Sometimes it hurts too much to laugh...

So, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner comes over to the Senate to explain the President's plan to avoid the 'fiscal cliff'. Whereupon, it is reported, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell laughed out loud. Okay, we all occasionally laugh aloud at ridiculous statements. But, like Lincoln and a century later, Adlai Stevenson, I find it too painful to laugh. Unlike those statesmen, I am not too big to cry.

Before November 6, 2012, there was hope in the news as we counted down the days to Obama's departure from office. 1450...1000...500... How the good feelings ever increased, right down to zero! Then came election night. We watched the returns and the sickening reality began to set in. Just as we had in 1996 and in 2008, we watched as Republican strategists lost another presidential campaign.

I am reminded of the story of the fox and the crow. Crow sat on a rock at the edge of the beach, looking at the ocean. Fox approached quietly from behind, slapped Crow on the back and asked "How's it going?" Startled, Crow fluttered out of the way, then turned angrily on Fox, "I was counting the waves and you made me lose count!"

Fox replied, "It's okay, just start over!"

So, now we start over, counting those seemingly endless days. As we do, bad policies erode away our freedoms, the very country we love, just as the surf may have eroded away Crow's beach.  

There is scant hope or joy in today's news, only sadness.

Hilary Hinton "Zig" Ziglar, RIP

Yes, Zig has died. How sad. Zig had a large influence on the lives of my wife and I. Zig was a motivational speaker whose motivating talks stuck like glue. Somehow you could never forget what Zig had said - and you wanted to always follow his advice.

He headlined several seminars we attended. Zig improved our lives immeasurably. One of my favorite Ziglar bits was his 'Round Tuit'. He informed us that many people promise to do a certain task as soon as they get "around to it." To help us along, Zig gave everyone a round, quarter-size piece of wood. Stamped on one side was the word "TUIT". "Now", Zig would say, "you have a 'Round Tuit', so get that job done."

"Never tell anyone your troubles.", Zig warned, "Half the people don't care and the other half are glad".

He taught us that there is a correct way to say things. The meaning may seem the same, but there is a vast difference between telling your girlfriend "her face would halt the hands of time" and saying she had a face "that would stop a clock."

I thank you, Zig Ziglar, for making our lives more productive. And, if people were only aware, many of our acquaintances would thank you for making us more pleasant people to know.

We'll keep trying, old friend!

The Biggest Environmental Disaster
Is The Environmental Movement


Anyone who has listened to me through more than a passing conversation knows that I consider the modern environmental movement Public Enemy Number One! I believe environmentalists are responsible for more death, deprivation and suffering than all the world's despots combined.

I do not have definitive numbers to back that claim, but just consider this fact: Since Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring was published in 1962, leading to the ban on the use of the pesticide DDT and the resurgence worldwide of the anopheles mosquito, malaria deaths among African children have steadily risen to numbers exceeding 2,000 per day. Makes Adolph Hitler's Nazis seem like Boy Scouts.

Think about that number. In ten years it is 73 million avoidable deaths, thanks to an environmentalist's whacko claim that DDT was wiping out the world's bird population. That claim was not based on sound science. Even if ingesting DDT-laced insects did cause birds to lay soft-shelled eggs which would not hatch, as Carson claimed, better science has shown that birds were developing an immunity to any such cause and effect. Never mind those facts. Carson's prose persuaded the environazis. They, in turn, persuaded governments around the world. DDT was out - anopheles was in..

Malaria deaths among African children, however, is only a part of the devastation caused by environuts. Consider our energy problem. America sits atop the world's largest energy reserves, oil, gas and coal. America possesses the technology to retrieve those reserves. Yet, our nation is hopelessly energy-dependent, has become the world's largest debtor and has staggering unemployment. Removing onerous restrictions on drilling, frakking and mining on Federal lands would solve our energy problems, put Americans back to work and selling our excess energy on the world market may be our only hope of recovering the $16 trillion our government has wasted in this current century.

Sadly, the United states Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) protects only the environmentalists. To accomplish this, the EPA violates the law at every turn. Check this link.

