Celebrity.
Harry Truman once remarked that he was amazed at the celebrity accorded the office of the president. He was right. People will wait in the blazing sun on a summer day - or in the rain or snow on a bone-chilling winter day, just to see the president's limosine whiz by.

One can almost understand that... the president is an enormously powerful man, selected for his job by tens of millions of American voters. What I cannot understand is the incredible devotion the American public shows to some shallow people. Like Paris Hilton. Google just announced that Paris Hilton is the most frequently posted name in a Google search! What? More people want information about Paris Hilton than any other person in the world? Talk about shallow? Why in the world are people so interested in Miss Hilton?

It doesn't stop there. The recent wall to wall coverage given what was called the "TomKat" wedding... Tom Cruise and some gal named Katie, I think. Do people really care about these people?

America is awash with physically attractive people who have learned how to stand in front of a camera (TV or movie camera) or on a stage, and pretend they are someone else. That is a wonderful talent, and for that I salute them. But it isn't enough that they are paid obscene amounts for practicing their craft. The public worships these people. Even to the point where they (the public) hangs on every word as the actors/actresses speak on some subject like America's foreign policy... about which they seem to know nothing.

I appreciated Arnold Schwartzenegger some years ago, after he had starred in a movie called "Kindergarten Cop". Someone started questioning him about the care and training of pre-school children. To his great credit, Arnold quickly informed them that he was an actor reading his lines for a movie and was not an expert on kindergartners.

Celebrity does not stop with big name movie stars. People go absolutely ga-ga over anyone on radio or TV. And, they will go to any end to get their own face flashed on TV, if for only a second. The other morning when my wife was flipping through the morning "news" programs on TV , I saw these huge crowds gathered on the streets outside the studio, waving like a bunch of idiots when the cameras panned across the crowd! One can imagine that they had previously notified all the folks back home that they were going to get up early, leave their comfy hotel room, and brave the elements to stand outside the studio for two hours during the morning show.... "please watch... I'll be waving a sign that says 'Hi, Mom & Dad'."

No wonder our critics abroad think we are all nuts.

Political TV Advertising - Another Perspective

That moaning sound you hear is the collective groan of TV viewers who realize that the race for the November, 2008 election has already started. Negative TV ads work and we will see more than ever before.

But there is another group doing some groaning, and for a bit more important reason. Let me explain. To the average viewer, TV commercials may be entertaining, informative, irritating, or (too often) just plain boring.

But remember, apart from PBS, (TV's beggars), our entire TV industry is supported by advertising. All those highly paid actors, the famous news anchors, the wonderful coverage of sports and news events, and much more, are paid with advertising dollars. That gives you an idea of how important TV advertising is to some people.

Many, many businesses cannot survive without their TV advertising campaigns. And, even though a business may survive, individual salesman and other employees with incomes tied to production, may not.

To a viewer, it seems there is a never ending stream of TV commercials. Actually there is an end... a station can schedule only so many commercials, then they are out of time. There is a finite number of commercials which can be scheduled. When they have all been purchased, it is no longer possible to buy TV advertising. Never mind that your very livlihood depends on it.

So, when millions upon millions of dollars in political advertising is thrown into the mix, it puts a serious dent in the inventory of commercial TV time available, forcing many commercial advertisers out. The public hears about the rates charged advertisers for very special programs, like the Super Bowl, and think all TV advertising is very expensive. Not so. We have clients in upstate New York for whom we regularly buy TV commercials for under $40 each. Imagine what happened to the availability of commercial time when Hillary dumped $30 million into her 2006 Senate re-election campaign in New York. Yep, our clients could not buy TV advertising. It hurt them, hurt their salesmen and other workers, and it hurt us.

I am opposed to the idea of campaign finance limits, because that curtails free speech. If you want to spend all of your money promoting a political candidate, you should have the right to do that. I would like to see a law that says a TV station can sell only a certain per cent of their commercial time to political candidates (at whatever rate the political supporters are willing to pay). The rest must be reserved for commercial advertisers, the bread and butter of our economy. Get your political message across if you will. But please do not stop us from making a living.

The True Meaning Of Christmas

Every year in December, we hear a lot about the "true" meaning of Christmas. We've all heard it so many times that we instantly know what they are talking about.... that Christmas, as the birthday of Jesus Christ, is really a solemn, sacred event, and we are wrong to observe it as a fun time to hold year-end merchandise sales, exchange gifts and get drunk at office parties.

But, if one really digs into the origin of observing December 25 as "Christmas", you will find it is not quite so simple. A boistrous celebration was staged throughout Europe, near the time of the winter solstice, for centuries. It was often such a wild celebration that, at one time, Christians in England were forbidden to observe the holiday

In the fourth century, the early church, which was more powerful than any government, (even powerful enough to ban the teaching of Galileo's marvelous discoveries) rather arbitrarily chose this period to represent the birth of Christ. In truth, no one knows when Christ was born - or even where he was born, for that matter. The early records from his followers, mention shepherds tending their flocks... grazing is hardly a winter activity.

In the case of Galileo's teaching, there eventualy accumulated such a body of evidence supporting the truth of his discoveries, the church was forced to choose between looking like a bunch of fools for denying him, or to agree that Galileo was right. As the world's early experts of "spin", they then proclaimed that Galileo's discoveries were further proof of God's existence.

Well, things have also changed regarding the meaning of Christmas. (Although the church never backed off its designation as Christ's birthday). This date remains an absolutely wonderful event that brightens and warms the short days and long nights in the cold and dreary month of December, turning it into the most joyous time of the year. How many people have been rescued from winter weather induced depression by some small act of love and caring at Christmas time?

I was a child during the great depression. During most of the 1930s, my father was employed and supported our family of seven on a flat $25. a week. During December my sisters and I were filled with great anticipation of wondrous things to come. The little box of hard candy we were given at our country school. The Christmas tree we decorated with home-made ornaments. The lights that decorated city streets. And, of course, the overwhelming joy we all experienced on Christmas morning when we opened our gifts.

Today, as adults, we experience much of the same joy as we share happiness with our friends and with our grandchildren and other family members. And, indeed, Christmas is celebrated around the world by many who do not consider themselves Christians.

Surely that is the true meaning of Christmas.

And, surely I can wish you a "Merry Christmas" without concern for being politically correct, or a failure to understand the true meaning of what I have said.

Imagine! If only....

...Islam were not involved in the Middle East!

In early summer, 1947, I was on a troop ship bound from Manila, P.I. to San Francisco - by way of Okinawa and Yokohama.

At Okinawa, I remember only some small trucks that pulled up on the dock alongside our ship. We were not long in the port of Naha - just time enough to pick up some other G.I.s bound for San Francisco. I remember local girls climbing onto the back of the truck and, under their dresses, we could see they were wearing G.I., olive drab colored boxer shorts. I yearned for a place where girls wore pink panties!

