to-time.

These are things that should go without saying, but after yesterday I thought perhaps they need to be said after all.  We will never all see the world and the issues through exactly the same eyes.  But there is absolutely no reason to be disrespectful, either to a blog writer or commenter.  There is room for reasoned debate, for an open exchange of ideas, but only if we can talk to each other without name-calling, mud-slinging, accusations and disrespect. Again, this is more for e-mail and Facebook readers, but I just thought it was a good time to say these things.  I am certain I am not the only blogger who has had similar situations.  Now … back to work …

The Supreme Court Becomes a Political Pawn

“Justice Antonin Scalia, whose transformative legal theories, vivid writing and outsize personality made him a leader of a conservative intellectual renaissance in his three decades on the Supreme Court, was found dead on Saturday at a resort in West Texas, according to a statement from Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. He was 79.” (New York Times, 13 February 2016).  Scalia was intelligent and best known for his “caustic dissents that alienated even potential allies.”  Although I rarely agreed with his opinion, he being a conservative and a textualist, I respected his intellect, enjoyed reading his acerbic opinions, and the Supreme Court is a little less bright now.  That said, it is not my intent to eulogize nor criticize the man, but to address a conflict that began brewing within minutes of the news of his death being announced.

Article Two of the United States Constitution places the power of appointing Justices with the President of the United States, stating:

“he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law…”

It is clearly the responsibility of President Obama to nominate a candidate to fill the vacancy left by Justice Scalia’s death.  However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a statement that the Senate controlled by his party should not confirm a replacement for Scalia until after the election.  Presidential candidate Ben Carson reiterated McConnell’s stance.  President Obama still has nearly eleven months left to serve as President of the United States, and it makes no sense whatsoever to wait that long to replace Scalia.  Obviously, the republicans are hoping to see one of their own elected as president in November, but never mind that it seems a long shot at this time, the issue here is whether it makes sense to leave the vacancy open for that long.

The Supreme Court consists of nine justices … now there are eight.  Not only does this create a possibility of a tie when deciding and ruling on cases, but under the circumstances, it creates a great probability that there will be ties in many cases over the coming months.  Why?  Because of the remaining eight justices, four are conservative (Kennedy, Roberts, Thomas, Alito) and four are liberal (Kagan, Sotomayer, Ginsburg, Breyer).  Some highly controversial issues are on the docket for the coming months:  abortion, affirmative action, the rights of religious objectors to the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act, the president’s powers on immigration, and deportation.  An eight-member court could very well be deadlocked on all of these issues.

While it is extremely unusual for a Supreme Court vacancy to be unfilled for a long period of time, it is not without precedent.  The longest was 2 years, 3 months and 18 days in a situation similar to the current one.  When Justice Henry Baldwin died April 21, 1844, John Tyler was president.  Followers of Henry Clay, believing he would be elected, voted to postpone consideration of all Tyler’s appointments.  Clay lost the election to James K. Polk at the end of 1844, but Polk’s first appointments were also rejected, thus it would be August 1846 before the Senate finally confirmed Robert C. Grier to fill the position.  (American Political Leaders 1789-2005, CQ Press Editors, 2005)

President Obama stated that he will nominate a Supreme Court Justice “in due time”, that it is his responsibility and that of the Senate to do so.  The reason, according to McConnell’s argument, that the next president should be the one to make the nomination, is to “give the voters a say in the selection”, but the fallacy in that is that the voters have no say whether President Obama or the next president make the appointment.  Unless, that is, it becomes a campaign issue.  The Supreme Court, by the nature of the Constitution, is the one branch of the federal government that is specifically not intended to be subject to the whims of politics.  That is why justices are appointed for lifetime terms, so that they will not face re-election, not be tempted by the corruption that is inherent in the political process.  So it would be unconstitutional to allow the nomination and appointment of a justice to become a political issue.

