...I wonder if they do it on purpose.
Listening to the weather forecast this AM, the "meteorologist," as if that covers for how wrong they often are, said, "Very warm today, with a high of 88." She continued, "Not as warm tomorrow, with a high of only 87." OK. And I don't know what "lower" humididity means. I keep hearing how the humididity is "lower," but it's still in the 60 and 70 percent range. I guess that's "lower" than the 85% of last week and the weekend, although that, too, was supposed to be "lower."
I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I pass schools whose outside message boards include words that are misspelled. Ah, "Your Public Schools. No Better Place to Learn." But perhaps I'm being too critical, maybe even picayunish. Still, with Spell Check?
That might be a reflection of the lack of importance in teaching spelling today. Certainly it's not important--spelling isn't on the state tests. And the rationale is "Students will catch up. They'll learn how to spell eventually." I guess whoever thinks that is relying on osmosis? But, from my perspective and all of the writing I have my students do, they don't "catch up," not at all.
Of more importance, why doesn't President Trump get rid of the federal bureaucrats impeding his agenda, that is, assuming he really has one? Not all of the positions filled by Presidential appointments require Senate confirmation. In fact, I think the majority of them do not. I'm guessing that the Trump transition team had no real idea of what transition meant or entailed. Maybe that's because his closest supporters and advisers were as surprised as he was in winning. But just make the appointments. He promised to "drain the swamp." Often it seems he's dammed it up.
Dennis Praeger had a good point this afternoon on his radio show, to which I listened driving home from the car dealer. I've addressed this idea before, more than once, but months ago. Why isn't there a huge meeting of imams from around the world to loudly and roundly condemn the despicable actions and violence committed in the name of their religion? They can cite the Quran and the Hadiths in their condemnation. Blast it to the world. Urge Muslims not to cooperate with the Islamofacists and that, if they do, they will face Allah's wrath. Are the imams afraid? Afraid of the extremists? Afraid of losing their flocks? If so, that surely casts doubt on the contention that there are "moderate" Muslims and that Islam is a "religion of peace."
What was it Dante wrote in The Inferno, the first book of The Divine Comedy? "The darkest places of hell are reserved for those who remain neutral in times of moral crisis." If this is not a time of "moral crisis, " then the Apocalypse has arrived.
Monday, July 31, 2017
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
The Elite
This Jeff Sessions thing is a microcosm of Trump and his modus operandi, a frightening prospect from the person holding the office of the Presidency. I know many people are happy with Trump and what he's done or not done so far. Some of his performance has been laudatory, but to me, not much.
I think his appt of Neil Gorsuch was a big plus. Withdrawing from the Paris Accords exposed a sham of an agreement. Perhaps his greatest achievement really wasn't his at all, preventing Hillary Clinton from becoming President. Of course, he didn't do that; voters did. But he was the engine, the means by which Clinton was sent to the sidelines. That's not a small thing.
All in all, though, I've not been impressed. He's not delivered on many of his promises, most egregiously, not pushing for repeal of Obamacare. Oh, he continues to babble on about it, but that's all it's been--talk. I know I've been told to "be patient," but that is not going to happen. I've "been patient" for decades, waiting for the Establishment to turn things around and it's not happening. Trump is no different. How much longer do I have to "be patient?" Years??????
That said, back to L'Affair Sessions. If people didn't realize it before, Trump is exposing his true self now. He's a vindictive man, one who holds grudges and carries out vendettas. When it suits him, for whatever reasons, he turns on people, even those close to him, those who have supported him. The reasons may or may not be legitimate. It's all about Trump. If he hurts someone else, even unnecessarily, that's OK if it benefits him.
He demands loyalty, faithfulness, and/or allegiance from others without requiring it of/from himself. When he feels the need, again legitimately or otherwise, he says, "You're fired!" (I never saw his television show, whatever it was called. But I believe that was the signature phrase he uttered.)
He is dishonest, openly so. He can't be trusted. Someone might claim he's made good appointments; that is debatable. But even granting that he has, what good is it if he stabs those appointments in the back for doing their jobs?
I know I really have no idea what goes on behind the scenes. But I am not confident. I am reminded of one of my high school teachers, when I met up with him some years after I graduated. I was not impressed with him as a teacher then and my opinion has slid even farther while I've become a teacher. We disagreed over Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon and their Vietnam policies. My teacher's claim was that we had to trust, blindly trust, what Johnson and Nixon did because they knew more than we did. Well, he was right about one thing: they did "know more than we did." And they lied and lied and lied, committing more and more Americans and others to death while covering their lies. This, I think, is what I feel most frightened about with Trump.
I've e-mailed several folks about John McCain. I have no doubts he is a good man. I equated him with Ted Kennedy, but only in this way. Kennedy was wrongly, perversely, held up as "The Lion of the Senate" when he was known to have fatal cancer. That was a sobriquet he didn't deserve; ask Mary Jo Kopechne. Oh, sorry......we can't. She died at Chappaquiddick. I realize there's no comparison between Kennedy's immorality and McCain's morality. That's not my point. I merely hope they aren't gong to do with McCain that they did with Kennedy. Again, I'm not equating McCain with Kennedy relative to morality. Kennedy had few morals/ethics. McCain seems like a genuinely good man--and has a notable record of courage, esp in the military. But politically, he's been a disaster. He's been a liberal in sheep's clothing. If he wasn't to be a liberal or at least support so many liberal causes, the right thing to have done was to have quit the Republican Party and become a Democrat. Changing parties would have been the honorable thing to do. Instead, he hid behind the Republican name. (I will refrain from going off on the Establishment Republicans, for today.)