The night before we arrived in Yokohama, our dinner was some sort of big, link sausage, which almost no one ate. We were probably a bit seasick. Anyway, many sausages were thrown away. On the high seas, troop ships threw their edible garbage overboard. But we were in Japanese territory, and could not dump anything. The next morning we were served pancakes. They were not very good, either, and many were thrown in the garbage.

When we had docked, small boats which looked like very large rowboats, slid in between the dock and the fantail of our ship. (The General A. W. Greely). Our soldiers who were on KP carried big (perhaps 30-gallon) stainless steel pots filled with the edible garbage that had accumulated since we had entered Japanese waters. These "garbage cans" were lined up on deck, alongside the rail.

Japanese workers from the small garbage boats, came on board our troopship and started dumping our garbage over the rail, into the waiting boats. A number of Japanese men gathered on the dock to watch. As soon as the first can of pancakes and sausages hit the boat, these men jumped into the small boats. With garbage raining down on them, they began to stuff both their shirts and their mouths with sausages and pancakes.

When they had eaten all they could eat, and their shirts were stuffed to capacity, they climbed back onto the dock and ran away. It was clear that these people were starving, and they apparently had friends or family somewhere who were also starving.

From that 1947 scene, fast-forward a couple of decades where you will see the Japanese enjoying one of the world's strongest economies. The Japanese people, who so enjoy absolute freshness in their food, live once again as a highly civilized people.

Remember, now, that these were the only people in the world who have experienced the horror of an atom bomb.

But the Japanese, not strangled by some religious ideology that had taught only hatred, went about the business of rebuilding their country. They did a magnificent job of it.

Now fly around the world to Iraq. Coalition forces invaded. Sadam was overthrown in a few days. Rebuilding of the country was undertaken. But Islamic extremists quickly tore down everything that was rebuilt. They permitted neither Coalition nor Iraqi workers to restore power and water, or rebuild any of their infrastructure.

Then followers of the various branches of Islam, started killing each other. Uncounted hundreds have died - for no reason, other than religious bigotry.

Imagine how Iraq would look today if this had not happened. Imagine Iraq without Islam!

Why all the bitter, negative political ads?

They work. So, the question should be, "Why do negative political ads work?" To simplify the answer, it is because our brains retain bad news longer than good news.

Scientists have proven this in numerous ways. Here is a simplification: Show subjects a series of pictures on a TV monitor - like a slide show. The pictures cover all sorts of things: good, bad and indifferent visuals. Then the subjects are shown a second set of pictures, and given a handheld device which they are instructed to click every time they recall that a picture in the second batch also appeared in the first batch. It is a test of which kinds of pictures they recall accurately.

The same is done with audio. Short, abstract sentences read by an announcer. After listening to the first batch of readings, they are asked to listen to a second batch and note each time they hear a sentence which was also in the first group of readings.

In every test, people remember the "bad" stuff much better than the "good" or "neutral" stuff.

I believe the reason is an ancient one, alive and well in our modern brains. Suppose you are an ancient person, a hunter-gatherer, doing your daily round of hunting and gathering food for the day. You see a wide variety of nature's creations. Then, suddenly you discover that a sabre-toothed tiger occupies a certain valley. You may well forget the meadow where you saw a mouse; but you are not going to forget that valley of the tiger.

It may have started by our remembering more accurately those things which were a danger to us. But it isn't limited to that. On the front page of today's local newspaper, there is a story of a small child who was killed in an auto mishap. To be specific, some family member backed a pickup truck over the child. A horrible accident. I read every story on that front page, but that is the only one I now recall. Somehow bad news, even when it happens to someone we do not know, is remembered longest.

This does not mean that the dirtiest, meanest political ads will always get their candidate elected. As in other types of advertising, some political ads are just poorly done. If an attack ad seems implausible, frivolous or just unfair, it may backfire. But it will almost certainly be remembered. And for that reason, people who write political ads will always search for a way to vilify their candidate's opponent.

Why Does America Go To War?

In the second decade of the last century, European nations got themselves into such a squabble that it quickly escalated into mass killings. Eventually the United States entered the fray to help restore peace. America had not been attacked, but we went to war to help solve someone else's problem.

My father and his brother participated as soldiers in that conflict which was so widespread it became known as The World War. Dad came home, his brother did not. He was one of 116,708 Americans who gave their lives to help their friends.

The peace we helped gain was managed badly, and in less than 20 years, the Europeans were at it again. America was attacked by the Japanese, but not by Germany or Italy. We entered that war - Europe first - because the American government was afraid our European allies could not hold out much longer. When VE-Day, "Victory in Europe" was accomplished, we turned our attention to our attacker in Asia.

I participated in the last year of that war... luckily, after the major shooting had ended. I was safe, but a total of 407,316 Americans died in what was called World War II. Many of the Americans died while saving someone else's skin. Then, hard-working American men and women paid for the restoration of what the war had destroyed in Europe and Japan!

Three years after I left the Army, the North Koreans invaded South Korea. Again, America came to the aid of the nation that was attacked. When it finally ended in a cease-fire, not a true end to the war, another 36,916 Americans had gone to their graves.

In 1961, another weak nation was attacked as North Viet Nam launched war against democratic South Viet Nam. Again, America came to the aid of the oppressed. In spite of the fact that politicians micro-managed that war, our military none the less won a decisive victory on the ground. But before victory could be declared, our politicians bowed to the pressure of ill-informed war protestors and did, summarily, "cut and run". 58,193 Americans had died in vain. The ones who came home were vilified by their own countrymen. Such are the depths to which an uninformed civilian population can sink when goaded by masses of ignorant protestors.

About thirty years later another small nation was attacked by a more powerful neighbor as Iraq invaded Kuwait. America again went to war. American deaths did not mirror the large numbers from previous wars, but in America we value every life and mourn the losses in the Gulf War no less than the losses in previous wars.

Each of these 20th Century wars was pre-emptive. But in the end, America did not claim any spoils of war, did not raise our flag over any new territory. We just restored the peace and went home.

I keep hearing people say that the Viet Nam war was an unjust war? In what way is that so? Was it "more just" to protect Kuwait and Korea than South Viet Nam? Every one of the wars of the 20th Century was fought to help some nation survive.

We have gone to war to protect the rights of people of every color and creed. Wouldn't you think America would be appreciated by some of those people? Well, we are appreciated by some of those people. But not necessarily the ones you may think.

During the Johnson Administration, Charles DeGaulle, then president of France, ordered that every American soldier be removed from French soil. Johnson asked if that order included those soldiers in graves in French soil. DeGaulle never answered. Attitudes have not changed in the French government - Chirac carries on the tradition of unfriendliness to America.

Happily, that is not always true on the streets of France. Many French men and women know what America did for their country and are not too proud to say it.

