Personal interactions are much more pleasant and constructive when we take the time to view things from the other person’s perspective. But, this does not necessarily require our adoption of their personal opinions or tastes.

I simply don’t care for some things others espouse. For example: I’ve never liked vanilla ice cream smothered in calf’s liver gravy and salmon caviar. No getting around it.  I hate vanilla ice cream.

Putin (Russia), Assad (Syria) and Iran can now claim success in achieving a cease fire in Syria. The three have produced at least a temporary win/win/win in the Middle East which will allow them to potentially claim a strong hold on distribution of oil. At the same time, Obama has shut down the possibility of drilling for oil in some tracts along the east coast, declared a large portion of Utah a national monument (disallowing energy exploration and drilling there). He is being sued by Utah over this. His fight against the pipeline is ongoing. All this seems to be completely contrary to common sense.

I recently read that Obama now holds a 51% approval rating just weeks before his departure from the oval office. He, by some counts, is claimed to be the most admired man in America. Folks I talk to don ‘t see things that way.

I guess I must admit to being a bit confused.  Unless, of course, the media reports regarding Obama’s public esteem are based on polling practices similar to those used prior to the election. Then it would make sense.

The year was 1914. World War I was raging. As Christmas approached, British, French and German soldiers along the Western Front decided to call an unofficial truce in numerous places. Men would cross “no-man’s land” to exchange gifts and good wishes with the enemy. This happened on other occasions as well. When the high commands of the armed forces learned of this, rules against “fraternization” became strict and such displays of humanity ceased.

There is something universally good about peace, kindness and tolerance. It is most often found in the hearts of individuals, but is far rarer when searched for in groups with agendas. Therein may lie the most basic problem.

People have always found strength in numbers. This could be for self protection or, in a more sinister sense, it could be for purposes of intimidation. Comfort is derived when surrounding oneself with those of a similar ilk. We see this as the genesis of tribes, ethnic communities, gangs, religions, unions, nations. The individual may be lost in the crowd.

When a group’s agenda comes to outweigh the compassion of the person, reasons for conflict can be rationalized and the logic of peace, lost.

As another Christmas comes to pass, we are, once again, reminded of the words, “Let there be peace on earth and good will toward men.” This is not an idea intrinsic to any particular religion or group. It is the essence of “The Golden Rule.” “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This is the rule that has kept mankind from becoming extinct. It should not be ignored or reserved for a holiday season.

While I continue to search for the meaning of life, please allow me to wish each of you, individually, a very Merry Christmas, ever increasing peace on earth and good will toward all mankind.

I know heaven exists. I’ve been there several times. Each time was when I witnessed one of my sons lose himself in laughter.

Please feel free to comment on any of my posts. I read all comments and will publish all which I don’t deem as spam. Thanks for any positive comments, but the comments don’t need to agree with me to be published. I will publish any opposing comments, as well. Although I reserve the right to edit full spellings of expletives.

I will not publish spam no matter how flattering the comments. Any comments which do not refer to specifics in my posts, or any comments I deem as solicitations, will be deleted.

Have a Merry Christmas!!!!!

Please give me one good or logical or honorable or, at least, less-than-fully-corrupt reason why Presidents of The United States should be able to escape criminal prosecution and/or penalties under federal law by pardoning themselves. Just one.

?

?

?

?

?

That’s what I thought.

I wonder if a study has ever been done on how the level of efficiency in government impacts the usefulness of the studies it does. It seems to me that many, if not most, government inspired studies have become irrelevant by the time the results are issued. Is the sole purpose of a study simply to provide employment for the folks who do the study?

Concerned with the effects of the recent drought in California, a new study to determine the feasibility of doing a study on what effect percipitation might have on the water level of Folsom reservoir, is now being planned. Of course, tax dollars will be needed and the results are expected to take some time. No, I’m not kidding.

I expect they will employ highly technical, scientific methods that will lead them to the conclusion  that no matter how much it rains, the water never rises much above a duck’s knee.

When filmmakers or TV producers consider casting their next project it would be wise to keep in mind that they are not the ultimate consumers of their product. As such, they should avoid the attitude of, “Give me the usual”, and instead spend some serious time perusing the menu. The options among available, diverse actors chomping at the bit for employment could not be greater. And neither could the possibilities for producing a better product.

There was a great outcry at last year’s Oscars about the lack of “minority” films chosen. Blame was placed upon the Academy for its perceived bias toward lack of diversity. This seems to be an odd accusation against members of an industry so publicly supportive of minority participation. Let’s take a look at what is going on. Continue reading DIVERSITY IN ENTERTAINMENT. IT’S ABOUT THE PRODUCT! →

Most of what I write (even the more serious stuff) usually has something “tongue-in-cheek” to try to elicit a smile. This essay does not follow that rule.

I was born not long after WWII ended and the Korean War was in full swing. I reached military draft age just after the 1968 Tet Offensive in Viet Nam.

During my formative years, I was taught to believe a hero was the guy who threw himself on a grenade to save his fellow soldiers. He was the guy who pushed the dead machine gunner away from the weapon and took his place, providing the cover fire that would hopefully allow his wounded comrades time to escape. Basically, a hero was someone who knew full well that he was going to die in order to save others and did it anyway.

Nowadays, the term “hero” is applied to people and animals for myriad reasons. It seems to have become a watered down catch-all word for instances that deserve recognition. I was prepared to write an extensive article on this subject but during my research came across another man’s already completed efforts. Chris Martin wrote, “A Veteran’s Perspective: What Makes a Hero?” This chap is far more qualified than I to share thoughts on this sensitive subject. He offers insights I hadn’t considered. HIs humble and honorable essay is well worth the short time it takes to read.

Let me end this by saying that there should be some word or phrase that sets apart those who expect to die while saving others from those who’ve done something that 40 years ago would have been considered common courtesy.

I think almost all of us, at one time or another, have had the occasion to give notable help or to save a life or two. This does not make us heroes. If we did not step up when we were in a unique position to be helpful, it would be difficult to justify our own existence.

There should be a term for the victims of violence (military or civilian) other than “heroes”. Some term of comfort for their families.

Michael Moore, (yes the same Michael Moore we all recognize as the fellow who does not consider his appearance as an afterthought, but probably not as any thought; the same literate fellow who many must think not only doesn’t know the definition of the word “comb” or the item’s possible uses, but may be unable to spell such alien words; the same cherubic blather spraying pseudo-pundit, who we cannot verify has ever seen the inside of a shower stall. In short, he is antithesis of the concept, “You can dress him up but you can’t take him anywhere.), has finally made some sense. Be still, my arrhythmic heart.

Moore is a film maker noted for his arrogant, self righteous, poorly thought out progressive opinions and cinematic productions. A very successful chap followed by hordes of stereotypical lemmings. In this one instance, I must swallow my pride and add my voice to his.

It is reported, “Lil Mikey”  added an essay to his Facebook page on Tuesday, in which he rails against Donald Trump’s decision to skip daily national security briefings. He explains how vital the daily briefings are and what will likely happen if Trump continues his foolishness. And, I’ll be danged, he’s hit the nail right on the nose.

I didn’t think I’d ever see the day when I would see Moore come out with a position or opinion that wasn’t missing half the facts in order to spin an issue to favor his far left leaning, liberal progressive agenda. I stand in head shaking amazement. His essay is clearly written and is nothing if not an exercise in well considered common sense.  Good work, sir. Now go check yourself for lice.