There is no doubt that, unless President Obama is able to pull a rabbit out of his hat and appoint a candidate who is unarguably acceptable to the republican controlled Senate, that same Senate will do everything in its power to block his appointments.  It is an abominable state of affairs when one party brings the wheels of justice to a screeching halt, but I fear that is what is going to happen.  And all for naught, as it is highly unlikely at this point that a republican will become the next elected president.  But alas, they must play their little games, and we, the citizens, must pay the price.

Still Cleaning Out Cobwebs …

More tidbits, since I am still awaiting the arrival of a replacement part for my brain, as I clean out cobwebs:

  • At least it isn’t Monday. When I woke up this morning, I thought it was Saturday, and I was happy.  Though I am retired, Saturday is still a special day in my house.  It means that my daughter, Chris, is home.  First, we enjoy having her home, but also, second, it means that she takes care of the morning chores of scooping the kitty litter boxes, cleaning the bathroom and kitchen, and taking out the trash.  Third, it means we will probably be going out to eat and to the local Barnes & Noble bookstore in the afternoon.  So Saturday is special.  But … then I put on my glasses and looked at my phone that seemed to have a smirk on its face as it informed me that it is Thursday, January 28th, 2016.    But then … it could be worse … it could be Monday!  Hit the snooze button … maybe in another 15 minutes it will be Saturday?
  • There are, as best I can figure, though I am having trouble keeping up with the roster, twelve republican candidates still in the 2016 presidential race (why are Fiorina and Carson still there?). One thing that none of them seem to understand is that they are going to be competing, if you will, against either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders (and possibly Michael Bloomberg, should he decide to run as an independent candidate).  They will not in any way, shape or form, be competing against the incumbent, President Barack Obama.  These twelve individuals are really confused!  They must honestly believe that their main competition is President Obama, as their ads, their rhetoric and their biases all point to what they call the “failed presidency” of President Obama.  WHY???  He is what is called a “lame duck”, meaning he has little power to make decisions beyond what will be effected during the next eleven months or so.  Why are they so concerned with trying to convince the public that President Obama is the root of all evil?  Shouldn’t they be focusing on trying to prove their worth vis a vis Clinton and Sanders?
  • So, Donald Trump was not in tonight’s GOP debate on Fox? I didn’t watch it, but not because of anything to do with Trump … I haven’t watched any of them because I find that I cannot sit idly watching a small rectangular box without either shooting (that’s shooting, not shouting) or other fun action taking place on said box.  I find that I am better able to understand what is said by reading the transcript (many, many thanks to The Washington Post for providing me with annotated and accurate transcripts for every debate) the day after the dust has settled.  That said, I was happy to hear that Trump was bowing out of this debate … perhaps the other candidates actually had their voices heard (not that they had anything of value to say) with the head trumpeter not on stage.  And on this topic, I am curious as to how that trumpeter thinks he will deal with Vladimir Putin, Bashir al Assad, Kim Jong-Un and the rest if he cannot even bear to face journalist Megyn Kelly for two hours!  But … so be it.  He did himself no favours, but perhaps did Ted Cruz a small favour by not showing up.
  • If, as most are predicting now, Donald Trump (the aforementioned trumpeter) should gain the GOP nomination later this year, who will be his running mate? This seems to be a burning question in the “enquiring minds that want to know”.  (Yes, I am feeling very snarky tonight, in case you are just now noticing).  I am thinking that there is some reason that Sarah Palin, the “Bimbo Who Came In From The Cold”, so vigorously endorsed Trump, and that is that she is still hoping to be a VP.  Trump-Palin … Clown-Bimbo … Buffoon-Floozy … I don’t know … just none of these really work for me.  Guess we will just have to wait and see.  Other choices besides Palin?  (Oh please, please, please that there ARE some other choices!) … Cruz-Christie … Cruz-Kasich … Rubio-Paul ???
  • Tiger Lily, the Evil Kitty … lives in our home. She is a beautiful, very petite, part-Persian grey/black tiger-striped two year-old kitty.  She is beautiful … on the outside.  She is pure evil on the inside.  She begs to be petted … puts her adorable, furry head right under your hand, just begging for a stroke or two, a bit of attention.  But BEWARE!!!  As soon as you touch her fur you are DOOMED!  I have the scars to prove it.  Anyone need a companion of the furry sort?