The Ancient Brain

I Googled "Ancient Brain" and got 140,000,000 hits! Well, let me simplify! Minutes after my youngest daughter was born, I stood next to the attending physician looking at this tiny, new human. He remarked that she was a healthy, normal baby girl. Realizing he had not yet had time to do a thorough examination, I wondered, aloud, "How can you tell?"

He said several things which I no longer recall, but I do remember his demonstration: "Normally babies are born with a fear of falling", he explained. To illustrate, he reached under the bottom of the crib and gave her little 'mattress' a good thump. She flailed her tiny arms as though grasping for something to hold onto.

Aha! The ancient brain! I liken it to when you buy a new computer with some software already installed. That is my definition of "the ancient brain"; knowledge that comes already installed in the new brain. The rest of the brain is just blank, like an empty computer hard drive, waiting to be loaded with things you will subsequently learn. I think of that part as 'The Conditioned Brain' (my label, that one got 1,710,000 hits!). You will learn many things during your lifetime, but you did not have to learn what is stored in the 'ancient brain'.

For the most part, that inherent knowledge has to do with the preservation of life and the propagation of the species. But the preservation of the life of the individual is important only so far as it supports the propagation of the species.

Air space at New Mexico's White Sands Missile Range, is restricted for air traffic to infinite altitude. At the range this spring, I was therefore surprised to see a contrail of a large jet aircraft flying directly overhead. I asked a maintenance employee of the range how that aircraft had permission to fly in this restricted airspace. She replied that the range "has dibs" on the airspace, meaning that the range commander could, at her discretion alone, suddenly call a halt to overhead flights, as when they were planning to launch a missile. In the 'ancient brain', the species 'has dibs' over the individual!

What is truly amazing, is that this seems true of species that are thought to have no brain. Like plants. A 'stalk' of wheat produces a head with many grains. When these grains are mature, they fall to the ground where some, at least, may take root and grow more wheat. Same with a stalk of corn. It may produce several ears of seeds, each with hundreds of grains. Once those seeds fall to the ground, the stalk of corn, or of wheat, shrivels and dies. The future members of the species have 'dibs' on life.

Propagation of the species, in my unlearned opinion, is what creates sex drive. Why does a male fish hover above an egg-laying female, spraying his semen into the water, fertilizing her eggs? There is no apparent reward for him. (Apparent? Maybe it makes him feel very good!) Gotta be that ancient brain at work.

At this point, if my Cognitive Scientist, University Professor son is reading this, he is surely pulling his hair. But that is unlikely, since his time is required for reading loftier writings. We can hope his hair is safe. You and I may, meanwhile, assume that I have reduced 140,000,000 complex explanations into one we all can grasp.

You're welcome!  

(Mis)labeling.

I just changed my profile on this blog to identify myself as an old white guy. The "old" part is a given. The white part is not so clear. It is, after all, just a matter of labeling. Or mislabeling.

Barack Obama is hailed far and wide as the black president. But, while his father (who deserted him before his birth) was certainly a black man, his mother and the grandparents who raised him were most surely white. Still, he is considered black.

Takes me back to the One Drop Rule of the old slavery south. According to Wikipedia, "The one-drop rule is a historical colloquial term in the United States for the social classification as Negro of individuals with any African ancestry; meaning any person with "one drop of Negro blood" was considered black."

Now, I may well have "one drop" of non-white blood in my veins. How could I know? I can trace my ancestry only so far, and have made no attempt to trace the ancestry of all of the wives and husbands along the way.

Then, again, according to Wikipedia, "The principle of "invisible blackness" was an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnicgroups to the group with the lower status." But wait... which is the lower status?

^{By that rule, why isn't Obama considered white? Can't Negro, or African, or Black (pick your label) be considered the higher status? A lot of people think so!}
.

More from Wikipedia: "Despite the strictures of slavery, in the antebellum years, free people of mixed race could have up to one-eighth or one-quarter African ancestry (depending on the state) and be considered legally white."

