Forget the big political or personal events of the past decade. Those gradual lifestyle changes that people do not always notice when they are happening are the kind that sometimes make even greater impact on people. So kick off those clog shoes (I hope you didn't actually buy a pair this decade), turn off that 52 inch big screen TV and get ready for a list of some of the things we had this decade, but didn't have prior to it.
* Infornews- It started about year 2000-2001. The "no news is good news unless it is entertaining" began. It's a sad fact but important news no takes second place to gossip and triviality, that is, if we are fortunate enough to get real news at all. Too, Reality TV is now our reality, and we are all much worse for it.
* Twittering- The new social network introduced tweets, retweets, follows and trending topics, as long as the message fit into 140 characters. I swear that I have never "tweeted" nor had any desire to do so.
* "Going green"- It took hold this decade because of environmental concerns of consumers and profitability advantages for sellers. the question about the excesses of greening is whether or not it has become sickening enough to turn us all blue.
* Tattoos- What was seen as deviant prior to the 2000's is now mainstream. Even moms get them, but I still can't think of a tattoo as anything but body mutilation.
*Cell phones- They are now used by more than 85 percent of the U.S. population and for some have replaced land lines. But not for me. I still fight my one man crusade to show they are the abomination of civilization.
* Facebook- They say it is a time sucking, time wasting obsession for more than 300 million users (me too) that are every where on the globe. Facebook may be a bigger uniter of cultural understanding and tolerance than any single thing prior to this decade.* ipods- It is hard to believe this portable media player was launched in 2001.....seems like everyone has one and they have been with us as long as the telephone.
*Tweenagers- Tweens, especially girls, became an economic force to be reckoned with, buying everything from clothes to electronic devices to music to concert tickets. "Like, it's totally awesome......"
*YouTube videos- The video-sharing site was born in 2005. Political candidates in 2008 even had their on YouTube channels and major news events are even discovered or covered with amateur yu tube productions
*Blogging- the world's favorite new sport in which unqualified writers post, inane commentary about nothing. What's worrisome is that people actually read the blogs in great numbers.
*Fat- This was the decade that fat became the enemy of the state. New York City banned trans fats, and Alabama, second in national obesity rankings, introduced a tax on overweight state workers. I'm just afraid they will take away my doughnuts.
*Starbucks- It is a cliché that there is one on every block..or is it? Well, the product is good, if way too expensive. I think the next decade will see the decline of Starbucks coffee dominance.
*Information Overload- An explosion in Internet use led to an overload of information about practically everything a large part of it being inaccurate? Just another reflection of the dumbing down of societies.
*Instant Gratification- Being able to get anything you want within an instant or throwing a tantrum became the norm. Might this be the theme of the first decade of the 2000's?
On that note, since I don't know if you agree....I am stomping my feet and ending this discussion right now.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
The First Decade Of The 21st Century
We are closing in on the end of the first decade of the 21st century. I know it technically ends on December 31st, 2010 (not December 31 at , 2009). But for the purpose of evaluating the decade I am ending it early (such power I have!). What do you think about this past decade? What are the defining moments? How has life changed since the beginning of the 21st century?
Historians never evaluate an era until it is long past because the effects from each one may be long in coming. Thank God we aren't historians. We can give our opinions and observations about it, and those may make some sense of it all. Since I am writing to you about this (how come I always supply the ideas in our E mails???) I get to go first with an analysis. I yet have no coherent one, so you get rambling observations from me instead.
In no particular order here are a few things from the first 2000 decade that might be significant for the world.
* Wireless power- that wireless stuff sure has impacted how we get news , report it, even transfer personal news to those closest to it. Remember when those students and housewives in Iran used their mobile phones and computers to record and broadcast footage that almost toppled the Iranian government after disputed elections. It didn't, but it sure lessened the vise of the Iranian dictators. There are many more examples of the power of instantaneous information, both good and bad. Google to Wikipedia to MySpace, Facebook and YouTube, those places have changed human relations for better or worse and have all come of age this decade.
* Rural isolation is disappearing- even the most remote and poor places today are armed with information that changes their lives and more importantly, their expectations for a better life. You can't keep them isolated on the farm anymore.
*Altered economic systems- This decade we lost faith in banks and mortgages, in stock markets and the divine right of real estate to increase in value. Some third world countries have become wealthy and some first world wealthy one saddled in debt.
* The dying newspaper, magazine and mainstream mediums- The world no longer wants real news in traditional format. It now cancels newspaper subscriptions and tunes into sound bite journalism as a replacement. So we know less about real issues important to our lives but have greater access to more trivial things that never enrich us but seem to entertain and sedate our brains like the drugs of the 60's decade did to those who were young and lived in it. That more Americans voted for contestants on a silly, vacuous TV show called "American Idol", than voted in the last two U.S. Presidential elections shows that the 2000's have opened as an age of triviality.
* Trendiness and political correctness- This has been the decade for followers, not leaders. We are expected to accept even the most unproved of theories if enough people believe that it becomes "a fact that" the theory is true. From Global Warming ("It's Global Warming and we are all going to die"!) to those crazy "healthy diets" we are told we must eat (My God! Give the children candy too once in awhile) to replacing Christianity with fanatical Islamism to texting and chatting while driving, if you don't participate you'll be pictured as odd.
Ok, your turn to tell me what has been different this past decade..
Historians never evaluate an era until it is long past because the effects from each one may be long in coming. Thank God we aren't historians. We can give our opinions and observations about it, and those may make some sense of it all. Since I am writing to you about this (how come I always supply the ideas in our E mails???) I get to go first with an analysis. I yet have no coherent one, so you get rambling observations from me instead.
In no particular order here are a few things from the first 2000 decade that might be significant for the world.
* Wireless power- that wireless stuff sure has impacted how we get news , report it, even transfer personal news to those closest to it. Remember when those students and housewives in Iran used their mobile phones and computers to record and broadcast footage that almost toppled the Iranian government after disputed elections. It didn't, but it sure lessened the vise of the Iranian dictators. There are many more examples of the power of instantaneous information, both good and bad. Google to Wikipedia to MySpace, Facebook and YouTube, those places have changed human relations for better or worse and have all come of age this decade.
* Rural isolation is disappearing- even the most remote and poor places today are armed with information that changes their lives and more importantly, their expectations for a better life. You can't keep them isolated on the farm anymore.
*Altered economic systems- This decade we lost faith in banks and mortgages, in stock markets and the divine right of real estate to increase in value. Some third world countries have become wealthy and some first world wealthy one saddled in debt.
* The dying newspaper, magazine and mainstream mediums- The world no longer wants real news in traditional format. It now cancels newspaper subscriptions and tunes into sound bite journalism as a replacement. So we know less about real issues important to our lives but have greater access to more trivial things that never enrich us but seem to entertain and sedate our brains like the drugs of the 60's decade did to those who were young and lived in it. That more Americans voted for contestants on a silly, vacuous TV show called "American Idol", than voted in the last two U.S. Presidential elections shows that the 2000's have opened as an age of triviality.
* Trendiness and political correctness- This has been the decade for followers, not leaders. We are expected to accept even the most unproved of theories if enough people believe that it becomes "a fact that" the theory is true. From Global Warming ("It's Global Warming and we are all going to die"!) to those crazy "healthy diets" we are told we must eat (My God! Give the children candy too once in awhile) to replacing Christianity with fanatical Islamism to texting and chatting while driving, if you don't participate you'll be pictured as odd.
Ok, your turn to tell me what has been different this past decade..
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
No More Security
What a reaction to the latest terrorist airline blow-up attempt here in the U.S. In the name of "security" the government now says even toilets will have restricted access. Yep! Toilets will be locked an hour before landing and passengers not allowed to leave their seats on international flights during that same hour time frame. That's one of the "new' security measures to be implemented. I fail to understand why we are now in name of security forbidden to use toilet one hour before landing.