America goes to war to help protect some weak nation from a bully. And we are reviled for it. But, Americans are slow learners, and on some future date another rogue nation will attack a weak neighbor. More thousands of Americans will lay down their lives to right that wrong. And more of the world's population will hate us for it.

Loose Lips Sink Ships

That saying was widely publicized during World War II.

I grew up in Kansas City, where there was, indeed, some activity for the war effort. At the confluence of the Missouri River and the Kansas (Kaw) River, an industrialist named Harry Darby built a small shipyard where he manufactured landing craft. I can no longer remember if they were LCPs (Landing Craft, Personnel) or LCTs (Landing Craft, Tank). But they were clearly instruments of war.

A short distance away was North American Aviation's plant where B-25 bombers were built. Crews were brought into Kansas City to match the timing of the completion of each aircraft. I remember formations of these airmen marching down the street in downtown Kansas City, singing in cadence a popular song of the day "In Der Fuehrer's Face", which made fun of Adolph Hitler. When their aircraft rolled off the assembly line, the crews took their planes off to war.

A little farther away was the Pratt & Whitney plant which manufactured engines for military aircraft.

There may have been other wartime industries of which we were aware, but the important fact is that we all realized that anything we may have casually observed must not make its way to enemy intelligence.

My parents were Republicans, as were most of their friends. Our president was a Democrat and Congress was controlled by the Democrat Party. But we would have died before we talked about anything that could leak secret information. We certainly did not want to have Loose Lips.

Further, if some bit of classified military information were learned by a newspaper, magazine or radio station, it is dead certain they would not have made that information public.

Compare that to what is happening today. Leakers, considering themselves "Whistle Blowers" leak classified information to news media on an almost daily basis. The media gleefully publish those portions of this classified information which they feel may support their point of view..

Suddenly some publisher or broadcaster feels the absurd idea of "the public's right to know" trumps the protection of the lives of our military personnel.

Worse, politicians happily use this classified information in any way which may help their re-election chances.

Suddenly partisan politics is more important than winning the war.

The United States was widely admired and respected at the end of World War II. There was one reason, and only one reason for this... the United States had won the war.

America was not admired because we insisted on being "nice" to our enemies. We were admired because we beat them on every front.

The world loves the winner of a tough fight. It has no respect for a loser, even if that loser can stand up and say, "Hey, it was more important to fight fair than to fight to win."

Today, we must describe our war effort by stealing a phrase from professional football... "Winning isn't everything... it is the only thing."

The Future of America.

The current rant of perennial ranter Pat Buchanan likens America's present immigration issues with those of the Romans, some 1530 years ago. We are told that so many people wanted to immigrate to the Roman Empire, the population of true Romans was seriously diluted. Even the mighty Roman Army had enlisted so many persons whose loyalties lay elsewhere, that army had no stomach for the fight that confronted them when the Barbarians invaded the empire in 475 A.D.

The Roman empire ceased to exist, institutions of civilization were destroyed and the world fell into the "Dark Ages" for the next thousand or so years.

Is that beginning to happen to America, as Buchanan warns? Perhaps.

But there is a more certain cloud hanging over our future.

In his excellent book "How The Irish Saved Civilization" (Doubleday, 1995), historian Thomas Cahill causes us to seriously consider our future beyond Buchanan's predictions.

In 1995, Cahill wrote: "As we, the people of the first world, the Romans of the twentieth century, look out across our earth, we see some signs for hope, many more for despair. Technology proceeds apace, delivering the marvels that knit our world together - the conquering of diseases that plagued every age but ours and the consequent lowering of mortality rates, revolutions in crop yields that continue to feed expanding populations, the contemplated "information highway" that will soon enable all of us to retrieve information and communicate with one another in ways so instant and complete that they would dazzle those who built the Roman roads, the first great information system.

But that road system became impassable rubble, as the empire was overwhelmed by population explosions beyond its borders. So will ours. Rome's demise instructs us in what inevitably happens when impoverished and rapidly expanding populations, whose ways and values are only dimly understood, press up against a rich and ordered society. More than a billion people in our world today survive on less than $370 a year, while Americans, who constitute five percent of the world's population, purchase fifty percent of its cocaine. If the world's population, which has doubled in our lifetime, doubles again by the middle of the next century, how could anyone hope to escape the catastrophic consequences - the wrath to come?"

The Buchanans of our time may build a fence along our border. Such a fence could stop dozens of people trying to cross our borders on any given day. But what happens if that number swells to hundreds? To thousands? To hundreds of thousands? And, suppose those people are not just trying to find work or peddle some drugs. Suppose instead that they are desperately hungry, armed and determined?

Will that happen in fifty years? One hundred years? Will it happen at all in the future of America?

Stranger Than Fiction

Here's a plot for a western movie. A small gang of thieves and killers has been roaming the west, creating all sorts of trouble, including murdering large numbers of people.

One town wants to protect itself and maintains a large posse of heavily armed gunmen. One day a few members of the gang ride into town, shoot up the place, kill a few residents, take one as a hostage, and ride away.

The posse quickly organizes, perhaps forty men, and pursues the fleeing outlaws. Suddenly some neighboring communities launch a huge protest. It is excessive force, they say, for forty armed men to pursue only five. The posse is labled as aggressors and terrorists.

Soon the posse overtakes the gang and a fierce gunfight ensues. Now the neighboring communities become more outraged at the posse and start demanding an end to the violence.

These neighbors meet independently and hammer out a plan to end the shooting. They decide the fighting must stop and they will send some weak and helpless enforcers to guarantee that the gang will never again raid this community. The gang is asked if they will comply. They agree, but openly declare that this community still must be wiped off the face of the earth. With the gang's agreement in hand, the posse is now pressured to accept as well.

The gang is not charged with having raided the community in the first place, and everyone ignores all their past crimes. Protected from the posse, they are now provided time to heal their wounds, rearm and plan further conquests. The posse is widely criticized for responding so aggressively.

(Not) The End.

What? You think that story line is ridiculous? I guess you are right. I've just been watching too much news coming out of the Israel/Lebanon border.

Any witches among you? Depends on whom you ask.

Remember your history about the Puritans of early New England? They believed so strongly in their religion that they lost contact with reality and actually burned alive some innocent women because of a warped idea that they were witches. Think about that! They tied these ladies to a post and lit a huge fire at their feet. What a horrible way to treat any living creature. And it was done because people thought their religion required it.

Believe it or not, there are people with those religious convictions today. They are the radical Islamists, and they are no less cruel than the Puritans. Parents allow their children to blow themselves to bits in order to also kill a few non-believers. They do it because they believe so strongly that their children will immediately go to paradise and escape the harsh realities of living in poverty.

In case you think their targets are only Christians and Jews, remember, radical Islamists in Pakistan are attacking Hindu India and Chechans are killing innocents in atheistic Russia. What will happen when they turn their attention to the one billion non-Muslim Chinese?

