Authoritarian Talk - Hang the General

I consider myself a pacifist for the most part, at least, when it comes to talk of the military and military might and all of that. Whether or not I would shoot someone to defend myself or someone I love, I don't know, but I don't think I would pick up a weapon to defend my country at the behest of a bunch of old rich guys. They just want to use up resources (young people) so they can retain or gain more power.

That said, I also understand the need for a military in today's world, and the need for nations to be able to defend themselves and their borders. And I can appreciate the desire to serve, to defend, to be a soldier, even if I myself could not be one. I have thanked soldiers, thanked my elders, thanked those who have served. My grandfather, father, and several uncles all served in the armed forces. I am not immune to it, or to the allure of patriotism. I like the United States of America. I am her citizen. I have always done my best to be a good citizen and to do right by my country and her people.

I know too that everything is not always as it seems. I'm just a normal person reading the news and I know only what somebody wants me to know. I'm not stupid. I know I don't know everything.

This morning, my guts roiled when I read what the former guy and an Arizona Senator said about out-going General Mark Milley, who has served, as best as I can tell, admirably in the face of an irrational 45th president as well as during what I considered to be unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Sorry, but I have always thought we should have hunted down Bin Laden and done away with him and left those other poor countries alone, if we had to take action.)

For one thing, Milley is a human being, and people in power should not talk about people the way the former guy and the senator have talked about Milley over the weekend. It's one thing for the man on the street to say such things. But it's another for "an influencer" to do that. In polite society, you don't call people names, you don't call them treasonous, and you don't call for them to die.

That's especially true if you're someone with power, like a former U.S. president or a senator.

You just don't do that in a sane, civilized society. Which, apparently, we are not.

So, my initial defense is of Milley as a human being who should not be subjected to hatred and foul words on a social platform that is followed by millions of crazy people who may take those hate-filled words to heart and go after the man.

My second reaction is, WTH? This is a decorated military man who has done nothing wrong other uphold the ideals of the United States Constitution, the document he swore to uphold.

That's more than I can say for the former guy and the 33% of his followers, who all apparently want to, as Kevin McCarthy stated recently, "burn down the government."

Milley is well aware that he is the line of fire. "The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg spoke at length with Milley, and his latest report included this memorable paragraph: “Milley has told friends that he expects that if Trump returns to the White House, the newly elected president will come after him. ‘He’ll start throwing people in jail, and I’d be on the top of the list,’ he has said.”" 

That anyone in this country should fear retribution from a sitting U.S. president, or a potential U.S. presidential candidate, is just . . . sickening. We don't do that here.

Or at least, I didn't think we did.

I am not going to repeat the exact words of either the former guy or the senator. You can read more about it here and here, if you want.

Honestly, though, this kind of rhetoric should upset anyone, and those who love the military for whatever reason, especially should be shocked at this kind of language coming from people in power. It's terribly alarming.

Personally, I hope General Milley sues them both for libel or slander or whatever he can come up with. The man shouldn't be tarnished simply because we have an electorate that seems to want the nation to be run by a bunch of ignorant warmongering jackasses.

A Sad Day

Yesterday, the former president presented himself to a jail in Georgia to have his fingerprinting and his mug shot taken.

It's been all over the news.

This is his fourth indictment since he left office. While I strongly believe he tried to stay in office illegally and, at the least, incited a riot, I find it sad that this is now what the world sees of America.

The world sees that we are a bunch of haters who elected someone who is a grifter, a con man, and a not-nice person by any stretch of the imagination. 

Hopefully, though, the world also sees that we are a nation of laws, and if one breaks those laws, then one is tried, and justice is served.

I take no joy in knowing that (a) this is the type of person so many people adore and want to follow, for reasons that continue to elude me and (b) that our government and our national reputation has been so wounded by this person and his ilk.

I have always believed in the power of the government to better the lives of its citizens. I have believed it can happen at the local level, and I believe it can happen at the state and federal levels. But the people in charge also must believe that.

The former guy believed, as best I could tell, that the government should only help him. I certainly didn't see much come out of his administration that helped me. Even the monetary loans during the pandemic were giveaways of federal funding to those who didn't need it, for the most part. Maybe they helped out somebody somewhere.

While seeing our country diminished makes me sad, I think it is important that the former guy be charged with conspiring to defraud the American people out of their choice for president. It is how we move forward from this and defend democracy and maintain the rule of law. I do not see this as a failure of the legal system, nor do I see these charges as political. I see them as necessary if the republic is to continue to function under the U.S. Constitution.

If these charges had not been brought, then the U.S. Constitution may as well be, as the former guy has suggested, tossed out the window. I would be less confident in the judicial system had charges never been brought, and even now I have concerns about the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and what role it will ultimately play in all of this. Because you know eventually, that is where some, if not all, of these indictments will end up if the former guy is found guilty. Maybe even if he is found innocent, I don't know.

I look for calmer days sometime in my lifetime. Preferably they would be ones where I don't have to look at the mug shot of a former president.

Roy G Biv

"How will the kids learn their colors?" That was my husband's reaction as we watched a local news story about a parent who objected to a rainbow motif in a classroom.

He, like me, remembers learning our colors via the rainbow and the familiar acronym of Roy G Biv. That's red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet, for the uninitiated.

 Bing generated image.

Fascism has come to the Roanoke Valley dressed up as "concern for the children," as book banners and school patrols go after what they consider items and persons who "groom" or "indoctrinate" children, ostensibly trying to "turn" young people into homosexuals or transgenders or whomever it is these folks are afraid of.

Ban one book, and where does it end? Is the next one to go some beloved story like Little Women, which is, after all, about strong young girls (and we can't have that). Remove one rainbow, and the next thing to go will be unicorns and leprechauns, I suppose. And why do these people - some of whom do not even have children - get to say what can and can't be happening in a library, a classroom, or any other place? And if they're so hellbent on protecting children, where were they when some were murdered this weekend by gunfire in Florida? Are they protesting for gun control? No. They seem pretty content with letting a child bleed out in the street.

We watched the first two hours of FDR on the History channel last night, and I highly recommend it. We are taping the remainder of the series and will watch it before the week runs out, I expect.