What is stopping another suicide candidate blowing himself in the toilet 2-3 hours before landing? It is a knee jerk reaction which will not serve as a deterrent and, despite attempts by the current administration to make people feel they are safer when flying. this idiotic measure will only irritate both passenger bowels and bladders and passenger patience. Living with the risk of terrorism is the price we pay for living in a free society. The less free we become the more we have surrendered to the terrorists. Now the idiots in our government have surrendered our toilets!
Whose interests are protected by increasing, invasive, offensive, often preposterous "security measures"? Passengers' lives? Citizens' dignity and civil rights? Western world values of freedom? In reality, the strategy of governments to pretend they are "saving us" from terrorism with preposterous, annoying and expensively needless security increases each time there is another terrorist attempt on a plane, is all an illusion. And the vast majority of riders know it.
Flying never was, nor can it every be a guaranteed safe voyage. Security does not need to be increased...just competent! In fact I think most of what passes for airport security is a cosmetic nightmare that does nothing by annoy and delay all..at an expensive cost to passengers. Too, airlines are a civilian method of travel and rely on sales.
If security is increased to the extent that people feel uncomfortable, fewer passengers will travel and already struggling airlines will fold. Do I hear "airline bail-out" coming next in this economic crisis period?
There are hundreds of ways for anyone intent on blowing up your plane to do it...and many of those are not detectable with current 'security measures'. I for one would prefer a simple profiling method of security. Through out all the crazy security checks now in place and just check the people who mostly resemble past terrorists, and let the rest of them go on board normally. It won't make me feel any safer, but my bladder and bowels will appreciate it.
What is stopping another suicide candidate blowing himself in the toilet 2-3 hours before landing? It is a knee jerk reaction which will not serve as a deterrent and, despite attempts by the current administration to make people feel they are safer when flying. this idiotic measure will only irritate both passenger bowels and bladders and passenger patience. Living with the risk of terrorism is the price we pay for living in a free society. The less free we become the more we have surrendered to the terrorists. Now the idiots in our government have surrendered our toilets!
Whose interests are protected by increasing, invasive, offensive, often preposterous "security measures"? Passengers' lives? Citizens' dignity and civil rights? Western world values of freedom? In reality, the strategy of governments to pretend they are "saving us" from terrorism with preposterous, annoying and expensively needless security increases each time there is another terrorist attempt on a plane, is all an illusion. And the vast majority of riders know it.
Flying never was, nor can it every be a guaranteed safe voyage. Security does not need to be increased...just competent! In fact I think most of what passes for airport security is a cosmetic nightmare that does nothing by annoy and delay all..at an expensive cost to passengers. Too, airlines are a civilian method of travel and rely on sales.
If security is increased to the extent that people feel uncomfortable, fewer passengers will travel and already struggling airlines will fold. Do I hear "airline bail-out" coming next in this economic crisis period?
There are hundreds of ways for anyone intent on blowing up your plane to do it...and many of those are not detectable with current 'security measures'. I for one would prefer a simple profiling method of security. Through out all the crazy security checks now in place and just check the people who mostly resemble past terrorists, and let the rest of them go on board normally. It won't make me feel any safer, but my bladder and bowels will appreciate it.
Attacking A Pope
As to the big item in the news.... The recent attack on Pope Benedict by a crazed woman is stirring both the faithful and unfaithful to question why and whether it is just "a sign of the times" that even sacred public figures like a pope are in danger. Well, in short, assaulting a pope is nothing new. Read any history of the papacy and you'll see periods of intense anger toward the pope, physical attacks on him (there was one female pope but she was never attacked) were even more common than in this generation.
In fact, the early popes were so hated in Rome that they feared appearing in public. Often they were pelted with curses and vegetables tossed by the masses who resented the power of, abuse of power by them, and their general indifference toward the common people of Rome. And of course, being such a political power with one of the best armies in Europe the papacy often was under assault from secular rulers, something that hasn't happened in modern times nor is likely to any time in the future.
So, NO, the pope is no less safe today from assault than he was before. The problem of providing an effective security for the head of the Roman Catholic Church that doesn't cut cut him off from his flock is a difficult challenge for his Vatican team of security advisers. The Pope uses an armored vehicle covered with bulletproof glass, the aptly named Pope mobile, in St. Peter's Square when the weather is fine and when he goes on tour abroad. But when he is moving about inside Vatican City, he walks or travels in a normal limousine that is susceptible to attacks, such as happened to Benedict and his predecessor, John Paul II who was shot in the early 80's in the Vatican Square as he rode in the Pope mobile.
People want to see the pope close at hand. A zero risk with increased security and physical barriers doesn't seem realistic in a situation in which there's will be direct rapport between a pope and the flock. So what is to be done to protect the pope from the crazies or the malicious? Not much more than is already being done, because to shield the pope too much is to break the rapport he must have to be effective as the leader of the church.
In a sense, it would turn the papacy into a figure of royalty rather than an equal member of the faith.Attacks on the pope have been common, yet they have been non political in nature most of the time. The question is what would be the reaction if a radical member of another faith were to assault and kill a pope? That's a far different scenario than what happened to Benedict. But in this age of extremism in politics and cultures it could happen
In fact, the early popes were so hated in Rome that they feared appearing in public. Often they were pelted with curses and vegetables tossed by the masses who resented the power of, abuse of power by them, and their general indifference toward the common people of Rome. And of course, being such a political power with one of the best armies in Europe the papacy often was under assault from secular rulers, something that hasn't happened in modern times nor is likely to any time in the future.
So, NO, the pope is no less safe today from assault than he was before. The problem of providing an effective security for the head of the Roman Catholic Church that doesn't cut cut him off from his flock is a difficult challenge for his Vatican team of security advisers. The Pope uses an armored vehicle covered with bulletproof glass, the aptly named Pope mobile, in St. Peter's Square when the weather is fine and when he goes on tour abroad. But when he is moving about inside Vatican City, he walks or travels in a normal limousine that is susceptible to attacks, such as happened to Benedict and his predecessor, John Paul II who was shot in the early 80's in the Vatican Square as he rode in the Pope mobile.
People want to see the pope close at hand. A zero risk with increased security and physical barriers doesn't seem realistic in a situation in which there's will be direct rapport between a pope and the flock. So what is to be done to protect the pope from the crazies or the malicious? Not much more than is already being done, because to shield the pope too much is to break the rapport he must have to be effective as the leader of the church.
In a sense, it would turn the papacy into a figure of royalty rather than an equal member of the faith.Attacks on the pope have been common, yet they have been non political in nature most of the time. The question is what would be the reaction if a radical member of another faith were to assault and kill a pope? That's a far different scenario than what happened to Benedict. But in this age of extremism in politics and cultures it could happen
Bribe On To Victory
Interesting developments in Afghanistan these days. The Obama administration, frustrated with non success in getting rid of the Taliban, has decided to copy the Bush administration to "win the war" there. And what are they doing? Well, uh..they are bribing the citizens to help. U.S. and Afghan officials have agreed on a new nationwide strategy that will funnel millions of dollars in foreign aid to villages that organize "neighborhood watch" programs to help with security. The plan will provide an incentive for Afghan tribal leaders to form their own militias and guard against Taliban insurgents.
If you can't win militarily nor get the support of the locals, bribing is an option. It surely worked in Iraq. At the end of the Bush term the co called "surge" in Iraq was not only an increase in soldiers there but tens of millions of dollars handed out to thugs in Baghdad neighborhoods surrounding villages. Cash for assistance worked there and allowed the war to wind down, and now officials are counting on the greed motive to win out again in Afghanistan.