Now he's again talking about the need to "compromise." Congress has to "compromise." He's been doing and saying that for years, playing both sides. (I will refrain from going off on Establishment Republicans today.) See where that's landed us? We've had more and more of the doo-good (and I do mean "doo") agenda. Perhaps McCain lacks a true political moral compass. I wish the best for Senator McCain and hope all of the prayers for him bring peace. But to lionize him is wrong. It demeans and belittles people who really deserve to be lionized.
I can't believe Kid Rock is running for the US Senate. Seriously? (OK, many of you know I don't care for his music and, in fact, think I might recognize only one of his "hits.") I have several problems with that. First, anyone who can defeat Debbie Stabenow is good. She has not been a good Senator, wrong on almost everything. But does this guy have any qualifications, other than those in the Constitution? I'm talking about knowing things. Haven't Jesse Ventura's, Al Franken's (That doesn't say much for Minnesotans, does it?), and other celebrities' tenures taught us anything? (Of course, it might be legitimately argued that they are no worse than the professional politicians!) But celebrity has become synonymous with success. Most important, will "Rock's" (I love how the Detroit newspapers refer to him as "Rock," as if that's a last name. Is it?) celebrity cause a far more qualified Republican candidate (esp Robert Young) to lose?
We live in strange, curious even, times. And they are frightening.
I think his appt of Neil Gorsuch was a big plus. Withdrawing from the Paris Accords exposed a sham of an agreement. Perhaps his greatest achievement really wasn't his at all, preventing Hillary Clinton from becoming President. Of course, he didn't do that; voters did. But he was the engine, the means by which Clinton was sent to the sidelines. That's not a small thing.
All in all, though, I've not been impressed. He's not delivered on many of his promises, most egregiously, not pushing for repeal of Obamacare. Oh, he continues to babble on about it, but that's all it's been--talk. I know I've been told to "be patient," but that is not going to happen. I've "been patient" for decades, waiting for the Establishment to turn things around and it's not happening. Trump is no different. How much longer do I have to "be patient?" Years??????
That said, back to L'Affair Sessions. If people didn't realize it before, Trump is exposing his true self now. He's a vindictive man, one who holds grudges and carries out vendettas. When it suits him, for whatever reasons, he turns on people, even those close to him, those who have supported him. The reasons may or may not be legitimate. It's all about Trump. If he hurts someone else, even unnecessarily, that's OK if it benefits him.
He demands loyalty, faithfulness, and/or allegiance from others without requiring it of/from himself. When he feels the need, again legitimately or otherwise, he says, "You're fired!" (I never saw his television show, whatever it was called. But I believe that was the signature phrase he uttered.)
He is dishonest, openly so. He can't be trusted. Someone might claim he's made good appointments; that is debatable. But even granting that he has, what good is it if he stabs those appointments in the back for doing their jobs?
I know I really have no idea what goes on behind the scenes. But I am not confident. I am reminded of one of my high school teachers, when I met up with him some years after I graduated. I was not impressed with him as a teacher then and my opinion has slid even farther while I've become a teacher. We disagreed over Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon and their Vietnam policies. My teacher's claim was that we had to trust, blindly trust, what Johnson and Nixon did because they knew more than we did. Well, he was right about one thing: they did "know more than we did." And they lied and lied and lied, committing more and more Americans and others to death while covering their lies. This, I think, is what I feel most frightened about with Trump.
I've e-mailed several folks about John McCain. I have no doubts he is a good man. I equated him with Ted Kennedy, but only in this way. Kennedy was wrongly, perversely, held up as "The Lion of the Senate" when he was known to have fatal cancer. That was a sobriquet he didn't deserve; ask Mary Jo Kopechne. Oh, sorry......we can't. She died at Chappaquiddick. I realize there's no comparison between Kennedy's immorality and McCain's morality. That's not my point. I merely hope they aren't gong to do with McCain that they did with Kennedy. Again, I'm not equating McCain with Kennedy relative to morality. Kennedy had few morals/ethics. McCain seems like a genuinely good man--and has a notable record of courage, esp in the military. But politically, he's been a disaster. He's been a liberal in sheep's clothing. If he wasn't to be a liberal or at least support so many liberal causes, the right thing to have done was to have quit the Republican Party and become a Democrat. Changing parties would have been the honorable thing to do. Instead, he hid behind the Republican name. (I will refrain from going off on the Establishment Republicans, for today.)
Now he's again talking about the need to "compromise." Congress has to "compromise." He's been doing and saying that for years, playing both sides. (I will refrain from going off on Establishment Republicans today.) See where that's landed us? We've had more and more of the doo-good (and I do mean "doo") agenda. Perhaps McCain lacks a true political moral compass. I wish the best for Senator McCain and hope all of the prayers for him bring peace. But to lionize him is wrong. It demeans and belittles people who really deserve to be lionized.