It really brings home the issue of fascism, which I consider any effort to ban a book to be, so I will end with this rather long quote that I am borrowing from Heather Cox Richardson, who borrowed it from an Army pamphlet from 1945. I looked up the original but it's easier to copy and paste. Yes, I can be lazy.

Keep this in mind and then determine who is really a Democrat, a Republican, and a Fascist. I know what I think. I think the people who keep calling Republicans Rinos are really the fascists. Real Republicans know better and are trying to keep our Republic strong. Anyway, this is worth the read:

Fascism, the U.S. government document explained, “is government by the few and for the few. The objective is seizure and control of the economic, political, social, and cultural life of the state.” “The people run democratic governments, but fascist governments run the people.”

“The basic principles of democracy stand in the way of their desires; hence—democracy must go! Anyone who is not a member of their inner gang has to do what he’s told. They permit no civil liberties, no equality before the law.” “Fascism treats women as mere breeders. ‘Children, kitchen, and the church,’ was the Nazi slogan for women,” the pamphlet said.

Fascists “make their own rules and change them when they choose…. They maintain themselves in power by use of force combined with propaganda based on primitive ideas of ‘blood’ and ‘race,’ by skillful manipulation of fear and hate, and by false promise of security. The propaganda glorifies war and insists it is smart and ‘realistic’ to be pitiless and violent.”

Fascists understood that “the fundamental principle of democracy—faith in the common sense of the common people—was the direct opposite of the fascist principle of rule by the elite few,” it explained, “[s]o they fought democracy…. They played political, religious, social, and economic groups against each other and seized power while these groups struggled.”

Americans should not be fooled into thinking that fascism could not come to America, the pamphlet warned; after all, “[w]e once laughed Hitler off as a harmless little clown with a funny mustache.” And indeed, the U.S. had experienced “sorry instances of mob sadism, lynchings, vigilantism, terror, and suppression of civil liberties. We have had our hooded gangs, Black Legions, Silver Shirts, and racial and religious bigots. All of them, in the name of Americanism, have used undemocratic methods and doctrines which…can be properly identified as ‘fascist.’”

The War Department thought it was important for Americans to understand the tactics fascists would use to take power in the United States. They would try to gain power “under the guise of ‘super-patriotism’ and ‘super-Americanism.’” And they would use three techniques:

First, they would pit religious, racial, and economic groups against one another to break down national unity. Part of that effort to divide and conquer would be a “well-planned ‘hate campaign’ against minority races, religions, and other groups.”

Second, they would deny any need for international cooperation, because that would fly in the face of their insistence that their supporters were better than everyone else. “In place of international cooperation, the fascists seek to substitute a perverted sort of ultra-nationalism which tells their people that they are the only people in the world who count. With this goes hatred and suspicion toward the people of all other nations.”

Third, fascists would insist that “the world has but two choices—either fascism or communism, and they label as ‘communists’ everyone who refuses to support them.” (Emphasis mine)

It is “vitally important” to learn to spot native fascists, the government said, “even though they adopt names and slogans with popular appeal, drape themselves with the American flag, and attempt to carry out their program in the name of the democracy they are trying to destroy.”

The only way to stop the rise of fascism in the United States, the document said, “is by making our democracy work and by actively cooperating to preserve world peace and security.” In the midst of the insecurity of the modern world, the hatred at the root of fascism “fulfills a triple mission.” By dividing people, it weakens democracy. “By getting men to hate rather than to think,” it prevents them “from seeking the real cause and a democratic solution to the problem.” By falsely promising prosperity, it lures people to embrace its security.        -- Heather Cox Richardson

Which do you want to be? The book burner or the book saver? The person who admires rainbows or the one who denigrates them because of their own personal insecurities and hang-ups? Just who do the children need to be saved from? 

I really have to wonder.

 

Why News Media Should Unite for the Greater Good

Way back when in the old days of journalism, the local media fed off of one another. I could see when the local TV station, for example, had read the weekly paper I wrote for, because they'd pick up a story I wrote and make it their own.

While I enjoyed the thrill of breaking a story and "beating the competition," I never enjoyed or endorsed the competitive nature of the media beyond that point. Once I had the "scoop," I was happy to share.

However, other reporters for the "big paper" seldom talked to me, and the TV outlets were even worse. Generally, they acted as if I was not there. Occasionally, a reporter would be friendly, and I never hesitated to offer up background or whatever another writer needed for a story if asked.

But I was seldom asked. I know journalists are supposed to work the room themselves, find their own resources, and do their own follow-up, but I have found that it never hurts to talk to a colleague to get another perspective or to have background information I may not otherwise find. Nothing says I have to use their information. It's like reading Wikipedia - a good place to start but then you go on to do the rest of the research.

Journalists generally attended multiple meetings and saw a project or whatever from various angles, more so than the average person. I appreciated their point of view and their knowledge. I wasn't trying to steal from them, or them from me. But I did want accurate and complete information to pass on to my readers. It helped to know how a project went from point A to point B.

This has never been a thing, having media work together. With democracy on the line, I would argue that now is the time for that to happen. It is time for a national narrative that ignores the dollar bills and instead promotes the will of the majority and the good of the people.

Otherwise, we're going to end up with fascism and the destruction of the Constitution, and the end of our republic and the demise of democracy.

With newspaper readership declining and opinionated "entertainment news" all over the TV, perhaps it is time for a paradigm shift, emphasizing the numerous benefits of collaboration among newspapers, TV stations, and other news media outlets. This, hopefully, would enhance journalistic integrity, accuracy, and the overall impact of news reporting.

Collaboration does not imply compromising individual identities or perspectives but rather harnessing the collective strength of the news industry to fulfill its critical role in society. It's not called The Fourth Estate for nothing.

Collaboration would foster an environment that promotes journalistic integrity. By working together on a story, news media outlets could pool resources, share information, and conduct comprehensive investigations. Such cooperation could reduce the risk of biased or incomplete reporting and enhances fact-checking processes. Moreover, by collaborating, journalists would hold one another accountable and maintain higher ethical standards. Collective scrutiny would ensure that journalists strive for accuracy and objectivity, safeguarding the public's trust in the media. If news media outlets prioritized collaboration, they would send a powerful message about their commitment to the truth and the fundamental principles of journalism. This is especially important now, when so many news outlets are underfunded and understaffed.