The theory is that by placing more responsibility for security in the hands of villagers, U.S. troops will be able to focus on more urgent matters at a time when the Taliban is on the rise. Even with less money spent on bribes than in carrying on the war with the U.S. army, There might be greater progress in defeating the Taliban. Having locals turn against rather than harbor the Taliban is a huge benefit to the U.S. army operations.
The bribery is similar in some ways to an initiative that helped turn the tide of the Iraq war by paying members of Sunni tribes, including some former insurgents, to defend their neighborhoods. Even for devoted anti infidel Muslims, money talks loudly. But unlike in Iraq, aid will not go directly to individuals. Afghan villages that cooperate will receive roads, health clinics, fuel, and other aid.
Afghanistan is a corrupt country with a corrupt and utterly weak government. This is different than the Iraq bribery scheme. There, the U.S. military was far more in charge and made recipients of the bribes be accountable for the money they received. I am not sure this Afghan government can do that.The bribe for help strategy is not a U.S. one. it has long been the focus of the U. N. when using "peacekeeping" or monitoring forces in war torn nations. One might claim the use of bribes is a modern war strategy of great appeal in an age of greed for material benefits. fewer soldiers are killed this way, meaning there is less upset back home at the price of war.
Too, the bribe amounts are usually smaller than the cost of sending and equipping more troops and support personnel. Opponents to the bribe strategy say that caving into world opinion, catering to the enemy, giving away taxpayer money when they can't afford it, giving the enemy more while taking away from the American people is a policy doomed to fail. So what do you think?
Is bribery now a reasonable tactic of war? I, but uh..I refuse to pay you a bribe in return for an answer.
If you can't win militarily nor get the support of the locals, bribing is an option. It surely worked in Iraq. At the end of the Bush term the co called "surge" in Iraq was not only an increase in soldiers there but tens of millions of dollars handed out to thugs in Baghdad neighborhoods surrounding villages. Cash for assistance worked there and allowed the war to wind down, and now officials are counting on the greed motive to win out again in Afghanistan.
The theory is that by placing more responsibility for security in the hands of villagers, U.S. troops will be able to focus on more urgent matters at a time when the Taliban is on the rise. Even with less money spent on bribes than in carrying on the war with the U.S. army, There might be greater progress in defeating the Taliban. Having locals turn against rather than harbor the Taliban is a huge benefit to the U.S. army operations.
The bribery is similar in some ways to an initiative that helped turn the tide of the Iraq war by paying members of Sunni tribes, including some former insurgents, to defend their neighborhoods. Even for devoted anti infidel Muslims, money talks loudly. But unlike in Iraq, aid will not go directly to individuals. Afghan villages that cooperate will receive roads, health clinics, fuel, and other aid.
Afghanistan is a corrupt country with a corrupt and utterly weak government. This is different than the Iraq bribery scheme. There, the U.S. military was far more in charge and made recipients of the bribes be accountable for the money they received. I am not sure this Afghan government can do that.The bribe for help strategy is not a U.S. one. it has long been the focus of the U. N. when using "peacekeeping" or monitoring forces in war torn nations. One might claim the use of bribes is a modern war strategy of great appeal in an age of greed for material benefits. fewer soldiers are killed this way, meaning there is less upset back home at the price of war.
Too, the bribe amounts are usually smaller than the cost of sending and equipping more troops and support personnel. Opponents to the bribe strategy say that caving into world opinion, catering to the enemy, giving away taxpayer money when they can't afford it, giving the enemy more while taking away from the American people is a policy doomed to fail. So what do you think?
Is bribery now a reasonable tactic of war? I, but uh..I refuse to pay you a bribe in return for an answer.
The Right To Be Or Not To Be Fat
How far has political correctness come? Too far, I think. We now face pressures to do what the majority in society likes, to think as society says we should and now to only even eat what society says is "healthy".
Yep, now being fat is considered a mortal sin. Just ask the obese students at, Lincoln University, a historically black college near Philadelphia. Until recently they were being told they could not graduate from the school if too fat, unless they took a course that chastises them from being obese. After the media picked up the story the idea was nixed and now it is ok to waddle across the podium and pick up a degree at Lincoln. Amid complaints the so-called "fat course" undermined a school principle of equal treatment, Lincoln's administration reversed its crazy policy the other day and says now the fatter students won't have to take a fitness class to graduate.
Why would a college put in such a non academic and insulting requirement? The school says it had initiated the policy to address high rates of obesity and diabetes, especially in the black community. (which has the highest rate of obesity of all ethnic groups in the U.S., despite being one of the poorest ones as well) Lincoln had earlier sent 80 students e-mails saying they had to take the fitness course to graduate.
The plan was to target students with a body mass index of 30 or above. Doctors consider that the obese point.But political correct stupidity can be brought down by the saving face syndrome, as in the fact that once media ridiculed the school for its obvious lack of respect for the privacy and freedom of its students the "Fitness for Life" course will instead be "suggested" to certain students after a freshman wellness class that addresses a number of health issues besides being too fat.How arrogant of the school!
Must humans all conform to some nebulous standard of fitness to merit a college degree? What other requirements might students be forced to accede. Maybe any student wearing too sandals might be expelled because wearing sandals could be dangerous to the feet. How about lighting in dorm rooms? Perhaps the lamp mom sent her son to use in their dorm provides too little light and might prove injurious to the eyes. better get rid of that lamp or no diploma....
The truth is a person has a right to weight whatever he or she wants, and to suggest extra weight makes one less worthy is not exactly in keeping with the treasured tradition of a college campus' pursuit of academic freedom. Maybe instead of a required fitness course the Lincoln administration should be required as a condition of continued employment, to take a class on political correctness, just so it may see how stupid one becomes when he or she tries to impose personal likes on others
Yep, now being fat is considered a mortal sin. Just ask the obese students at, Lincoln University, a historically black college near Philadelphia. Until recently they were being told they could not graduate from the school if too fat, unless they took a course that chastises them from being obese. After the media picked up the story the idea was nixed and now it is ok to waddle across the podium and pick up a degree at Lincoln. Amid complaints the so-called "fat course" undermined a school principle of equal treatment, Lincoln's administration reversed its crazy policy the other day and says now the fatter students won't have to take a fitness class to graduate.
Why would a college put in such a non academic and insulting requirement? The school says it had initiated the policy to address high rates of obesity and diabetes, especially in the black community. (which has the highest rate of obesity of all ethnic groups in the U.S., despite being one of the poorest ones as well) Lincoln had earlier sent 80 students e-mails saying they had to take the fitness course to graduate.
The plan was to target students with a body mass index of 30 or above. Doctors consider that the obese point.But political correct stupidity can be brought down by the saving face syndrome, as in the fact that once media ridiculed the school for its obvious lack of respect for the privacy and freedom of its students the "Fitness for Life" course will instead be "suggested" to certain students after a freshman wellness class that addresses a number of health issues besides being too fat.How arrogant of the school!
Must humans all conform to some nebulous standard of fitness to merit a college degree? What other requirements might students be forced to accede. Maybe any student wearing too sandals might be expelled because wearing sandals could be dangerous to the feet. How about lighting in dorm rooms? Perhaps the lamp mom sent her son to use in their dorm provides too little light and might prove injurious to the eyes. better get rid of that lamp or no diploma....
The truth is a person has a right to weight whatever he or she wants, and to suggest extra weight makes one less worthy is not exactly in keeping with the treasured tradition of a college campus' pursuit of academic freedom. Maybe instead of a required fitness course the Lincoln administration should be required as a condition of continued employment, to take a class on political correctness, just so it may see how stupid one becomes when he or she tries to impose personal likes on others
Sports Scandals
I like sports. As a child I played many of them and I still follow a few closely, but I must say that the news about sport and athletes has changed. There is less news and talk about the games and players exploits on field and more about their off the field peccadilloes. And the internet Age has changed the speed of transmission of the naughty things athletes do in private.