As I may have mentioned earlier, I am in a snarky mood tonight, and most of the above probably reflects that mood.  In large part it is due to the constant and steady flow of political “news” that passes in front of my eyes in the course of the day.  In part it is because I woke up thinking it was Saturday when it was really only Thursday.  In part it is because I ate too much fried rice for dinner, and in part it is just because I am a human being who is daily confronted with the same limitations we all face from time to time and sometimes, rarely, but sometimes, this bothers me.  At any rate … until tomorrow … thanks for checking in here and I will try to post something more meaningful tomorrow!

Filosofa’s Hit-And-Run News

Most of my regular followers know that I am a news junkie, an addict, if you will. I scan a wide variety of legitimate news sources (no, dear readers, Fox is not one of them … I said “legitimate”, did I not?) and I troll for fodder for the blog (and sustenance for my mind) for a couple of hours every day. Typically, I choose one or maybe two news events to use for my daily blog post and save the others for a rainy (news-less) day. As if there will ever come that day! At any rate, today I am using a hodge-podge of news stories from this morning and spouting what I refer to as a “hit-and-run” on each. This is a simple, off-the-cuff comment based on my initial reaction to the story or headline. This rather laid back approach rather than my usual, more in-depth analysis, is basically a result of a day spent trying to recover from the holiday weekend and prepare for the next holiday weekend which will begin in approximately 66 hours! So on to the news for 28 December 2015:

• Carly Fiorina in response to Donald Trump calling Bill Clinton “sexist”: “Yes, Bill Clinton is fair game, but my point is attacking Bill Clinton won’t defeat Hillary Clinton. The only way to defeat Hillary Clinton is to attack Hillary Clinton’s track record.”

o So, attack is the only way to win the presidential election? Not putting forth policies and ideologies that are better than the other guy’s, but simply attack? In this way, the candidate really doesn’t need a platform, right? All he/she needs to do is attack, ridicule and mock his/her opponent!

• Donald Trump regarding Virginia RNC about “loyalty oath” not letting democrats vote in the republican primary: “It begins, Republican Party of Virginia, controlled by the RNC, is working hard to disallow independent, unaffiliated and new voters. BAD!”

o Frankly, the democrats have two very capable and qualified candidates from which to choose, certainly more so than any in the republican camp, especially Donald Trump! Actually, though, if democrats were allowed to vote in the republican primary, they might actually vote for Trump, as every vote for Trump increases the likelihood of a win for either Clinton or Sanders.

• Dr. Ben Carson on the campaign to win the republican party nomination: “Obviously, going through a process like this is pretty brutal.”

o It’s okay, Ben … it’s over now. All you need to do is go pick up your hat from the ring and go home. They won’t pick on you any more once you do that.

• “The number of Americans killed in gun homicides on Christmas Day is comparable to the number of people killed in gun homicides in an entire year in places like Australia or Britain.” (The Washington Post, 28 Dec 2015)

o We are certainly the luckiest nation on earth for having nearly-unrestricted “rights” to own and carry firearms, yes?

• “A grand jury declined to bring charges against either of the two police officers involved in the fatal November 2014 shooting of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old boy who was playing with a toy weapon in a Cleveland park.” (The New York Times, 28 Dec 2015)

o As you might well figure, there will be an entire post about this, but for now … @#$%

• Donald Trump on Vladimir Putin: “I think the biggest thing we have is that we were on ’60 Minutes’ together and we had fantastic ratings. One of your best-rated shows in a long time. I think that I would at the same time get along very well with him.”

o That’s great, Don! Why don’t you go over to Russia and help him destroy Russia instead of asking him to help you destroy the U.S.?

• Vladimir Putin on Donald Trump: “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.” (Politico, 17 Dec 2015)

o Highly respected???  Since when?  Are we speaking of the same Donald Trump???  Of course Putin would like to see Trump win! It would ensure that he (Putin) would have no resistance or obstacles from the U.S. in his future quests to build the empire he envisions, similar to the USSR.