Multiple media sources

Coordinated efforts among news media outlets would have the potential to amplify the impact of important stories and increase public awareness. By sharing research, sources, and perspectives, media organizations would be able to construct a more comprehensive narrative, bringing greater attention to crucial issues. This is essentially what the TV media, and some print media, did to ensure the election of #45 and the loss of Hillary Clinton in 2016. He received way more attention (for ratings) and free press than she did.

Collaborative reporting would allow for a deeper exploration of complex topics, reaching a broader audience and inspiring meaningful conversations. Additionally, when multiple news media outlets present a unified front on critical matters, public trust would be reinforced, further emphasizing the significance of the reported stories. By working together, news media could create a collective voice that is louder, more influential, and capable of effecting positive change in society. There would always be dissenters who would see such collaboration as some kind of conspiracy.

In an era where misinformation and disinformation run rampant, collaboration among news media outlets should be indispensable. By sharing resources, cross-referencing facts, and aligning narratives, media organizations could more effectively counter the spread of false information. Collaborative fact-checking initiatives might help distinguish reliable sources from unreliable ones, empowering the public to make informed decisions. Furthermore, joint efforts could expose disinformation campaigns and highlight their deceptive tactics. By presenting a united front against misinformation, news media outlets could collectively protect the integrity of the information ecosystem, fortify public trust, and prevent the erosion of democracy.

Collaboration allows news media outlets to overcome resource limitations, particularly in an era of shrinking newsrooms and financial constraints. By pooling together their expertise, skills, and equipment, media organizations could undertake ambitious investigations and in-depth reporting that might otherwise be unfeasible. Shared resources enable the efficient allocation of limited budgets and personnel, ensuring the coverage of essential stories that may not receive adequate attention otherwise. Collaboration could also facilitate knowledge exchange, fostering professional growth, and expanding the collective capacity of the news industry.

By prioritizing collaboration, news media could enhance journalistic integrity, amplify the impact of stories, combat misinformation, and overcome resource limitations. Collective efforts would send a powerful message about the commitment to truth, while fostering public awareness and trust in most arenas.  Ultimately, by working together, news media outlets could inspire positive change, promote informed citizenship, and uphold the fundamental values of journalism.

It's a shame I fear we're too far gone for this to even be considered by other media.

*ChatGPT assisted with this essay.*

They Are Offended by This?

Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe

By Benjamin Alire Saenz

Copyright 2012

Read by Lin-Manuel Miranda

8 hrs 8 minutes

A Time Best YA Book of All Time (2021)

This book has been challenged in my local library. I have a list of 13 books that have been deemed inappropriate by the fascist Nazis who want to ban books. This was one of them.

This is the story of Ari and Dante, who meet when they are 15 years old. Dante teaches Ari how to swim. The book is very forward in examining feelings and relationships. The book is told from Ari's point of view, and he has many emotions, particularly pertaining to his parents and his absent and unspoken of older brother.

He is quite introspective and examines everything in detail. He and Dante become best friends and this relationship becomes stronger after Ari saves Dante's life. 

At first, I thought the problem with the book was that the boys are Mexican, or Mexican-American. This was something Ari also examined - how does being thought of as Mexican fit in when you live in the United States but are of Mexican descent. I liked the cultural aspect of the book and how it showed a view of this from a non-white perspective.

The book touches on some homosexuality issues somewhere after the first half (so 4 hours into the book) when Dante admits he has feelings for boys. But both young men have mixed emotions about sex and sexuality. At various times both are attracted to girls. As the book progresses, it is obvious Dante loves Ari, but Ari does not feel the same way until he grows up a good bit and has discussions with his parents.

Remember the relationship between Raj and Howard in The Big Bang Theory? That's basically what we have revealed in this book. There are no explicit sex scenes. The young men kiss. That is it. Not even a feel-up or a squeeze.

The book is also very well written.

It works both ways and it's a slippery slope when you start banning books. The Bible is offensive to some people. So is Christian literature.

Both are in the library. Should they be removed?

I don't know how we ended up with so much stupid in this country, but here we are.

At least I read the book so I would know what these people find offensive. Me? I find book banning offensive. And book banners are certainly not Christian by my definition of the word. (They said in the meeting that they were Christians and found this book and others offensive. That's not my inference, it is what was said.)

If you don't want to read a book, or have your child read a book, then don't check it out. It's as easy as the way I never have my TV turned to FAUX news. No one has the right to tell someone else they can or cannot read a book. (Or must have a baby, but that's another topic though along a similar line of thought.)

People apparently need more to do. And they need to mind their own business.

Biden Announces

Today, exactly 4 years to the day he announced in 2019, President Joe Biden announced he will run for the office again. 

Biden has a long history of public service, including serving as Vice President under Barack Obama and as a Senator from Delaware for 36 years. This experience has given him perspective on the challenges facing the country and the skills to navigate the complex political landscape in Washington.

Biden has also been a strong advocate for working-class Americans throughout his career, which I find attractive.

Here are some of his achievements as president to date:

- He passed a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package that provided direct payments, unemployment support, vaccine funding, rental assistance, and more to millions of Americans.

- He rejoined the Paris Climate Agreement and pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030.

- He signed a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill that will improve roads, bridges, airports, public transit, broadband, water, and energy systems across the nation.

- He ended the US military involvement in Afghanistan after 20 years of war and evacuated more than 120,000 people from the country.

- He restored US leadership and diplomacy on the global stage by rejoining the World Health Organization, the Iran nuclear deal, and other international agreements and organizations.

- He expanded health care access and affordability by reopening enrollment for Obamacare, lowering prescription drug prices, and supporting Medicare expansion.

- He advanced racial justice and voting rights by creating a task force on policing reform, reversing some of the former guy's immigration policies, nominating a diverse cabinet and judiciary, and supporting legislation to protect voting access.

President Joe Biden (photo from whitehouse.gov)

Generally, Biden's platform and efforts as president reflect a commitment to economic justice. Whether or not this has been successful could be debated. I don't know how inflation is going to hurt him. As Bill Clinton said, "It's the economy," and that's always difficult to determine. People may be making more money today, but they are spending more, too, and that is the part that sticks with you. That bill at the grocery store hurts.

