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.

To the shores of Tripoli.

Marines have been singing that refrain for well over 100 years, as a part of their The Marines Hymn.

It refers to the Battle of Derne in the First Barbary War in 1805. Not unlike the activities off the coast of the African Horn today, pirates had been ravaging shipping in the Mediterranean. Unlike today's Somali pirates, the Barbary pirates were state sponsored, and nations could make a deal with the pirates to pay a mafia-like "protection" sum to avoid the pirate attacks.

In 1800, the United States was in financial straits from the recent war, and paying a ransom seemed the least expensive way to avoid pirate disruptions to U. S. shipping. The pirates, however demanded unreasonably high payments from our new nation, so the U.S. president said no. The U.S. Marines settled the dispute, as they continue to remind us in their Hymn, ending the piracy. British Admiral Nelson called the Marines action the most bold and daring act of the age.

Why then, I wonder, can we not do the same in Somalia today? I hear that unlike 1805, the U.S. Military today is involved all over the world; and that we just cannot afford another engagement.

Maybe that is true, but in 1805, the U.S. Population was about 5,300,000, less than 2% of today's population. And, the U.S. Military was very small, whereas it is now the most powerful in the history of the world. But, in 1805, Thomas Jefferson was president of the United States, and Americans were on fire with the concept of liberty! When faced with an unjust affront to that liberty, America took action.

Has that fire gone out in the belly of the American government? Does America no longer engage in bold and daring acts in the name of liberty?

Surfin' porn on the company computer

There's been a lot of talk on TV news this week about employees at the Securities and Exchange Commission spending hours - in some cases hundreds of hours - surfing pornography on the government computers while "on the clock". Much of what has been said is about the possible reasons for or results of a seeming addiction to porn. They miss the point!

When you - private enterprise or government bureau - employ someone, you make an exchange agreement... so many dollars for an agreed upon time at work. Work forty hours - I pay you $500., or whatever amount agreed upon. Now, suppose the boss decides to renege a bit and give you something less? Well, now! You go to NLRB and complain. They, in turn, tell your employer to make up the shortage or face the wrath of the law.

But what happens if the employee decides to renege and not work the agreed upon hours. Maybe the employee, instead, spends several hours a day on the phone, visiting with friends or family. Or he spends those hours glaring at a computer screen (furnished and powered by the employer) showing naked people engaged is all sorts of explicit sex acts. In the latter incident, all sorts of learned people carry on as to why you chose that particular endeavor, and how that may affect your life or your behavior!

Like I said, that's beside the point. The point is that you purposely failed to keep your agreement with your boss and it is payback time... your next check should be docked pay for every hour you were not working.

If an SEC employee is drawing $100,000 a year, as claimed, and they spent 1600 hours looking at porn, they owe back $76,923.07.

Hey, fair is fair!

My problem with "social networking"

I don't use Facebook, don't Tweet, don't participate in any of the wildly popular social networks. I have nothing against daily contact with friends and family. My opposition hinges on the requirement of brevity.

Radio and television, love them though I do, introduced the era of brevity. Of quick little sound bites. In broadcasting, we always talked about "time constraints" as the cause for brevity. These constraints existed because we knew we had to get off the serious side of informing people with real news and get back to entertainment programming, or we would lose our listeners.

Now, in the era of broadband, high speed Internet connections, our society has become an impatient society. If it takes too long to download, forget it! If you cannot tell a story in one brief sentence, you will lose your listener. The new social networks serve to reinforce this practice. I wish to eliminate it.

We no longer want to take time to read a lengthy analysis of a current news topic. The result, in my opinion, is a population uninformed, easily misled, easily fooled.

For example, today's news is anchored with President Obama lecturing Wall Street, and his plan to "reform" their practices. Sounds okay, until you start thinking. The president is scolding - punishing, if you will - people who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to support his election. What's going on?

In the suspicious mind of this old man, something is wrong. But you are not likely to learn more from sound bites. This is a big, involved subject for the average guy. Needed is a patient, detailed explanation. I found one in John Mauldin's "Outside The Box" column today. It is long, requires time and concentration to read and understand, but if you want a peek behind the curtain, please check it at www.johnmauldin.com/outside_the_box.html

Mauldin points out that, tucked away in the 1300 page financial reform bill, are requirements that will seriously impact investing by (comparatively small) "angel" investors, while heaping crippling obligations onto innovators seeking investments in their new business venture.