Okay, so that’s it for today, folks! Stay tuned for more …

Leave the Children ALONE!

Politics is messy. It is dirty. It is brutal. Those who choose to run for office are fully aware of this and, with few exceptions, better be prepared to be called every name in the book, to be ridiculed, mocked, threatened, and maybe even have a tomato or two thrown at them. It is the American Way. If you cannot take the heat, then get out of the kitchen. I do not feel sorry for any of the candidates running for president in next year’s election. All have taken their fair share of criticism and much of it was well-deserved on both sides of the aisle. BUT …. the candidate’s families, and especially their children should not be forced to pay the price. Leave the children out of it!!!

The most recent breach of this unwritten rule was a cartoon in very poor taste in the Washington Post on Tuesday, December 22, 2015, depicting Senator Ted Cruz’ two daughters, ages 7 and 9 as trained monkeys on leashes. Shame on the Washington Post! Criticize Trump’s bad toupee, Christie’s weight, Hillary’s need for a bathroom break if you must, though I find this juvenile chatter to be pointless,  but do not touch on their children! It is very difficult for the children of a politician to have a “normal” childhood as it is. They should never be put into the spotlight by the media … it is in extremely poor taste and further, it may even place the children in danger from some lunatic in possession of one of the 310,000,000 civilian-owned guns who happens not to like Cruz and decides to take matters into his own hands.

That said, it was in equally poor taste on the part of Sen. Cruz to exploit his daughters in an equally poor taste political advertisement, which was cartoonist Ann Telnaes’ poor excuse for her cartoon. Shame on Senator Cruz!  Mr. Cruz must, indeed, bear some of the blame, however Ms. Telnaes, as a member of the press, and her editors at the Washington Post, must bear the lion’s share. Simply put, two wrongs do not make a right. Senator Cruz needs to be taken to task by the leadership of the GOP as well as by his wife. Were I his wife, he would absolutely never have been allowed to exploit his children, exposing them to ridicule and to danger, but thankfully I am not his wife.

Ultimately the Washington Post did the right thing and took down the cartoon. I hope that Ms. Telnaes will be disciplined for her poor judgement and that the Cruz family will receive a written apology. Through the years, the Post has been one of about 5-6 news sources that I scour daily, and I have always found them to be fair and to exercise reasonably sound judgement. This fiasco was reminiscent of something I would expect from Fox or one of the other less reputable news sources. Admittedly, this has been a very heated campaign year and many of the rules seem to have gone out the window. I don’t necessarily like it nor approve of it, but I understand it, and I save my commentary on that issue for another day, another post. I draw the line, however at involving the candidate’s children. Period. There is no excuse, there are no “if’s”, “ands” or “buts”. The kids are off-limits and the media need to recognize and adhere to this, even when the candidates themselves have not the good sense to do so. Let us hope that the Post has learned a lesson, that the candidates have learned a lesson, and that any other media outlet tempted to follow suit will heed the same lesson.

My Opinion on …. Opinions!

A friend has suggested on a few occasions that I should “tone it down” and stop posting about controversial topics such as politics and religion.  A couple of points here:  a) this is a well-educated friend, a published author, and I like and generally respect her, so I let what she says wash over me without responding, and b) I rarely post about religion, as whatever view I post I am almost certain to offend more of my friends than I would like.  When I do post about either religion or gun control, I do not share those posts on Facebook, meaning people have to actually make the effort to travel to my blog and then choose to either read or not read it.  So, while I respect and like my friend, I continue to write, muse and opine, because that is what I do.  A few days ago this friend said, as part of her own musings, that we should all stop opinion-sharing, that it is pointless and offensive, and keeps people from living peaceful lives.  I did not and will not respond on this to my friend, as I already walk a fine line between writing what I see/think/know, and offending friends.  However, here, in my own venue, my own little corner of the virtual world, I must disagree.