One of the most significant issues for me with Biden is his age. While age alone should not disqualify a candidate, it is a legitimate concern given the demands of the presidency and the need for a leader who can keep up with the pace of the job. That said, should the former guy win the Republican nomination, he won't be a spring chicken, either, as he would be 76 years old in 2024. 

I like the "Dark Brandon" side of Biden; he can be firm when he has to be. I appreciate his efforts to draw attention to the crazy MAGA people and differentiate them from those who still call themselves Republicans but no longer fit what that party has become. (I think the MAGA people call them RINOs but to me that's backwards.) The Republicans of today are not my father's party. Those people had some sense. Today, not so much.

Biden also has a folksy side that I have enjoyed watching. It may not be the most attractive thing about him, and he does make gaffes, but we all do. The only thing is everything he says and does is under a zillion microscopes, while the rest of us can slide on by. Or some of us can, anyway.

Personally, I would like to see a Democratic challenger who is younger in years. I'm afraid in the current climate, the reality is that this person would have to be a straight, white male, and while I am loathing myself for writing that, I also know that in order to keep what little freedoms we have remaining, this is not the time to push a far-left agenda. We are too far along the road to an authoritarian transition of government, and I for one do not wish to live in a regime run by police and militia vigilantes. Nor do I want a theocratic state, medical restrictions, or to lose my right to vote, all of which I think are possible if we continue to follow the path of a state like Florida, as an example.

In order to pull in the moderate vote, I think the Democrats need to find this younger person, and soon. Unfortunately, other than Gavin Newsome, the governor of California, there aren't many names that pop into my head at the moment.

I will vote for whomever the Democratic Party nominates, as I always have, but I am not convinced Biden is the person to keep the country going. A younger version of him would be ideal. I just don't know who that might be.

(This post was written with input from both chatGPT and Bing AI)

The Craven, the Crazies, and the Rest of Us

Over the weekend, an Oklahoma newspaper with no online presence printed this as its front page of its weekend edition:

You can hear Rachel Maddow discuss this at this link, if you want.

I have written local journalism for 39 years. My first article was published in 1984. I've written for nearly all of the local publications, including many that no longer exist, and for statewide magazines. I estimated once that I've published over 2 million words in multiple publications.

My editor at The Fincastle Herald always told me if I didn't have someone angry at me, I wasn't doing my job.

Suffice to say, I did my job. Over the years, I have been threatened by various and sundry people, including a sheriff in nearby county. He stopped me as I was entering the courtroom to listen to a board meeting. "How do I know that's water you have in there?" he demanded, nodding toward my ever-present water bottle.

I took a drink and held it out to him. "You're welcome to the rest of it. It's just water."

"I could haul you in right now for having liquor and who'd know different?" he said. He banged his hand against his pistol on his thigh for emphasis.

"Everybody knows I don't drink alcohol," I replied, and I walked past him to my seat. I could feel him glaring at the back of my head.

Later that same night, I nearly wrecked my car on the way home as I drove over Caldwell Mountain and the tire went flat. In the shine of a flashlight, I discovered my tire had been slashed with a knife.

Yes, someone in the next county over had tried to kill me. Caldwell Mountain is a dangerous drive, over twisting, winding roads. My car could have gone off the pavement and down the mountainside, not to be found for possibly years.

That happened about 25 years ago. So, while this is nothing new, the rhetoric now has been taken to a whole other level.

It was not unusual for me to receive phone calls from people complaining about stories I wrote. "I didn't say that" was the usual complaint. I carried a tape recorder and I'd play it back to them, if I had to.

They backed down then.

Sometimes, though, the complaint was not that I wrote what they said, but that I didn't write what they said.

Sometimes people simply sound so stupid to me that I paraphrase or leave it out completely if it's not relevant to the main part of the article. It is my job to tell a story that is truthful, but that doesn't mean I have to use ignorant, racist, homophobic, fascist, or antisemitic language. Paraphrasing is allowed.

But some people want their words - no matter how ignorant they sound - in print. They want their opinions, word for word, stated. That's how sure they are that they're right. That's how sure they are that their closed-minded world view is the one that should rule the day.

So it was that last week I found myself listening to someone rant about how I hadn't printed exactly what this person had said at a supervisors meeting. 

The person threatened me. I hung up on this person, and I called the police and reported the phone call. I also blocked the number.

Twenty years ago, I would not have done that. I'd have ignored the call. But these are different times, and people feel mean and emboldened, and being a bully is now in fashion. 

I was taken aback by the phone call because it was literally over nothing, as far as I was concerned.

These are the times we live in. People feel emboldened in their fascism and narrow-minded thoughts. They have no room in their brains for open-minded thinking. My way or the highway, as my parents used to tell me.

However, we are all adults, not children in need of being sent to our rooms. And if someone can't have an adult conversation with me that doesn't involve threats, screaming, or insults, then that is not someone I care to talk with.

And as for the report above, it just shows how low people can be. To call these people snakes would be an injustice to snakes. The people in the article/photo above are lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut. They're so low, there is no bottom for them.

I hope they all lose their jobs.

On My Mind

Hospital Liability

A story I read in Sunday's paper disturbed me. A 51-year-old man, who had been in the hospital for 9 days being treated for pneumonia, checked himself out of the hospital. No one made sure he had a ride, or someone waiting to pick him up.

Hospital personnel just let him go.

They found him dead just below the grounds of the hospital. Apparently, he tried to walk out. Maybe he was still ill, maybe he had dementia, maybe he was still drugged up and not thinking clearly.

I don't know the whole story, and as a journalist I learned long ago not to judge, but on its face, it seems the hospital potentially has liability here. Shouldn't they ensure their patients have a ride - at least a cab or Uber - before they let them waltz out the door?

Or are we so callous as a society that it doesn't matter if someone walks out of the hospital and dies a few steps from its grounds?