I can't believe Kid Rock is running for the US Senate. Seriously? (OK, many of you know I don't care for his music and, in fact, think I might recognize only one of his "hits.") I have several problems with that. First, anyone who can defeat Debbie Stabenow is good. She has not been a good Senator, wrong on almost everything. But does this guy have any qualifications, other than those in the Constitution? I'm talking about knowing things. Haven't Jesse Ventura's, Al Franken's (That doesn't say much for Minnesotans, does it?), and other celebrities' tenures taught us anything? (Of course, it might be legitimately argued that they are no worse than the professional politicians!) But celebrity has become synonymous with success. Most important, will "Rock's" (I love how the Detroit newspapers refer to him as "Rock," as if that's a last name. Is it?) celebrity cause a far more qualified Republican candidate (esp Robert Young) to lose?
We live in strange, curious even, times. And they are frightening.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
Repeal?
Well, what is it? Will the Republicans in the Senate find some backbone and do what they've promised and even symbolically done for the past 7 years? Will they repeal Obamacare and send that to the House? (I don't know if this is all part of an appropriations bill. If it is, then the repeal must start in the House. Still......)
What took so long? Promise after promise was broken. I'd really like to know Mitch McConnell's motivation. He and the Establishment Republicans had the opportunity to end Obamacare months ago, after years of promises to do so. All those courageous (Yes, I'm being very facetious!) Republicans who voted to repeal Obamacare fully knowing the repeal was dead on arrival (veto) suddenly got cold feet.
I'm not a fan of Obamacare, for many reasons. I know a lot of folks like it. If people still want to believe that it has "saved lives," that's fine. If they still want to believe that it has allowed more people to have better health insurance, that's fine. I don't believe those, not for an instant. I've written about that many times, how the middle class families, the "forgotten Americans," have been hurt financially and medically, forced to pay far higher premiums with far higher deductibles and co-pays that, in reality, have made health insurance impossible to use. But if people want to believe otherwise, that's fine.
That's not what this is about. This is about promises, not slinking away when the rubber hits the road. How many times have the Republicans promised to repeal Obamacare since 2011 or thereabouts? How many times have they voted to repeal it, fully knowing it was merely a gesture because Obama would veto the repeal? Now, with control of Congress, both the House and Senate, and a President who would sign the repeal bill, too many of them are balking, making a repeal highly unlikely.
I find this repulsive. It's not just the financial costs that have burdened individuals, families, and, esp, small businesses. It's antithetical to the centuries-old principle of limited government, one of the foundations on which this nation was built. How much more intrusion of the federal government into our lives will we allow? When will we stop the federal (and some state and local) government(s) from pitting citizen against citizen, having some people pay to give things to other people? ("Why should I have to forgo trips to Florida several times a year to purchase, with my own money, quality health insurance when the government forces others to pay for my insurance?" And on and on......
But now that the Republicans are in the position to fulfill their promise(s), too many of them are balking. They include the Establishment Republicans. Were these people lying to us? Nah, a politician lying to his constituents, to everybody. If you voted to repeal many times before, why not now?
(This reminds me of teaching. How many times did I speak out against yet another foolish policy, program, etc., being handed down and have teachers sit quietly, letting me carry the ball? Then, surreptitiously, always very surreptitiously, I'd get support, with small handwritten notes, with e-mails to my private address, with mumbled encouragement in the hallways or lunchroom (but never within earshot of an administrator), or even with phone calls to my home. "Way to go, Ron! We're with you! You tell it like it is." And the next time, when looking for some support among my colleagues (a term I hesitate to use), they'd sit on their thumbs and spin yet again.)
Have the courage of your convictions!!!!!! Either vote no on the purely symbolic vote or vote yes when the vote really means something. I'm no fan of cowards. It's one reason I rarely identify myself as a teacher.
Speaking, at least tangentially, of schools, Karen has retired! Not quite 43 years of working in the schools. I really don't know how she worked for some of the people she did; I'm not sure I could have. Well, I did, but not as directly. I wonder if people know how much more, how much beyond the ordinary, she did for families and kids. I'll bet not many. I would say a conservative, a very conservative, estimate of the money she gave to needy families in her building (30 years in the same school) would be $30,000. I'm not kidding and I wouldn't be at all surprised, if we really got the receipts from all of those years, if the amount was double that. A kid came in a couple of winter days without boots, off to Meijers to buy some for him. A kid didn't have a coat in the middle of January, off to Kohls to buy her one. At Thanksgiving and Christmas, esp when the economy tanked and the local churches weren't able to provide as much help, she stepped in, getting food and gift cards for families that might have been left out that year. I remember she told me one year her principal asked her, with some incredulity, "Does Ron know how much money you spend" on these families? I did and she knew I didn't mind a bit. I wonder, now that she's retired, if anyone will step in and spend what she did each year, each month, each week. BTW, if you read this, you are now one of the very few people who know she did this.