I remember well the late 1930s when we listened to radio speeches by Adolph Hitler. He would rant and the crowds would scream and cheer. It was pretty scary and made even scarier by the strange echo effect that accompanied all trans-Atlantic communications of that time. We all, including this young farm boy, knew Hitler was a madman. But, pacifists like Charles Lindberg used their considerable influence to convince many Americans to stay out of "Europe's War". So, we gave Herr Hitler free rein until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. By that time, Hitler was almost too powerful to stop. Millions of innocent people died as a result of our delay.

Our local newspaper published an editorial today, blasting Miguel P. Garcia, a New Mexico State Representative who called for a trade boycott with Israel because of what he called "the state-sponsored terrorism that Israel is unleashing on Palestine and Lebanon". The editors said Garcia was badly misinformed or merely ignorant. I say he is a dangerous threat to the world.

If people like Rep. Garcia succeed in stopping the civilized world from overcoming these radical Islamists before they become even more powerful, I fear the Holocaust of the 1940s will be exceeded beyond the bounds of our imaginataion.

Adolph Hitler was a radical leader of a very civilized state. The German people did not share his desire to murder millions of people. Once he was overthrown, they again became full partners in the civilized world. The Islamists are not the same. They are not a state being dragged along by corrupt leaders. They are a population in whom the desire to kill non-believers has been deeply ingrained. Destroying their leaders will not change them.

This past weekend, at an Art Festival, I was surrounded by many artists, very talented people all. Many of these people are Liberals because they live in la-la-land. The only thing on their radar is their art. They want to end poverty and take away the military budget to build hospitals and schools, etc., etc.

I have no problem with these people so long as their energies are directed toward their art. However, they do vote, and they would vote for the idiot Miguel P. Garcia, solely because his name is on the Democratic side of the ballot. And that is what scares me about this year's elections. I truly believe that the pacifists will control our future if the Democrats regain control of the government. If they prevent the civilized world from stopping radical Islam, it is only a matter of time until someone decides that we are all witches.

Eastern Bias

I know, that's silly, but let me explain. First, some statistics you may have never heard. The "Lower 48" United States span four time zones. Believe it or not, a lot of Americans do not realize that.

50% of the population of the "Lower 48" live in the Eastern Time Zone.
30% live in the Central Time Zone.
5% live in the Mountain Time Zone.
15% occupy the Pacific Time Zone.

Ever notice how TV announcers proclaim that a certain program will be aired "at 9:00, 8:00 Central"? (As a rule, programs are aired in the Pacific Zone at the same clock time as the Eastern Zone.) So, what time will the program air in the Mountain Zone? Who cares? The population there is too small to be important.

I live in the Mountain Time Zone and am often in my office at 6:00 a.m. Since we do business with people in the Eastern Zone, it is not uncommon to receive calls as early as 6:00. The caller asks for someone by name. I reply that the person they are calling is usually not in the office until 7:00 a.m. Most frequently there is a silent pause, after which the caller says,"Uh... what time is it there?"

Yesterday there was record breaking rainfall in El Paso, TX, which is located on the U.S./Mexico border. The city was flooded, roads washed out and many residents evacuated from their homes. The temperature plunged during the thunderstorms that brought the rain.

I turned on a national cable TV news channel to see if they would mention El Paso in their weather reports. They did not. As always, the weather reporter stood in front of the map of the "Lower 48", completely blocking our view of the entire Mountain Time Zone. Numbers over the map indicated temperatures in the high 90s or low 100s over most of the nation. When the weather person did briefly move to the viewer's right, the number 68º was seen posted for El Paso. That was at least 30º below temperatures of cities on the Canadian border. Doesn't that seem a bit strange? Would you not expect the reporter to note that extreme? Not a chance. El Paso is in the Mountain Time Zone. Who cares?

But, Eastern Bias goes beyond just ignoring us. A lot of Easterners think Westerners are all hicks. About 25 years ago I was at a business meeting in Pittsburgh, PA. A speaker was reciting results from a successful new advertising technique used in Pittsburgh. A member of the audience (an Easterner, but not from Pittsburgh) asked the speaker if he thought an advertiser could expect the same results "in a less sophisticated city, such as Oklahoma City." Hmmm!

All the way home I thought about that remark and wondered what constitutes a "sophisticated city" and why Oklahoma City (in the Central, not the Mountain Time Zone, but clearly considered to be 'in the west') was not one. Back in my office, I started looking up statistics, trying to find something that would point to sophistication. No luck. I did note, however, that Oklahoma City's population contained a higher per cent of college graduates than did the population in Pittsburgh.

Remembering People We Knew. (and some we don't want to know)

Yesterday my wife and I remembered a guy we once knew who worked for a laundry/dry cleaners in Kansas City. He came to our house once a week to pick up laundry or cleaning and drop off the finished work he had picked up before. When we moved to a residence on the other side of town, he continued the delivery service to our office, which was closer to his business. Later we moved our office to a more distant location, but he continued the pickup and delivery service. What a nice man he was.

I noted that we had known a goodly number of nice people in our past. There was George, the waiter, who always knew what we liked to eat and how we wanted it prepared. Meals were so much more pleasant because of George.

I could name several more, but I hesitate because I know I would forget some.

These thoughts brought me back to my sincere belief that the world is absolutely full of good people. Recently I have formed the habit of hitting the "Next Blog" button after I visit my own or someone else's blog. Sure, there is some porn, and some kooky stuff, but as you randomly view blogs from around the world, you quickly discover that many blogs are just about families. Mothers bragging on their kids, kids talking about their friends. Good people all, from all around the world.

Sadly, however, there is a small per cent of the world's population that are not good people. Taught from early childhood that certain beliefs are not to be tolerated, these people place no value on human life - even their own. They will kill you just because you do not believe as they do.

Recently a reader wrote a letter to our local newspaper editor, stressing that we should face the insurgents in Iraq with love, education, jobs, etc. My immediate reaction was - sure go to Iraq and give them love, give them books, money, jobs, whatever you have to offer. They will take your valuables, behead you and throw your body into a ditch. That writer, like so many liberals, truly believe that the insurgents are people who have been deprived and want only to catch up.

No, those people have been taught little more than to hate you and to destroy you and your way of life. Their goal in life is to die and go to the promised paradise, while killing as many non-believers as possible in the process.

Does anyone believe we can reverse that? Not me!

Still, I continue to believe that the majority of the world's population are good people who love their families. They don't care if you subscribe to a different religion, or no religion. All they really want is to have a safer, healthier, happier life for their families.

So, what do we do about that small population of ideological radicals. Time to get tough folks. Time to get messy. Time to destroy them before they acquire the ability to destroy even more innocents.

What happened to the boots?