Searching For Bad Guys

Last night, instead of contacting media, the local sheriff posted a video on Facebook that his deputies were searching an area of our community known as Timber Ridge for a fellow who'd been seen with a rifle. He counted off a list of charges the man was wanted for - having a weapon after being convicted as a felon, assault, etc. - and proceeded to say the problem was domestic violence and the person they were pursuing was of no danger to the public.

If there was no danger to the public, then why was half of the county's police force out looking for this fellow?

Why just post this on Facebook, and let the media find out about it that way? Or is Facebook the new media? I don't know. I don't get my news from there. I still read a newspaper.

And where's the promised update? This is not that far from me as the crow flies, nor is it far from people I know and care about. So there's a guy with a gun running around but he isn't a threat but the sheriff is searching for him. As far as I know, he's still at large almost 24 hours later.

Does that make any sense?

Banana Republic

From Georgia (the southern states are so messed up) comes this little ditty: a submitted bill that would allow the party in power to remove prosecutors they don't like.

What is going on in Georgia? The former guy and/or some of his friends is looking at an indictment for possibly illegally involving himself in the 2020 Georgia election.

When we remove officials on party-line whims, when the goals of a new law are strictly to satisfy something so one person or set of persons can benefit at the expense of others, then we've lost the rule of law. 

I believe strongly in the rule of law. I believe in the justice system. I also know it is a human construct, and that on its face makes it corruptible. Having come to the conclusion in recent years that we have no better angels, that most people, in fact, want their devils to come out and play, because it's actually more difficult to be a nice person than it is to be an asshole, I conclude that we, the USA, are doomed.

We've been a banana Republic run by yellow-belly sapsuckers since 2000. I was never an Obama fan, as he didn't live up to his potential. The president who won in 2000 won in what I considered an illegal election, and was given the seat by the Supreme Court, so if one wants to tout election issues, it needs to go back twenty years, not two. The former guy is just Hitler in a blue suit and a red tie. Some of the crap he spewed at this weekend's CPAC meeting was despicable. Does he think he is Jesus Christ? Sheesh. Biden is trying, but he's not what we need right now, and frankly, all politicians at the moment seem corrupt and bedraggled. None of them are shining examples of good government. They all have baggage, though I know everybody does.

Mind Your Own Business

I acknowledge it's everyone's right to do what they want about masks and vaccines, though I think it is irresponsible not to be vaccinated. I'm not talking about just Covid, I'm talking about other things, too, like chicken pox, measles, tetanus, hepatitis, polio., etc.

Vaccines have saved many, many lives.

Today I was the only person in the grocery store with a mask on. And you know what? I don't care. I don't care if people think I may be sick, I don't care if they want to make fun of me, I don't care what they think in the least. Because you know what I think? It doesn't matter what I think.

I don't go up to people and tell them what I think of them. I mind my own business, and I expect others to do the same.

By the way, I have a note I carry with me at all times from my doctor. Do you know what it says? It says I have been instructed to wear a mask when I am out in public at all times. Do you know why? Because I have health issues. I've been a walking illness since I was born. Modern medicine may have saved my life, but some days I don't know what for.

Register to Write?

From the land that is constantly giving us "Florida man" and the finger to Disney, comes a new proclamation: a proposed bill in the state legislature that, "would require bloggers who write about Gov. Ron DeSantis, his Cabinet or state legislators to register with the state."

The NBC story goes on to say it pertains to paid bloggers and not to websites of news organizations. 

No one pays me to write in my blog. I have Google Ads on the sidebar, but apparently not everyone sees them. They earn less than 1 cent a month, so I know few people ever hit them. I should take them off the blog, but I like to see the ads for the stuff I'm interested in, like guitars. I look at guitars a lot so I generally see ads for those. I can't click on the ad because that's against the rules, but I can drool over the expensive Gibsons that come up.

This proposed bill is so anti-First Amendment that I don't even know where to start. I thought it was anti-First Amendment when my locality made me get a business license to write, but it was easier to pay the small fee and get the license than to argue about it.

Forcing paid bloggers to register with some government agency is just one step away from forcing every blogger to register, paid or not. Do you want to register your blog with the government? 

I sure don't.

Playing Catch-Up

January is a horrid month, and I'm glad it's over. February isn't much better, but at least by now I have finished getting the paperwork together for the taxes and have that pain out of the way.

I have been remiss in my blog, though. I don't generally go two days and not write something. I couldn't think of anything to write yesterday that didn't make me tired when I thought about it, so I wrote nothing.

But today I'm not creatively tired, I am ready to write something.

So here goes.

Books

So far this year, I've read A Trick of the Light, by Louise Penny, which was one of the books in her series I skipped by accident, The Recovery Agent, by Janet Evanovich, which is a reworked version of a more competent Stephanie Plum with her ex-husband in Lula's role, Unf#ck Your Brain, by Dr. Faith Harper, a self-help book, Into the Glades, by Laura Sebastian, which is a young adult fantasy, and The Jasmine Throne, by Tasha Suri. 

The last book is an adult fantasy book, and like many of the fantasies I read, it takes on a political tone and examines the role of the feminine in power. The magic in the book was intriguing in that is a feminine magic - control of the Earth's soil and plants, along with another type of magic that involves telling the future. No fire wizards or things like that, although fire plays a big role in this story, wielded as a manly power. Swords and not guns. My only complaint was multiple points of views; I occasionally forgot who was talking and had to flip back to the beginning of the chapter to see whose name was on it. I recommend it if you prefer your books to have strong female characters and can imagine bucking the patriarchy one day.

The book I am currently reading is called Born with Teeth, by Kate Mulgrew. It is an autobiography (not a memoir), and I decided to read it because I try to read nonfiction and fiction alike. The last autobiography I read was Sally Field's. I prefer to read autobiographies or memoir of women, but dang if every woman who writes a memoir hasn't been raped at some point. I know that statistically something like 1 in every 3 women has been raped or a victim of incest or something, but I am not so sure that every single female in this world hasn't been manhandled at the crotch by some guy at some point. Mulgrew was robbed and raped not on a casting couch, but as she tried to fumble her way into her New York apartment with her hands full of grocery bags.

We do a poor job of raising men, if every woman is considered fair game. And apparently, we are.

