Diamonds From the Sky

Yesterday afternoon we had a beautiful sun shower.

Growing up in Missouri and Kansas, I don't remember sun showers. When it rained there, it was usually cloudy from horizon to horizon, gray skies in every direction.

Here in the high desert Southwest, that is not always the case. Often on a sunny day, a small patch of clouds will pass overhead and it will start to rain. I have driven down a highway and seen rain pouring off to one side while the sun was shining off to the other side.

Sun showers happen in the afternoon when the sun is lowering in the west. At our high elevation (4,300 feet) skies are especially clear. The sun, at a lower angle, shines brightly with blinding light. Then, a patch of cumulus clouds moves overhead and it starts to rain. Big clear drops of water pour from the cloud. The sun, shining under the cloud, illuminates those drops of water and they sparkle. Like diamonds from the sky! That is what we call a sun shower.

There is another angle to the diamonds description. In the desert, water is precious. As of the first day of fall, our 2010 rainfall has totaled only 8.94 inches. Through all those weeks... through all of winter, spring and summer, our rainfall has totaled less than nine inches. Believe it or not, we are a little ahead of normal this year and everyone is talking about how green the desert looks! Those raindrops truly are diamonds!

Independents?

I find it hard to be excited about people who have a wishbone for a backbone. I place "Independents" in that category. People say they are not a Republican or a Democrat... they are an Independent. My, my.

I am a Republican. I largely adhere to the principles of the Republican Party. Certainly I do not agree with all Republican politicians, party leaders or spokesmen. Some who wear the Republican label are far removed in their beliefs from those beliefs I hold. I am still a Republican.

I don't know any person today who is a true Democrat as I once knew Democrats to be... one who believes their first goal to be the advancement of the working man. Every "Democrat" I know today is really a liberal... a politically correct, environmentally agitated, apologist blinded to reality by their beliefs.

I do not personally know anyone who claims to be an Independent. That's good. Because I view Independents as people who don't quite have enough courage of their their convictions to stand up for them.

They hide behind a meaningless label to pretend they are above the fray of political discourse. Or, maybe they just relish the label, thinking they are one of the special voters the political parties will have to woo.

Labels.

We've been taught... Don't judge a book by its cover. Yet we do. People form judgments based solely on labels.

Some 30-odd years ago I first read the book "The New Left - The Anti-Industrial Revolution" by Ayn Rand. A friend walked into my office just as I was looking at the cover of the little paperback. I held up the book and made some remark about it being a great book to read. My friend saw only the words "The New Left", and immediately declared he would not read such a book. I didn't know my friend's ideology (still do not) and he did not know what was in Rand's book. But he had made a firm judgment, all the same.

We frequently hear someone say America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. Some non-religious people I know cringe at that label. Neither Jew nor Christian, they nonetheless have deeply held principles and resent being told their principles are founded in a religion they do not follow.

If their problem is with only the label... not the principles, where did those principles originate?

I believe that when the earliest humans began to live in social groups, they surely discovered that their peaceful existence depended on the acceptance of certain rules of conduct. Further, I believe those rules evolved and became more perfect over time.

The early Jews and Christians clearly articulated those time-honored principles and recorded them in written language.

If you are troubled by the Judeo-Christian label, try the Greek Philosophy label. In about 300 B.C., the Philosopher Epicurus said (translated here), "Justice never is anything in itself, but in the dealings of men with one another in any place at any time it is a kind of compact not to harm or be harmed."

Not to harm or be harmed. Sounds like The Golden Rule to me.

Ancient traditions are traditional because they have stood the test of time. If you want to label your traditions, your moral principles, fine. If you do not want to say your beliefs sprang from an ideology with which you do not always agree, fine. Reject the labels. Not the traditions. Not the principles.

Mosque building - Koran burning...

Someone keeps telling us... "Be tolerant - it is the American way".

Someone keeps telling us... "Don't put our troops in further danger by insulting Islam"

Now, I want to tell you, it is time to back off and look at the big picture! And, just in case you missed the big picture, Michelle Malkin redraws it for you. Here is her column today, reprinted without permission, because every American must read it:

The Eternal Flame of Muslim Outrage

by Michelle Malkin

09/10/2010

Shhhhhhh, we're told. Don't protest the Ground Zero mosque. Don't burn a Koran. It'll imperil the troops. It'll inflame tensions. The "Muslim world" will "explode" if it does not get its way, warns sharia-peddling imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Pardon my national security-threatening impudence, but when is the "Muslim world" not ready to "explode"?

At the risk of provoking the ever-volatile Religion of Perpetual Outrage, let us count the little-noticed and forgotten ways.
Just a few months ago in Kashmir, faithful Muslims rioted over what they thought was a mosque depicted on underwear sold by street vendors. The mob shut down businesses and clashed with police over the blasphemous skivvies. But it turned out there was no need for Allah's avengers to get their holy knickers in a bunch. The alleged mosque was actually a building resembling London's St. Paul's Cathedral. A Kashmiri law enforcement official later concluded the protests were "premeditated and organized to vitiate the atmosphere."
Indeed, art and graphics have an uncanny way of vitiating the Muslim world's atmosphere. In 1994, Muslims threatened German supermodel Claudia Schiffer with death after she wore a Karl Lagerfeld-designed dress printed with a saying from the Koran. In 1997, outraged Muslims forced Nike to recall 800,000 shoes because they claimed the company's "Air" logo looked like the Arabic script for "Allah." In 1998, another conflagration spread over Unilever's ice cream logo -- which Muslims claimed looked like "Allah" if read upside-down and backward (can't recall what they said it resembled if you viewed it with 3D glasses).
Even more explosively, in 2002, an al-Qaida-linked jihadist cell plotted to blow up Bologna, Italy's Church of San Petronio because it displayed a 15th century fresco depicting Mohammed being tormented in the ninth circle of Hell. For years, Muslims had demanded that the art come down. Counterterrorism officials in Europe caught the would-be bombers on tape scouting out the church and exclaiming, "May Allah bring it all down. It will all come down."
That same year, Nigerian Muslims stabbed, bludgeoned or burned to death 200 people in protest of the Miss World beauty pageant -- which they considered an affront to Allah. Contest organizers fled out of fear of inflaming further destruction. When Nigerian journalist Isioma Daniel joked that Mohammed would have approved of the pageant and that "in all honesty, he would probably have chosen a wife from among them," her newspaper rushed to print three retractions and apologies in a row. It didn't stop Muslim vigilantes from torching the newspaper's offices. A fatwa was issued on Daniel's life by a Nigerian official in the sharia-ruled state of Zamfara, who declared that "the blood of Isioma Daniel can be shed. It is abiding on all Muslims wherever they are to consider the killing of the writer as a religious duty." Daniel fled to Norway.
In 2005, British Muslims got all hot and bothered over a Burger King ice cream cone container whose swirly-texted label resembled, you guessed it, the Arabic script for "Allah." The restaurant chain yanked the product in a panic and prostrated itself before the Muslim world. But the fast-food dessert had already become a handy radical Islamic recruiting tool. Rashad Akhtar, a young British Muslim, told Harper's Magazine how the ice cream caper had inspired him: "Even though it means nothing to some people and may mean nothing to some Muslims in this country, this is my jihad. I'm not going to rest until I find the person who is responsible. I'm going to bring this country down."
In 2007, Muslims combusted again in Sudan after an infidel elementary school teacher innocently named a classroom teddy bear "Mohammed." Protesters chanted, "Kill her, kill her by firing squad!" and "No tolerance -- execution!" She was arrested, jailed and faced 40 lashes for blasphemy before being freed after eight days. Not wanting to cause further inflammation, the teacher rushed to apologize: "I have great respect for the Islamic religion and would not knowingly offend anyone, and I am sorry if I caused any distress."
And who could forget the global Danish cartoon riots of 2006 (instigated by imams who toured Egypt stoking hysteria with faked anti-Islam comic strips)? From Afghanistan to Egypt to Lebanon to Libya, Pakistan, Turkey and in between, hundreds died under the pretext of protecting Mohammed from Western slight, and brave journalists who stood up to the madness were threatened with beheading. It wasn't really about the cartoons at all, of course. Little-remembered is the fact that Muslim bullies were attempting to pressure Denmark over the International Atomic Energy Agency's decision to report Iran to the UN Security Council for continuing with its nuclear research program. The chairmanship of the council was passing to Denmark at the time. Yes, it was just another in a long line of manufactured Muslim explosions that were, to borrow a useful phrase, "premeditated and organized to vitiate the atmosphere."
When everything from sneakers to stuffed animals to comics to frescos to beauty queens to fast-food packaging to undies serves as dry tinder for Allah's avengers, it's a grand farce to feign concern about the recruitment effect of a few burnt Korans in the hands of a two-bit attention-seeker in Florida. The eternal flame of Muslim outrage was lit a long, long time ago.