"Do you believe in miracles?" I think that came from the US gold medal in hockey in the '80 Olympics. I don't remember the sportscaster's name. But I think it applies to our (Michael's) Colt League (ages 15 and 16) team this summer. With one game and playoffs remaining, our record is 9-4. I know that's our record--I coach. Who'd a thunk it? A week before the season, we had 7 players; that's all. We were told we needed 11 to have team and we recruited a few more--12 now, with one who rarely shows and always one or two with other things to do. Of the recruits, a couple never played organized ball before, not even in the Dairy Queen League! Mostly, I think, it's not really us, but that the pitching in the league is not nearly as good as last year, when we only won three or four games. Teams usually have one really good pitcher now, whereas last year they'd have one great pitcher and another one or two really good ones. But our kids are doing pretty well. They play hard and listen. Oh, catching a fly ball or pop-up is still an adventure for about half of the team and running bases remains a mystery for many of the players. But they never quit and they are some pretty nice kids. I'm glad for them. It's been fun to coach them.
What took so long? Promise after promise was broken. I'd really like to know Mitch McConnell's motivation. He and the Establishment Republicans had the opportunity to end Obamacare months ago, after years of promises to do so. All those courageous (Yes, I'm being very facetious!) Republicans who voted to repeal Obamacare fully knowing the repeal was dead on arrival (veto) suddenly got cold feet.
I'm not a fan of Obamacare, for many reasons. I know a lot of folks like it. If people still want to believe that it has "saved lives," that's fine. If they still want to believe that it has allowed more people to have better health insurance, that's fine. I don't believe those, not for an instant. I've written about that many times, how the middle class families, the "forgotten Americans," have been hurt financially and medically, forced to pay far higher premiums with far higher deductibles and co-pays that, in reality, have made health insurance impossible to use. But if people want to believe otherwise, that's fine.
That's not what this is about. This is about promises, not slinking away when the rubber hits the road. How many times have the Republicans promised to repeal Obamacare since 2011 or thereabouts? How many times have they voted to repeal it, fully knowing it was merely a gesture because Obama would veto the repeal? Now, with control of Congress, both the House and Senate, and a President who would sign the repeal bill, too many of them are balking, making a repeal highly unlikely.
I find this repulsive. It's not just the financial costs that have burdened individuals, families, and, esp, small businesses. It's antithetical to the centuries-old principle of limited government, one of the foundations on which this nation was built. How much more intrusion of the federal government into our lives will we allow? When will we stop the federal (and some state and local) government(s) from pitting citizen against citizen, having some people pay to give things to other people? ("Why should I have to forgo trips to Florida several times a year to purchase, with my own money, quality health insurance when the government forces others to pay for my insurance?" And on and on......
But now that the Republicans are in the position to fulfill their promise(s), too many of them are balking. They include the Establishment Republicans. Were these people lying to us? Nah, a politician lying to his constituents, to everybody. If you voted to repeal many times before, why not now?
(This reminds me of teaching. How many times did I speak out against yet another foolish policy, program, etc., being handed down and have teachers sit quietly, letting me carry the ball? Then, surreptitiously, always very surreptitiously, I'd get support, with small handwritten notes, with e-mails to my private address, with mumbled encouragement in the hallways or lunchroom (but never within earshot of an administrator), or even with phone calls to my home. "Way to go, Ron! We're with you! You tell it like it is." And the next time, when looking for some support among my colleagues (a term I hesitate to use), they'd sit on their thumbs and spin yet again.)
Have the courage of your convictions!!!!!! Either vote no on the purely symbolic vote or vote yes when the vote really means something. I'm no fan of cowards. It's one reason I rarely identify myself as a teacher.
Speaking, at least tangentially, of schools, Karen has retired! Not quite 43 years of working in the schools. I really don't know how she worked for some of the people she did; I'm not sure I could have. Well, I did, but not as directly. I wonder if people know how much more, how much beyond the ordinary, she did for families and kids. I'll bet not many. I would say a conservative, a very conservative, estimate of the money she gave to needy families in her building (30 years in the same school) would be $30,000. I'm not kidding and I wouldn't be at all surprised, if we really got the receipts from all of those years, if the amount was double that. A kid came in a couple of winter days without boots, off to Meijers to buy some for him. A kid didn't have a coat in the middle of January, off to Kohls to buy her one. At Thanksgiving and Christmas, esp when the economy tanked and the local churches weren't able to provide as much help, she stepped in, getting food and gift cards for families that might have been left out that year. I remember she told me one year her principal asked her, with some incredulity, "Does Ron know how much money you spend" on these families? I did and she knew I didn't mind a bit. I wonder, now that she's retired, if anyone will step in and spend what she did each year, each month, each week. BTW, if you read this, you are now one of the very few people who know she did this.
"Do you believe in miracles?" I think that came from the US gold medal in hockey in the '80 Olympics. I don't remember the sportscaster's name. But I think it applies to our (Michael's) Colt League (ages 15 and 16) team this summer. With one game and playoffs remaining, our record is 9-4. I know that's our record--I coach. Who'd a thunk it? A week before the season, we had 7 players; that's all. We were told we needed 11 to have team and we recruited a few more--12 now, with one who rarely shows and always one or two with other things to do. Of the recruits, a couple never played organized ball before, not even in the Dairy Queen League! Mostly, I think, it's not really us, but that the pitching in the league is not nearly as good as last year, when we only won three or four games. Teams usually have one really good pitcher now, whereas last year they'd have one great pitcher and another one or two really good ones. But our kids are doing pretty well. They play hard and listen. Oh, catching a fly ball or pop-up is still an adventure for about half of the team and running bases remains a mystery for many of the players. But they never quit and they are some pretty nice kids. I'm glad for them. It's been fun to coach them.