The State of the Union

I did not watch The State of the Union address last night. I consider that political theater on the part of both sides. I have read varying synopses of is, and as best I can tell, some of the crazier Republicans acted like children and Dark Brandon handed them their ass on an environmentally friendly clay platter.

Since I read about the political scene almost every day, I know the state of the union without the drama and theater. I also buy groceries and gas, and listen to people, and read stuff from both sides of the aisle. The truth and the facts are in the middle. Sorting them out is a yeoman's task.

Contrary to popular belief, neither side represents me. I suspect a lot of people feel like that.

And that's all I have to say about that.

TV

I don't watch much TV, but I started a show on ABC called Alaska Daily that I want to recommend. It stars Hillary Swank and is about a newsroom in Anchorage. Very realistic and good acting. There are only six episodes available so far, but the show returns February 23. You can watch it on the ABC app.

Whose Line Is It Anyway? taped its last show last week. Since my husband and I are probably the only people left who watch the show, this is not unforeseen, but we enjoyed the interplay between the comedians. Also, it was on the CW, and I understand that channel is undergoing a revamp. The only other show I watched on that channel was Stargirl, and it's been cancelled. It had a good ending, though.

We've been watching the new version of Night Court with Melissa Rauch, but I can't decide if I like it or not. La Brae also returned on Tuesday nights. I like this show but have a feeling it's veering off into a direction that I may not like. 

On Thursdays, my husband watches Swamp People and tapes BattleBots. I read during Swamp People; once you've seen a few alligators killed, I don't need to see anymore. I like BattleBots because no one is getting hurt, you're just seeing robots fly to pieces. Too bad real-world problems can't be solved like that.

Life in General

We have re-rented the little house my mother left me, and I have high hopes for my new tenant. My husband on Saturday, on his way over there to finish some projects - every time someone leaves the house, we must spend money and time trying to fix things, replacing light bulbs, unstopping sinks, etc. - and swerved to miss a deer. He took out the mirror on his truck.

My leg is still swollen and tender, but it is no longer throbbing and purple, so it is getting better. I am unclear as to what I have - varicose veins, I think - or how to deal with it, other than stay off of my leg for a long while until things settle down. It is not my back, it's not a Charlie Horse, it's something in my veins. The fact that I am fat doesn't help, even if I did lose 15 pounds back in 2020. I need to lose a lot more.

The bird feeder is a great source of fun. We have lots of cardinals, blue jays, chickadees, etc. there, especially in the mornings. I like watching the birds. I haven't been taking pictures of them because it has been wet and damp, and like the Wicked Witch of the West, I melt in the rain.

I also still haven't found the green comet. The moon has been full, so there's a lot of light, and it may be that even though this is a rural area, there's simply too much light pollution around me now to see it. Or I just can't find it. I found Mars. I found Polaris. I found all the markers I was supposed to find, but no green comet.

The weather has warmed, and the rain has stopped. I may have to go sit outside a spell. I suspect an early spring.

It Takes Just a Little While

Change does not happen overnight.

Not generally, anyway.

I've heard of folks who go to bed and wake up in the morning with white hair. Canities subita is the medical term for hair turning white overnight. The phenomenon is almost universally acknowledged as myth—but not entirely. There have been 84 verified instances of it happening since 1800.

My hair often looks much grayer (soft white is the term I prefer) after a cut. I accuse the beautician of using her scissors to ferret out the color and leave the gray, but the gray was already there. With each cut, my hair grows whiter. (I have a friend whose hair was totally white by the time she was 45, if not younger, so I consider myself lucky to still have my natural brownish color at all.)

Weight does not fall off in 10-pound increments. No, it comes off a half-pound at a time. Some days one may wake up and find the scale indicates one weighs two or three pounds less, but it is a change that happened over a period of days, unless one is quite ill. Even so, the most weight I've ever lost at one time is 8 pounds in a week, and that was a week of barely eating because my gallbladder was giving me a fit.

So, I could starve myself and lose 8 pounds a week. Maybe.

And then there's the world. How much has the world changed in my lifetime? And how much has it stayed the same?

The truth is the change has been minimal. Oh sure, there are advances in technology, changes in the way we raise children, a loss of morals and civility. But this has happened before, maybe just clothed in different colors.

In the past, I have spent much time reading old local newspapers. What struck me the most was the similarity of stories from the past to today. The concerns were the same: how to spend tax dollars. How to train children. How to make the most of agriculture products. How to keep private what should be public, and vice versa. Racism, sexism, money.

The only difference between then and now were the sums and the civility. The chairperson yelling in 1922 about money going toward public schools did so with decorum and manners. We've lost that, but it's taken my entire lifetime for the moral character of society to degrade itself as it does now. That's 60 years before that kind of corrupt change became more apparent. Personally, I think it's as it always has been, only now it has a megaphone in the form of social media and 24/7 television news. When we have things blaring at us constantly, we tend to feel it more, or feel that it is a more immediate change than it truly is.

That's not to say we haven't made strides of change - we have. But they have been imposed upon the external elements of society. Government edicts in the form of the Civil Rights Law, for example, or Title IX, or other legislation.

Legislation doesn't change the hearts of people. Legislation doesn't make a racist any less a racist, or a misogynist any less a woman-hater. It may make some hearts more accepting or may force the hatred to turn - as today it turns toward those who profess a difference in gender pronouns, for example. And legislation can't make attitudes such as fascism go away, nor make hearts any more open.

That takes a change that occurs over centuries. Maybe a millennium, maybe longer. It's certainly not going to change in my lifetime into anything good, particularly now when we see a return of a bent toward authoritarianism, when antisemitism is again on the rise, when dislike and disloyalty are applauded, and loyalty dismissed, unless it's loyalty to a personality.

Change takes a while. Sometimes it takes a long while, and sometimes it feels like we are changing for the worse or going backwards. In those moments, what we're really seeing is the rise of the realness of the human heart, which for better or worse, does not often lend itself to love of our fellow human beings and all of their diversity and uniqueness.

If I could snap my fingers, and like a snowy day turn the darkness of winter into something glittering and lovely, I would. If I could eat something bitter and turn my hair back to brown or make myself stop aging, I would. But none of us can do that. We cannot legislate away the calamities of the human heart.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Don't Wanna Smile

This is a somber day, the anniversary of the January 6 insurrection. As the January 6th Committee proved, this was a staged coup by an ousted president, who wished to maintain power and bring the USA under authoritarian rule.