Could it be that this new "reform" legislation, meekly accepted by the people it is supposed to be punishing, is actually a tool that will force billions in new business their way?

Sorry, that question cannot be answered with a sound bite. But if you are willing to spend fifteen minutes or more, Mauldin may well answer it for you.

More problems with changing definitions

I know it is a product of aging, but when you have accepted the definition of a word for decades - or for a lifetime - it scrapes on the edge of your nerves when someone changes that definition.

One that irritates me is the now universal practice of calling a serious TV news program a "Show"! To me, Show means Barnum and Bailey, proprietors of The Greatest Show On Earth!

In my day, we called a newscast a newscast or perhaps just a report. I think it robs your effort of dignity when you say "At the end of our show, we will..... ", or "on tomorrow's show we will... ".

The other word that more people are using is in reference to politicians who belong to the Democrat party. You know what it is... Democratic! Columnists and reporters I love now talk about the Democratic Caucus, or the Democratic majority! Can't you just, please, refer to them as Democrats. Increasingly, they demonstrate that they are anything but democratic!

If I were to start a new political party, I might call it the Virtues. Then maybe people would refer to us as Virtuous.

Probably not!

Tempted and tried...

Back in the 1940s, on country music radio, we were playing a country/Gospel song titled "Farther Along". The lyric said, in part,

Tempted and tried we're oft made to wonder
Why it should be thus all the day long
While there are others living about us
Never molested, though in the wrong.

Through the years, I've known people who seemed to fit that lyric... good, decent people who were struck by one disaster after the other. People who were good parents, good neighbors, but faced one devastating illness after the other.

But, did you ever know a nation that seemed to fit that lyric?

I do, it is Poland. That nation of good and decent people has never caught a break. Before World War I, their nation was destroyed. After that war, it was somewhat restored. Then came the Nazis. Polish men, intent upon defending their homes marched out to meet the German tanks, some armed with nothing more than pitchforks. Who has that kind of courage, that resolve! My, how I admired those brave Polish farmers.

The Soviets marched through and wiped out the Germans, only to replace them with a new kind of brutality. But the Poles persevered again, finally winning their freedom once more.

Recently, in the process of remembering past Polish heroes murdered by a foreign power, the Presidential plane crashed, killing the nation's president and many other Polish leaders.

Now, a volcano erupts, just in time to halt air traffic and prevent many from attending funeral services for these latest Polish victims of unending misfortune.

Perhaps, as the old country song continues,

Farther along we'll know more about it
Farther along we'll understand why.
Cheer up my brothers, live in the sunshine
We'll understand it, all bye and bye.

We can hope!

A National Day of Prayer

Everyone who knows me well knows that I am not a religious person... at least, not a promoter of organized religion. I know some truly religious people who are magnificent humans. However, my lifetime experience has found about as much corruption among "religious" people as among politicians. Do the names Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton ring any bells? How about Jeremiah Wright, Father Flager or Louis Farrakhan. Might I add Oral Roberts and a few other TV evangelists to the list?

But beyond that, most religions - and I mean the established religions, not the storefront things with the strange names like "Church of the Guiding Light" - or flashing light - or whatever they call themselves... most established religions have their roots in ancient times when curious but uninformed people were searching for answers to things they could not understand.

So, they decided the earth was the center of the universe. And that the earth was flat. And lots of other things which certainly appeared valid to the average observer, but proved to be patent nonsense.

But, through the years, they also discovered a code of conduct which, by and large, is as applicable today as then.

So if a teacher today tells my grandchild or great-grandchild that God guides the stars across the skies, I object. I have no idea exactly what guides the stars to go wherever they are going, but that doesn't mean "God" is doing it.

If someone points to the Ten Commandments and says "Thou Shall Not Kill" or "Thou Shall Not Steal", I agree. If they say "Thou shall have no other Gods Before Me", I disagree. I, you see, don't have any "Gods"... if that means one specific being sitting on a throne somewhere.

But "prayer" is not religion. To some, prayer means the Christian "Lord's Prayer". Of course, that is nothing more than a wish for basic life (our daily bread) and a wish to be a better person, (lead us not into temptation). To some, prayer means to drop on your knees and ask that your team wins the game. To the Muslims, it is a five times a day ritual of facing Mecca and doing some kind of orchestrated bow.