This past July 4, I watched the parade in Lubbock, Texas. Sitting on the sidewalk, I was able to watch the floats, the bands, lots of flags and people's feet. It was alarming to notice that, aside from flip-flops, almost 100% of the people wore sneakers. There must have been every brand and style of plastic footwear in attendance. Probably all were imported. The only boots I saw among spectators were on my own feet.

C'mon! We're in Texas... home of Justin, Tony Lama, Nokona and numerous other brands of western footwear.

You do not have to be a cowboy to like cowboy boots. When I first moved to the southwest in 1949, I quickly found that I was having to stop frequently and dump sand from my shoes. And to occasionally pull a goathead (a little sand burr sticker that actually looks like a tiny goat's head) from my socks. That's when I switched to cowboy boots. Problem solved! I've been wearing them ever since. I currently have six pair, including two brand new pair... all purchased in Texas!

During the 2004 presidential election campaign, President Bush visited our city. He said it was good to be in a place where there were "more boots than suits". Actually, not all that many people in that audience were wearing boots, either, and I thought to myself, "the president thinks he is still in Texas." I mean... aren't cowboy boots the preferred footwear of Texans?

At the Fourth of July parade I witnessed in Lubbock, Texas, I just expected to see more boots. I saw sneakers.

Has PETA driven leather out of the footwear market?

In addition to keeping sand out of your shoes and goatheads out of your socks, cowboy boots are very comfortable. Plus, with all leather construction, they are actually cooler than footwear with rubber, plastic or composition soles.

While in Texas for the Fourth, I heard a song called "My New Tony Lamas" on a country music radio station. That song described a whole new reason for wearing cowboy boots. Check it out. Then buy yourself a pair of boots and ditch those ugly sneakers!

Wow!

As a World War II Era Guy, I never thought I would see the day when the Prime Minister of Japan stood beside the President of The United States, on the White House lawn, receiving full military honors as a visiting head of state.

The fathers of these two men were on opposite sides in WW II, each with a mission to kill the other. Peace is a wonderful thing.

So it makes me wonder about the hue and cry from some latter day politicians over the prospect of the new Iraqi government grantng amnesty to insurgents who may have killed Americans.

Yes, I would like to see these guys tried, convicted and punished. But, how long must the cycle go on?

When I was in the Philippines, helping make arrangements to repatriate 10,000 Japanese soldiers held as POWs on Leyte, I was amazed at the lack of hostility that existed between the POWs and the American soldiers. In fact, one of the POWs painted a watercolor of a giesha girl and gave it to me. It hangs on my wall to this day. For both the Japanese and the Americans, when it was over, it was over.

Perhaps today, in Iraq, we should all say it is over... and mean it. Forget about an eye for an eye, etc. There has been a lot of killing already. I know of only one way to stop it... to say "It's Over".

Obviously everyone has to agree. You cannot release people who want to keep killing. But, if the time comes when the insurgents are willing to quit the fight, let's all shake hands and say, "It's Over".

Se Habla Español

Literally, that means "They speak Spanish". But when it is lettered on the door of a retail shop, printed at the bottom of a newspaper ad, or super imposed over the end of a TV commercial, it means, "If you speak only Spanish, we still want your business and you will be served by another native Spanish speaker."

I've never had a problem with that, until president Bush said that people who want to become Americans should learn to speak English.

I am reminded of stories from my childhood when my father talked about the great wave of immigrants coming to America from Europe. That was probably some time before the first World War, but I don't know and don't care enough to research the time line.

He spoke about a feeling of "America For Americans", or some such, that opposed the seemingly endless flood of immigrants. As I recall, this movement eventually became anti-Jewish, then anti-African, then it became the Ku Klux Klan.

But, that is not where I am going today. Today, I am wondering if all those Europeans would have assimilated and learned English, if everywhere they turned a sign said "We speak Polish", or whatever.

So, I wonder what incentives for learning English are offered immigrants who are native Spanish speakers. In my state, New Mexico, essentially all official documents are printed in both Spanish and English. So every government agency and virtually every business can accomodate a Spanish speaker.

I studied Spanish for six semesters (after my 65th birthday) at New Mexico State University - just because I wanted to learn the language. Today I can read Spanish that is simply written. I can express myself in Spanish well enough to communicate with the gentle people of Juarez, Mexico. But when they speak, I am pretty much at a loss. So, I know it is damn hard for an adult to learn a new language.

In fact, I think the only way is complete immersion. Learn to understand the language or starve.
But, there is no immersion when everyone is willing to accomodate you in your native language.

So, maybe local governments and those commercial enterprises who so readily offer to speak Spanish, (Se habla Español) are actually hurting the immigrants who might well want to learn English but have a very full time job earning a living, and have no pressing immediate need to learn English.

Maybe.

A message to today's Military - regarding the New York Times

If, during the course of duty you see that the New York Times has published a photograph or a news story demeaning your service, your mission or your personal conduct, don't take it seriously.

It really has nothing to do with your service; nothing to do with President Bush or Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, it is just the New York Times expressing its decades old hatred of the military. You see, when it comes to America's Armed Forces, The Gray Lady is no lady at all.

In 1946 I was assigned to Base K, AFWESPAC (Army Forces Western Pacific) at the village of Tacloban on Leyte, in the Philippine Islands. My job was running the Radio & Cable Section - a sort of message center that distributed all incoming messages to the proper organization, as well as sending all messages from the various Army units on Leyte.

I had a couple of G.I.'s and several Filipino civilians working in the office. We had an excellent relationship with the Filipinos. They taught me a lot about their culture, and even taught me a smattering of their local Bisayan dialect. I learned enough that I was later able to work the main gate, assissting Filipinos who had business with the Army.

In October of 1946, the New York Times sent a reporter to the Philippines. His story, under the dateline of October 20, 1946, said:

U.S. Manila Forces Held Slur On Army

The unchecked deterioration in the conduct and the appearance of the United States Troops here is doing inestimable damage to American prestige as well as alienating the people of this nation.

With morale at its lowest ebb, their carelessness in dress, their unconcealed dislike for the Filipinos and their slovenly demeanor, the American troops on occupation duties in the Philippines are being openly referred to as Ambassadors of ill will.

The reporter went on to accuse the G.I.s of breaking all traffic laws, wearing unpressed uniforms and unshined shoes, even of refusing to salute a superior officer.

When this message arrived at my office, it was retyped by one of my Filipino typists who wondered what in the world the newspaper was referring to. Okay, so we were not in Manila, but we saw none of what the Times reported. And, of course, the folks back home had no idea that not all of us were stationed in Manila.

The message of the Times news story was followed by a message from our commanding generals, who said: "This article has received such prominence in the last few days, that we, the Commanding Generals of AFWESPAC, 13th Air Force and Pacific Air Service Command, feel we must tell you, our soldiers that we believe this condemnation is unwarranted by the facts of our behavior and we resent this attack on you." The generals went into a great deal more detail, which I will not repeat here.

