Wednesday, February 19, 2025
Life of Pi, The Wild Robot, and Conclave--all excellent films
Sunday, February 16, 2025
Inconsistencies
The odd times we live in have given rise to inconsistencies that are just begging to be commented upon.
The political party of family values, headed by two powerful and wealthy men, have fathered seventeen children between them via six different women. The same party is pushing for the birth of more children in the USA, but is not anti-divorce or anti-adultery or pro-marriage for that matter. Family values? Don't make me puke. Having more children is all well and good, but I'm assuming that if they're not pushing for polygamy in order to achieve that goal, this means that in monogamous marriages, wives should be willing to have more than one child, despite the fact that it costs a fortune at present to raise a child, buy a home, and pay monthly expenses. So is the party of family values willing to give young couples a break so that they can have large families? And do women get a say in how they want to live their lives? Just asking. This brings me to the next point.
If the party wishes to return to 1950s America, when family values were apparently sacrosanct, when women stayed home to raise children (more than one) while men as heads of the family worked to provide for their families, then I'll say to the younger men who like this philosophy, get your asses in gear. Or get off your asses. Get out there and hustle for an education and high-paying jobs. 1950s America is no place for losers. You're a loser if you don't make a good salary and provide a house for your family. And you can forget about getting any help from mommy or daddy. Men in America at that time, unless they came from truly wealthy families, did not get help from anyone. They made it on their own. So get out there and work for a living instead of living at home with mommy and daddy until you're thirty. Stop living life through your devices. Stop moaning and complaining that women aren't interested in you. They will be if you show them that you can earn money. THAT was 1950s America. It was no place for men who were losers in the job market, whiners, or complainers. And there was no safety net.
The men who support the current political regime are the men most likely to lose under it. It is not a regime that supports losers, the poor, the uneducated. It says it does and says it will, but it won't. It will enrich the already-rich. Because most politicians at present, in both parties, have grifter tendencies. They are interested in enriching themselves. That's the world we live in, that's the world we've become. Eat or be eaten. It's about survival of the fittest. And those at the top of the food chain got there by eating those at the bottom of the food chain. Study Darwin and you'll learn all about evolution, which as much as you'd like to deny it, is a reality and a fact of life.
And of course, along with the new regime, comes the resurgence of viewpoints about how women should behave. Women, like children, should be seen and not heard, unless they're the 'dollies' on Fox News as my friend calls them. If you look 'glam', you're acceptable to men. If not, you're invisible. The non-glam women should just know their place, in relationships and in society at large. They should acquiesce to men. When I was younger, I had a conversation with a priest friend of mine where we disagreed about the New Testament passage that talks about wives obeying (submitting) to their husbands. What is often ignored is the second part of that equation--the admonition for husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. I told the priest, when men can achieve that, when they can love their wives as Christ loved the church, then come talk to me about wives acquiescing to their husbands in all things. I haven't met one man who has managed that type of love, not one. The priest had no response, because he knew I was right. And while we're on the topic, why should women listen to others less intelligent than themselves about how to live and think? There are so many women I know who are far more intelligent than many men. How they think and feel about their lives is far more important to me than what some random men (read--politicians) I do not know or care about, think.
Is the party of family values going to do something about the dying middle class? Will they continue to blame the less fortunate for their status in life? Because no matter what, a civilized society will always have to carry the less fortunate, because that is what civilized societies do. My father used to say that. Christ, who was a wise man, once said that 'the poor you will always have with you'. What kind of society blames it citizens for not being financially successful when that same society makes it impossible to for its citizens to get ahead? If you're in debt up to your ears because of high prices for everything, you have no chance. The rich blame the poor for being poor. But perhaps the truly rich should look at the advantages that they've had from birth. They are not the advantages that the poor have had, that's for sure. And trust me, if you haven't had those advantages, you can scramble and struggle an entire lifetime to achieve success and never reach the level of wealth and success that the rich enjoy. Because many of the rich inherited their wealth; they did not work or struggle for it. Average ordinary people, who belong to the middle class that I was born into, worked hard to get what they have. Most of them have achieved moderate success. Most of them are financially-comfortable. But most of them would go under if faced with staggering medical bills as a result of some illness that required expensive treatments or full-time nursing care. And most of them are careful with money, with how they spend it. That is not something the truly rich need to worry about. The current level of hypocrisy in society is appalling. Perhaps it's always been there, but I see it in its entirety now. We need to call it out at every opportunity. The time to rise up against it is now.
Saturday, February 15, 2025
Sunny and warm--welcome to south Florida in winter
This comic strip (Garfield by Jim Davis) was not our recent experience--we were there at the beach, in Florida, relaxing and enjoying the sun and warm water.
My friends and I recently enjoyed one blessed week in south Florida--a respite from winter's darkness, snow and cold. Being in Florida is like being in another world, in the sense that it's hard to believe you can travel from bitter cold to blessed warmth by plane in the space of about three hours, within the same country. We rented a townhouse in Deerfield Beach this time around, a few blocks from the ocean; last year we spent a week in Fort Lauderdale at an apartment on the intercoastal. This year we had warm and sunny days for the entire week we were there. Balm for the body, mind and soul. We managed visits to Butterfly World in Coconut Creek (near Deerfield Beach) and Constitution Park & Arboretum, as we enjoy anything botanical and nature-related.
At the entrance to the beach near where we lived. An hour on the beach can also provide perspective. |
I love the plants and flowers in warm climates. |
our townhouse |
one of the Morpho butterflies in Butterfly World |
at Butterfly World |
one of the birds in the aviary at Butterfly World |
another colorful bird in Butterfly World |
overhanging tree branch in Constitution Park & Arboretum |
a eucalyptus tree starting to shed its bark, leading to an array of colors |
the ocean and the beach on a warm sunny day--there is nothing like them for relaxation |
Putting things in perspective
Just what I needed today, a good laugh and a reminder that everything could be much worse......Thanks to Stephan Pastis and Pearls Before Swine......
Sunday, February 9, 2025
Creating fear and outrage is the new normal
Creating fear and outrage is a policy tactic. Creating chaos likewise. The buckshot approach. Shoot your mouth off and watch the words spread out in all directions, no specific target in mind. The media can’t possibly focus on all directions at once, so where there is a vacuum or an oversight on the part of the media, fear and outrage move in. The public will panic and try to deal with what’s happening as best it can. Those being attacked will try to protect themselves, but after a while it’s exhausting to fight back.
This buckshot approach may work in a business setting, but not when the setting is the governmental arena. It’s impossible to run the government as a business, no matter how many times we say that it all should work more efficiently. Downsizing the bureaucracy is not an overnight job. Even if it’s necessary to pare it down, it’s not right or ethical to dismantle it completely and throw it into chaos. People depend on functional bureaucracies for unemployment benefits, retiree benefits, health coverage, etc. The country will not function without bureaucracies. Those who attempt to downsize them should know what they’re doing, and should accept that it will take time. Let’s hope they don’t do more harm than good.
Life of Pi, The Wild Robot, and Conclave--all excellent films
Traveling to and from the USA gives me the opportunity to catch up on my movies on the plane. On my recent flights to and from New York, I w...