Okay, My skin color would indicate that I am one-eighth or one-quarter white. So I am an old white guy. What does that make me, other than the product of the breeding choices of all of my ancestors since Noah? (By the way, what was Noah's ethnicity?)

Another example of mislabeling that irks me is the media preference for the label "atheist" when referring to anti-religious people. Most atheists do not consider themselves anti-religious. One close friend who is an atheist complained when it was revealed that young children were taught in school that God made the planets rotate around the sun. Fair enough, but that is simply objecting to the teaching of things other than proven facts.

Yet, every time a group protests a nativity scene on city property, they are immediately identified as atheists. Why not be more accurate and call them what they are: anti-religious groups.

Education

Recently someone posted a You Tube video in which a former Marine stood up at an outdoor gathering and sang the fourth verse of our National Anthem. As soon as he uttered the first four words, "Oh, thus be it ever,..." I recognized what he was singing and sang along with the video. We sang all four verses when I was a kid in school.

I have talked to several people about that video and I am yet to find anyone aware that there were four verses to our anthem. Has education changed that much? One of the Founding Fathers said The Constitution should be taught our children in school. Is it? Just in case you've never read it, it is not a complex legal document. Yes, there are parts that would hold little interest for a ten-year-old, like the eleventh amendment. So, save that part for college level students. But every American kid should know the Bill of Rights.

That is just one tiny bit of the massive problems with our education system. We truly are becoming a nation of dummies. Elementary education absolutely does not prepare students for higher education. Much of higher education teaches nothing of benefit to our citizens. About the only value of a liberal arts degree is that the four years gives a kid four years to mature. But a kid could work at odd jobs for four years and accomplish the same maturity - maybe more - and not have student loan debt.

Unemployment is high right now. Yet many high-paying jobs are unfilled because employers cannot find workers with the required skills. All sorts of skills are needed, welders, machinists, etc. But, kids out of high school are told they must go to college! What a disgrace to send your kid to a (hold your nose) Trade School!

Go to college? My wife and I have five children, all have college degrees. At one point in their "higher" education, one of the kids took a class from which he described the opening remarks of the instructor. They were, "Please tell me all the nicknames you have heard for the female vulva." Whereupon the students started shouting out the answers. This was not a medical school, mind you. The announced purpose of the exercise was to condition the class to discuss human body parts without embarrassment.  What would be the value of that instruction to a college freshman? Any uneducated high-school dropout can do it, no tuition costs, no textbooks needed. By the way, never say freshman - that would be discriminatory.

What benefit is it to a kid to study mathematics? Think of the case where a man walked into a fast-food restaurant and told the young cashier to give him a half-dozen chicken nuggets. She told him they did not sell chicken nuggets by the half-dozen, only in quantities of 6, 12 or 24.

How about history? A TV reporter asked a college student at a July 4th celebration what year the U.S. declared its independence. She replied, "1964." From what country? "Russia." How important is history? Current politicians are pushing policies which failed at great expense in the past and opposing policies which greatly profited the nation in the past. And no one realizes it.

Whose fault is all this? Right now it is the professors teaching the teachers who are teaching the kids. We are teaching small children the phony science of man-caused global warming. They will grow up believing it with their heart of hearts. High school and college will confirm it. If they teach, they will teach it. Meantime, their students will not know that 6 is the same thing as a half-dozen.

Yes, you can learn engineering, medicine and other lofty subjects in college. From a practical standpoint, probably only in college. But who wants to go for a graduate degree that requires (God forbid) mathematics!

Right Wing Radicals

Yeah, maybe we are kooky old men, but at least we remember some history.

When we call Barack Obama a communist, we are soundly scolded. Why would we come up with that foolishness? We remember an old saying suggesting that if something "looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck" you can quit searching for further identification; IT IS A DUCK.

Listen to Obama in his recent news conference: "I refuse to give tax cuts to rich people who don't need them." Who don't need them? Where have we heard that sort of quacking before? Oh, Yes,  "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That was Karl Marx, father of Communism. Only Communists believe governments should decide what their citizens need. Rich folks don't need tax cuts? Says who?