In case you wonder what we were doing in the Philippines at that time, I offer this: We had 10,000 Japanese POW's on Leyte, alone. They had to go home. We had hundreds of tanks, trucks, Jeeps and every other sort of supplies that had been on cargo ships on the way to the anticipated invasion of Japan. When the Japanese surrendered, this cargo was all dumped on Leyte. We had to properly dispose of this material.

Our relationship with the Filipinos was great. They openly adored the American soldiers, and we had great respect and admiration for them. They had suffered greatly at the hands of the Japanese. But, of course, the Times reported nothing of this.

Remind you of some of the stories coming out of Iraq? It should.

Champagne, anyone?

1.4 billion dollars. That's is how much FEMA money was scammed in the Katrina relief effort. Our tax dollars... money you and I worked hard to earn... was stolen to buy expensive goodies, like $400 bottles of champagne, vacations to the tropics, etc.

And, they say it gives emergency management a black eye. I say it gives Congress, and even the White House, a black eye. Why in the world were they so committed to pour all those billions into hurricane relief? Did someone in Washington send that hurricane on its destructive mission? Did we taxpayers cause it to happen?

If we didn't do it, why are we having to pay for it? I proudly admit that I did not (willingly) contribute a dime to Katrina relief. Since when is the government (taxpayers) responsible for a natural disaster that stikes someone else?

Every day in America some family's home burns to the ground, through no fault of its occupants. Homes slide off hillsides in California as a result of heavy rain. If the homeowners didn't have insurance - tough luck!

In 1964 I built a radio station in central Kansas. The construction came after a seven year battle before the FCC to obtain a broadcast license. Seven years of working two or three jobs at a time to earn enough to pay the lawyers and engineers necessary for the proceedings. When the station went on the air, it appeared that the waiting and the hard work were worth it. The station achieved immediate success.

Four months later, the Johnson Administration, in a round of military base closings, shut down the local Air Force base, throwing our town into an economic tailspin. Our radio station never made another 10 cents profit. We held on for seven years, then were forced to give up. I had invested 14 years of my life, and every dime I had earned in that period, but I walked away, dead broke. That was a direct result of an action by the Federal Government. There was no compensation for me from the Feds. Or from anyone else!

But, a hurricane hit New Orleans and people who had stupidly occupied houses that were below sea level, people who had refused to evacuate when warned to do so, are suddenly our responsibility and become the recipients of our hard earned dollars.

Can anyone explain this to me?

An Analogy For Islam

when soldiers are not busy with official duties, or entertaining themselves in the way soldiers like to be entertained, they sit around and tell stories.

Since any small group of soldiers may include men from across the country, these stories are often both interesting and informative. Occasionally, however, there is a clinker. Some Private, who has already demonstrated that he is not the brightest bulb in the string, will relate a story, preceded by a bit of a threat. Typically, a tale may go as follows:

"I'll tell you a strange story my mother told me. She knew this to be a fact, and anyone who says it is not true is calling my mother a liar. There was this young girl, about five years old. Every night she would save a little bit of her supper and take it outside. Everyone thought she just liked to finish eating outdoors, but one night her daddy followed her just to see what she did.

"She went out behind the barn and as her daddy watched from a distance, she fed her remaining food to a huge rattlesnake. Her daddy stayed out of sight, but as soon as the little girl returned to the house, he grabbed an axe and killed the snake. The next day the little girl died."

Obviously some other dim bulb would hear and believe the story, because I heard it told the same way by soldiers in different parts of the world.

I always felt these wild stories were born of ignorance. They were retold by people who lacked the mental capacity to rationalize the story and dispute its accuracy. Doesn't that remind you of Islam?

As I understand it, Islam began when the Prophet Muhammad went out from his village to some caves where the Quran (The Recitation) was repeated to him (by some unnamed spirit)until he committed it to memory. (It seems a lot of religions started in a similar fashion, but that is a subject for later exploration.)

All this wisdom was supposed to be recited from memory, but some people later decided it should be written and the book of the Quran was born.

To perpetuate the religion, the children of devout adherents are kept in ignorance of much of the world's accumulated knowledge, and forced instead to memorize the recitation. Like the soldier's story of the little girl who fed the snake, Islam requires a massive helping of faith and not a shred of rational thinking.

I will admit that I have not read the Quran, but what is most apparent to a casual observer is that Islam teaches complete intolerance of any other religion or belief system. After all, we could spoil the soldier's story by pointing out that rattlesnakes eat only live prey - mice, small birds, etc., not left over chicken and dumplings. Similarly, a knowledge and understanding of other religions and belief systems may well lead the Muslim child down the path of tolerance of other teachings and doubt in his own.

So long as intolerance is an integral part of a belief system, there is the liklihood that someone will consider it their mission in life to express their intolerance violently. We see it in racial intolerance, and in the utter hatred some direct toward persons of a sexual persuasion different from their own.

Will there ever be a change? I am doubtful.

Puh-leeeze!

This past Memorial Day weekend I spent most of three days assisting my wife at her booth at the New Mexico Wine Grower's Festival, held at the Southern New Mexico State Fair Grounds. As always, I mostly just watched the crowd. You see all kinds of people at this sort of event, and most seemed like good folks just out to enjoy perfect weather over a holiday. But, sometimes their choice of attire, and how they wear it, taxes the patience of this old man.

I have been wearing "jeans" for about 57 years. When I reported for duty at my first radio job, in July of 1949, I was mightily embarrassed because my luggage did not arrive on the same bus I rode into that small New Mexico town. My new employer, a woman named Beulah Shirk, was a jewell. She said, "Don't worry about it. This is the 'Land Of Mañana'. Just go buy yourself a pair of Levis and you'll be fine." So, I went to a dry goods store and bought a pair of blue denim pants.

When I wore them into the station, the boss looked at me in surprise and said: "Those are not Levis... they are gardner's pants!" Oops! Back to the dry goods store for the purchase of a pair of Levis 'Shrink to Fit' 501 jeans (price: $2.65). Actually I didn't hear them called 501s until a number of years later, but they are my jeans of choice to this day.

After so many wearings - especially if you are active in the outdoors - you end up with a rip or a tear here and there. The knees are often one of the first places to go. Once they are torn, denim jeans fray, and look tacky. For all these years, a rip in the knee was a signal to amputate the legs of the jeans and turn them into a pair of cut offs. Continuing to wear torn jeans was not cool.

But, alas, something happened along the way. Affluent young people - mostly those who did not actually work for their affluence, suddenly wanted to look poor and deprived. So, continuing to wear frayed jeans became some sort of status symbol.

Now, most of these kids have not done anything strenuous in their jeans (no longer Levis... but some designer brand which probably cost their parents about $80.) so there are no naturally obtained rips or tears. How to look cool? They cut their jeans, then wash them a couple of times so they will fray.