History: re-writing or just ignoring?

Growing up on the farm, we had no TV and precious little radio, our rural address was beyond the delivery limits of a daily newspaper - which my parents could not afford anyway. So my early education in current affairs came from listening to adult conversation and observing firsthand the grinding poverty of the depression.

Dollar bills were so rare that when we did get our hands on one, we read it! A fun riddle was "How many ones are on a $1 bill?" If you got hold of one, you counted the ones... both the numerical version and the spelled-out version.

I also remember that those old $1 bills did not say "Federal Reserve Note". Instead, they said it would be exchanged for a silver dollar, on demand!


Can you count the 14 "ones" on the Silver Certificate above? (Sorry - I could find no picture of the greenback side)

One thing I did learn from the $1 bill of my childhood was that Henry Morgenthau was Secretary Of The Treasury. His signature was there on the front of every $1 bill. Morgenthau was appointed by FDR in 1934 - the year I turned six years of age and entered the first grade of school. He served until 1945, the year I turned 17 and entered the U.S. Army. $1 bills with his signature lasted a lot longer. (The $1. bill on the bottom (above) was printed when Andrew Mellon was Secretary of The Treasury. Mellon was appointed by Warren Harding and served through most of the Hoover Administration.)

I knew his name, but I didn't know anything about Morgenthau. I realize he must have been an important part of the FDR New Deal, by simple virtue of the fact that FDR kept him in the cabinet until his (FDR's) death.

In the ensuing years, I have learned a lot about the New Deal, details I did not hear or understand as a kid when I listened to adults complaining that the policy was a total failure.

One gem came from the heart of the New Deal, from the mouth of that man whose signature was on the front of every $1 bill: Henry Morgenthau. Reflecting on the New Deal in 1939, Henry Morgenthau said:

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... and an enormous debt to boot!"

So, how do today's progressives view that fact? They say Roosevelt should have spent more. Can any intelligent person believe that? Agree with that? Morgenthau said "It does not work." Do today's experts know more than the guy who was at the heart of it?

Apparently, if history does not support your point of view, the history must be wrong!

A Rose By Any Other Name
Would Smell As Sweet...
-Wm Shakespeare

Former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson got himself in trouble for saying Social Security was like a cow with 300 million tits.

No, they did not object to the reference that the program was indicative of a nanny state. They did not seem to resent his inference that millions were being sustained at the public trough.

They were mad because he used the word "tits".

Raised on a dairy farm, I spent many morning (and afternoon) hours on a three-legged stool pulling on cows tits, filling a bucket with warm milk. And tits is exactly what we called them. It was a nasty job sometimes, especially in rainy weather when the cow had been lying in a muddy barnyard. And when she slapped you up the side of the head with a cockle burr-filled tail.

Even my patient, tolerant wife was offended by Simpson's remark. Said the word tits was degrading. Even if Simpson was talking about a cow.

Now, wait a minute!

I see quail hens lead their chicks to our back yard to scratch in the dirt for seeds we spread for them. Robins and other birds pluck a worm or a wiggling bug from the grass and carry it back to their nest to cram it, alive and dirty, down a gaping throat. A hawk kills a mouse and tears the tiny creature apart to stuff pieces of raw meat into the beaks of her young. Other creatures, like sea turtles, lay their eggs in the sand and swim away leaving hatchlings to fend for themselves.

But not mammals! From the body of the mammal mother comes a clean, precious, complete food... untouched by hands, hoofs or paws, fed directly into the mouth of her offspring, snuggled warmly against its mother's loving body! In addition to nourishment, and unlike the bird's germ laden bug or diseased mouse, mother's milk also imparts her immunities, protecting her offspring! How fantastic is that?

Degrade mammary glands? Impossible! An entire class of creatures are named for them. We (humans, at least) are not named for our five-toed feet, our opposing thumbs or any other physical feature... we are mammals... named for those miraculous mammary glands.

What an incredible possession for any mammal mother... be it a cow, a doe, a sow... or a human! And, in the case of the latter, those breasts are also alluring, a thing of beauty, proudly displayed to accentuate femininity!

As a child we chanted. "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never harm me". So call them breasts or boobs, tits or teats, jugs or hooters - doesn't matter. Nothing can degrade this miracle of mammalian life.

Sacred Honor

I first read (or heard) The Declaration Of Independence many years ago. Can't remember exactly when, because it didn't have much impact on a young farm boy. I've read it many more times down through the years. That long list of grievances against the King of England always lost me. It was foreign to my sphere of knowledge. It read like some sort of legal document: a lot of verbiage on the peripheral of my comprehension.

In recent years, I have come to understand that, apart from the list of reasons for declaring independence from the King, that document contains powerful and beautiful language: ...all men are created equal... unalienable rights... Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed... precious words, indeed!

The signers concluded with another powerful statement; we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor. Get that? Our sacred honor! To these men, their honor... their integrity, their honesty, their truthfulness, were sacred! How many of us today believe that?

In a business transaction where you suddenly discover a hidden fact, or a mistake, that would unfairly benefit you - would you consider it your sacred obligation to point out the error? You are walking down the street and find a billfold containing cash and other items, would you consider it your sacred obligation to restore it to its owner?

I once had a business partner who often repeated the slogan "There is no part time honesty!" Think about that. You are not an honest man because you are honest 99% of the time. One dishonest action, makes you a dishonest man.

My Dad used to say, "If a man doesn't have his word, what does he have?"

It doesn't matter how much money you have, how big your house, how luxurious your automobile... you could lose all those things in the blink of an eye. Your honor is your truly valuable possession, because no one can take that from you. It is yours alone, to keep or lose. Keep it sacred!

A place to worship?

In the latter years of his life, my father was pastor of a small Baptist church in a tiny Kansas community. The church building was a very small, ancient wood frame structure. As the little congregation grew, the need for more space became paramount. The congregation gradually scraped together enough money for the framing lumber, sheet rock, roofing, etc.

My elderly father, who had worked as a carpenter in his youth, worked with other men in the congregation for many days to build the addition to the church building. Yes, they swung the hammers, operated the saws, built it by hand.

That is the American definition of building a place to worship.

Do those people supporting the New York "Ground Zero Mosque" really believe we are stupid! Do they think we will accept that a fifteen story, $100 million structure represents a congregation building a house of worship? What size congregation would be required to raise $100 million? How long would that take?

Dr. Thomas Sowell has called the proposed 15-story structure a middle-finger salute to Americans. Others have called it a "law school", a place where Islamic Sharia law will be taught and promoted.

I don't know what it will be. I can bet what it will not be: a place to worship, built by a local congregation.

Soap in my life.

When I was a small boy on the farm, my mother made our soap. I have no idea how she did it or what was in it. She poured her mixture into a pan, like a cookie sheet, about 3/4 of an inch deep. When it solidified, she cut it into bars. I have heard jokes about "grandma's lye soap", and maybe she put lye in it. I never knew. I do not remember what it was like using her soap, either, because I hated soap in all its forms.

Mostly I hated the rule that, after running around the farm barefoot all day, I could not go to bed until I washed my feet. We had no inside plumbing, so washing my feet meant going to the well, pumping a pan of that ice cold water, sitting on the edge of the well and washing my feet in that pan.

I remember mornings when I was ready to head out the door for school, mother would grab me by the ear, turn my shirt collar inside, and wash my neck and ears. Sometimes I went on to school with my collar still turned inside. In fact I remember Annie Turpin, my teacher for the first four grades of school, pulling me aside and turning my collar out. One time she said, "At least I know your neck and ears are clean."

Anyway, mother's homemade soap served all purposes. How I long for that simple way of life!

Today, I step into the shower, and, starting at the top, there is hair soap... called shampoo. I use it on my hair and my beard. Then there is face soap. Good for ears, nose, neck etc., although I am not sure exactly where your neck ceases to be part of your face and becomes part of your body!

On a few occasions on the farm, I was caught swearing and got my mouth washed out with mother's soap. Today there is a special soap for that - called toothpaste.