Things once whispered over a backyard fence now can go around the world in the click of a mouse as the mediums love to gossip about the athletes personal relationships and decisions off the field. It is a shame, and probably why so many sports fans have or are losing interest in competitions on the field because they are weary about the scandals the mediums love to focus on. From scandals about spousal abuse by athletes, to steroid overuse, cheating athletes (on the field and at home in the bedroom), disclosures of non politically correct views or unconventional sexual roles the athlete may assume (he or she is gay or bi sexual)..whatever is salacious is writing about as much as the scores and events of the games themselves.
For example, the dark secrets of sports' most fiercely private public man, golfer legend Tiger Woods, were his own until that fateful post Thanksgiving crash with a fire hydrant as he fled his golf club enraged wife who sought vengeance for Woods string of tangles with mistresses. The gossip about Woods is everywhere, often on unlikely sites, such as the front page of a major serious daily newspaper. And printing and speaking about his private life has somehow made his sport achievements less impressive to watchers.
Style has trumped substance for Woods and many others in sports. Some former fans of the sport now are fans of seeing how the athletes are discredited fro doing what they fans can and still do themselves in private. The joy many get in watching the hero fall is an aberration as curious as any sports contest itself. I wonder why so many fans want to see their heroes discredited and chased from the playing fields. Maybe it is to show that they are simply athletes plain and simple, and that nothing about them is heroic. Bringing the star to a lower level might make the fan feel a simpatico with the athletes on display.
Do we love shaking our finger at public figures when we can? I wonder if their fall from it a greater thrill to see that is their rise to glory?
Things once whispered over a backyard fence now can go around the world in the click of a mouse as the mediums love to gossip about the athletes personal relationships and decisions off the field. It is a shame, and probably why so many sports fans have or are losing interest in competitions on the field because they are weary about the scandals the mediums love to focus on. From scandals about spousal abuse by athletes, to steroid overuse, cheating athletes (on the field and at home in the bedroom), disclosures of non politically correct views or unconventional sexual roles the athlete may assume (he or she is gay or bi sexual)..whatever is salacious is writing about as much as the scores and events of the games themselves.
For example, the dark secrets of sports' most fiercely private public man, golfer legend Tiger Woods, were his own until that fateful post Thanksgiving crash with a fire hydrant as he fled his golf club enraged wife who sought vengeance for Woods string of tangles with mistresses. The gossip about Woods is everywhere, often on unlikely sites, such as the front page of a major serious daily newspaper. And printing and speaking about his private life has somehow made his sport achievements less impressive to watchers.
Style has trumped substance for Woods and many others in sports. Some former fans of the sport now are fans of seeing how the athletes are discredited fro doing what they fans can and still do themselves in private. The joy many get in watching the hero fall is an aberration as curious as any sports contest itself. I wonder why so many fans want to see their heroes discredited and chased from the playing fields. Maybe it is to show that they are simply athletes plain and simple, and that nothing about them is heroic. Bringing the star to a lower level might make the fan feel a simpatico with the athletes on display.
Do we love shaking our finger at public figures when we can? I wonder if their fall from it a greater thrill to see that is their rise to glory?
Life In Prison For Juveniles
What do you think about incarcerating a juvenile in prison with a life without parole possibility sentence? The Supreme Court here is now studying and preparing a ruling as to whether states can keep a juvenile in prison for the rest of his or her life. In my state of Louisiana we have 17 of the total 109 juveniles (17 years of age and and under) in prison under those terms. Two of those offenders, one 13 at the time he raped a 72-year-old woman and the other 17 when he staged a home invasion robbery, have appealed their sentences of life without parole all the way to the Supreme Court. My guess is the court will rule that it is a matter for each individual state to decide.
It could declare life in prison for kids to be unconstitutionally cruel and unusual, as it did before in banning the death penalty for any reason for anyone under the age 17. Proponents of letting them go after being rehabilitated say that even though many are violent, remorseless predators (many sexually abuse smaller children). Some of them might never be anything but dangerous psychopaths that society needs to be protected from. Others, proponents claim, might be able to change their behavior as they age and life productive lives in society. Because young brains haven't matured fully teenage impulses and risk assessment are underdeveloped. So proponents claim the kids just need a chance to grow into a normal moral state. Too, they claim unequal application of life in prison, in which juvenile judges often give unfair life sentences to some of the offenders and not others who commit the same type of crime. Too adult criminals who commit they same offense as the juvenile often receive lighter sentences than the teen.
Most of the kids in prison for life have committed violent acts, beginning long before teenage years. There is some doubt that some of them could ever be changed enough to release them into society. As it stands now, the teens in those prisons were convicted after being tried as an adult for heinous crimes. Many states allow this kind of trial because society would be endangered if kids were tried as juveniles and released as required by law before or at age 21.
Those in favor of keeping the worst juvenile offenders in jail for life say that the whole point in sentencing any person to life in prison is to protect society. As long as they are locked in prison, no one else can be victimized out side of it can be another of their victims. Further, they claim that rehabilitation for people capable of such offenses as armed robbery, rape or murder has been demonstrated to be a waste of time.
Therefore, they rationalize, these youth do not deserve to be given any additional opportunity to harm the public. Once they have made it clear that they lack any respect for human life they should to be kept in prison.Your turn...what do you think about life in prison for juvenile offenders?
It could declare life in prison for kids to be unconstitutionally cruel and unusual, as it did before in banning the death penalty for any reason for anyone under the age 17. Proponents of letting them go after being rehabilitated say that even though many are violent, remorseless predators (many sexually abuse smaller children). Some of them might never be anything but dangerous psychopaths that society needs to be protected from. Others, proponents claim, might be able to change their behavior as they age and life productive lives in society. Because young brains haven't matured fully teenage impulses and risk assessment are underdeveloped. So proponents claim the kids just need a chance to grow into a normal moral state. Too, they claim unequal application of life in prison, in which juvenile judges often give unfair life sentences to some of the offenders and not others who commit the same type of crime. Too adult criminals who commit they same offense as the juvenile often receive lighter sentences than the teen.
Most of the kids in prison for life have committed violent acts, beginning long before teenage years. There is some doubt that some of them could ever be changed enough to release them into society. As it stands now, the teens in those prisons were convicted after being tried as an adult for heinous crimes. Many states allow this kind of trial because society would be endangered if kids were tried as juveniles and released as required by law before or at age 21.
Those in favor of keeping the worst juvenile offenders in jail for life say that the whole point in sentencing any person to life in prison is to protect society. As long as they are locked in prison, no one else can be victimized out side of it can be another of their victims. Further, they claim that rehabilitation for people capable of such offenses as armed robbery, rape or murder has been demonstrated to be a waste of time.
Therefore, they rationalize, these youth do not deserve to be given any additional opportunity to harm the public. Once they have made it clear that they lack any respect for human life they should to be kept in prison.Your turn...what do you think about life in prison for juvenile offenders?
Food Claims
Do you ever eat cereal in the morning? A cereal e mail for you today.... Kellogg, the largest cereal maker in the United States, is being challenged by critics of its advertising because some object to the swine flu conscious claim on Cocoa Krispies cereal boxes. In bright yellow banner headline fashion the boxes all say: "Now helps support your child's IMMUNITY." It's ridiculous to imply that a sugar cereal with vitamins mixed in can boost one's immune system, much less protect against the flu. But the media has so many fearful of that strain of flu, marketers want to capitalize on it.