Trouble is, they've never owned a pair of "honestly" worn and torn jeans, so they don't know how to fake it. I saw two different teenage girls who had cut a neat, rectangular hole in the knees of their jeans. After a couple of washings, these openings were a little frayed, but not enough to disguise the perfectly cut openings.

I wanted to ask these girls what sort of work would create these neat, rectangular holes in the knees of their jeans. But, aside from being silly, these girls seemed like nice people, and I just didn't have the heart to embarrass them.

My advice? Check out some really poor kids' jeans if you want to learn how to fake your jeans to make you look authentically poor and deprived.

Backyard Breakfast

Sometimes the simple things, those close to home, can be most appealing. I am not a fan of pets, and having been raised on the farm, do not want animals living inside my house. But I do enjoy wildlife very much.

In our backyard, I have reserved one section to stay "natural", that is, desert sand and desert plants. On that little patch of ground I keep several water bowls, and a block of birdseed. Plants include creosote bush, yucca and several kinds of cactus

I also have a birdbath and three hummingbird feeders. Before we discovered the seed blocks, we sprinkled bird seed on the ground. That attracted no less than 100 doves each day.
We have three kinds of doves: mourning doves, white-winged doves and small, Inca doves. They scarfed that birdseed in about ten minutes, leaving none for other birds. For some reason, the doves cannot devour seed in the blocks so quickly, and one block will last for a few weeks.

This ever present source of seed results in several covey of Gambel's quail spending most of their time in our yard. And there are lots of small sparrow sized birds (house finches, etc.) who are ever present.

In addition to all the birds, my little patch of desert is also home to one small turtle. I have not checked his pedigree, but calling it a box turtle is probably close.

This morning I was entertained by these various creatures enjoying their breakfast. First to appear was a roadrunner. Unlike the cartoon version, real roadrunners are not so innocent. This one eased close to the seed block where a group of sparrow-sized birds were picking at the seed. In a flash he snagged one bird. For several minutes he held it in his ample beak, slamming it against the ground. I thought he was dislodging feathers and expected him to eat the bird hawk style, by holding it with one foot and picking the meat off with his beak. Nope. I think the slamming was to make certain it was dead, because his next act was to swallow it whole, feet, feathers and all.

He tried several times to catch another bird, but they had become too cautious. Roadrunners also eat small lizards and they love raw hamburger.

We put some dry bread near the seed block this morning. Dry bread always attracts grackles who pick up every chunk they can and put it in the water bowls. They dip the bread repeatedly, then just go get another piece. I never see them eat the wet bread and the next time I fill the bowls they are always half full of soggy bread, which I dump.

Our little box turtle crawled up near our back door. My wife cut a piece of cucumber into small slices for him. He loved the cucumber and ate it all.

While all this was going on, a group of quail ran across the yard and attacked the seed block. Quail are interesting birds. While they are good fliers, they prefer to be on the ground. That is also true of the roadrunner. He can run very fast and usually will not fly unless threatened.

I often think of the drama that takes place in every little ecosystem. Be it a patch of woods, a pond, or a rocky mountain slope, it's wild occupants are in a day to day struggle to find food for themselves, and to prevent their becoming food for someone else.

Plants are not exempt from this struggle. Consequently, nearly every desert plant has thorns of some kind. Over the eons, it is the thorniest plants which have survived.

Joan of Arc, Where are you?

I held my tongue during the recent protests in France... the ones where French youth were protesting a proposed law that said they could, indeed, be fired from their job.

During those protests a lot of Americans were scratching their heads. To illustrate our inability to understand the position the young French were taking, let me recall an incident from the mid-1960s. At that time a group of Kansas farm boys went to the Soviet Union to participate in a cultural exchange.

When they returned they were asked for their impression of Soviet farming methods. The one story they all wanted to tell, and laugh about, was that there was a five o'clock whistle on the collective farms. When the whistle blew... everyone quit for the day and went home.

What made it so funny to them was that baled hay, or other crops, were often left in the fields when rain was forecast. On their Kansas farms, as on farms all over the United States, farmers know that hay bales left in the rain will likey grow mold and be ruined. If you have baled your hay in the afternoon and rain is likely, you continue working to get that hay picked up and hauled to the barn, regardless of the hour. I personally have hoisted bales of hay onto a horse-drawn or tractor-drawn wagon late into the night.

And, when you finally do crawl in bed and you hear thunder and hear rain pounding down, you have a wonderful sense of pride that you did your job so well your crop was not destroyed.

It seems the French youth are being denied the opportunity to feel pride in their work. In fact, it seems they are being taught not to be proud of their work. The lesson is, just put in your time and draw your pay. If you quit too early... if you screw up... don't worry, you will not be punished... you cannot be fired!

To me, this is anti-French. France has a proud history. They did not become the nation they are by shirking their duty, and letting the government protect them when they failed. The heroes of France's past were the kind of people who did get their hay out of the field. Whatever the task - whomever the foe, they persevered and they triumphed.

Now, one has to wonder if this new generation of Frenchmen will ever again triumph over a powerful adversary... be the battle economic, scientific or military.

One can only hope that the genes of the great French heroes are still present in some French youth, and will some day make their presence known.

Free Speech?

I am a full supporter of free speech - with one small qualification. Since when did vulgarity become speech? Free Speech should pertain to expressing ideas, good or bad, with no reprisals.

If you do not like the government, or any other public entity, you should be free to say so. If you have some new ideas on how things could be done, you should be free to say so.

But to many, Free Speech means any utterance that can come out of your mouth - or that you can write or draw - should be protected.

The constitution prohibits Congress from passing laws that would, in any way, inhibit the free flow of opinions and ideas. But it says nothing about protecting the guy who wants to exhibit his lack of consideration for other people's sensibilities.

Yes, some will say that what offends one person is an expression of an idea or opinion to someone else, so there can be no dividing line. But, I say that is bogus. If you were asked to give a talk before a class of first graders and their mothers, no one would have to explain to you what constitutes offensive language. You would just know.

Today it is popular to make your statement by way of a bumper sticker, or a printed T-shirt.
This weekend I saw a young teen boy with a T-shirt that said, "Poker? I hardly know her." Nice.

A young girl had a shirt that said, "Drop and give me twenty." An adult woman's shirt said, "Manure Happens." Another girl's shirt said, "This is your boyfriend's shirt." A man's shirt had a picture of a dog and the text, "Whose leg do I have to hump around here to get a beer?" Another man's shirt read, "I am trying to see things from your point of view but I can't get my head far enough up my ass."

There are bumper stickers that say, "Mean people suck. Nice people swallow.", "I know Jack Shit.", etc., etc.

I just can't imagine why anyone would want to advertise that they are coarse, vulgar, and indifferent to what may offend their fellow human beings.

And, speaking of advertising, why in the world do people pay good money for clothing that has the manufacturer's name emblazoned across the front or back? And why do they pay tens of thousands of dollars for an automobile, then have a fifty-cent plastic frame around their license plate with the auto dealer's name, phone and web address imprinted?