Okay, if rich folks don't need to have their taxes cut, who does need for rich folks to have their taxes cut? The answer is, all the rest of us. John F. Kennedy, an icon of the Democratic Party who pushed for deep tax cuts, argued, "A rising tide lifts all boats." Urging a tax rate cut, Kennedy said: "It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low -- and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now. The experience of a number of European countries has borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reductions in 1954 has borne this out, and the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget -- and tax reduction can pave the way to full employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budgetary deficit but to achieve the more prosperous expanding economy which will bring a budgetary surplus."

Economist Art Laffer researched history and came up with the Laffer Curve. A graphic way of illustrating his findings, it clearly showed that as tax rates decreased, tax revenues increased. History.

Two time winner of the Pulitzer Prize, David McCullough, widely acclaimed as a “master of the art of narrative history,” was interviewed on CBS Television's 60 Minutes. He deplored American's lack of knowledge of history. We old right wing radicals concur. How sad that lessons we learned, often with considerable pain, must be re-learned.

Reuben and Rachel

For some time now, that ditty has been stuck in my head. Especially the part where Rachel sings:

Reuben, Reuben, I've been thinking
What a grand world this would be
If the men were all transported
Far beyond the Northern Sea

My guess is that the author chose "Far beyond the Northern Sea" for meter and rhyme. But the meaning from Rachel's point of view was clear... she wanted those men gone, forever removed from any influence on her life. She did not necessarily want them to suffer harm, just sent too far away to ever return.

I think of that ditty every time I think of the folks who ran the political campaigns of Bush 41 - second term, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney. Karl Rove, et al, were great statisticians. They understood the electoral college, the political divisions among states, all the nuances of voting blocs. They just didn't know how to sell a candidate or a policy position.

Far beyond the Northern Sea sounds like a terribly cold place, so I would settle for some place like Idaho. It is a very pretty place, where they could surely find happiness. Just don't ever let them run another political campaign.

Medicine Men

When I was a small boy, back in the "Dirty thirties" there was scant family entertainment. We had no TV or computers, no CDs, DVDs, cassettes, 8-track cartridges, I-Pads, etc.  We did have 78-rpm records and an old Victrola wind-up record player, but with titles like "Brother, Can You Spare A Dime" and "May I Sleep In Your Barn Tonight Mister?", records were not very entertaining.

There were movies, but they cost money, which we did not have. Also, my straight-laced parents disapproved of Hollywood and their products. Movies were off-limits.

But, we did have "Medicine Shows"! The name, medicine show, was dreamed up by the public... the same way we call certain TV dramas "Soap Operas". (Only because they were often sponsored by soap or detergent manufacturers.)

A Medicine Show was a kind of vaudeville show, live, usually in a big tent. I no longer remember the entertainment, but I certainly remember the "Pitch". Sitting through the pitch was the price you paid for the free entertainment. Halfway through the show, the pitch man came on stage. An extraordinarily persuasive, smooth-talking guy, his perfect presentation glorified the product they were selling.

Usually the product was some kind of tonic - sold as a magic cure-all for any and every ailment. I always bought into the pitch and wondered why my father never bought a bottle. Many others did lay out their 25¢ or 50¢ to acquire a bottle of the expertly sold tonic, on their way out of the tent!

When TV came along, medicine shows moved from the tent to the studio. The entertainment improved. The products changed, But the concept did not. You could sell anything to a gullible public with a carefully crafted message. And, the message crafters have become ever more skilled.

This morning I visited a doctor's office.  The receptionist, with whom I have discussed politics in the past, remarked that "We are still scratching our heads", a reference to the presidential election which gave us four more years of Barack Obama.

The answer to her unanswerable question, of course, is medicine men, that is, very smart persuaders who correctly read the public's mood and crafted a message that convinced millions of Americans to buy a bottle of Obama on their way out of the tent.

Were Obama's policies good? Didn't matter. Were Romney's policies bad? Didn't matter. Obama's medicine men succeeded in selling their tonic. Romney's did not.    