To others, prayer means a moment of personal reflection to think of what you are doing, what you should do, and how to reconcile the two.

Frankly, I don't care what prayer means to you. But to each of the above-mentioned, prayer is, obviously, a serious, important thing. So, why is that not okay? Someone, okay, some politician hoping to accrue good will (I'm too lazy to look up the origin) by promoting that feeling of personal fulfillment, initiated a "National Day of Prayer". No problem. A national reminder to take a few moments and think about your feelings as to what the world is doing... what you are doing.

Now a Federal judge, one Barbara Crabb from Wisconsin, has decided that a National Day of Prayer violates the basic law of our land! Unless someone can better explain those ten clear, concise words of the First Amendment that deal with religion, I conclude, Your Honor, that you are an idiot!

To my environmentalist friends...

Where I live, in the Southwest, the wind blows. Today we are under a huge wind warning and the wind is screaming around our house. Such raw power! How many kilowatts are there for the capture?

I love the wind generators. they are big, clean and, in my opinion, rather graceful looking. Sadly, as an energy source, they are a long way from fulfilling their promise. That is why I can scan the wide open landscape and see not a single wind generator.

A friend of mine in another state also loves the generators. so much so that he decided to erect one on his property. Then he learned that the going price is about one million dollars! Wow! What are the chances of recovering that kind of investment? Pretty slim.

Much the same can be said about a nuclear generating plant. Big, big investment. Questionable rate of return.

This is why some two-thirds of America's energy comes from burning coal. I know you hate those "pollutant belching" coal powered generators, as one of my liberal friends described them. But think of the good we all achieve from electricity. Without electricity, we would be hard pressed to continue to live in our home. I don't like air pollution, either. but, I can live with it. I cannot live without electricity.

So, today, in wake of the tragic loss of life in a West Virginia coal mine, I am especially thankful for coal, and for the many men and women who secure it for us. Talk about unsung heroes! How long could America last if their efforts ceased?

Thank you - and bless you, coal miners!

Communism - The fantasy that persists.

About 25 years ago - give or take a couple of elections - a fellow in western Missouri ran for Congress. In his campaign advertising, he told how he, his father and his brothers all "lived from the same wallet". They each worked and put their earnings into a common bank account. All lived and spent frugally and all prospered. You can imagine that if one lost his job - he was taken care of until he found a new job. If one suddenly got a better job with higher pay, all profited. What a wonderful picture. Many folks I knew planned to vote for him. Sadly, the poor man was killed in an airplane crash before the election, so we'll never know how he may have governed had he been elected. But his story was very appealing. Of course, their success depended entirely upon every member working equally, spending frugally, being always true to the group.

For centuries, men have watched ants and bees, admiring and envying the way they all worked for the common good. There were no "poor" ants or "poor" bees, unless the entire colony was poor.

Then a German named Karl Marx spelled out a way for humans to live the same way... to live in an always equally sharing commune. Communism.

Trouble is, humans are not ants or bees. Humans are individuals with unique thoughts, aspirations and ambitions. Bees tolerate drones. Males whose only purpose is to mate with the queen and then be killed. Bees have worker bees which work endlessly until they drop dead on the job, never achieving anything special for themselves. Humans will not tolerate such a society.

But the Marxists have persisted. When enough people in a nation subscribe to their philosophy and install their form of government, the results are always the same. Too many workers refuse to work. Those who do work soon realize they are being cheated and quit working. The requisite rules and regulations soon trump reality and big mistakes are made in the name of compliance.

In the 1960s, the U.S. and Soviet Russia cooperated on an exchange program where teens of each nation spent a summer in the other nation, to learn about their way of life. Some farm boys from Kansas who participated were appalled when rules required that everyone leave the fields at quitting time, leaving crops to be destroyed by a coming storm. In Kansas, If your hay crop is cut and baled ahead of an approaching storm, you stay in the field, working through the night to get the hay safely in the barn. Then you can rest as necessary.

Every nation that has tried Communism has failed. Current examples are Cuba and North Korea. The greatest failure of Communism, of course, was the U.S.S.R.