In making TV commercials, I have always been very careful when I chose someone to give a testimonial for my product. My theory is that a person giving a testimonial is sending two messages: First is what they are saying. Second is what message their appearance is sending. A person may say your product is great. But if they just look stupid, viewers may well feel they do not want to take advice from an idiot.

The same applies to T-shirts and license plate frames. If you wear a T-shirt with a vulgar saying, I am reading the message that you are lacking in culture or education, or feelings, or something else - but definitely lacking.

If you bought an expensive automobile to impress me with your success, then use it to display a crude bumper sticker or a cheap license plate frame, I will conclude that you don't come close to being the person you would like me to think you are.

A Weekend With The Military

This past weekend my wife participated as a vendor in a craft show at Ft. Bliss, Texas. The show was a fund-raiser for some charitable activities by Army wives at the base.

I'll admit to being biased - I did a short stretch in the Army in 1946 and 1947 - and found much to admire.

The Army has changed a lot in 60 years, but some things never change. We still found the soldiers (male and female) to be clean, neat and ever so courteous and friendly. The show was held in a big gymnasium which was kept spotless at all times.

Anyone who has not recently had a close encounter with the Army should try to learn if there are any public events at your nearest post. If found, make plans to attend.

The whole idea of "Support Our Troops" takes on a new meaning when you spend a few hours around these guys. My wife's first impression was, "They're just babies!". Indeed, they do seem young, but I was just 17 when I joined the Army and I certainly did not consider myself a baby. Nor did the Army. We were always called "men", though we were really only boys.

I asked one of the soldiers about the scenes in the movies where a nom-com gets right in someone's face and yells at him. He said it does happen, buy does not anger him.

I am afraid it would anger me. My immediate C.O. was a First Lieutenant. He treated his men so well, we would have gone to the end of the earth for him.

Among my souvenirs, I still have a note from him, addressed to the men in our department, wishing us a Merry Christmas (1946) and expressing his understanding that for most of us it was our first Christmas so far from home (Tacloban, Leyte, P.I.)

Would I have saved, for 60 years, any communication from a guy who had screamed in my face? Unlikely.

The gender thing was a bit new for me. There were women in the Women's Army Corps, the WACS, when I was in the Army, but they were widely separated from the male soldiers.

Also, in the mid-1940s, races were kept in separate encampments. Now soldiers of all races and both genders freely work together and it makes you question Army policies toward race and gender during World War Two.

Many off-duty soldiers attended last weeks event in civilian clothing. I asked a soldier from Puerto Rico about dress rules. Yes, they are permitted to wear civilian clothing on base. In fact, he said, there are some jobs where soldiers actually wear civilian clothes on duty. (That never happened in the 1940s. Once I was issued a uniform I saw no more civilian clothing until I was discharged.

But, uniform or no, it was never a problem identifying the soldiers. Even in civvies, their good health and neat appearance had Army written all over it. That was particularly evident when contrasted with a civilian teen with long, dirty hair, pants that barely stayed above his hips, while the pant legs dragged the ground and were dirty and badly frayed.

And, there was a bit of a sad side. One craftsman, who happened to be a soldier himself, sold some Army posters which he neatly matted and framed. One showed a painting of a group of soldiers approaching a building, wearing today's style Army uniforms, rifles at ready - obviously painted from a scene in Iraq.

Two women stopped at his display and the younger of the two studied the poster for a moment, then started to cry. The older woman, probably her mother, comforted her. When the younger woman walked away, the older woman whispered, "she lost her husband in Iraq."

That made you want to embrace the young soldiers - and try somehow to convey your love and appreciation for them. But, alas, it is not proper to cuddle a warrior - even if it is a very young warrior, and you are a very old man.

Small Group - Big Mouths

I wonder if your town, like mine, is being directed in one way or another by a small but vocal group that manages to get themselve heard in high places.

Our city government recently banned all ground audible and high bursting fireworks. My home is on high ground, overlooking the city. Last July 4, my wife and I dragged out a ladder and climbed to the roof for an even better view. Our city lies along the Rio Grande and we could see all of the valley, from north to south.

From one end to the other, there was a spectacular fireworks display. It lasted for about an hour and was something to see. But, some dog owners protested that their animals were traumatized by the noise and managed to make a lot more noise before the city council. Hence the ban.

We have a "Farmer's and Crafts Market" each Wednesday and Saturday morning. It is held on city property. Some people bring their dogs with them to visit the market. I, as a vendor, consider the dogs a major nuisance. Recently a number of other vendors circulated a petition to have the city ban dogs at the market. I was not present for the petition signing and just read of it in the newspaper.

One day I watched a man with two small dogs, on leashes, stroll through the market. One of the dogs pulled his owner toward a low grass planter on the mall. The man allowed the dog to jump into the planter and stood watching as the dog crapped in the planter. Then, the man and his dogs proceeded on their way, without cleaning up.

Recently two elderly women walked through the market with a small dog on a leash. As they approached our display, the dog edged up to our display and hiked his leg to urinate. I yelled "Hey!" at the top of my voice. That startled the dog and he stopped what he was about to do. It also startled the dog's owner, who looked at me in surprise. I said, "Your dog was about to wet on our display!" She just looked at me and said, "Didn't you ever have to go?", and walked away.

Again, the vocal dog lovers prevailed, persuading the city government not to ban dogs from the market.

The most sought after thing in America

Everywhere you turn, everyone is searching for the same thing: Blame.

You don't hear anyone stand up and say, "Wow, I did the wrong thing. I am responsible." No one uses that old-fashioned rhetoric and more.

The New Orleans residents who decided not to evacuate their homes ahead of the coming hurricane, and were subsequently flooded, blame the mayor, the governor, FEMA, George Bush.

Natalie Holloway's mother blames the government of Aruba and perhaps, Holland, but certainly not her daughter's possible reckless behavior.

The government is blaming some employee for leaking the news of the phone wire tapping, and blaming the New York Times of endangering American security for publishing the story.

A bus or a train wrecks and everyone is trying to decide who to blame.

An airplane crashes into a river and everyone is trying to determine who to blame.

This is largely an American phenomenon. Or, at minimun a feature of the more affluent Western nations. Walk down the street of some poorer community in Mexico. If there is a sidewalk at all, you may suddenly find broken or missing concrete. With your head in the air, you could fall on your face. The rule here is, watch where you're going or pay the consequences. In America someone could feint a fall, then blame, and later sue, the city, the owner of adjacent property, the company that built the original sidewalk, and perhaps even the company that mixed the concrete.

There always has to be someone you can blame, and in our society that means you could go to court and force them to support you for the rest of your life.

How can we change this? There is a long term solution: parents teaching their children to take responsibility for their actions.

In the short term, we might put a stop to frivolous lawsuits.