With the media here trying to make H1N1 into a crisis those kinds of claims by food makers have become common. Problem is, the government here has not always held them accountable for their advertising as to truthfulness. This has created situations where food of all types is falsely labeled as being superior to others or possessed with some curative or preventive properties. Recently though, the cereal industry's self created "Smart Choices" nutrition labeling program was voluntarily halted after federal regulators expressed concern that such programs may be misleading. It's a good first step to stop mislabeling.
The claims are in fact bold faced lies that gullible consumers have accepted as truisms. It's the same mentality that enables other trendy but empty campaigns (as in ridiculous Global Warming hysteria) to gain credibility with consumers. The food makers sell more and consumers believe that "eating healthy" is beneficial. But the idea that eating Cocoa Krispies will keep a kid from getting swine flu, or from catching a cold, doesn't make sense," Adding more vitamins to food isn't going to protect one from disease.
As bad as it is for sugary kid cereal makers to claim their products are enriching the body and immune system, the claims of the so called "healthy" food products are even worse. Consumers with even a smidgen of education know that the kid cereal claims are false. But when propagandists for food that is labeled as healthy make wild claims of their favorite food's properties consumers are more often fooled and buy and consume those products. Just look at the signs in any grocery store of the fruit and veggie department. One gets the impression that if he or she heavily doses on veggies there will be no aging shown, no illness possible, he or she will have an ideal body weight, have superior intellectual and physical conditions and can become immortal (Ok, the last one is my exaggeration).
All of cereal maker claims, from the "healthy boxes' to the sugary kid cereals have gone over the edge in advertising the benefits of eating their products. they are microcosms of the greater food labeling/claim problems today. Perhaps governments should take food marketers to court more often to make them prove what they say is what we get. As for me, I will eat some of the good and some of the "bad' foods, based on how they taste. The rest is all empty rhetoric, promises unsubstantiated and pointless.
I think I'll have an unhealthy donut to salute the glories of "unhealthy foods".
With the media here trying to make H1N1 into a crisis those kinds of claims by food makers have become common. Problem is, the government here has not always held them accountable for their advertising as to truthfulness. This has created situations where food of all types is falsely labeled as being superior to others or possessed with some curative or preventive properties. Recently though, the cereal industry's self created "Smart Choices" nutrition labeling program was voluntarily halted after federal regulators expressed concern that such programs may be misleading. It's a good first step to stop mislabeling.
The claims are in fact bold faced lies that gullible consumers have accepted as truisms. It's the same mentality that enables other trendy but empty campaigns (as in ridiculous Global Warming hysteria) to gain credibility with consumers. The food makers sell more and consumers believe that "eating healthy" is beneficial. But the idea that eating Cocoa Krispies will keep a kid from getting swine flu, or from catching a cold, doesn't make sense," Adding more vitamins to food isn't going to protect one from disease.
As bad as it is for sugary kid cereal makers to claim their products are enriching the body and immune system, the claims of the so called "healthy" food products are even worse. Consumers with even a smidgen of education know that the kid cereal claims are false. But when propagandists for food that is labeled as healthy make wild claims of their favorite food's properties consumers are more often fooled and buy and consume those products. Just look at the signs in any grocery store of the fruit and veggie department. One gets the impression that if he or she heavily doses on veggies there will be no aging shown, no illness possible, he or she will have an ideal body weight, have superior intellectual and physical conditions and can become immortal (Ok, the last one is my exaggeration).
All of cereal maker claims, from the "healthy boxes' to the sugary kid cereals have gone over the edge in advertising the benefits of eating their products. they are microcosms of the greater food labeling/claim problems today. Perhaps governments should take food marketers to court more often to make them prove what they say is what we get. As for me, I will eat some of the good and some of the "bad' foods, based on how they taste. The rest is all empty rhetoric, promises unsubstantiated and pointless.
I think I'll have an unhealthy donut to salute the glories of "unhealthy foods".
Reality Internet
The ultimate vulgarity in reality media has just taken place. And this time it was not "reality TV", but rather a "reality internet". Either way it is as pointless and time wasting as the garbage TV shows as alleged "reality". Lynsee (she never gave her full name but revealed everything else about herself....odd... but then this whole episode is odd) is a first-time mom who gave birth to a healthy baby girl on November 7th at 12:46am! She and her husband Anders did so with thousands of people cheering them on via a live video stream on MomsLikeMe.com!
Yep! The lady arranged for cameras to follow her during pregnancy and delivery. But what is the point and why would she do this? "We wanted to share this experience," Lynsee said about the decision she made with her husband Anders. "If I were in a classroom, I'd be teaching about development. It was a way for me to teach… A way for me to use myself as a textbook."
Uh, I think perhaps a financial incentive might be more the motivation. Lynsee sees contracts and dollars ahead, maybe a book deal. It's another person who has become famous "for nothing". Perhaps Lynsee is one of those people who would sell her soul for five minutes of fame. Regardless of her motivation, I doubt seriously if her reality internet experience is of much benefit to anyone. And what a time waster it must be to watch the whole birth process that way.
Sigh... what will be the next reality internet show? Perhaps a bathroom experience where we can all "watch and learn from others' bowel movements"? It's not much farther fetched than Lynsee's birthing reality show.The doctor for Lynsee must be starved for publicity or customers too. To trivialize the birth process this way is not in the medical tradition of privacy. I would have expected the doctor to tell an egotist like Lynsee to get someone else to manage her dog and pony show.
Hmmmmmm I am surprised that she hasn't offered to have a company logo tattooed on her belly to earn some extra money and attention from her newborn. Is there nothing private anymore? Apparently not. The rise of technology today has been accompanied by a fall in modesty and taste. What should be private and treasured is now public and marketed for gain. Civility continues to be lost in the mix and, sadly, few of us even notices or cares about what is happening.
Yep! The lady arranged for cameras to follow her during pregnancy and delivery. But what is the point and why would she do this? "We wanted to share this experience," Lynsee said about the decision she made with her husband Anders. "If I were in a classroom, I'd be teaching about development. It was a way for me to teach… A way for me to use myself as a textbook."
Uh, I think perhaps a financial incentive might be more the motivation. Lynsee sees contracts and dollars ahead, maybe a book deal. It's another person who has become famous "for nothing". Perhaps Lynsee is one of those people who would sell her soul for five minutes of fame. Regardless of her motivation, I doubt seriously if her reality internet experience is of much benefit to anyone. And what a time waster it must be to watch the whole birth process that way.
Sigh... what will be the next reality internet show? Perhaps a bathroom experience where we can all "watch and learn from others' bowel movements"? It's not much farther fetched than Lynsee's birthing reality show.The doctor for Lynsee must be starved for publicity or customers too. To trivialize the birth process this way is not in the medical tradition of privacy. I would have expected the doctor to tell an egotist like Lynsee to get someone else to manage her dog and pony show.
Hmmmmmm I am surprised that she hasn't offered to have a company logo tattooed on her belly to earn some extra money and attention from her newborn. Is there nothing private anymore? Apparently not. The rise of technology today has been accompanied by a fall in modesty and taste. What should be private and treasured is now public and marketed for gain. Civility continues to be lost in the mix and, sadly, few of us even notices or cares about what is happening.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Holiday Stress Events
I am convinced they are all crazy this time of the year. Uh the "they" would be people in general, as in they are all nuts now. The Christmas holidays bring out the frenzies in humans as well as the joy and kindness. You can see it in the way people drive their autos now. Not only do they speed precariously to their destinations, they also multi task while racing. It's an anxiety induced frenzy and that is always one element of our modern Christmas.
Together with the fun and tender times of Christmas we also have the stress of deadlines and the demands to make the holiday what it is actualized to be in the mediums that form our impressions of what a "perfect holiday" should be. I think it is more stressful now because the technologies we commonly use now bring the stress too us more readily. There may no longer be any "simple" Christmas holiday experiences because technology won't allow it (at least for the 90% of humanity addicted to their gadgets).