 

All of humanity both offer and receive opinions every day in the normal course of our lives, from the simplest “Does the stew need more salt?” to the reading of political or social editorial opinions online and in print.  Opinions are inevitable, which in no way means that we need to be swayed by every opinion we hear, but frankly it is always good to listen to a wide variety and then go with our own instinct.  Most often, being fairly (strongly?) opinionated person, I have already formulated an opinion on, say, a story in the news, such as the University of Missouri story about which I wrote a week ago.  However I still read the opinions of others and think about them, whether I agree or not. Only on occasion do I alter my own opinion, but as with the aforementioned story, I sometimes do.  Interestingly, the opinions I offer on my blog are generally well-received, leading me to think that people tend not to read or follow bloggers with whom they aren’t philosophically “in sync”.  On the other hand, my published Op-Ed pieces get much more of a mixed review, with some even making extremely disparaging remarks about me, my ancestors, and … well, you get the picture.  Luckily I am a pragmatist with pretty tough skin most of the time and am able to laugh it off, else I wouldn’t be doing what I do.

 

Okay, so I am rambling and should really make my point.  My point is simple … opinions are a part of daily life.  Like it, don’t like it … doesn’t matter.  My own opinion in this case is that listening to the opinions of others is necessary and desirable as long as, at the end of the day you are making your decisions based on what you think, not what somebody else tells you to think.  And offering informed and educated opinions is also necessary and desirable as long as the opinions you offer are informed and educated opinions and they are offered in a moderate way, without extreme temper, profanity, etc.  That is the beauty of living in a nation where free speech is not only a right, but is encouraged, but the trap is when people start spouting opinion without compassion and without any knowledge of the topic on which they are opining.

 

There are, of course,  certain things on which  opinions should not be offered, such as personal issues (dress, appearance, relationships), child-rearing, etc. except when asked for, and sometimes not even then.  Use compassion and common sense.  Balance truth with kindness.  For example, when your wife asks “Does this dress make me look fat?” there are two possible answers:

  • No, honey, that dress looks gorgeous on you, but you are the one that makes the dress beautiful, or
  • Not any more than any of your other clothes

I leave it to you to figure out which one will lead to you sleeping alone on the couch tonight!

 

So, after listening to my friend’s opinion and giving this some thought, I conclude that sharing of opinions is as necessary to humans as any other form of speech, and it is not the evil that my friend seems to think it is. But that, of course, is only my opinion.

On Dr. Ben Carson

Yesterday, when my granddaughter brought in the mail, there was a fat envelope from the campaign offices of Dr. Ben Carson with his picture prominently displayed on the front of the envelope. I frequently tease her about bringing in nothing but “junk mail”, so she wasn’t surprised when I gave her a mock-stern look and said “do you know who this is from and where it should go?” I explained to her that this was a campaign solicitation for Dr. Ben Carson, a renowned medical professional turned radical right-wing politician who is planning to run for the republican nomination for president in 2016. I further explained that Dr. Carson has been an extremely vitriolic critic of President Obama, going so far as to refer to him as a psychopath. My granddaughter is a smart girl and she picked the envelope up with two fingers, rather as one might a rag that had been used to clean the dog’s rear end, and tossed it in the appropriate place, the trash can.

Dr. Ben Carson has earned numerous awards in the field of medicine and he was the first surgeon to successfully separate conjoined twins joined at the head. He was the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital. At 33, he became the youngest major division director in the hospital’s history as director of pediatric neurosurgery. There can be no doubt that Dr. Carson was an excellent and dedicated physician. He retired from the medical field in July 2013 and has recently thrown his hat in the ever-growing ring of GOP presidential hopefuls. It is too bad he didn’t stick with medicine and stay out of politics, as he is now merely another addition to the radical right wing of the Republican Party. Dr. Carson has very limited knowledge of international relations, which is critical in today’s global environment. During a recent briefing on the political system of Israel, Dr. Carson appeared bored and commented that “It sounds complex,” he finally said. “Why don’t they just adopt the system we have?” Sure, Doc, let’s just suggest that to Mr. Netanyahu! Run it up the ol’ flagpole, as they say, and see if it flies. Recently, the Carson campaign has lost four of its senior advisors who have not yet been replaced. Based on some of these comments and gaffes, it would seem that this man is in serious need of some level-headed and politically educated advisors. Now without further ado, let us get to know Candidate Carson.