It wasn't just a break-in, or a tourist visit. It was a damaging, demeaning effort to toss the U.S. Constitution into a trash can and light it afire.

It's also a somber day because the U.S. House of Representative has yet to be seated as I write this. The 118th Congress is not in session, is not doing the people's business, or overseeing all that it oversees because the Republicans, who hold a thin majority, cannot come together to vote for a Speaker of the House. Kevin McCarthy is on his 13th vote as I listen to the roll call. (My own representative, Ben Cline, apparently went to the bathroom and didn't vote yet this round, but he's been voting for McCarthy. I guess they'll get him when they go back for those they missed in the first run-through.)

It's the first time in 100 years the House did not elect a Speaker on the first try. The last time it went this many votes was back in 1851 or thereabouts.

To see this disarray in the House is disheartening. Even if McCarthy wins, and I expect he will eventually, he will be a weak Speaker. This not the way to lead. A man of integrity would have stepped aside, but I don't see too much integrity when it comes to politics.

Having spent 35 years covering local government, and being one of those persons who love history, seeing the government fail before my eyes is a bit like watching a ghoul suck out my soul. I have held the local courthouse in reverence and considered it sacred. I have walked the halls of government buildings awed that I could do so, that I didn't have to fear being challenged, that I had every right to be there, simply because I was a citizen, and not solely because I was working for a news outlet.

The law is as sacred to me as the Bible is to others. To violate the law is to break the societal contract, the one we all must live by if we are to get along. When the laws go by the wayside, so too does the Republic. We cannot live in peace if we choose to ignore the laws, no matter how moral our religious beliefs may be. I have not found the morals of religion to be strong enough to keep society in check, unless one wants to live under a strict religious rule such as the Taliban. That is not my idea of freedom, though. Those who want it have no idea what they're requesting. Looking forward is not the strong suit of those who seek those types of changes.

No, this is not a day for celebrating. This is one of those dates that will stay with me, like 9/11, or 01/28/86, when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded. Or my own wedding date, or my husband's birthday. The dates one cannot forget.

I do want to call out someone though - The Honorable Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives. I've been watching her and her deputy clerks deal with this rowdy bunch of elected fools (which in and of itself makes me frustrated, it's not a party and that goes for both sides of the aisle), and she deserves praise and a raise.

The count for the 13th time continues . . . 

Another Day, Another Shooting

Yesterday I woke to the news that three football players at the University of Virginia had been shot, and two others injured, by gunfire.

The alleged murderer was known to the campus and the local police, apparently, and he was eventually captured, about 12 hours after the murder.

The last I read, motive was unclear. Maybe there wasn't a motive.

Sometimes people are simply crazy, or bloodthirsty, or violent.

It pains me to admit that I've become somewhat nonchalant about the news of shootings. They happen EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. It may not be a mass shooting, but somebody, somewhere, is shot. Yet, I still watch those around me when I go out. I look for people who are acting "off" or suspect. I duck at loud noises.

In 2020, over 45,000 - yes, thousand - people died from gun-related deaths in the United States. We've already had over 37,000 gun deaths this year, and the year isn't over.

One guy has some blow-up stuff on the bottom of his shoe at an airport, and we all take our shoes off to get on an airplane, but we have thousands die from guns every year, and we do nothing.

Somebody found a few problems with Tylenol a long, long time ago, and suddenly medicines were put in plastic shrink wrap and made tamper-proof. Thousands die from guns every year, and we do nothing.

A child dies from a defective crib, and there's a recall. Thousands die from guns every year, and we do nothing.

A car crash indicates the air bags don't work, and there's a recall. Thousands die from guns every year and we do nothing.

I know the response - guns don't kill people, people kill people, blah blah thoughts and prayers. But guns are made for killing.

That is their sole purpose. To kill, or at least to maim.

I am a gun owner, and I am in favor of stricter gun control laws.

Dispelling a Myth

Occasionally, I see weird stuff cross my Facebook feed, generally from people who seem incredibly obsessed with sexual items, gender identity, and children, to the point where I think they may have a mental illness of some sort.

One of the weirder ones that some local folks continually insist is happening in our schools it something called "furries."

Allegedly, this involves young people dressing up as animals, speaking only as that animal would, and using litter boxes.

Reuters looked into this in July and found absolutely no instances of this taking place in public schools, yet there is a segment of the population that insists this happens. The New York Times refuted it in January.

There is not a single legitimate news site that pops up that corroborates anything about this. While some might consider The New York Times to lean left, Reuters is, as best I can tell, one of the most middle-ground news media groups out there.

I certainly do not think it is happening in my local public schools, even though I see posts that insist it is. There are never facts involved, just hearsay (my friend said her friend said she saw it happen) and I honestly find the people posting these things can trip out mentally over practically anything - they are incredibly sensitive and easily riled up over any perceived slight that doesn't meet their idea of a perfect world, whatever that is.

I do not believe this is happening at all, except maybe in some cosplay somewhere (like pretending to be a superhero), and in the minds of folks who apparently need better things to do with their time.

But let's pretend, just for a moment, that this allegation is true. That all over the United States, we have a percentage of children who are dressing up as dogs or cats.

Nobody asks why this would be happening. Why would children suddenly want to be animals?

Might it be because we take better care of our pets than our children?

Perhaps they see momma kissing on the pup while she screams at the kids?

Or they see dad idly stroking the purring cat while he's looking at his smart phone, and then yells at the kids for distracting him?

If this is a constant in their world, wouldn't the children, at some point, conclude that the parents love the animals more than they love their children? Wouldn't they do whatever they felt they had to obtain their parents' attention and love?

And if this is the case, then don't we have a parenting problem, not a school problem? Don't we have here a perfect (though fictional) example of horrid parenting gone wrong?

But these posts never blame the parents, never consider what might cause this kind of action on the part of a child. The posts just announce their horror that the school system might be taking this seriously and adding litter boxes to the bathrooms.

As I said earlier, I think this involves a sick mental illness on the part of the protesting posters, who want desperately to believe this kind of thing is actually happening for whatever reason.