I observe the chaos every time I go out during the Christmas season. Hmmmmmmmmmm. There seems to be some organized Xmas stress events out there and they can be fascinating to watch. Just the other day while driving to the obligatory shopping venues to get those gifts the retailers say we have to buy I got a taste of these holiday stresses.
* The "Fight for the Parking Space" event- It's a simple equation at any shopping mall parking lot that Einstein would have calculated quickly..E=MC2...That would be energy of crazy drivers looking for a spot to park = mass chaos doubled with occasional profanity when the two competing drivers race for the same spot they both claim as their divine right. Sometimes the lucky spectator will see their competitors actually crash into each other as they both try to squeeze into the spot at the same time. But be careful if one has a red neck and driving a truck..he may be carrying a shooting iron and be quick to use it.
* The "Jump the Line at the Checkout Counter" hurdle- I must Say, as rude as they are, these line jumpers are clever and athletic. They hurdle past those in lien and then claim "I didn't see a line" as they hold their ground to get a quicker checkout for the purchase of their gifts. Most line hurdlers are either to stupid or are too uncouth to understand their own rudeness. Some can even be seen wearing a T shirt with their philosophy of life, "It's all about me".
* The "Scream in the Cell phone" contest- I am not sure why the lady behind me in the post office decided to berate her son publicly, but she did it loudly. And she used language that most moms would not tolerate....they would wash out the mouth with soap of their kids who used it in their home. But she was "mf-ing" him" about his "not being considerate" of her. Sigh....How ironic. But the story has a good ending in this holiday event. It seems the postal clerk told that woman to either put away her phone or get back into the end of the line. I swear I heard sighs of ecstasy from we line dwellers. It was a beloved X mas miracle.
* The retailer " Clearance or X mas Sale" - My God! How many sales can those retailers have? And are any of those sales any different from the normal a sales they advertise all year? I think not. They insult me with English usage challenged ads that proclaim "Final Clearance". When I asked a sales clerk to explain the difference between a "clearance" and a"final clearance" she uttered a simple.."I have to ask the manager. I never thought about it." Being convinced that any manager who would put up such a nonsensical sign as that is probably just as illiterate as the clerk, I uttered, "never mind" and exited. But people respond to the sale frenzy. The day after Thanksgiving here, Black Friday, they line up in front of the store the wee hours of the morning in order to be first in line to buy the "sale" item that can be had weeks later at the same or lower price. And they fight over article once inside. It's a least more exciting to watch than hockey or golf!
Well, those are a few of my favorite Christmas stress events. Hope you always have a stress free holiday
Together with the fun and tender times of Christmas we also have the stress of deadlines and the demands to make the holiday what it is actualized to be in the mediums that form our impressions of what a "perfect holiday" should be. I think it is more stressful now because the technologies we commonly use now bring the stress too us more readily. There may no longer be any "simple" Christmas holiday experiences because technology won't allow it (at least for the 90% of humanity addicted to their gadgets).
I observe the chaos every time I go out during the Christmas season. Hmmmmmmmmmm. There seems to be some organized Xmas stress events out there and they can be fascinating to watch. Just the other day while driving to the obligatory shopping venues to get those gifts the retailers say we have to buy I got a taste of these holiday stresses.
* The "Fight for the Parking Space" event- It's a simple equation at any shopping mall parking lot that Einstein would have calculated quickly..E=MC2...That would be energy of crazy drivers looking for a spot to park = mass chaos doubled with occasional profanity when the two competing drivers race for the same spot they both claim as their divine right. Sometimes the lucky spectator will see their competitors actually crash into each other as they both try to squeeze into the spot at the same time. But be careful if one has a red neck and driving a truck..he may be carrying a shooting iron and be quick to use it.
* The "Jump the Line at the Checkout Counter" hurdle- I must Say, as rude as they are, these line jumpers are clever and athletic. They hurdle past those in lien and then claim "I didn't see a line" as they hold their ground to get a quicker checkout for the purchase of their gifts. Most line hurdlers are either to stupid or are too uncouth to understand their own rudeness. Some can even be seen wearing a T shirt with their philosophy of life, "It's all about me".
* The "Scream in the Cell phone" contest- I am not sure why the lady behind me in the post office decided to berate her son publicly, but she did it loudly. And she used language that most moms would not tolerate....they would wash out the mouth with soap of their kids who used it in their home. But she was "mf-ing" him" about his "not being considerate" of her. Sigh....How ironic. But the story has a good ending in this holiday event. It seems the postal clerk told that woman to either put away her phone or get back into the end of the line. I swear I heard sighs of ecstasy from we line dwellers. It was a beloved X mas miracle.
* The retailer " Clearance or X mas Sale" - My God! How many sales can those retailers have? And are any of those sales any different from the normal a sales they advertise all year? I think not. They insult me with English usage challenged ads that proclaim "Final Clearance". When I asked a sales clerk to explain the difference between a "clearance" and a"final clearance" she uttered a simple.."I have to ask the manager. I never thought about it." Being convinced that any manager who would put up such a nonsensical sign as that is probably just as illiterate as the clerk, I uttered, "never mind" and exited. But people respond to the sale frenzy. The day after Thanksgiving here, Black Friday, they line up in front of the store the wee hours of the morning in order to be first in line to buy the "sale" item that can be had weeks later at the same or lower price. And they fight over article once inside. It's a least more exciting to watch than hockey or golf!
Well, those are a few of my favorite Christmas stress events. Hope you always have a stress free holiday
Friday, December 25, 2009
Gift Of The Magi
The best lesson on the meaning of Christmas is the O'Henry classic short story 'The Gift of the Magi'. Today I will summarize it in the spirit of the Christmas season and as a reminder of what Christmas should be about. The story is simple but speaks volumes about happiness, about Christmas and about meaning in life itself.
In Biblical context the magi were wise men who brought gifts to baby Jesus in the manger, thus inventing the art of giving Christmas presents. Being wise magi their gifts were the best ones. And so I go to my version of the story O' Henry wrote about the Christmas gift. Bear with me. It will be short and follows below...
A man and woman very much in love because they were together, relatively poor, approached Christmas time. Though they had no children and little money, they were happy because they were together, only regretting that this Christmas they were too poor to buy each other a gift. Each had only one possession that they cherished above any other material thing, he a beautiful gold watch left to him by his father and she her long golden cascading hair. It came to be the day before Christmas and they had no money with which to buy each other a gift.
But on his way to work the man realized there as a way he could buy his wife a wonderful present, and she too, during the Christmas Eve day, discovered a way to buy her husband a fine gift. That Christmas Eve night the man came home with his gift tucked under his arm, and she too had wrapped her present for him. They rushed to embrace and gasped as they gazed at each other, tears dribbling to the cheek of both as they looked into each other's eyes. Through bittersweet tears they exchanged gifts. The man opened his. It was a beautiful gold fob for his watch. But he no longer had the watch. He had sold it to buy her a present, a beautiful sparkling gold comb for her hair. But she couldn't use it. She had cut her hair and sold it to a wig maker to pay for the fob she had just presented to her husband.
The looked at each other and at the presents and smiled. They realized at once that in spite of it all, they had given to each other the greatest gift of all- true love.
In Biblical context the magi were wise men who brought gifts to baby Jesus in the manger, thus inventing the art of giving Christmas presents. Being wise magi their gifts were the best ones. And so I go to my version of the story O' Henry wrote about the Christmas gift. Bear with me. It will be short and follows below...
A man and woman very much in love because they were together, relatively poor, approached Christmas time. Though they had no children and little money, they were happy because they were together, only regretting that this Christmas they were too poor to buy each other a gift. Each had only one possession that they cherished above any other material thing, he a beautiful gold watch left to him by his father and she her long golden cascading hair. It came to be the day before Christmas and they had no money with which to buy each other a gift.