Saturday, July 8, 2017
??????
I'm pretty sure I don't have all of the answers. In fact, the older I get the more I think I don't have many of the answers. But I do have more and more questions; they seem to multiply.
I understand some people's dissatisfaction with Don Trump as President. I have expressed my disappointment on many occasions. But the Trump Presidency and the reaction to it have raised many questions for me.
Why wasn't there the same extreme opposition to Obama? OK, if you still think Obama was a good President, you can stop reading right here. Yes, the Republican Establishment was called "The party of no." But I don't remember the vehement protests and vitriol toward Obama. His policies were often divisive. His administration was selective in its application of the law, etc. He and his administration were just as dishonest, if not more so, than other Presidents and administrations. His foreign policy was disastrous; that is, the world was a far more dangerous place when he left office than when he entered.
For that matter, I don't remember a whole lot of angst regarding Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Yet another question: How can anyone support her?
Where do some of these politicians get their nerve? Jerry Brown, a few weeks back, called Californians opposed to some $52 billion tax increase "freeloaders." First, what does opposition to a huge tax increase have to do with freeloading? Second, what's wrong with opposing any tax hike? Third, why are Californians all over this guy, "Governor Moonbeam?" For that matter, how does he ever get elected--to anything?
How can Oregon pass legislation that requires insurers to pay for abortions, even for illegal immigrants? It's one thing to think it's OK to murder babies under the euphemisms such as "reproductive rights," etc. It's far another to force people, through their premiums to insurers, to pay for others' abortions. I enjoyed the photo of an Oregon woman holding a sign, "Free abortions on demand!" Again I ask, how did we get here, to this point?
How, too, is it decided what roads to resurface? I'm not complaining. I worked road construction for a number of years. But why are some roads, often less traveled, slated for repaving while other, more torn-up streets, untouched? I was thinking of this the other day, on my bike, when riding on the shoulder of the road was far less of a bumpy ride than being on the road itself.
I understand some people's dissatisfaction with Don Trump as President. I have expressed my disappointment on many occasions. But the Trump Presidency and the reaction to it have raised many questions for me.
Why wasn't there the same extreme opposition to Obama? OK, if you still think Obama was a good President, you can stop reading right here. Yes, the Republican Establishment was called "The party of no." But I don't remember the vehement protests and vitriol toward Obama. His policies were often divisive. His administration was selective in its application of the law, etc. He and his administration were just as dishonest, if not more so, than other Presidents and administrations. His foreign policy was disastrous; that is, the world was a far more dangerous place when he left office than when he entered.
For that matter, I don't remember a whole lot of angst regarding Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Yet another question: How can anyone support her?
Where do some of these politicians get their nerve? Jerry Brown, a few weeks back, called Californians opposed to some $52 billion tax increase "freeloaders." First, what does opposition to a huge tax increase have to do with freeloading? Second, what's wrong with opposing any tax hike? Third, why are Californians all over this guy, "Governor Moonbeam?" For that matter, how does he ever get elected--to anything?
How can Oregon pass legislation that requires insurers to pay for abortions, even for illegal immigrants? It's one thing to think it's OK to murder babies under the euphemisms such as "reproductive rights," etc. It's far another to force people, through their premiums to insurers, to pay for others' abortions. I enjoyed the photo of an Oregon woman holding a sign, "Free abortions on demand!" Again I ask, how did we get here, to this point?
How, too, is it decided what roads to resurface? I'm not complaining. I worked road construction for a number of years. But why are some roads, often less traveled, slated for repaving while other, more torn-up streets, untouched? I was thinking of this the other day, on my bike, when riding on the shoulder of the road was far less of a bumpy ride than being on the road itself.
Friday, July 7, 2017
Fri Musings
This AM I spoke with my physician, who is retiring at the end of the month. After thanking him and wishing him well, I joked, "I hope you aren't as busy in retirement as I've been." He laughed and said, "I think I'm already getting that feeling." Yep, "retire from retirement."
Last week I spent a couple of minutes watching some of the Tiger game. Victor Martinez hit a rope for a home run. Isn't it cool to watch the smiles on the faces of the home town crowds when one of theirs reaches the downs and does the Cadillac Trot? Yep, it is.
Speaking of baseball, in sports, is there anything more fun than shagging fly balls? My dad would often take me out after dinner and hit me flies for hours on end. I loved it! It was a lot of fun. One night I ran into a light pole at the nearby park, my eye quickly closing. The next AM, it looked like a plum, that purple! Or, so I was told. I had a game that day and, I suppose foolishly, I played. As luck would have it, maybe bad luck, a bad bounce smacked me in the same eye. The city ran me up to the local medical clinic for x-rays. No permanent damage was done. And we didn't stop with the fly balls.
OK, I've reconsidered. Taking BP was also great. After working in the dining hall in college, I'd go down by myself two hours before team practice, set the pitching machine, and take BP until my teammates arrived. That was great fun, too.
I hope the Tigers don't clean house. I know the reasoning behind all the trade talk. But I enjoy watching most of the players whose names are being thrown around regarding trades. I'd hate to see these guys go. But, it's not baseball; it's a business.