• Carson is against the legalization of recreational cannabis. He believes it to be a gateway drug that leads to “hedonistic activity”. Hedonistic activity??? Really, Ben, who uses that term anymore? And do you honestly believe that the legalization of pot is more likely to lead to “hedonistic activity” any more than alcohol consumption, which has been legal ever since the ratification of the 21st amendment to the Constitution in 1933, repealing prohibition?

• He stated that he is strongly in favor of the Second Amendment. He also said that if in a position of national authority, he would allow citizens to own any weapons, including automatic and semi-automatic guns that they could buy. Wonderful, Ben, let’s have everybody running around toting sub-machine guns in Kroger!

• He claimed that the ACA (commonly known as Obamacare) originated with Vladimir Lenin, and quoted Lenin as saying that “socialized medicine is the keystone to the establishment of a socialist state”. There is no evidence that Lenin actually said this, and it was ill-advised for Carson to say it, as well.

• He supports a flat tax, which he calls the “proportional tax”. The problems with a flat tax are far too numerous and complex to cover in this essay, but my point in mentioning this is that Dr. Carson is not an economist and obviously doesn’t understand the impact such a taxation policy would have on the infamous 99%. Again, he needs to hire some qualified advisors soon!

• He considers political correctness to be “dangerous”, because it “goes against freedom of expression”. What is political correctness other than common courtesy toward those who are different, whether of a different race, religion, body style, gender orientation, or nationality?

• “Being president”, Carson says, “ain’t exactly brain surgery”. No, it sure “ain’t”, Ben, though I think each has specific qualifications and the two “ain’t” the same. I’m sure Dr. Carson was a highly qualified neurosurgeon, but he “ain’t” got the qualifications to be president.

• “Like most psychopaths,” Carson grumbled. “That’s why they’re successful. That’s the way they look. They all look great.” Said in reference to President Obama as he gave his sixth State of the Union address. I understand that Mr. Carson may disagree with some, or even most, of the President’s policies, but the name-calling is reminiscent of something that belongs on the kindergarten playground.

• He’s invoked bestiality and pedophilia while arguing against gay marriage, and earlier this month, during an appearance on CNN, he argued that homosexuality is a choice, “because a lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight, and when they come out, they’re gay.” (After an uproar, Carson issued an apology and declared he would no longer talk about gay rights.) Nothing like spouting a bit of rhetoric on a topic about which you obviously have no knowledge, huh?

• Railing against ACA, he declared that Obamacare is “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery” and, in fact, “is slavery, in a way.” Similarly outrageous was his contention that “we live in a Gestapo age” and that America today is “very much like Nazi Germany.” You’re kidding, right Ben? I guess history wasn’t required reading in med school.

Though he ranks fairly well in some of the early polls, the odds of Dr. Carson winning the GOP nomination next year are slim. The field is so diluted by an over-abundance of candidates as to be laughable and because of his lack of experience and knowledge in the areas of economics, law and foreign relations, he is likely to be weeded out early in the process, perhaps even in the first debate. Dr. Carson did some great things as a medical doctor, and it’s a shame he gave that up for a pie-in-the-sky dream.

Thoughts on relevancy …

There are a number of things that people ought to be concerned about on this planet, in this century. Among them are:

• The environment
• World hunger
• Terrorism (global and home-grown)
• Bigotry and discrimination
• Sustainable energy sources
• Decline in educational levels in U.S.
• Human Rights violations worldwide
• Violence and persecution in the Middle East
• Russia’s apparent intent to establish a soviet-style empire
• Gun regulation and violent crime

Note that this is my own list, roughly prioritized by my own philosophies, and everybody will have a slightly different idea of what is or isn’t important. I get that and it doesn’t bother me in the least. Obviously there are many, many more issues of importance, but I limited my list to my top ten, in hopes of finishing this article sometime today. I should also add that the health, well-being and happiness of my friends and family are high on my priority list, but I did not include them in the above list, as that is a personal priority, not a public one.