Now some point to China as a success of Communism. But Communism in China exists only in the halls of government. Essentially, they have turned away from the collectivist rules and allow the people to make their own way. China is now the most entrepreneurial nation in the world. Unlike the Russians on the collective farms of the 1960s, the Chinese work tirelessly to succeed. Chinese people make great sacrifices to travel and live in distant places when that means a better job, a better salary, a better life for their families.

Still, the world is full of "bee watchers", intent upon transforming humans into drones and workers, etc. How much more proof do they need that this is a fantasy that has not, does not, will not work?

How did
The Greatest Generation
get it so wrong?

God knows we thought we were doing it right. We struggled through the depression years of "The Dirty Thirties" - dust bowl and all. We ate the simplest foods and were grateful for every bite. We went to school with homemade clothes and bare feet. We listened to the politicians promise us a new deal as the depression worsened. We dumped high school to join the military and serve the country we so loved.

When the world finally settled down, we also settled down to raise a family, determined that our children would have a better life than ours.

So, what did we do? We created a generation that cares nothing for the values so dear to our hearts. A generation that hates the American entrepreneurial spirit. A generation totally ignorant of the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and totally disinterested in the miraculous constitution they gave us.

We cared so much for them, they now believe they should always be cared for. But, the greatest generation is rapidly disappearing, and this new generation soon will realize that we will not be replaced. And I fear they will also learn that the rest of the world will not care for them but will destroy them if they can.

This weekend I was reminded that the students starting college this year were born in 1992! Born in 1992??? Why, that's only.... oh.... 18 years ago! How could they know? They didn't live it. We didn't teach it. Whatever they are, perhaps we are responsible.

How did we get it so wrong?

But, still caring, I yet have one sincere wish: that today's generation will learn (please, not the hard way) before it is too late.

Where will we be in 2052?

My father died 42 years ago today. He did not have a lot of formal education, but he was an intelligent, well-read man, aware of current events.

But, at his death, he had never heard of the internet. Knew nothing of personal computers. Never heard of GPS. Would have been puzzled at the mention of HDTV or flat screen LCD TVs, much less a digital TV. Never saw a CD or a DVD. Never saw a cell phone. Never saw an electronic calculator. You get the idea. None of those things were a functioning reality in 1968.

He once told me the story of being at some sort of display in which a person could pick up a telephone on one side of the room and speak to another person, on another telephone, on the other side of the room. As the onlookers marveled, someone said, "Some day they will do it without the wire." Everyone laughed.

The advances in technology through his lifetime and since his death are just mind boggling. Now consider what engineers at Texas Instruments were once quoting as having said: "Every time we develop a new and better calculator, it makes it much easier to make the next improvement." With all the new tools we now have in our toolbox, what wondrous new tools lie in our future?

Want to plan a future amusement for your grandchildren? On a sheet of paper, write today's date, then make a list of all the examples of the latest technology in your daily life. Put it in a safe place to be opened at some future date. Not 42 years from now, but say, when that new baby graduates from high school.

Advance of the human!

In my eighty-one years, I have observed a lot of human real estate. In so doing, I have developed a keen eye for the human condition. Believe me, it has changed!

In the 1950s, Andre Williams recorded a song called "Jail Bait". In the lyric, a man stood before a judge, accused of improper relationships with underage girls. Pleading for leniency, the accused promised

Please Mr. Judge
You just let me go this time
I won't mess with those young girls no more
I swear I won't bother them no more Mr. Judge
I ain't gonna bother none 15
I ain't gonna bother none 16
I ain't gonna bother none 17
I ain't gonna mess with none 18

To underscore his sincerity, he explained:

I'm gonna get me a girl about forty-two...

Talk about a laugh-out-loud line! 42? Teens of the day wondered: Do girls really get that old?

Well, that was the 1950s. The world was on a different track. President Eisenhower was busy ending the Korean War (he succeeded), keeping the budget balanced (succeeded, again), and designing the Interstate Highway System (Yep, he succeeded there, also.)

But, off to the side - in the shadows - the nanny state was hatching in some people's minds. Looking beyond national security, fiscal responsibility and modern infrastructure, these folks were wanting to save us from our own bad habits. (Uh, they still are!). It took awhile, but they eventually eliminated trans-fats; got rid of well-marbled steaks, in favor of tough, lean beef; they created bottled water, glorified vegetarianism; greatly curtailed high fructose corn syrup; brought us organic eggs, etc., etc.