But on his way to work the man realized there as a way he could buy his wife a wonderful present, and she too, during the Christmas Eve day, discovered a way to buy her husband a fine gift. That Christmas Eve night the man came home with his gift tucked under his arm, and she too had wrapped her present for him. They rushed to embrace and gasped as they gazed at each other, tears dribbling to the cheek of both as they looked into each other's eyes. Through bittersweet tears they exchanged gifts. The man opened his. It was a beautiful gold fob for his watch. But he no longer had the watch. He had sold it to buy her a present, a beautiful sparkling gold comb for her hair. But she couldn't use it. She had cut her hair and sold it to a wig maker to pay for the fob she had just presented to her husband.
The looked at each other and at the presents and smiled. They realized at once that in spite of it all, they had given to each other the greatest gift of all- true love.
Christmas Music
Every November, right after Thanksgiving, I start dreaming. I dream not of a White Christmas, but of Christmas music. I love the songs of Christmas and the history of them too. Every year for about four weeks in late November and during all of December I am content to listen to the songs of Christmas as much as humanly possible, on my car radio (there are many "all Christmas music" stations to choose from), my computer, in elevators, at shopping malls, in TV shows, wherever it's played (which is practically everywhere)....and it is ubiquitous. And oddly enough, the musical melodies and lyrics of Christmas is good stuff. It can hold its won musically with just about any music format.
The music of Christmas helps define the holiday itself and more importantly, it helps us to retrieve memories of our Christmas past through timeless lyrics and melodies that take us back to when we remember hearing it, perhaps for the first time. Christmas Music is the long lost friend who returns for a visit and enchants us while here. It calms us, stirs our imagination and sense of anticipation, even inspires us to live out the ideals embedded in the holiday itself.
It's impossible to list every Christmas song that we enjoy because there are so many. They come from every era and of every persuasion, be it religious, lay, silly or somber. So much of the religious and somber Christmas music came from the 19th century. That was the time when churches were the center of life, including musical lives. That style endures because the songs still inspire us and set ideals for us to achieve. Humans never stop needing ideals. Perhaps 'Silent Knight' best typifies those 19th century Christmas tunes. It tells us that we can't let those songs disappear because they have become a part of our humanity that is too important to forget.
In the 20th century Christmas music turned more buoyant and commercial. But it is lively and fun...like the favorite 'Jingle Bells'. The songs of that era prove that it doesn't matter what is one's religious persuasion when enjoying Christmas songs is the subject. Most people can recite and hum the Christmas carols they've heard repeatedly since childhood. We all try to sing them, both in and out of the shower, because they just make us feel better about ourselves, and the world around us.
Since the second half of the 20th century writers have turned to composing silly songs for Christmas. From 'Grandma Got Run over By A Reindeer' to The Chipmunks crooning what that star munk Alvin almost destroys when singing with his mates to Jimmy Boyd's classic 'All I Want For Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth'. Those modern novelty songs remind us that Christmas is supposed to be fun and filled with giggles.
If we allow it, Christmas music does it all. No need to be a Grinch and declare that Christmas singing is corny or "for kids and old folks". If you have an imagination and want to be instantly transported to wonderland, tune into those Christmas tunes while they are still being played and jingle all the way with them
The music of Christmas helps define the holiday itself and more importantly, it helps us to retrieve memories of our Christmas past through timeless lyrics and melodies that take us back to when we remember hearing it, perhaps for the first time. Christmas Music is the long lost friend who returns for a visit and enchants us while here. It calms us, stirs our imagination and sense of anticipation, even inspires us to live out the ideals embedded in the holiday itself.
It's impossible to list every Christmas song that we enjoy because there are so many. They come from every era and of every persuasion, be it religious, lay, silly or somber. So much of the religious and somber Christmas music came from the 19th century. That was the time when churches were the center of life, including musical lives. That style endures because the songs still inspire us and set ideals for us to achieve. Humans never stop needing ideals. Perhaps 'Silent Knight' best typifies those 19th century Christmas tunes. It tells us that we can't let those songs disappear because they have become a part of our humanity that is too important to forget.
In the 20th century Christmas music turned more buoyant and commercial. But it is lively and fun...like the favorite 'Jingle Bells'. The songs of that era prove that it doesn't matter what is one's religious persuasion when enjoying Christmas songs is the subject. Most people can recite and hum the Christmas carols they've heard repeatedly since childhood. We all try to sing them, both in and out of the shower, because they just make us feel better about ourselves, and the world around us.
Since the second half of the 20th century writers have turned to composing silly songs for Christmas. From 'Grandma Got Run over By A Reindeer' to The Chipmunks crooning what that star munk Alvin almost destroys when singing with his mates to Jimmy Boyd's classic 'All I Want For Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth'. Those modern novelty songs remind us that Christmas is supposed to be fun and filled with giggles.
If we allow it, Christmas music does it all. No need to be a Grinch and declare that Christmas singing is corny or "for kids and old folks". If you have an imagination and want to be instantly transported to wonderland, tune into those Christmas tunes while they are still being played and jingle all the way with them
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Forbidden Holiday Foods
Cheese straws, Swedish meatballs, eggnog, stuffed potatoes, creamed spinach, pot roast, fruitcake, and pecan pie were listed by the New England Journal of Medicine as the worst 8 holiday foods to eat, Supposedly they all have too much fat and calories and make the holiday celebrant gain weight. So the journal lists "alternatives" to each. Most of those involve the so called "low fat" and "healthy" foods that substitute the good tasting ingredients with awful tasting healthy ones. Ugh! Health food makes me sick.
Don't the "eat healthy at the holidays" people understand that nutrition for the soul at holiday time means eating the good tasting and fun "junk", not their version of what is good for the body. Holidays are short in duration and NOT about healthy bodies (look at fat Santa for proof). Eating the good stuff for a few weeks won't harm anyone physically, but not eating the fun foods will harm the soul through deprivation. It could turn the fruitcake or eggnog deprived celebrant into a scrooge.
The Christmas and New Year celebrations are not about routines, health and self disciplined. They are a catharsis for us in that we can do all the things that we keep ourselves from doing all year long out of fear of the food police and other "nay-sayers". I wish the health nuts would eat in isolation at holiday time so they won't infect us with their notions of healthy foods.
Are not some of our best memories of past holidays the delicious forbidden foods we ate then? How could anyone idealize and memorialize broccoli and asparagus as a treasured holiday memory. It isn't possible. Why spoil the holidays with tasteless foods when a Chocolate butter cream, filled yule log can be so easily had. When sitting around a fireplace at Christmas would you rather have a cup of hot chocolate and a gingerbread cookie or a cup of skim milk and a no fat granola bar? If you choose the latter no need to continue reading this diatribe. You are already a prisoner of the healthy food police.
And who wants to cook Brussels sprouts during holiday time? Not I! It does nothing for my spirit because it isn't special or "unhealthily good tasting". But when I make a fruitcake or gingerbread muffins, maybe my Christmas cheesecake or holiday decorated sugar cookies I get a lift of enthusiasm and feel bonded to the holidays. It's equivalent to decorating the Christmas tree. How can anyone be sullen when doing that or eating a Santa cookie?
As far as I am concerned, those health nuts and their no fat recipes can all fly to the North Pole. I am going to the kitchen for a glass of pumpkin eggnog and to cut myself a big piece of fruitcake.
Don't the "eat healthy at the holidays" people understand that nutrition for the soul at holiday time means eating the good tasting and fun "junk", not their version of what is good for the body. Holidays are short in duration and NOT about healthy bodies (look at fat Santa for proof). Eating the good stuff for a few weeks won't harm anyone physically, but not eating the fun foods will harm the soul through deprivation. It could turn the fruitcake or eggnog deprived celebrant into a scrooge.