That said, let me put forth another list, this time of things that people ought NOT to be concerned about:
• Caitlyn Jenner
• Anything Kardashian
• Anything Duggar
• The amount of air in a football
• Any sports persona
• What people wear to shop at Wal-Mart
• George Clooney
• Lindsay Lohan/Miley Cyrus

Are you getting the picture? People are only relevant in my world if either a) I know them personally, or b) they are world leaders or in a position to make changes (positive or negative) in the world. By this definition, a political candidate may be considered relevant, but not his/her personal life. I do not care if he/she had an affair or smoked pot in college … it is not my business, will not affect my judgement of him/her, and I will not waste my precious time reading about it. If I read and study about just the ten issues in the first list, then I certainly don’t have time to care about any of the things in the second list. So why is it that both mainstream and social media seem to be flooding the airwaves with the “B-list” stories? Is this what we, as a society, have been reduced to? Do we not have enough to do in our own lives that we need to concern ourselves with the day-to-day trivia in the life of a total stranger?
My own criteria for determining relevancy is whether, ten years from now, it will likely still matter. Think about that and re-read the lists. I would stake my life-savings on the fact that every single item in the first list will continue being an issue in ten years and will be in history books 100 years from now. I will also bet that any name on list two will be long-forgotten, replaced by yet some other shallow sports/entertainment “celebrity” of the next decade. According to the Washington Post, there are now more than 300 “reality” shows on television. Seriously??? Television producers only produce shows that make money through advertising, and advertisers only support shows that people watch, so this means that the bulk of people are actually spending their valuable time watching other people live their lives instead of living their own lives. I find this a sad statement about our society. Does anybody else?

Merry Christmas!

I have been biting my tongue, or trying to, for weeks now and I find I cannot do so any longer. I must speak to a topic that I find important. In this, the season of JOY, of LOVE, of PEACE ON EARTH, to name a few, there certainly does seem to be a lot of hate going around. There is the usual hatred directed toward any number of politicians, which is fairly normal year-round, but this year seems worse than most. There is hatred toward certain political agendas and policies – the first one that comes to mind, of course, being the Affordable Care Act, followed by NSA security measures and trailed closely by a number of others. On the other side, there is hatred toward those who hate the above-named people and things. And then there is this inane controversy over the interview given by the man I refer to as “Papa Duck”, the man who gave an interview in which he put down the entire LGBT community. The purpose of this blog posting is NOT to promote my own opinions, so I don’t intend to give my opinions here … those of you who know me, know my opinions, and the rest of you probably don’t care. My higher purpose here is to admonish everyone who, in putting forth their own opinion, is being rude to others. Yes, I have been guilty of engaging in some of these conversations, however I hope never to the point of abusing another individual and NEVER to the point of putting down an entire group of people. It is Christmas … there is a lot to do besides posting hate-filled rhetoric on blogs and social media sites! Go bake some cookies, wrap some presents, decorate your home, drive around and look at the pretty lights, invite some friends over, go fight the crowds at the mall, light some candles and have a glass of wine while remembering the many things you have to be thankful for, volunteer a few hours in a soup kitchen or homeless shelter. Do something that has more to do with LOVE and less to do with hate!

In our ethnically diffused society, Christmas has become a holiday for all to enjoy. Since Christianity is embraced by only about 28% of the world-wide population, I think it is a wonderful thing to see Christmas being shared by anyone who wishes, regardless of religious belief. Many Jews, Muslims and atheists are known to celebrate Christmas more as a secular holiday. It is a time, I think, for sharing love, for expressing hope for a brighter future, for sharing and for giving comfort to those less fortunate. For Christians, certainly it is a time to celebrate the birth of Christ. However you view it, it is NOT a time for spewing hatred. It is NOT a time for judging people based on criteria such as race, gender-orientation, culture, or any other superficial criteria.

I would like to take this opportunity to wish a MERRY CHRISTMAS to ALL of my friends, Christian as well as non-Christian, and to ask that those of you who are angry about something find positive things to do to bring the joy back into the holiday, into your heart.