Mostly, we did not realize that these steps were doing wonderful things for some citizens.

Today I look at a 42 year-old-woman and I think: college freshman! Everywhere you look there's a hot 50-year-old!

The other day my wife of forty years headed out the door for some grocery shopping. All I could think was, "Damn, she's cute!"

Long live bottled water!

I Am Sick and tired

of being sick and tired of hearing know-it-all talking TV heads telling us what The American People like. Or, Really Like!

So, with some degree of regularity, I have to scream "You're wrong, stupid!"

On one of the Sunday talk shows today, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich reminded us, yet again, that Social Security is a big, costly government program but that The American People love it!

After all these years, one might hope that old Bob would pick up some smarts along the way. No such luck. So, let me explain once more, Bob:

When I took my first job away from the family farm, at about age 13, the government explained that I now owned a retirement insurance program. It was an ill-conceived idea. It was bound to fail. I didn't like it then. I don't like it now. I had no say then. I've had no say along the way.

But I paid their required premiums with every paycheck I ever earned. I know those premiums were not many dollars at first. But those were powerful dollars. With one - just one - I could buy a gallon of gas; a sack of six White Castle hamburgers; a cup of coffee; get a haircut and have some change left. And, I worked damn hard for one of those dollars. A ten-hour day got me two of them.

For fifty years I paid those premiums. The government quickly spent those dollar. Then they printed more and more of them, making each worth less and less. On my 13th birthday, $33.85 would buy an ounce of gold. As of last Friday, it took $1,133.60 to buy that ounce of gold.

Now please, Mr. Reich, don't tell me about big government programs that the people love. Don't tell me I am getting some kind of handout. The government made the deal. They gave me two choices: go along or go to jail! Yes, Social Security was and is a lousy idea. Not my problem. I want my benefits.

Just when you think

things cannot get more absurd... guess what? They get really dumb!

The big outrage today is that "kids were directing air traffic!" OMG! The former director of the NTSB said "The absence of an accident does not mean there was no danger!"

Apparently, a professional, veteran air traffic controller brought his kids to work. The kid sat there for some time listening to his/her dad chat with the pilots. As a one-time pilot, I can testify that these chats are almost universally pleasant, and absolutely always professional.

Once in a great while a pilot gets impatient when a controller follows rules that inconvenience the pilot a little. I remember an incident when a controller, feeling safety necessitated that he delay a landing by a few moments, directed a pilot to make a 360.... a 360º turn... a big loop in the sky to use up a few minutes of time. The pilot snapped in reply, "Are you aware that it will burn $500 worth of fuel to make a 360 in this aircraft?" The controller replied, "Affirmative. Please give me a $500 left turn."

But that is rare... controllers generally will do everything they can to accommodate pilots. And as a pilot, I can attest that it is a comfort to concentrate on landing your aircraft and not have to worry so much about other air traffic because the controller is watching out for you.

I recall an incident from my broadcast days. A very pretty young woman and I were guests at an Air force bombing range. The grading officer in the tower would, in turn, call each plane in for its bombing run. We listened for some time, and caught on to the lingo. Finally, the novel of having a pretty girl in the tower, presented a special opportunity for the airmen. The controller handed his mike to the young woman and instructed her to call the next plane in for its bombing run.

In those days of an essentially all-male Air Force, one can only imagine the surprise of that F-105 pilot in hearing a pleasant female voice directing him. We'll never know... that plane, roaring past the observation tower at 500 miles per hour, was a shattering blur. Flying in at treetop altitude, the plane flew straight at its target, released its bomb, then turned straight up, roaring out of sight vertically. Very exciting!

Back to the present. It is apparent that this controller had mentioned to one or more pilots that his kid was at his side in the tower. We can imagine a pilot radioing his hello to the visitor. And, it went from there. Pilot or controller asked the kid to repeat his father's instructions. The kid did as told. Both controller and pilots enjoyed the exchange.

Does anyone think, for an instant, that the controller or any pilot was taking their eye off the ball? Give me a break. These are the most professional of professionals. They are also dads and moms - humans, if you will.