11th Hour of 11th Day of 11th Month, 1918

That was when the Armistice was signed, ending the first world war. So brutal, so widespread was the violence of that war, it was widely believed that civilized humans would never again engage in war. Thus, World War I was called the war to end all wars. November 11 was remembered as Armistice Day and became a national holiday.

A scant twenty-one years later, on September 8, 1939, then again on May 27, 1941, President Roosevelt declared a State Of Emergency because Europe was once again at war. On December 7, 1941, Imperial Japan attacked American soil in Hawaii. Another World War was underway for Americans. President Truman declared an end to hostilities of this second world war on December 31, 1946.

Three and one-half years later, on June 25, 1950, North Korea launched an attack on American and Korean forces in south Korea, and we were at war again.

When President-Elect Dwight Eisenhower engineered an armistice in 1953, the observance of November 11 as "Armistice Day" seemed a little outdated. The following year, it was officially decided to designate November 11 as Veteran's Day, to recognize all veterans of all American wars.

Going back to 1918 and just ten days before that famous armistice, my uncle, Prentice (Prince) Bradley was killed in France. U.S. Army Captain Clifford Davidson, commanding Co. A, 359th Infantry, wrote my grandfather:

I don't know if my uncle's remains were ever re-interred, but it is evident that in 1918, if a soldier received serious injuries, he just died and was buried by his comrades.

Things have changed. Thanks to today's advances in medicine, many seriously injured soldiers survive. The result means a great number of "Wounded Warriors".

While we honor all veterans on November 11, today we feel especially indebted to those young men and women suffering both visible and invisible war wounds. The sight of a young man with an artificial leg, or a despairing homeless man wearing a Viet Nam Veteran cap is heartbreaking.

The death of my uncle ten days before the end of a war, or the sight of these wounded warriors always makes me ask "Why?". What value ensued from killing my uncle when, for all practical purposes, the objectives of that war had already been passed? What value ensued from the exploding I.E.D. that took the young soldier's leg? Why must nations go to war?

Perhaps, some day, Iraq or Afghanistan, or The War On Terror will be remembered as The War That Ended All Wars. Perhaps, some day, all veterans of all wars will have died of old age. But, I hope America will always observe the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month in remembrance of those American veterans who brought about that final end of war.

The Election...

Everyone except me has weighed in on election results. Now it's my turn.

1.The Candidate: Never mind that Romney was eminently qualified. He lacked charisma. He lacked Hollywood appeal (whatever that is). Way back in 1964, I observed a local election in which one candidate was a lawyer, more than adequately qualified. But he was a funny-looking guy. Unusual facial structure, parted his hair in the middle and wore a mustache.

A friend predicted that this guy could not be elected because people will not vote for someone who parts their hair in the middle or wears a mustache. This candidate did both.

My friend was correct as to results of the vote, though not exactly right on the reason. The hair part and mustache were starters. In all, this guy was just, well, funny looking. Romney certainly looked okay but, no matter, folks just didn't really like him.

2. Voting blocks: Romney lost the Hispanic vote (in spite of a broken promise on immigration reform); black Americans (in spite of same-sex marriage); Jews (in spite of Obama's sorry treatment of Israel); Catholics (in spite of the contraception brouhaha.

I remember when folks spoke of "The Solid South". Solid Democrat, that is. But Republicans came to understand the issues important to the south, addressed those issues, and became inclusive. The South is still solid, but now it is solid GOP. The GOP can, and must, show other groups that they are the party most likely to solve their problems.

The Democrats have treated black Americans shoddily for decades. Jim Crow, etc. But, certain Democrat candidates sold black Americans on the idea that they were the ones responsible for civil rights successes. The idea caught on and has passed from generation to generation. It is accepted as fact in the black community - no questions asked.

Same goes for Hispanics. History has proven that Democrats always have and shall continue to have disdain for Hispanics. But they convinced Hispanics that they were their party. I had one Hispanic friend who owned several small businesses. The Democrat's policies were clearly counter to this friend's business interests. Yet he often said "My father would turn over in his grave if I ever voted for a Republican." And he never did.