With a clean head, I now reach for the body wash. This liquid goes on a wash cloth for arms, legs, pits, etc. And don't forget the hand soap! It is anti-bacterial! Wow!

There is no foot soap... guess I don't have to worry about bacteria on my feet! After all, I no longer run around barefoot all day - haven't been on a farm in decades.

I wonder what would happen if you accidentally got the hand soap on your hair? Or the shampoo on your feet?

Sometimes I think that sitting on the edge of the well washing my feet with cold water and homemade soap, wasn't as bad as I remembered!

Scary Weather!

I remember standing in the kitchen of my Kansas City home, adjustable wrench in hand, on a hot summer afternoon in the 1950s. I was watching a huge tornado move west to east across a residential area several miles to my south. My plan was simple - sensible or not: if the tornado swung north, toward my home, I would run outside and use my wrench to close the valve on the natural gas line. Then I would come back into the house, pull the main breaker on the electrical supply, and hurry to the basement to sit out the storm.

The tornado did not swing to the north. It just sort of petered out and ended. Later inspection of its path revealed houses in piles of pick-up-sticks, refrigerators and washing machines, sofas, beds, and every other kind of household furnishings tossed about the devastated neighborhood.

That was a scary storm, but not the scariest to make me tremble: that was while on board a U.S. Army Transport - a troopship - on the South China Sea, during a typhoon. I used to try to tell the story of that unimaginable violent weather, until it became clear that every listener appeared to believe it was just another wild exaggeration. Was it? Had the event grown wilder in 65 years of memory?

Yesterday I chanced to meet an old friend on a street corner. I say old friend because he is in his 90s, and I have known him for at least 15 years. He and his wife had just returned from a peaceful little cruise on the Great Lakes. He excitedly described his cruise until I remarked that after spending an aggregate of about six weeks on an Army troopship, I had no hankering for any time aboard a floating vessel.

He laughed and assured me there was a vast difference between the two sailings. Then, typical of an aging world War II Veteran, he began to describe some of his own troopship experience. The worse part, he vowed, was being caught in a typhoon on the South China Sea. He described how the bow of the ship would rise high out of the water, then slam violently down again. Then, as the bow went deep into the trough of the wave, the fan tail would rise high out of the water, exposing the screws, the ships propellers, to the air. They would gain speed and whine loudly, as a huge wall of water broke over the bow of the ship. He spoke of looking out into the violent blackness that surrounded the vessel and the realization that it you went overboard you were a dead man... you could never have been found even if the ship could turn around. All exactly as I remembered it!

I know there are seamen who have experienced this sort of weather on more than one occasion. They could probably top our stories for scariness. But for a couple of old landlubbers, like my friend and I, it was a horrible experience.

Yesterday, however, I found a bit of comfort in having my own aging memories verified.

Enough to make a grown man cry!

I recently heard someone comment about the inner workings of America's military men and women. Sorry... I forgot who said it, but it was explained that America's soldiers (marines, sailors, airmen, etc.) have a cause. They have a fire in their bellies for America. Before their first military training, they are already filled with a love of and loyalty to our nation. No other fighting men or women in history have fought more fiercely for their country.

Contrast that with the Afghan Army we are trying to train. These new soldiers may well love the land on which they live... but they have no history of a nation, a state, worth dying for. In addition to teaching them how to handle a weapon, move as a unit, and accept the discipline required of an effective fighting force, we must first convince them the fight is worth fighting.

But there is much more. A recent report was of a Afghan unit that came under fire and sustained casualties. They were able to radio for help - specifically for helicopters to evacuate their wounded. But not one member of the group knew how to read a map. They could not tell anyone where they were.

In another report, cash military payrolls were being raided by superiors along the way. A decision was made to issue cash soldier pay by ATM machine. Alas. The Afghan soldiers did not know how to work the machines and they were being forced to pay bribes to someone who could operate the machines for them.

The frustration for U.S. and NATO trainers trying to forge a reliable fighting force in Afghanistan must, at times, be almost overwhelming. May bring tears of frustration to adult eyes.

I am reminded of a story from my past. One of my daughters contracted Type One diabetes when she was eleven years old. After she completed college and became a school teacher, the disease gradually robbed her of her sight. She was assigned to teach a class of visually impaired children. Curious as to what grade level her students had achieved, I asked her to explain what the children were being taught. One little boy, she explained, persisted in beating his head against the wall. They were trying to teach him not to do that. No "three Rs" in the foreseeable future.

So the public asks, "What's taking so long to train the Afghan Army?" Uh... maybe less time than it will take to answer your question.

Blago. Convict or acquit?

Actually that is not truly the choice... to be acquitted, he must be retried. I am opposed to that.

I have no love for or loyalty to Rod Blagojevich, former Governor of Illinois. Admittedly I do not know the truth as to what he did or did not do. (Does anyone?) But my impression is distinctly one of disdain. I find it hard to believe that Mr. Blagojevich was little more than another crooked Chicago politician.

But he is being prosecuted by another man whom I perceive to be a crooked politician... Patrick Fitzgerald.

So what is the difference between the two? Fitzgerald has power. Blagojevich has none. Don't know about you, but I am much more fearful of crooks with power than of crooks without power.

"Cracklin's"

Looking for a change-up in snacks, my wife brought home a container labeled "Pork Rinds"!

Sounds like tree bark, lemon peel, parts of old footballs - or, as my dictionary states, a "hard or tough outer layer"!

Actually, they are not pork rinds at all, and I don't know who gave them that name. When I was a kid on the farm, we called them cracklin's. I loved them then, still do! Cracklin's are a by-product of rendering lard. Lard has been demonized by the health czars, but, used in moderation, it is not dangerous and imparts a flavor to fried chicken that has no equal.

When we butchered hogs on the farm, my dad trimmed off much of the fat before curing the hams and slabs of bacon. This fat was marbled with flesh, so it would be more accurate to say he trimmed away those parts that were mostly fat. These trimmings of "mostly fat" were the raw material for making lard.

Trimmings we put in a large pot and heated on the stove. I was too young then to remember details today, so I don't know how hot or how long, but eventually the fat melted and was drained - strained - off. This liquid fat was poured into large cans and, when cooled, was lard.

What was left was cracklin's, those traces of lean flesh, now cooked crisp and devoid of all fat. Or, almost all fat. Cracklin's do contain some fat... and calories.

Cracklin's are a great snack. As in the case of most simple foods, just remember the "M" word... moderation!

Watching Nature

In the Southwest desert trees grow alongside streams or where people plant and water them - rarely elsewhere. Here we are accustomed to endless views, generally as far as the next high mountain range.

Accordingly, it is fun to sit on the back patio and watch nature.

The other afternoon, we watched a hawk soaring over the landscape - rarely moving a wing - just gliding on thermals. His presence, while enjoyed by my wife and I, became very troubling to a neighborhood mockingbird. This smaller bird decided it was time to harass the hawk and, perhaps, persuade it to hunt elsewhere.

Repeatedly diving at the hawk, the mockingbird caused the hawk to react, but could not succeed in driving the large predator away. Instead, the hawk just circled and flew back toward us.

Finally, the mockingbird decided to increase the pressure. It dived so close to the hawk it appeared it was actually pecking the hawk on the head. On the next attack, it appeared to actually make contact with the hawks left wing. That was its mistake.

What happened was too quick for the eye to follow. All we saw was the mockingbird dive into the hawk's wing, then suddenly tumble to the ground. Somehow the hawk had delivered a knockout blow.

Birds, with their hollow bones and fluffy feathers, are lightweight. Perhaps the mockingbird survived the crash. Perhaps it landed on a creosote bush. We could not tell.

My wife was saddened, observing that the mockingbird was only trying to protect its nest from a perceived danger.

We were reminded that nature rarely plays favorites... just or unjust, if you make a mistake you'll pay.

Recent Events.

VJ Day was 65 years ago on August 15th. The anniversary of that event quietly passed the other day... completely ignored by our current president. Aside from events involving family, I believe VJ Day in 1945 was the most joyous occasion of my life. VE Day (Victory in Europe) had passed a few months earlier. I was working in a defense plant in Southern California on that day. All work was stopped and all workers were called to a meeting place. We were told that the war in Europe was over, but were reminded that the Pacific war continued to rage. There was more to be done and we all went back to work.