But some jerk - the politician or journalist who would ignore corruption and fraud - is coming down on the controller. And probably someone unloaded a heap of wrath on one or more pilots!

What will we feel outraged about next?

Name Calling.

I've been called names. They probably started out okay: "Darling baby!" "Cute little boy." Can't verify either, but a song I remember as a child claimed "Every old crow thinks her baby's white as snow". Cooing baby names seem assured.

But, the names went downhill from there. "Dumb kid."

Then "Teenager." Has there ever been a word more frequently used as a synonym for stupid?

Next was "Young Adult." Meaning, "still wet behind the ears", not quite yet a real person.

This was followed by "Middle Age." That's a nice term for a "Dicky Do" (A 40-ish beer drinker whose belly sticks out farther than his dicky do.}

Then, of course, came "Senior Citizen", a lame attempt at being PC... as though it is an insult to call an old person "old". I've wondered who first came up with that name.

Now I am called an "Octogenarian".

You know what's next?

"Ancestor".

Patience and Discipline!

Received this in an email: None of it verifiable, but certainly fun to think about!

A Well-Planned Retirement

Outside England 's Bristol Zoo there is a parking lot for 150 cars and 8 buses. For 25 years, its parking fees were managed by a very pleasant attendant. The fees were 1 for cars ($1.40), 5 for buses (about $7).

Then, one day, after 25 solid years of never missing a day of work, he just didn't show up; so the Zoo Management called the City Council and asked it to send them another parking agent.

The Council did some research and replied that the parking lot was the Zoo's own responsibility. The Zoo advised the Council that the attendant was a City employee. The City Council responded that the lot attendant had never been on the City payroll.

Meanwhile, sitting in his villa somewhere on the coast of Spain or France or Italy .... is a man who'd apparently had a ticket machine installed completely on his own and then had simply begun to show up every day, commencing to collect and keep the parking fees, estimated at about $560 per day -- for 25 years.

Assuming 7 days a week, this amounts to just over $7 million dollars ...... and no one even knows his name.

I once read a book that spoke of British patience and discipline. It talked about far-flung outposts of the British Empire, observable by no one, where faithful employees none-the-less showed up for work every day, rain or shine, to fulfill their assigned duties. Patience and discipline.

The Brit at the zoo was most certainly patient and disciplined. But don't you wonder how it could have started?

I can imagine some well-intentioned 1985 zoo patron, trying to help the then-administrators of the zoo raise revenue for the welfare of the animals. He suggested they charge for parking.

They whined that it would take some equipment and someone would have to be employed as an attendant. He offered to volunteer both - and did.

When he had accumulated a sum of money for parking fees, no one would accept the money: They did not have a bank account; They would have to form a committee to elect a treasurer; They would need to employ an accountant to compute taxes or other fiscal liabilities. They had other pressing things to do - like shoveling dung out of the elephant's enclosure.

The old guy just agreed to hang onto the dough until they solved their problems. Time passed and the administration of the zoo changed. The patient, disciplined old Brit continued in his self-imposed obligations.

Then, one day, some asshole insulted him in the way people often insult those they consider "beneath" them.

The old guy said nothing, just went home - wherever that may now be!

May he live happily ever after!

Just A Word?

President Obama was widely quoted after his "just words" comments. He was saying that some comments were a great deal more than just words.

I agree - but recently I hear comments - words, that is - that have a darker meaning than immediately apparent. If a pattern of behavior acquires a name - and if that behavior becomes unpopular - don't change the behavior, just change the name used for that behavior.

Or, if you want some behavior to seem better than it is perceived to be, you might just nuance the name commonly associated with that behavior.

The current mania for "political correctness" brings many examples to mind. "Disabled" replaced "crippled". Okay by me if "crippled" was hurtful to some.

But, I am not necessarily okay with discarding a name that has become distasteful by preempting a fully tasteful word as the new name. I have never liked the idea of calling homosexual men "gay".

Homosexual women are called a name derived from a Greek island - for some historical reason, perhaps - but the women didn't go out and steal the name from some more widely accepted behavior. I am not bashing homosexual men, and I have no problem with their wanting to be called something different. But why choose a word long associated with happy children at play?