It is part of the weirdness we have going on right now - we have a subset of the population who literally are making up stuff to upset other people. These folks who believe these types of lies and fairy tales are living in an alternate reality, some kind of fantasy that I cannot pretend to understand. Nor do I want to.

Instead of simply passing on stuff as truth and being outraged about it, whatever happened to asking questions, such as why would this be happening? Or doing a little fact checking to see if it's real or just some strange thing someone's put out there to rile up nervous people?

What will it take to shake some of these folks out of their bubble, and back into the real world?

Our Democracy Would Fall

"David Montgomery of the Washington Post has written a roundup of what 21 experts “in the presidency, political science, public administration, the military, intelligence, foreign affairs, economics and civil rights” say would happen should Trump be reelected in 2024.

They argue that upon taking office, Trump would install super loyalists to do his bidding and would ignore the Senate if it tried to stop him, as he largely did in his term. He has, after all, already outlined a plan to fire career civil servants and has explored a rigorous system for guaranteeing loyalists for those posts. Next, the experts suggest, he would deploy the military at home against his enemies while disengaging internationally and turning things over to Putin and other authoritarians. America’s global leadership would end, not least because no other nations would trust our intelligence services. Political violence would become the norm, giving Trump an excuse to declare martial law, and our democracy would fall." - From Heather Cox Richardson's newsletter, October 11, 2022

I believe this to be true. This is not because the former guy is a Republican. This is not what Republicans are. This is a new party under the guise of an old name. This is an authoritarian party. These are not my father's Republicans.

BANG!

 

The loud blast resounded around the warehouse-like grocery store moments after I walked in the store.

I froze.

"It was a balloon, it's alright," someone called. A manager raced by me, calling that he was double-checking that it was, indeed, not a gunshot. (I consider it somewhat heroic that he headed toward the sound.)

The store sells helium balloons, and one had burst. In that cavernous building, it sounded like a .22 caliber gun going off.

It was a loud echo chamber, the noise bouncing off the ceiling like a bird hitting a glass door.

It upset me more than I realized. Mostly, I was upset at my reaction. Some, like me, simply stood, but other people ducked behind vegetable crates.

I was in a section with nowhere to go, nothing to duck behind.

I was vulnerable.

So, I am happy today that I didn't get shot yesterday.

But I am terribly pissed off that this is where we are, that I came home angry, frightened, and upset because a helium balloon burst in the supermarket.

Terrified that I know now that when the gunman enters the store, I'll be among the first to go, because I froze in panic instead of running.

I try to tell myself that on some level I knew it was a balloon, that I had just walked by there, and my subconscious had noted someone using the helium tank.

But the reality is that I froze, and now I wonder if I need to practice not freezing at such sounds, practice hustling my fat ass out of the way, around a corner, falling to the ground knowing that with my bad back and my pudgy body I probably wouldn't get up again without help. I think about how embarrassing that would have been, had I overreacted . . . this time.

Because this time, it wasn't a gunshot.

I am happy about that.

Fragile Democracy

China can trace its history back to the 21st century BC - more than 2,000 years before the current Gregorian calendar started.

But humans have been around approximately 1.7 million years. The Roman Empire lasted for over 1,000 years, beginning in 27 BC and ending, more or less, in 1453 AD.

For all of those years, people did not have a say in their government. The government was a king, a despot, a ruler "sent by God" or some other something, but until the Magna Carta was signed in the 13th century, the notion that anyone other than a chosen one or the biggest bully had a say in what went on in life was unheard of.

The United States was founded in 1776. The U.S. Constitution was signed in 1787 and ratified in 1788. 

So, this country is about 234 years old, if one counts from the signing of the U.S. Constitution.

Democracy is an experiment, and it has, to date, relied upon the righteousness and morality of the people in charge in order to remain in play.

Our form of government is new. It is based on a rule of law, not the whims of a man.

And we came within five feet of losing it.

The fragility of our government has been brought home to me in the last two months while I watched each moment of the January 6th committee hearings. How close we came to having a king is frightening.

It frightens me more to think that there still Americans who apparently do not want democracy but want instead a king. And not a nice king, but a tyrant who wanted to kill off his own vice president because the vice president chose not to be a lackey at a critical moment in time.

We do not have sufficient structure in place to maintain democracy. I see that now, because (mostly since the 911 attacks) we have become a depraved and cowardly people.

Depraved and cowardly people require bullies to lead them. They don't trust themselves, I guess, to govern. How could they, after all, when they are so scared that they must carry a six-shooter on their side simply to go to the market?

 

Nothing in our history has prepared us for a president who would dismantle the nation. Nor are we prepared to deal with a rogue SCROTUS, a group of contemptuous Bible-thumpers who believe that their Word of God outweighs the law of man.

The law of man is what this country was founded upon, not the word of God.

Nor are we prepared to deal with an entire party of fascists who would bring us all to ruin simply for the sake of, well, to be honest, I don't know what they want. I don't think it is what they will get, even if they win, because the reality will be so terrible as to make them wish they'd had some sense to begin with.

Many people are dismissing the January 6th committee as a witch hunt. I am seeing things I already knew - some tidbits of new information, sure - but the overall theme of a power grab was already there. I saw it in 2016.

I wrote about it in 2016. Anyone who was paying attention could see what was happening. What I couldn't do, and what apparently people in power could not do, was figure out how to counterbalance it.

If I could time travel, I would go back and ensure Democrats held the majority in 2014, so the Mitch McConnell could not be the asshole he is and stack the Supreme Court.

And I certainly would not allow the former guy to be anywhere near the Oval Office.

But I cannot time travel, I can only move forward. 

Now I am focused on seeing democracy survive, because I think we have maybe two years - maybe just a few months - before it crumbles.

The January 6th committee, strangely enough, is showing the way. It was nice to hear a Republican refer to a Democrat as "my friend" and vice versa when yielding in the back and forth that the committee has set up to make its points.

Republicans and Democrats are not two difference species. We are not - or should not be - enemies.

We need to find common ground before it's too late, and if that means holding hands with strange bedfellows, so be it.

Important things require compromise. If we can't do that, we are lost.