I see former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Young has thrown his hat in the ring for the November '18 election for US Senator. He's a very intelligent man. I heard him on the radio one day last week driving to class. In addition to some good ideas, he also was right on the money in criticizing current Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow. He cited her "spend, spend, spend" history and, if there isn't enough money, just put more spending "on the credit card," leaving others to pay for her boondoogles later. I know the Republicans have run some very mediocre candidates against her in the past. But, then, I still couldn't understand anyone voting for her. Now, especially, I cannot imagine, not in the least, anyone choosing Stabenow over Young unless voting blindly for the party; still, someone voting like that once again conjures up IQ tests for voters. OK, I'm just kidding, but......
A Michigan state Supreme Court justice, elected last November, has been nominated for the US Court of Appeals. Joan Larsen, in a several candidate race, managed to win about 60% of the vote in gaining her seat. She scored nearly twice as many votes as the runner-up. Yet Larsen's appointment is being held up by Michigan Senators Peters and Stabenow, who haven't given the "blue slip" approval. "Blue slip" is a practice that allows Senators in whose states the nominee(s) will serve to be review and submit opinions (approval or disapproval?) before the Judiciary Committee in the Senate allows hearings. It's a version, I guess, of Senatorial courtesy. What is holding up Peters and Stabenow? It must be politics, pure and simple. In addition to Larsen's overwhelming popularity in the election, she has a vast amount of experience, even clerking for a past US Supreme, Antonin Scalia I believe. (Regardless of one's political agreement with Scalia, the man was brilliant.) She has the overwhelming support of the Law School at U of M, hardly a bastion of conservative thought. And the ABA has given her its highest rating. So...... Are Peters and Stabenow being lackeys for the Democratic Party leadership? Why doesn't that surprise anyone? Is this evidence they are more concerned with what the Democrat leadership wants than what Michigan's citizens want? Why doesn't that surprise anyone? Of course, I often stay the same thing about Establishment Republicans.
Speaking of politics, someone the other day, in a rare, but welcome serious discussion, began referring disparagingly of Republicans. I understand. I'm not a Republican and often speak disparagingly of Establishment Republicans myself. Of course, I also criticize Democrats and can't imagine voting for many, if any, of them. Yet, this person was focusing only on Republicans. I wanted, but didn't, to ask why there was no similar vehemence toward Democrats. I think for every rotten and stupid thing the Republicans, esp the Establishment Republicans, do or enact, one can be found among the Democrats.
I didn't vote for Don Trump--and never would. My views on him are not secret. But all I feared of him becoming President seems to be coming to fruition. Yet, I fully understand why people voted for him. See the above paragraphs. I don't know if our Establishment politicians are stupid, arrogant, so self-confident they can manipulate the system to their advantage, or what. But they don't listen to what is being said loudly and clearly.
I don't like what I hear on some radio commercials. There are companies out there that claim they can fix it so people who owe money, to the IRS or even private firms, don't have to pay their full debts. I don't like that! One guy claimed he paid about 10% of what he owed. Why? It's yet another instance of people who live by the rules get rotten deals while those to don't get the advantages. After hearing such ads, why wouldn't someone go out and buy more and more, refuse to pay their income taxes, etc.? More and more we seem to encourage bad behavior and punish good behavior. This is like the auto bailouts. They made crappy products, had lousy labor-management deals, etc. so much so they were about to go belly up. Yet, they were salvaged. Funny, when Karen and I were eating Chunky Soup on rice--bulk rice!--three times a week, going for terrible all-you-can-eat Little Caesar's spaghetti for $1 on Weds, etc., nobody bailed us out. When our health insurance premiums started costing us thousands of dollars a year more than previously, nobody offered to bail us out. (For that matter, Stabenow and Peters have gone on the record about the terrible effects on some groups of the current Republican plans to scuttle Obamacare, which doesn't do that at all. They weren't at all concerned about the terrible effects of Obamacare on people like me--higher premiums, higher co-pays and deductibles, making the mandated insurance impractical to use.) Yep, I didn't vote for Trump, but I understand why so many did. (And that doesn't even consider his rotten opponent, H. Clinton.)
Last week I spent a couple of minutes watching some of the Tiger game. Victor Martinez hit a rope for a home run. Isn't it cool to watch the smiles on the faces of the home town crowds when one of theirs reaches the downs and does the Cadillac Trot? Yep, it is.
Speaking of baseball, in sports, is there anything more fun than shagging fly balls? My dad would often take me out after dinner and hit me flies for hours on end. I loved it! It was a lot of fun. One night I ran into a light pole at the nearby park, my eye quickly closing. The next AM, it looked like a plum, that purple! Or, so I was told. I had a game that day and, I suppose foolishly, I played. As luck would have it, maybe bad luck, a bad bounce smacked me in the same eye. The city ran me up to the local medical clinic for x-rays. No permanent damage was done. And we didn't stop with the fly balls.
OK, I've reconsidered. Taking BP was also great. After working in the dining hall in college, I'd go down by myself two hours before team practice, set the pitching machine, and take BP until my teammates arrived. That was great fun, too.