Okay, none of those example are a burr under my saddle. Two that are is the practice of calling liberals progressives. Progressive sounds like someone supporting "progress". Not everyone realizes that Progressive delineated a much more sinister ideology a century ago. The second is the practice of calling Democrat politicians Democratic. The Democrat Party is an ideology that has been hijacked. So, calling a Democrat senator, a Democratic Senator, sounds better!

I'd like to think that all senators are democratic. Which is exactly why Democrats want us to give the term democratic a capital "D"! Even some competent journalists are now doing it.

Determined to Damn The Tea Parties

The current tactic of the liberal Left is simple: If you disagree with someone or something, don't debate, destroy!

The other day, some dingbat woman running for Governor of Texas, was a guest of commentator Glenn Beck. He asked her point blank if she was a "9/11 truther". Did she believe the U.S. Government was behind the attack on September 11, 2001. She gave a worthless politician's answer... she didn't have enough evidence to answer. Translation, "I have no belief, I just don't want to offend anyone who may vote for me."

Today, a TV reporter questioned another dingbat, identified as an expert of some sort. This clown was asked if the comment by dingbat #1 will hurt her candidacy. His answer, in effect, was, "If her polling goes up, it will prove that the Tea Party movement agrees with her."

Say, what?

I translate that as: Don't know what you're talking about, but here's a chance to take a vicious swipe at the Tea Party movement. Let 'er rip!

I have participated in every Tea Party protest I could. I have met and talked at length with Tea Party followers in my city. I have yet to hear one of them express an opinion that the Bush Administration engineered the 9/11 attacks in New York. Quite the opposite. Most are absolutely convinced that 9/11 was solely the work of Islamic extremists.

So, why did the expert on TV imply that Tea Party people will hinge their support for the Texas lady dingbat on her 9/11 conspiracy stand, or lack thereof?

For Valentine's Day:
A French Love Story

When my youngest son was barely a teen, we invited a French boy to come to America and be our guest for a summer month. The next summer we repeated with a second French boy. The following summer, our son spent a month with a family in France. We enjoyed the French boys and our son loved his summer in France - although most of it was spent at their vacation home in Spain!

One of the interesting stories he later told was that the French boys revealed they had always heard American girls were hot and horny. This surprised him, because he had always heard it was the French girls who were lovely and love-starved.

There are a lot of silly misconceptions between Americans and the French. Don't most Americans think the French are a bunch of pantywaists? Aren't most Frenchmen in complete bewilderment that America is full of wholly unsophisticated rednecks? Not really. Here is one story about our true relationship.

On Christmas Eve, 1732, a boy named Edward Peregois was born somewhere in France. For reasons no longer known, he emigrated to America.

A Frenchman, in an America run by Englishmen, Edward found his surname misspelled repeatedly. Eventually the family settled on the spelling Pedigo - which, pronounced by an Englishman, sounds about like Peregois, pronounced by a Frenchman.

Edward fell in love with his new land and when there arose a movement among colonists to declare America's independence from England, Edward joined in. In fact, he became a member of America's military, willing to fight for that Independence. With a Virginia Regiment, he joined General Washington's army at Valley Forge, PA where they did, indeed, fight for America's independence.

After the war, a grateful America gave Edward Pedigo a land warrant and he became a successful Virginia farmer, and father of seven. When his wife died, he remarried and fathered another seven children! Lots of hands for that Virginia farm.

But, as the years and generations progressed, much of the family migrated west to Kentucky and beyond. Eventually, Estella Greene Pedigo, daughter of the fifth generation, gave birth to three sons in Texas. These three Texas boys all came of age in time to be called to military duty during the global conflict that would become known as the World War. (And eventually, "The First World War")

The oldest son, Prentice Bradley was first to go to France. There, in November, 1918, just before the Armistice ended it all, in a wooded place known to historians as the Argonne Forest, Prentice Bradley died fighting for the freedom of his great, great, great, great grandfather's native land.

Such is the true relationship of the Americans and the French. As Charles DeGaulle once pointed out, our nations have always been the closest of friends. We share the rare and blessed fact that French and American armies have never faced each other in battle.

And I find it poignant that my great, great, great, great, great grandfather, Edward Pedigo left France to come fight for America. And that my uncle, Prentice Bradley, left America to go fight for France.

That was a true French love story. A Frenchman and an American. Love of freedom. Love of your fellow man.