But VJ Day meant it was all over. I was in downtown Kansas City where huge crowds spilled into that city's famous 12th Street. We all sang patriotic songs and every guy kissed every girl. There was truly unbounded joy that lasted well into the night.

Art Linkletter died last May at age 97. This TV personality was a good guy who entertained us for years simply by demonstrating that "Kids Say The Darnedest Things" - which became the name of his show. I thought of him last week. After a six-hour drive to visit our granddaughters, I was sorely in need of a visit to a bathroom. Leaving the bathroom and returning to the family gathered in the living room, I was soon followed by my two-year-old granddaughter who loudly announced to the family that "Grandpa made my bathroom smell like poop!"

Elvis Presley was remembered August 16th, the anniversary of his death, by a large gathering at his former Memphis home - more quietly, elsewhere. I'll always remember the day I received a call (at the radio station where I worked) suggesting that I should check out some recordings on the Sun label by a kid from Memphis named Elvis Presley. "Who?", I asked. The caller, "Bubbles" Gilmer, manager of the Record Department for the Katz Drug Store chain, had to spell the name for me. No one has to spell his name today. 33 years after his death, it is still one of the most familiar names in the entire world.

About Prop 8 and That judge.

Recently I had a conversation about the California marriage referendum and the action of a federal judge negating the will of 7 million voters. Opposed to the judge's actions, I was challenged on the grounds that the law could not deprive one of their "rights". As someone with Libertarian leanings, I agree that the government needs to butt out.

But, when, exactly, did marriage become a right? If a man has a right to be married, some woman is obligated to marry him. What if no woman wants to marry the creep? If he has a right to be married, some woman must marry him. Are we all "endowed by our creator" with that right? (Sorry, lady. I have a right to a wife and you're it! Start rattling those pots and pans!)

Do you still think of marriage as a right?

And, if marriage is a right, why isn't polygamy? Certainly polygamy has greater historic significance than gay marriage. Think Solomon! Marriage is not a right. It is a tradition.

Marriage between one man and one woman is a tradition that has existed for a millennium. In my eight-plus decades of stumbling through life, I have come to the conclusion that ancient traditions became traditions through the test of time. It is terribly egotistic to think we are the first generation to think of something other than traditional marriage. Surely it has been tried. Surely it has failed the test of time.

Can we imagine why?

Statistics regarding single women raising (actually flunking at raising) kids are mind-boggling. Children with idle time at home with no parent in the house are much more likely to become troubled children. Single moms raising kids are overwhelmingly poor. Another recipe for troubled kids.

Lower birth rates are a death knell for any society. We need child-bearing families. Not easy for gay couples.

I could go on and on with the sad statistics of spouse-less parents and parent-less children. But the facts are simple... gay marriage satisfies only the selfish desires of two people. It benefits no one else.

Certainly we should not deny two people who love each other the joy of spending their lives together. But neither should we call them "married", and shout their relationship from the rooftops. Instead we should be promoting the virtues of traditional marriage... the benefits to both the husband and the wife, the benefits to children from having a mom and a dad, and the benefits to society from a generation of kids likely to be more successful.

A Mosque at Ground Zero?

I am not a member of any organized religion, but I am a passionate supporter of the First Amendment. In America, no law may prohibit the free exercise of one's religion.

However, according to Dr. Peter Hammond, author of "Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat" Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

The Constitution does not guarantee the right to any system of life. Head-hunting, cannibalism, and other practices are prohibited because they necessarily incorporate practices so forbidden by the laws of a civil society, that the question of religion is not relevant. And some "religions" do the same.

The religion of the ancient Aztecs that required ripping the heart from the chest of a living person and the devil-worship religions that require the sacrifice of even willing victims, are two examples. The practice of cutting off the nose and ears of a young woman, for some supposed moral transgression is another.


So, please, no more about freedom of religion as regards the Ground Zero Mosque. Hernan Cortez eliminated the ancient Aztec's blood-letting religious practices. Civilized societies everywhere should eliminate these current murderous religions.

The Wimping of America.

Remember the "Little Rascals" (sometimes called "Our Gang") ... Alfalfa, Spanky & friends? That early film (later, TV) comedy series followed the bumbling, stumbling antics of a group of kids. This unkempt, often unwashed gang; black, white, fat, thin, were not much, but they were always boys. (Yes, some girls did appear in the series.)

I loved the Little Rascals. So did a whole generation of ordinary kids... a generation which grew up to be The Greatest Generation.

This past week, my wife and I have been babysitters for four granddaughters: ages 12, 10, 6 & 2. Needless to say, I have watched a lot of The Disney Channel. A disappointing experience.

No more Spanky. No more Alfalfa. No more boys, as I knew boys to be. The male children on TV today are perfectly attired, beautifully coiffed little girly boys. All scrubbed clean, looking like they never even heard of dirt... much less had any under their fingernails from digging fishing worms with bare hands.

How could any girl be attracted to these girls in boy disguise? Maybe that is why so many boys want to marry other boys. And why girls want to marry other girls. There is no opposite to be attracted to.

Are the producers of these show purposely trying to groom a generation of wimps? What, exactly, will this generation of wimps grow up to be?

Here's one that made me say "Wow!"

On July 30, I underwent a stress test at the clinic of my Cardiologist. Upon completion, they gave me a letter which stated that I had received an injection of Thallium-201 Chloride, a radioactive substance for the purpose of medical imaging. They said to carry the letter with me at all times for the next couple of weeks - especially if I would be going through a Border Patrol check point, as I may set off their detectors. Yeah, right. I'll watch out for flying pigs, also!

Six days later, on Thursday morning, August 5, I did go through a BP check point. The very courteous officer asked if either my wife or I had recently undergone any medical imaging procedure.

I Showed him my letter and, still very courteous, they checked my I.D., then had us step out of and away from the car. With a Geiger counter, they checked out the vehicle, then they checked me. When he neared me, his instrument clicked like crazy.

They then checked with my Cardiologist to confirm what the letter said, thanked us for our patient cooperation, and wished us a good day.

Merely driving up to the check point in our car, I had set off their detectors! Wow!

I am not a fan of 'Big Brother' tactics, but if anyone is concerned about someone entering the country with a "dirty bomb", rest assured someone is doing something to prevent it.

Recently, some TV commentators have rudely criticized the Border Patrol. Not us. We congratulated the officers for doing their job and thanked them for their service.

Incidentally, most of the agents were Hispanic, as are many of our local police officers. So, never believe the lies about Border Patrol and police in the southwest practicing racial profiling. In all my years in the Southwest, I have never heard of a local police or Border Patrol officer accused of profiling by a Hispanic person.

Thou Shall Not Lie...

unless, of course, it is the easiest way to advance your position.

Go back to the earliest writings of civilization. Civilized people have always warned against bearing false witness. "Thou shall not lie!"

Remember George Washington and the cherry tree? "I cannot tell a lie." The legend says that young Washington believed that any punishment meted by his father was preferable to the disgrace of having been caught in a lie.

So, what, exactly, constitutes a lie. One dictionary definition is "to make an untrue statement with the intent to deceive." Not to be confused with an honest error... a mistake. But I believe it is also a lie to make an untrue statement because you have not taken the time to learn the readily available truth of the matter. Often that is the case with lies published by newspapers or magazines, or uttered by speakers. Someone hears a lie and repeats it without checking it out. They are still lying. It is still wrong.

Today, however, it seems that it has become okay to lie. Why bother to do fact checking when the lie so conveniently fits your point of view.

Here is a lie that originated with Mike Smith, a political cartoonist with the Las Vegas Sun, syndicated by King Features, and reprinted by the newspaper in my home town.


We expect political cartoons to be edgy, partisan. But, to just outright lie! And for supposedly respectable newspapers to happily reprint this lie... is that okay?

In the 1960s, I was involved in radio broadcasting in Kansas. First Lady Ladybird Johnson led a campaign to outlaw all billboards that obstructed the scenic view of passersby. As I have written before, we radio people could well have done without the billboard industries competition for advertising dollars. But we fought the billboard ban. Because it was wrong.

With the above cartoon, some newspapers have shown they would happily promote a lie to slander another news medium. Fox News Channel never mentioned Shirley Sherrod - never aired the offensive video clip, until hours after the White House forced her to resign. Notice that in the right hand side of the above cartoon, the representation of a TV screen labeled "Fox" shows the commentator as some sort of a loon. There was only one objective here: to declare Fox News Channel to be crazy. And, of course, they show a representation of President Obama pressing the "mute" button! Translation: Don't debate people who disagree with you - just call them crazy and shut them up!