I hope the Tigers don't clean house. I know the reasoning behind all the trade talk. But I enjoy watching most of the players whose names are being thrown around regarding trades. I'd hate to see these guys go. But, it's not baseball; it's a business.
I see former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Young has thrown his hat in the ring for the November '18 election for US Senator. He's a very intelligent man. I heard him on the radio one day last week driving to class. In addition to some good ideas, he also was right on the money in criticizing current Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow. He cited her "spend, spend, spend" history and, if there isn't enough money, just put more spending "on the credit card," leaving others to pay for her boondoogles later. I know the Republicans have run some very mediocre candidates against her in the past. But, then, I still couldn't understand anyone voting for her. Now, especially, I cannot imagine, not in the least, anyone choosing Stabenow over Young unless voting blindly for the party; still, someone voting like that once again conjures up IQ tests for voters. OK, I'm just kidding, but......
A Michigan state Supreme Court justice, elected last November, has been nominated for the US Court of Appeals. Joan Larsen, in a several candidate race, managed to win about 60% of the vote in gaining her seat. She scored nearly twice as many votes as the runner-up. Yet Larsen's appointment is being held up by Michigan Senators Peters and Stabenow, who haven't given the "blue slip" approval. "Blue slip" is a practice that allows Senators in whose states the nominee(s) will serve to be review and submit opinions (approval or disapproval?) before the Judiciary Committee in the Senate allows hearings. It's a version, I guess, of Senatorial courtesy. What is holding up Peters and Stabenow? It must be politics, pure and simple. In addition to Larsen's overwhelming popularity in the election, she has a vast amount of experience, even clerking for a past US Supreme, Antonin Scalia I believe. (Regardless of one's political agreement with Scalia, the man was brilliant.) She has the overwhelming support of the Law School at U of M, hardly a bastion of conservative thought. And the ABA has given her its highest rating. So...... Are Peters and Stabenow being lackeys for the Democratic Party leadership? Why doesn't that surprise anyone? Is this evidence they are more concerned with what the Democrat leadership wants than what Michigan's citizens want? Why doesn't that surprise anyone? Of course, I often stay the same thing about Establishment Republicans.
Speaking of politics, someone the other day, in a rare, but welcome serious discussion, began referring disparagingly of Republicans. I understand. I'm not a Republican and often speak disparagingly of Establishment Republicans myself. Of course, I also criticize Democrats and can't imagine voting for many, if any, of them. Yet, this person was focusing only on Republicans. I wanted, but didn't, to ask why there was no similar vehemence toward Democrats. I think for every rotten and stupid thing the Republicans, esp the Establishment Republicans, do or enact, one can be found among the Democrats.
I didn't vote for Don Trump--and never would. My views on him are not secret. But all I feared of him becoming President seems to be coming to fruition. Yet, I fully understand why people voted for him. See the above paragraphs. I don't know if our Establishment politicians are stupid, arrogant, so self-confident they can manipulate the system to their advantage, or what. But they don't listen to what is being said loudly and clearly.
I don't like what I hear on some radio commercials. There are companies out there that claim they can fix it so people who owe money, to the IRS or even private firms, don't have to pay their full debts. I don't like that! One guy claimed he paid about 10% of what he owed. Why? It's yet another instance of people who live by the rules get rotten deals while those to don't get the advantages. After hearing such ads, why wouldn't someone go out and buy more and more, refuse to pay their income taxes, etc.? More and more we seem to encourage bad behavior and punish good behavior. This is like the auto bailouts. They made crappy products, had lousy labor-management deals, etc. so much so they were about to go belly up. Yet, they were salvaged. Funny, when Karen and I were eating Chunky Soup on rice--bulk rice!--three times a week, going for terrible all-you-can-eat Little Caesar's spaghetti for $1 on Weds, etc., nobody bailed us out. When our health insurance premiums started costing us thousands of dollars a year more than previously, nobody offered to bail us out. (For that matter, Stabenow and Peters have gone on the record about the terrible effects on some groups of the current Republican plans to scuttle Obamacare, which doesn't do that at all. They weren't at all concerned about the terrible effects of Obamacare on people like me--higher premiums, higher co-pays and deductibles, making the mandated insurance impractical to use.) Yep, I didn't vote for Trump, but I understand why so many did. (And that doesn't even consider his rotten opponent, H. Clinton.)
Sunday, July 2, 2017
July, Already?
Wow! It's July already. Where did June disappear? Even my 7 1/2-week spring course is over, finals graded and recorded. (BTW, it was a very good group. A whole lot of them grasped the "stuff" of history quite well. There were about 3 or 4 times more As than I usually have.) And our baseball season is half over, 4-3. I'd have never thought we'd win four games, maybe not even one. But the kids play hard, even though several have never really played organized ball before. (We needed them to have enough players to form a team.) They are nice kids, listen, and hustle. They seem to be enjoying themselves, at least after the first two games. And a very pleasant surprise has been Michael's pitching--Wow! Now, can I coach for another 5 years??????
We dropped off our other two kids yesterday. Today has been a downer, thoughts on Ashley and Cody now living in South Carolina. I know other grandparents are separated from their kids by hundreds and thousands of miles, too. But I think of the difference. I changed more of both of their diapers (and more, like homework, bike rides, hikes, etc.) than anyone.