I have partnered in business with Jews who were dear friends, smart people, good businessmen - but solidly Democrat. The reason? Henry Ford was once associated with a openly anti-Semitic newspaper. So bitter were my colleagues that they refused to drive any automobile produced by Ford Motor Company. Henry Ford has been dead for 65 years!

The bottom line? A national primary might nominate a candidate people like, regardless of qualifications. No more of this "He won Florida." She won Ohio."

Then, instead of a dozen candidates fighting through a long, bitter primary campaign which included a dozen debates, the GOP could concentrate on listening to the disparate voting groups, learning to understand their concerns, finding ways to honestly address those concerns, then selling the groups that they will do so.

Racism... its roots.

Ever since Barack Obama, the "post racial president" burst upon the scene, talk of racism has increased exponentially. What's going on?

I believe it is two things: the multicultural mindset and the politicians never-ending quest for votes. 

1. We must acknowledge and respect the Black culture. We must support its unique qualities.

2. We must lump Blacks into one, cohesive voting group. We must bestow them with common problems that only politicians can solve.

How sad!

Skin color means no more than eye color or shoe size. Skin color has no connection to the brain. Yes, some people in the South eat collard greens and grits (yum). Skin color has nothing to do with it. Lots of people from Maryland rave about crab cakes (yuk). Skin color has nothing to do with it. 

People from places like Brooklyn talk with a funny accent (my late mother, foremost among them). Skin color had nothing to do with it. Or, you might say that people from the deep south are the ones with the funny accent. Skin color has nothing to do with it.

People like Thomas Sowell and Ben Stein are great economists. Skin color has nothing to do with it.

The only way to end racism is to recognize these facts. Politicians must quit talking about "The Black Vote". Politically correct do-gooders must quit promoting and protecting "Black culture" and "The Black Community". Young Black men (boys) must quit striving to act, talk and dress "Black". Above all, the spotlight must be removed from race baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.  

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had it right. Character is everything. Skin color is nothing. Once we agree with him, we dig racism out by the roots.

Helloooo! Anybody home????

CBS Television's Steve Kroft, on 60 Minutes, interviewed Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid. He pressed the idea of cooperation, compromise. Why can't it happen to get the work of Congress done?

Steve is not alone. Everywhere we hear that Congress is deadlocked. We need compromise! We need bi-partisan action! We need the parties to come together! Everything will be lovely if the Democrats and Republicans will just reach across the aisle!

Why are all these TV and print reporters being paid such high salaries when they seem to be permanently "out to lunch"? Why can't any of these tunnel vision idiots see the big picture?

We have had years of compromise. We have had decades of bi-partisan cooperation. Congress has worked with the White House to get the job done.

What is the result? $16 trillion in debt ($10 trillion before Obama). Trillion dollar deficits. The housing market nearly non-existent. Unemployment disgracefully high. Elementary education is a disaster, higher education a high-priced waste of time. Energy independence nowhere in sight. Record numbers of Americans on the dole. Entitlement obligations we cannot possibly hope to meet. Daily warnings of a coming fiscal cliff.

They blame the Tea Party. We hear reporters of every stripe call them radical, extreme, obstructionists. Have any of these big time journalists ever left their East Coast neighborhoods? Doesn't seem like it!

In the spring of 2009, a movement of sensible, everyday Americans finally took a good look at their government and realized it was screwing up their beloved country. En masse, they stood up and said, "Stop! No more spending! We don't give a hoot for the consequences. Just stop spending! Fix the entitlements! Eliminate those wasteful, failed government bureaus!"

They are the Tea Party. They are hated, vilified.

Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe said we are lucky when congress is not in session; they cannot hurt you.
Texas Governor Rick Perry said we should follow the Texas legislature's practice; let congress meet for 60 days every other year then go home.

They are the voices of reason. They or ridiculed, ignored.

The high-salaried reporters? They are the stars. The celebrities. Millions hang on their every word!

Amazing.