That tells me a lot about the character of the newspapers which carried the Mike Smith cartoon. With them, lying is okay in political cartoons. Do they also lie in their regular news reporting? No wonder their circulation is shrinking.

Things I've Grown to Dislike.

I intensely dislike the word "colored" when applied to people. People are not colored - unless they are on stage as a clown - they are what they are born. (No, suntans do not apply!)

If we must comment on people's skin pigment, why can't we sensibly say "light-skinned" or "dark-skinned"? That is all the description we need - if we need a description at all.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. What does that title do to advance anyone? Nothing, in my opinion. It is antiquated and degrading.

People native to the tropical zone, all around the world, generally have dark skin. It is a product of the sun. Move away from the tropics - north or south - and you find people with lighter skin. A product of absorption of UV rays, or something. Of all the unimportant things in our modern world, that has to be one of the most unimportant.

Scientists tell us the human race originated in tropical Africa, where almost everyone was dark skinned. As humans migrated to temperate and colder latitudes - where suns rays were weak - their skin lightened. So, instead of talking about "colored" people. Why could we not say "bleached" people?

NAABP.

I might like that!

What I want from members of the new Congress:

1. Never introduce a bill - never vote for a bill - that is longer than one page. The founders wrote the master law of the land covering freedom of religion; freedom of speech; freedom of the press; freedom to peaceably assemble; freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances... all in one sentence! Forty five words! (See the first amendment to the Constitution.)

2. Never write a bill - never vote for a bill - that does not include the word repeal.

3. Support repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment. Eliminate all taxes that punish hard work and initiative; support a simple, fair tax code.

4. Support repeal of the Seventeenth amendment. U.S. Senators were supposed to represent the interests of their state... not the interests of their political party leaders.

Here we go again!

Everyone is piling on BP again. Maybe they deserve it... but that is not the point. My problem is that BP is accused of looking after their own interests (and the interests of thousands of people who have invested in BP stock) as opposed to appeasing Americans.

This time it is over the release, by a Scottish judge, of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the guy convicted of planting a bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, causing it to crash at Lockerbie, Scotland.

The complainers think the guy should not have been released. I agree. Why show humanitarian kindness to a person who inhumanely murdered so many innocent people over a perverted ideology?

They say BP petitioned for his release to help them secure an oil deal with Libya. I say, (if the charge is true) "Why shouldn't they have done that?" Our own Constitution (not applicable in this Scotland case in spite of the loss of American lives and property) grants the right to petition the government to redress a grievance.

You may argue the use of the word grievance, but the oil deal was certainly in the best interest of BP stockholders, while continued confinement of al-Megrahi provided no direct benefit. Letting him go will not bring back any lost lives - nor will it cause further losses. Apparently the only result is to anger a bunch of Americans.

BP is charged with acting in their own best interest. That, in itself, is not a crime.

Now.... if the Scottish judge winked at the law to do a favor for BP, that would be a crime. Then the judge should be punished, not BP.

Beyond the book's bizarre cover.

We keep hearing outrageous things from the radical Muslim camp, and keep wondering if they are really nuts. Look deeper.

In her weekly column, Kathleen Parker reports that another Islamist fatwa has been issued against a cartoonist (Seattle based Molly Norris) for a perceived insult to the prophet Mohammad.

In his 2006 book America Alone, Mark Steyn tells of a rumor that swept Khartoum, the capital of Sudan. The rumor told of a Sudanese shop keeper who shook hands with a western man and instantly felt his penis shrink and disappear. The story was supported by another man who said a man from west Africa handed him a comb and told him to comb his hair. When he complied, he immediately felt his penis shrink and disappear.

Are these people nuts?

Well, yes, but they are cleverly being led - no, dragged - down a path to hate all non-Muslims.

Someone, at some ancient time, determined that the ultimate, unforgivable sin was to make a picture of the prophet Mohammad. And, they apparently made it the solemn duty of every true believer to seek out and punish the sinner. How better to foment acts of violence than to identify a sinner and remind the faithful that it is their responsibility to inflict punishment?

Imagine the mental pain (not to mention the physical suffering involved) for a woman who loses a breast in a mastectomy. As much as anything, a woman's breast is symbolic of womanhood.

For a man, the penis is the icon of masculinity. In my opinion, a penis is more important to a man than is a breast to a woman. To a man, Muslim or otherwise, loss of one's penis renders him impotent - no longer a man. In a society so oriented toward sex (What religion other then Islam promises a man 72 virgins as he enters heaven?) that feeling of impotence upon the loss of one's penis, must be overwhelming for a Muslim man. What will those 72 virgins think? Can you imagine the giggling and pointing?

So, what of the Khartoum rumor? It teaches that you cannot even befriend (shake hands with) an infidel without being rendered impotent. You cannot accept charity (a comb) from an infidel without being rendered impotent. And even if you have enough scientific understanding to basically doubt the shrinking, disappearing penis story, why take a chance?

How then can we hope to reason with people so indoctrinated? With people who deeply hold such beliefs? If you offer a hand of friendship to a Muslim man; if you offer to help a poor Muslim man is your offer perceived as an attempt to make him impotent?

Do you find it hard to believe someone could be motivated to violence by an perceived attack on their religious beliefs? Blasphemous phrases against God are so offensive to some Christians that hearing the utterance causes great mental anguish. But, those people usually suffer in silence... they have not been taught that it is their duty to kill the offender.

When you hear talk of moderate Muslims; When you hear that Islam is a religion of peace; keep in mind that all Muslims would welcome an Islamic world. At what point, if ever, would they reject the radicals in favor of peace? To what extremes might they agree in the belief that the end justifies the means?

And, when you hear something from the world of Islam that sounds really kooky, think a little harder before you dismiss it offhand!

Is the president really stupid...

or does it just look that way?

First, having spent 25 years working for a news reporting medium, I know we never get the full story. Not always the reporter's fault... there are lots of obstacles (time among them) that keep us from getting all the details.

In politics, however, that matters little. It is the perception that counts.

Some months ago, when the city of Las Vegas was just beginning to feel the pinch of the recession, President Obama went on the air. Intending to discourage wasteful spending, he cautioned everyone not to go running off to Las Vegas. That misguided statement tightened the noose around Las Vegas' neck as group after group canceled conventions and meetings in that city, in fear of appearing wasteful.

Stupid? You make the call.

Now we have a situation wherein a oil spill, followed by an apparently ill-advised moratorium on off-shore drilling, has caused great economic pressure on a big chunk of America. Again, perception hurts. Talk of oil-soaked beaches and dead pelicans has scared away people who would normally be vacationing in the region. In reality, many of the beaches and associated resorts are pristine... someone needs to get the word out! Call the White House!

The President wants to take a vacation. Fair enough. All he has to do is make a big prime time TV announcement that he, Michelle and their daughters will be going to the Gulf to relax on the powder white sand beaches and in the crystal clear waters. Can you imagine him saying, "Come join me, America... let's show the people of the gulf that we support them!" That announcement would surely result in sell out crowds throughout that region. Not only would it boost the economy of the region, it would boost the president's sagging popularity ratings.

Does the president take advantage of this gold-plated P.R. gift? Nope. He vacations in Maine.

This time I will make the call... that was just plain, old-fashioned stupid!

What is the Tea Party movement?

Some TV commentators keep saying they just don't know what the Tea Party is all about. Locked in their view of the political parties, they see the DNC, the RNC, the state party headquarters, right down to those precinct captains, all trying to seduce voters to their point-of-view. And the TV heads keep searching for an equivalent structure in the Tea Party. Who is their leader? What is their objective?

Let me help: We do not have structure. We do not have a "Leader". We are not a party. But we do have an objective. Simply put, we are the voters the politicians hope to seduce.

It is pretty obvious that we have been naive. Throughout the Great Depression, World War II, the '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s we have behaved in what we believed was the American way. Each election we voted for the candidates we preferred. Some won. Some did not. But when all the votes were counted, we accepted those who did win. As they went off to their new offices, we cheered, trusting and believing they would act in the best interest of the nation.

Now, to our great dismay, we realize this has not been true. Beginning with Woodrow Wilson, many of those election winners have advanced a political agenda completely contrary to the best interests of the nation we so love.