I was dismayed by the veto from Michigan's governor stopping the anti-abortion license plate option. I understand his reasoning, but am not sure I agree. He thinks it would be too divisive an issue, something we don't need. I agree with that. But he didn't seem to take that same line when he, against his previous stance, signed the "right-to-work-for-less" anti-union law in Michigan a few years back. I guess his concern over divisive legislation is situational. No, I'm not a big fan of his, not at all.
Wes sent me an issue of a magazine that included several articles regarding what I consider insanity on college campuses. A professor at my college, Amherst, was roundly criticized for bringing a bottle of champagne to class after Trump's victory in November. Yet, look at the actions of professors and administrators at many other campuses, actions that are condoned by the powers-that-be on those campuses. Where was it that the professor tweeted about collecting money for some sort of memorial celebrating the assassination of the President? And how many teachers and administrators have coddled students supposedly frightened by the election of Trump? What student government body, supported by its administration, refused to approve of a pro-Trump group on campus because it was, well, "pro-Trump?" At least two colleges have not allowed the US flag to be flown because some students find it offensive. C'mon...... I suppose you can find all these using a Google search. But it is disheartening to me that this is what college campuses are becoming.
Many people know that I revere most of my college professors. They were wonderful teachers; what they taught was far more than their subject matter. I was and am very fortunate. Yet, I have serious questions about the faculty at Amherst now. Over the past years, I have noted some of the course titles; many seem trendy, devoid of academic quality or rigor, at least the quality and rigor I remember. And the whole controversy over the mascot/nickname, especially the faculty's stance on it, has led me to several questions. Particularly baffling to me is the silence and acquiescence of the history department. The historical record is not at all clear, not as it is erroneously being portrayed. Where are the members of the history faculty in clearing up the distortions or, at least, questions? I heard a panel discussion where the history members on the panel fell lock-step into the college's indignation, a self-righteous and ignorant indignation. Where is the rigor of examining history, the rigor I was required to follow? I harbor no illusions. I could never have taught at Amherst among the professors I had. Now, with what seems to be there now, I am not so sure.
Driverless cars? Right. Heck, the auto manufacturers still can't straighten out airbags, ignition switches, and more. How will these driverless vehicles react to the teeth-rattling potholes found all over Michigan? Will the almost certain lawsuits drive the manufacturers to bankruptcy? Of course, the federal government will bail them out with our money. So, what's the worry?
I really, the past few weeks, haven't had much time to read--anything. I'll fix that tonight. Out.
We dropped off our other two kids yesterday. Today has been a downer, thoughts on Ashley and Cody now living in South Carolina. I know other grandparents are separated from their kids by hundreds and thousands of miles, too. But I think of the difference. I changed more of both of their diapers (and more, like homework, bike rides, hikes, etc.) than anyone.
I was dismayed by the veto from Michigan's governor stopping the anti-abortion license plate option. I understand his reasoning, but am not sure I agree. He thinks it would be too divisive an issue, something we don't need. I agree with that. But he didn't seem to take that same line when he, against his previous stance, signed the "right-to-work-for-less" anti-union law in Michigan a few years back. I guess his concern over divisive legislation is situational. No, I'm not a big fan of his, not at all.
Wes sent me an issue of a magazine that included several articles regarding what I consider insanity on college campuses. A professor at my college, Amherst, was roundly criticized for bringing a bottle of champagne to class after Trump's victory in November. Yet, look at the actions of professors and administrators at many other campuses, actions that are condoned by the powers-that-be on those campuses. Where was it that the professor tweeted about collecting money for some sort of memorial celebrating the assassination of the President? And how many teachers and administrators have coddled students supposedly frightened by the election of Trump? What student government body, supported by its administration, refused to approve of a pro-Trump group on campus because it was, well, "pro-Trump?" At least two colleges have not allowed the US flag to be flown because some students find it offensive. C'mon...... I suppose you can find all these using a Google search. But it is disheartening to me that this is what college campuses are becoming.
Many people know that I revere most of my college professors. They were wonderful teachers; what they taught was far more than their subject matter. I was and am very fortunate. Yet, I have serious questions about the faculty at Amherst now. Over the past years, I have noted some of the course titles; many seem trendy, devoid of academic quality or rigor, at least the quality and rigor I remember. And the whole controversy over the mascot/nickname, especially the faculty's stance on it, has led me to several questions. Particularly baffling to me is the silence and acquiescence of the history department. The historical record is not at all clear, not as it is erroneously being portrayed. Where are the members of the history faculty in clearing up the distortions or, at least, questions? I heard a panel discussion where the history members on the panel fell lock-step into the college's indignation, a self-righteous and ignorant indignation. Where is the rigor of examining history, the rigor I was required to follow? I harbor no illusions. I could never have taught at Amherst among the professors I had. Now, with what seems to be there now, I am not so sure.
Driverless cars? Right. Heck, the auto manufacturers still can't straighten out airbags, ignition switches, and more. How will these driverless vehicles react to the teeth-rattling potholes found all over Michigan? Will the almost certain lawsuits drive the manufacturers to bankruptcy? Of course, the federal government will bail them out with our money. So, what's the worry?
I really, the past few weeks, haven't had much time to read--anything. I'll fix that tonight. Out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