Bit by bit they have been stealing our freedoms - our way of life - and we want it all back. We are not asking them to give it back. We are going to take it back. No, we will not do it with violence... we will not subvert the rule of law we so love. We will do it the American way. We will vote for the candidates who promise to "fix it". But, unlike the past, they will not be supported with our blind trust. We will monitor their performance as never before. We will share our views and opinions. We will work tirelessly.

Who is the Tea Party? Show up at any polling place next election day, and you will see them. They will be there to unleash the irresistible force of the power of their vote.

The BP Oil Spill

Ranking the tragedies.

For 85 days - since April 20, we have heard commentators tell us that the oil spill was a tragedy. Sometimes, I feel, for the wrong reasons. So, here is the way I would rank the seriousness of the various happenings.

The real tragedy was the loss of eleven lives when the drilling rig exploded. That can never be reversed, never healed. If you were a parent, a sibling, a spouse or a child of one of those workers who were killed, you will likely bear the grief of that loss for the rest of your life. For some reason, that is the "tragedy" we hear least about.

The second worse result of the spill is the loss of income for so many people. Whether you own a boat which was the source of your paycheck, but is now tied up at the dock; own a Gulf area business which is now closed, or are a worker idled by the mysterious moratorium the government is determined to impose, the result is the same: How will you make your next mortgage payment? Will you have to forget about that new car you had ordered? Forget about buying new school supplies and back-to-school clothes for the kids? And what about the people who hope to make their living by selling those things? If yours is one of the families so impacted, this is a tragedy - not of your making.

The third is the money lost. Millions of gallons of U.S. oil lost means millions, perhaps billions of U.S. dollars going to places like Saudi Arabia, where those dollars will be used to build madrassas to teach children to hate Americans; or to Venezuela, where the dollars will likewise be used for anti-American endeavors. And what about the pensioners dependent upon the value of BP stock?

Yes, the damage to wildlife and the environment is a tragedy - but that will be the quickest to heal. Pelicans should never die by choking in oil, but like all birds, the species will survive. I've stepped on tar balls on Miami Beach, and on the beaches at Santa Barbara, California. A messy situation, but survivable.

A tragedy that saddens me has been the widespread dissemination of misinformation. Otherwise reasonable news reporters have come unglued over uncertain or downright false and frivolous charges. Every news reporter should know that persons from different parts of the world tend to express themselves differently. But when the BP chairman made reference to "small people", he was accused of insulting Americans. Do you suppose he was simply speaking on behalf of the "little guy" we all seek to support?

BP has been vilified by virtually everyone. Is the company at fault? Was the explosion a result of bad company policy - the fault of one incompetent supervisor cutting corners - the result of an incompetent or uncaring government inspector repeatedly blowing off safety violations... or was it just a pure, out and out accident... one of those things people like to call "an act of God"? We may never know the truth. But we have already tried and convicted BP and levied punishment , perhaps far beyond the Constitutional limits of fair and reasonable punishment.

Hopefully, the well is now being capped, the spilling of oil will end. The eleven lost lives cannot be replaced. But, I wonder, will the other "tragedies" be allowed to end?

...until proven... NOT!

In America, we have this strange custom... we do not just accuse someone of something then proceed to punish them. The accused must be proven guilty after, as the Constitution states, having been informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; is confronted with the witnesses against him; has a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and if desired - the assistance of Counsel for his defense, etc.

Why, then are entities like Angie's List so popular? In one of their TV commercials, a painting contractor is black-listed because one of his employees behaved stupidly and tracked paint across a customers floor. This contractor may be the best in his community. (Has their ever been a business, large or small, that did not experience an employee behaving badly?) Surely he would have cleaned up the mistake if informed... perhaps his other employees already did! No matter - Angie's List says to blacklist him!

In another commercial, a plumber is lauded because he walked the customer's dog. A nice man, but did he know anything about plumbing? Maybe he was a skilled plumber, but the demand for a skilled plumber's time is such that one can hardly imagine him having time to walk someone's dog. I think I would like a little more information before calling this guy for a plumbing job.

With Angie's List, Service Magic, Super Pages, even the Better Business Bureau, consumers are given, not useful facts, but uncontested opinions which may or may not be accurate, truthful and pertinent.

I have seen many cases of good, legitimate business operations penalized - even forced out of business - by false accusations. I recall one contractor who was sued on what I know to have been a phoney charge. The customer wanted to not pay for $10,000. worth of work. The contractor surely could have won his case in court. But, his attorney calculated the time and grief that defense would require, the actual estimated cost of legal expenses, and told the contractor that his lowest cost option was to settle and give the disgruntled customer his work for free.

So, before relying on any of these consumer protection outfits, first read the Sixth Amendment, then find a more reliable way to confirm the qualifications of a company or individual you are considering for work.

Suppose...

Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Patreus and a few other top officers were talking about the twin wars in Iraq and Afghanistan... and the problems with the Palestinians and the Pakistanis and Iran and all the other Arab crazies, and said - strictly off the record - "This civilian team is going to cause us to lose it all. We have to do something."

The group agrees they can't do anything about Obama or Biden, that will take an election. But neither Holbrooke or Eikenberry were elected, they can start with them!

But, someone said, "We cannot make a frontal assault on the team. Any officer that tries that is sure to be demoted."

Then McChrystal says, "To hell with it! I'll take the demotion. These guys have to go." And someone counters, "But... if you just flat out tell them they are idiots, you'll get the demotion but they will stay. How can we swing it so that you take the demotion and they get the boot as well?"

McChrystal says, "Suppose I say they are idiots in a way that is not a frontal assault, but more like a slip-of-the-tongue. Maybe I will get the demotion but public pressure will force their exit!"

Someone adds, "Maybe. But if you take the demotion, who will take your place? Who will be acceptable as your replacement?"

Patreus jumps in, "I've got it! Hell, I'll take the demotion, too. But I won't attack the team up front. When you make the slip-of-the-tongue that gets you canned, Obama will be hard pressed to find a replacement whom anyone will accept... except me. But, that will be a demotion for me... and I haven't done a thing to deserve it. Which means I will have a big bargaining chip! So I will say, "Okay... I'll take that job... but I want something for it. For starters, I want Holbrooke and Eikenberry gone."

As usual, David Patreus has the right answer. Now to arrange that slip-of-the-tongue. It has to be sort of 'second hand', like through a reporter.

Now, of all the news organizations wanting in-depth access, who is most likely to blow a slip all out of proportions?


Just supposing, of course!

MacArthur & McChrystal

Today there are a lot of people making comparisons between Generals Douglas MacArthur and Stanley McChrystal. Both were relieved of their command by an incompetent president. Let's pray that is the end of the similarities.

My Army career was undistinguished but I did spend nine months with AFWESPAC - Army forces Western Pacific. Douglas MacArthur was my C.G.

MacArthur doesn't need me to defend him. He was one of the most competent military commanders of modern times. When the Korean War erupted, the invading North Korean forces pushed the ill-prepared American forces southward to the tip of the peninsula. When MacArthur came to the rescue, he did not join the beleaguered forces on their toe-hold of Korean soil. He landed his forces on the western shore, in the middle of the peninsula and swept across, trapping the North Korean forces which had pushed southward. Then he turned north and quickly swept to the Chinese border.

The Chinese Air Force began attacking the Americans from the safety of their bases on Chinese soil. MacArthur - a General who won wars - wanted to take them out. Had he done so, Korea would have been unified and we would not be facing them as a rogue nation today. But, timid Truman feared that action would restart World War II, and fired MacArthur.

The result was that North Korean and Chinese forces were able to push the Americans back to the 38th parallel, where the two armies have glared at each other for nearly 60 years.

Now, president Obama, like Truman, has fired an imminently capable commander. This time, it was over a perceived insult to the president.

Only those younger than me will be around to see the long-term results. Unless, of course, a nuclear-armed North Korea, or Al Qaeda wipes us all out beforehand.

The last straw.

Before Muhammad invented Islam and turned everyone into religious fanatics, the Arab world was a source of great wisdom. Arab shepherds, lying in the fields at night, gave us much of our early knowledge of astronomy. Watching stars rise in the east and set in the west each night they noticed that some of those "stars" moved along a different path. They gave them an Arab name that meant "wanderer" which word we translate in English to "planet".

The ancient Romans gave us a great alphabet and language, but they were not so good with math. They wanted to use their wonderful alphabet for counting, and chose the letters I, V, X, L and M. That part was good, because those letters formed with straight lines were easy to create in any material and were difficult to forge. But they couldn't figure out how to designate the empty box, and never came up with a zero.

The Arabs, whose alphabet failed to gain wider acceptance because it was too complicated, liked squiggly lines and used them to make numbers... one of which was "0", zero. We owe thanks to the Arabs for much of today's technology developed by the application of advanced mathematics.

The Arabs also gave us the delightful parable of the man who loaded his camel to the absolute limit of its ability to carry. As he embarked upon his journey, the wind blew a single straw onto the top of the camel's load. That straw, added to the load, broke the camel's back.

Through the ages it has reminded us that there are limits... there is a last straw! It may seem we are always able to handle one more pain... one more problem... one more abuse. But, like the old Arab's camel, there could come that single straw that is the back-breaker.

Barack Obama professes to be a friend of the Arabs. I wish one of them would remind him of their ancient parable. For, if he continues to pile abuses on American freedoms, he will surely one day add that last straw.

Tick, tick, tick...

One statistic released from the new Census is the ratio of births to deaths. Among white people it was reported to be 1:1. One birth for every death - a stable population. Among Hispanics it was 9:1. Nine births per death. Explosive population growth.

If that meant only that there would be lots of Hispanic babies, it would be wonderful. There are few things more precious than a Hispanic baby. Thick black hair, dark brown eyes. And this world certainly needs more such beautiful things.

Why should there be such a disparity between whites and Hispanics? Partly it is the philosophy of white elites against population growth, the misguided one-child-is-enough belief, pitted against the Hispanic culture of big families.

Sadly, it is in large part due to teen pregnancy. An alarming number of Hispanic girls are becoming pregnant almost as soon as they reach puberty. Generally that means a serious curtailment if not a complete end to their education. That often results in a lifetime of living on welfare.

Alarmingly, those pregnancies are not always the result of a careless relationship with a boy who also has just reached puberty. Newspaper headlines too often tell of abusive sex with young Hispanic girls by an uncle, a stepfather, or other adult man in a position of authority. A crime, in other words. An outgrowth, perhaps, of the long-held Hispanic culture of machismo - the philosophy of male superiority which more or less devalues women to the status of property.

There is another dark side to the statistic. With the Federal debt now over $13 trillion, we keep hearing people say we are burdening our children. With explosive population growth, maybe there will be enough children to handle it. Sheer population growth has pulled our chestnuts out of the fire in the past. But what happens when the children we are burdening are totally incapable of shouldering that burden?

When a baby is born to a 13-year-old mother (of any race, creed or color), there is an odds on chance that it will grow up on some form of welfare; that it will not have parental insistence, or even encouragement to stay in school; that it will not become an earner of high wages. Odds are against it becoming a taxpayer... necessary for paying down the government's debt.

Is a time bomb ticking?

Justice, American Style.

Let's say you run a stop sign. A policeman saw it and gives you a ticket. Damn! You call your lawyer for advice and he says to pay the fine. The law places the maximum fine at $50 and it would cost more than that to fight it in court - a fight you would lose.

You appear in traffic court and the judge says, "Guilty. Pay the clerk $13,333.34." What?

But, your honor, the maximum fine for running a stop sign is $50. "Doesn't matter", says the judge, "We need the money. In fact, this is not the cap... you may be asked to pay more."

The court isn't satisfied with an outright theft of your money... they go on to berate, humiliate, and do everything possible to ruin your reputation.

C'mon! That sort of thing could never happen in America!

-0-

The oil giant, BP, wanted to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, where the water was 500 feet deep, and the state of Louisiana granted permission to do so. But, BP needed further permission from the federal government, which said "No. We want you farther out from the shore, to better protect the shoreline in case of a spill."

BP replied that the water out there was 5,000 feet deep and they had no experience drilling at that depth. What if something went wrong? We're not sure it is worth it.

The Feds held firm - and besides, the law specifically places a cap of $75 million on liability in case of an accident.

BP engineers know there is a lot of oil down there! It is worth a $75 million risk.

They drill. Something goes wrong.

The Feds take 20 billion now, and advise they may want more later.

But, the Feds aren't satisfied with an outright theft of BP's money... they drag them into the White House, then to Congressional hearings, where they berate, humiliate, and do everything possible to ruin their reputation.

Ah! Justice!

Flag Day.

I just watched a TV commercial in which Fred Thompson made a pitch for a company offering a reverse mortgage. Fred was standing in front of a house. Behind him, attached to that house, a wall-mounted flag staff held an American Flag waving gently in the breeze.

I liked it. The flag was pretty and it afforded me the opportunity to watch the flag and ignore what Fred was saying. But it brought back memories of another Flag Day, about 30 years ago. We were in Toledo, Ohio - in the studios of WTOL-TV - to do a live television program. Part of the set for the program were a group of telephone operators, seated at tables, each with a red telephone to accept viewer calls which would come.

Since it was Flag Day, we bought some little American Flags, on miniature staffs, and set one next to each telephone. Ooops! A station executive made an appearance just before air time and ordered the flags removed. We protested that it was June 14, Flag Day, and we just wanted to promote the displaying of the flag! Nope, station policy prohibits using the United States Flag in any commercial announcement!

How things have changed! Notably those standards enforced by broadcast stations. Not always for the better, in my opinion. And I am not talking only about flags.

Sixty years ago, as an announcer at radio station WLDY in Ladysmith, Wisconsin, I was called into the station manager's office and reprimanded for using the word "crud" on the air. Today it is okay for the President of The United States to say, on coast-to-coast network TV, that he is learning whose ass to kick. I would have been fired for using that kind of language.

We used to ask fellow announcers, "Would you use those words in front of a class of kindergartners?" "Would you say those things in a church?" No one had to define profanity. Or pornography. Or rude behavior. Everyone understood what was unacceptable in civilized company.

The next time you see some old guy with a sad face, think of this: he may be remembering the days when civility was the rule.

Little Things

sometimes speak loudest.

June 6, 2010 was the 66th anniversary of the World War Two invasion by Allied Forces of Mainland Europe. It was a mission in which American soldiers and Marines knew there was only one way to make the invasion succeed... storm the shores faster than the Germans could kill them. The body of the force did succeed, but thousands of Americans died in the effort.

In France, where the landing occurred, civilians honored those dead, as they always do. But our president, Barack Obama, completely ignored the anniversary. Members of his administration marked the event playing summer games with no observance of the anniversary.

A lot of people were upset by the presidents action on that day, saying it just reinforced his disdain for our military. I agree, but we did not need this event to prove that president Obama hates the military.

Each time the president steps out of Marine One, the helicopter assigned for his personal transportation, a Marine, in full dress uniform stands at the bottom of the stairs - a personal guard for the president, and honors his Commander in Chief with a crisp salute.

For those who have never been in the military, the salute may not seem important. But in the Army, I learned that it takes a long time and a lot of hard work to achieve rank. (Yeah, we were a little skeptical of the second lieutenant graduates of Officer Candidate School, who became commissioned officers rather quickly!) Thus, when an enlisted man or woman confronts a commissioned officer, they salute - expressing their respect for that officer's achievements. The officer returns the salute - displaying his gratitude for the honor shown him. So, the salute is not some kind of robotic action - it is an expression of respect.

The president of the United States, as Commander in Chief, is technically a member of the military, and thus entitled to this demonstration of respect - and the salute - by all military personnel.

Now, the little thing!

When Obama leaves the helicopter, he does salute - but it is very robotic. He always looks straight ahead, never at the Marine saluting him... never acknowledging the existence of the Marine guard. What a slight!

President George Bush reacted quite differently. He always turned toward the Marine guard when he saluted, saying with that small action, "Thank you for the honor, and I, in return, honor and appreciate your service to our country."

Little thing? Yeah. A little thing that stabs me in the heart every time I see it happen.

How do you say "Louisiana"?

Back in my radio announcer days, we were given two rules for pronouncing place names. First rule, a place name is always pronounced the way the residents of the place pronounce it.

If you do not know how the locals pronounce it, you make your best effort, based on logic. If the place has what appears to be a Spanish name, try to use rules for Spanish pronunciation. San Juan would be "Sahn-wahn".

Louisiana, we were told, was named for a King Louis of France, not someone named Louise! So we should not say "Loo-wees-ee-anna". We tried to say "Loo-is-ih-anna", though occasionally we tried to imitate locals who seemed to say "loos-ih-anna"

Okay... so the French may drop the "s" and pronounce Louis as "Lou-ee".

Today, newscasters - even the big and famous ones - do say "Loo-wees-ee-anna"!

Someone please help. How are you supposed to say "Louisiana"?

Health Care?

Or just another stupid idea?

This past week I have been scanning a lot of documents. With the scanner I use, it was quite a drag. So time consuming! So, this week I have thought a lot about a conversation in the office of my doctor - my primary care physician.

First, please understand that I consider my doctor an extraordinary person. Recently, after my annual physical, I unfolded a list of questions I had saved up to ask. I used up a lot of the doctor's time. The doctor never hurried me, but answered every question to my total satisfaction. Finally, realizing I had taken so much time, I thanked the doctor and apologized for taking so much time. The doctor replied, with a smile, that I should not apologize for asking questions... it is the doctor's job to answer my questions. When I again expressed my appreciation, the doctor said, "It really is okay. But, if one day you have to wait a few minutes longer in my waiting room, please be patient as I may be answering extra questions for another patient.

Honestly... what more could you ask?

But, back to my earlier referenced conversation with the office manager. My off-hand remark was "How are things going?" The frustrated person said she was trying to figure out where they were going to get $18,000 to pay for computer programming required by the new health care law to get their patients records digitized... then, she added, we have to scan all of this. She motioned to shelves of folders, each holding the detailed medical records of one patient.

Obviously, the cost of the software would be only a down payment. The real cost would come in opening each folder, scanning each document, and then checking to see that each document was clearly readable. You can't risk a patient's life by posting medical records that are not crystal clear and accurate in every detail. Obviously, this office staff could not handle that - they would have to hire people to do the job.

I shuddered! The stuff I had been scanning was not life threatening. If one of the documents turned out to be hard to read, no one would suffer. But with my doctor's files, some one could suffer. Then I thought of the documents in my own medical files. There were reports from labs on blood work. Notes from specialists who had performed tests. All on different kinds of paper - some with scribbled notes by a technician. My doctor, who knows me so well, could decipher them. Could another medical professional, far away, looking at a computer screen?

It seemed so simple: put the patient's records on line, improve care, improve accuracy, save lives. Now, I realize it is just another hair-brained idea from someone who has no idea what is involved... a hair-brained politician or bureaucrat. A hair-brained idea that is going to increase the cost of medical care - and could well endanger some patient's health.

Veterans

Recently you may have seen pictures of World War II veterans floating around the internet. Most look something like this guy:


And, today's young people find it difficult to connect. It's somewhat like looking at the picture of George Washington on a dollar bill. Nearly impossible to animate that person, to comprehend what they were like as a living, breathing human, the ones who took up arms for America.

Too bad you couldn't know some of these guys as I knew my Army buddies. Like Bill Martinek:

Cpl. Martinek (from Topeka, KS) was a good looking guy. He would have caused heart throbs among all the girls at a high school prom. But Bill wasn't at a High School Prom. He was in the Western Pacific, in the service of his country.

And, how about Chester Liszka? Maybe today Chester looks like the old pictures of Vets we now see. But this is what he looked like back on Leyte:


We used to hear a lot about our "boys" in uniform. The Army never called them "boys" - the Army always called them men! But, they were boys. Good, wholesome American boys who loved their country enough to interrupt their lives and enlist in the Army.

So, the next time you see an old, stooped guy with a VFW hat, close your eyes for a moment, and see Bill Martinek or Chester Liszka as they were 65 years ago.

Maybe, though, you can avoid imagining those few, devil may care, undisciplined types who had fun no matter what... like this guy. Uh... oh, never mind... that was me!

Yardsticks: Good and bad.

We use a lot of standards to compare things. Sometimes I think those standards are out of whack.

We see a guest appear on a TV news program and immediately the screen shows a sidebar listing the educational accomplishments of the guest. B.A. at such and such school in some year; M.S. at some other school in a later year; Ph.D., perhaps; then political offices held. Ho Hum!

I am reminded of the old joke about the country boy who went off to school and climbed the ladder of academia. Eventually he could write his name followed by BS, MS, PhD. Another country boy asked his pa what the letters stood for. The old man explained, "We know what BS is; MS means more of the same; Ph.D. means Piled Hip Deep".

Recently, when Barack Obama appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, some commentator remarked that she had gone to "all the right schools." Really? By what or by whose standards were those schools "right"? Was it the price of the tuition? Was it the number of Senators and other famous politicians who graduated from the school? Was that because of a better education provided, or just because that was the school chosen by wealthy, influential parents? And what difference does that make to a student, anyway?

Years ago, when my youngest son was attending a Community College, he had a conversation with a lawyer who had graduated from one of the prestigious Ivy League schools. My son asked what difference it might make to attend such a school, compared to, say, a state university. The lawyer answered that, in a given course, both schools may use the same text book. But, at the Ivy League school, the professor may well be the guy who wrote the book.

Fair enough. But which student is better? The kid who listens to the lecture by the guy who wrote the book, then goes out to party and cruise around in the luxury car his parents bought for him... or the poor kid who leaves the state university classroom, goes back to his dorm room and reads and re-reads that textbook, absorbing all the information, truly learning what the author had written?

In preparing advertising for a certain trade school, I once asked the school administrator if her students really excelled after completing her course of study. She said that some students graduate, then fade into oblivion. Other students, once exposed to the information, exploded with confidence and enthusiasm, found ways to be better and accomplished significant things. In other words, the school introduces the student to knowledge but it is up to the student to do something with that introduction. You've heard the old riddle, "What do they call the guy who graduated last in his class in medical school? DOCTOR!"

Yes, there is a difference in schools. Some teach better than others. Some demand more of their students than do others. But the mere fact that a person attended a certain school means nothing to me. Why even list it? We need a better yardstick... how did that student perform in school? What did the student accomplish after graduation?

Years later my son was teaching at Cornell - high above Cayuga's waters. He spent most of his time in his office with students who were begging for a higher grade. He said a student would make 60% on a test, then argue endlessly for a better grade.

Maybe that sorry student is today holding some very important position in government, and proudly proclaims that he graduated from Cornell! He is still a 60% student.

Time to opine!

I have to vent. After a year of outrageous actions on the part of our federal government, one more outrage should not cause your head to explode. However, the piling of the Obama Administration's reaction to the new Arizona immigration law on top of all previous outrages, does the trick.

Barack Obama warns that if you take your child out for ice cream a police officer may demand to see "your papers".

Eric Holder, America's top lawyer, is concerned that the Arizona law will lead to racial profiling and announces that the government is considering filing a lawsuit against the state of Arizona.

Then, under oath in a Congressional hearing, Holder admits he has not read the Arizona law! (Members of Congress were handed a Health Care Bill of over 2,000 pages and expected to read and understand it in 24 hours.)

Doesn't everyone understand that neither Holder nor Obama have read the Arizona law, because neither man gives a damn about the content of the Arizona law? They only want to keep agitating the subject to help assure that the vast majority of Hispanics will vote for Democrats.

Big Girls Don't Cry...

Well, sometime they do, along with big boys. The truth is, some people, boys and girls, big and small, old and young, easily cry. Some do not.

If you easily cry, it is totally beyond your control. You hear a patriotic song; you spot a disabled veteran; you watch a wedding as people make vows they, and you, hope will hold a lifetime; the accomplishment of a child; a random act of kindness... your eyes suddenly burn and tears well. You dare not speak, knowing a choke, a sob, or some other involuntary sound will come from your throat and reveal your emotional overload. They will wonder.

Elvis Presley once recorded a song titled "I Was The One". He sang, the sight of her tears drives you out of your mind. As a matter of fact, the sight of tears drives a lot of people out of their mind, and not in an empathetic way. People who do not cry look at people who do cry as weak, or worse. At best, they turn their eyes away. Sometimes they make a remark that hurts.

A senior friend once admitted that he cried at the drop of a hat. That made me think that crying easily was just another unpleasant side effect of aging. As though, by the time you are old, your nerves have been rubbed so raw, your emotions easily erupt in tears. Then, I see younger people cry... at times when they should not!

So, it remains that some big girls, and others, do cry, whether they like it or not. I've noticed that if a person has a visible disability, like a limp, people sympathize. If the disability is not so visible, as in the case of mental disability, people just dismiss you as stupid. Crying, involuntarily, is visible. But don't expect sympathy.