The Christmas and New Year celebrations are not about routines, health and self disciplined. They are a catharsis for us in that we can do all the things that we keep ourselves from doing all year long out of fear of the food police and other "nay-sayers". I wish the health nuts would eat in isolation at holiday time so they won't infect us with their notions of healthy foods.
Are not some of our best memories of past holidays the delicious forbidden foods we ate then? How could anyone idealize and memorialize broccoli and asparagus as a treasured holiday memory. It isn't possible. Why spoil the holidays with tasteless foods when a Chocolate butter cream, filled yule log can be so easily had. When sitting around a fireplace at Christmas would you rather have a cup of hot chocolate and a gingerbread cookie or a cup of skim milk and a no fat granola bar? If you choose the latter no need to continue reading this diatribe. You are already a prisoner of the healthy food police.
And who wants to cook Brussels sprouts during holiday time? Not I! It does nothing for my spirit because it isn't special or "unhealthily good tasting". But when I make a fruitcake or gingerbread muffins, maybe my Christmas cheesecake or holiday decorated sugar cookies I get a lift of enthusiasm and feel bonded to the holidays. It's equivalent to decorating the Christmas tree. How can anyone be sullen when doing that or eating a Santa cookie?
As far as I am concerned, those health nuts and their no fat recipes can all fly to the North Pole. I am going to the kitchen for a glass of pumpkin eggnog and to cut myself a big piece of fruitcake.
Santa Clause Letters
I'm beginning to look allot like Santa now, not by force of will but rather by nature. But I guess getting old is not as bad if we turn into a Santa. So today I will play Santa reading his mail. There is so much of it and some from celebrities who want something. Sigh..but only little boys and girls are unselfish enough to ask for things that serve all mankind well. The rest of them are out for the big buck items. Here are a few of the letters Santa has gotten this Christmas season as well as Santa's replies.Dear Santa,I am 13 years old now and the typical teen boy. What I want for Christmas is to be 20 years old, anything but a teen. I treat my parents like servants and rarely speak to them, lust for anything in a skirt, and have pimples and acne the size of China. Help meeeeeeeeeeee.Tommy.Dear Tommy,I'll see if I can find your parents servant outfits, put Lindsay Lohan under your Xmas tree and leave a giant size acne cream in your stocking. Good luck on making it to 20. You'll need it. what a pathetic creature you are. H Ho Ho=====================================================================Dear Santa,Those blonde Barbie girls you sent me this year have given me a pain and threatened my career and marriage. My wife chased me out of the house with a golf club and beat me with it when I tried to escape in the car. It seems she tapped my cell phone and found some of the messages I left to my babes. Can you take back all those Barbies and make people forget what happened?Your golfing pal,Tiger WoodsDear Tiger,Forget it. Just keep your pants on this year and listen to the new CD I am leaving under your Xmas tree..."I Saw Mommy Kissing Tiger Woods".============================================================================Dear Santa,Last year you made me God, and I appreciate it. They voted me the first black President, and because I am a minority everyone is afraid to criticize my many errors as president. Thanks Santa. But this Christmas I want substance to go with my style. Eventually, the voters will expect me to fulfill some of the promises I made and haven't kept. There patience is beginning to wear thin and that Nobel Peace prize you arranged for me is a joke, given I have done nothing to merit it. Please, Santa, make me earn some of the praise I get this year. Perhaps an adviser might help. Do you have an available elf who knows politics and can help?Barrack ObamaDear Barrack,Forget it! I am not sending any of my innocent elves to any politician. However, Sarah Palin is available if you would like her under your tree.===================================================================================Dear Santa,I'll get right to the point! I need plenty of heat. This past 18 months have been rather cool and it's not fitting my phony agenda to shiver this way. Hurry, Santa! My reputation depends on it.Al GoreDear Al,You whined so much about making it seem that Global Warming was happening the past few years I made the climate temporarily warmer so you could claim the earth was getting hotter. Now you want me to cool it because more and more realize that Global Warming is a crock. Sigh.... Can't you make up your mind? Ok, I am going to keep cooling the earth (I like the snow more anyway) so you can pretend the next ice age is coming...by the way, Al, when are you going to get a real job?Globally Cooled Santa
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Forget recessions that cause you to spend less for gifts this holiday season, Christmas is the time for gifts...err...for your favorite pet. Yep, Fido is expecting an Xmas gift this year. At least that is what one would believe when the sales of pet Xmas gifts are tabulated.
Here is a trendy top 10 gift picks list for pets this year:
* PAW- That would be the Positioning Animals Worldwide collar mounted GPS device, a device especially for dogs who love to roam. This idiotic, expensive device is tied to (what else?) the dog owner's cell phone to ring an alert when Fido makes an escape.
* The Drinkwell Pet Fountain- Believe it or not, this is a water fountain designed for cats! Veterinarians say cats need plenty of water, so a water fountain is..oh..it's just stupid! If I had a cat who wouldn't drink out of a water bowl I would tell him to pack his bags and move out....preferably to a water front lot.
* Pet Breed Detection kit- This is a kit (it has an oral swab for detection) used by the owner to test the pet's DNA in order to find out if four legged creature is of pure or mixed breed. And why is that important to know? I have no idea. But perhaps it might make it easier for Fido to join a country club if his good breeding is verified.
* Donate in Fido's name- Some owners dedicate money to causes, human or animal, in Fido's name. Why not donate in the owner's name instead? Perhaps Fido's feelings will be hurt if he is seen as a stingy Scrooge Canine.
* Micro chipped Pet Id's- Just what a pet bird or lizard needs...a jeweled studded micro chipped ID tag. It might make him the next bird brained blinged rap artist
* Pet Fur Yarn- I am not sure a cat would like this one as much as the owner (but then all these crazy gifts are really for humans anyway) The owner collects all that cat hair and has the raw stuff prepped and spun into balls of knit table or crochetable yarn. Hehe Want a cat hair sweater for Xmas?
* Pet Books- No, no. These books that are about or centered around animals aren't for the pets to read or be read too. They are for the pet fanatic owners...who probably would benefit greatly also if someone gave them a book on obsessions...about their pets.
* Dremel Toenail Clipper- A rotary toe nail trimmer for the dog or cat? Haha What is the owner supposed to do before trimming the reluctant pet's toenails? Maybe it comes with pet tranquilizers to knock out Fido before the clipping. otherwise, he's not going to cooperate while you attempt to clip.
* The Furminator- It's a grooming tool to help reduce the shedding the pet normally does by removing the undercoat and loose hair. It is said to reduce shedding up to 90%.
Hmmmmmmmmm Heck with the dogs, the smart lady will use one of these on her human honey.
Who says a dog's life is a bad one....Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as gods. I think both the humans and cats have never forgotten this.
Here is a trendy top 10 gift picks list for pets this year:
* PAW- That would be the Positioning Animals Worldwide collar mounted GPS device, a device especially for dogs who love to roam. This idiotic, expensive device is tied to (what else?) the dog owner's cell phone to ring an alert when Fido makes an escape.
* The Drinkwell Pet Fountain- Believe it or not, this is a water fountain designed for cats! Veterinarians say cats need plenty of water, so a water fountain is..oh..it's just stupid! If I had a cat who wouldn't drink out of a water bowl I would tell him to pack his bags and move out....preferably to a water front lot.
* Pet Breed Detection kit- This is a kit (it has an oral swab for detection) used by the owner to test the pet's DNA in order to find out if four legged creature is of pure or mixed breed. And why is that important to know? I have no idea. But perhaps it might make it easier for Fido to join a country club if his good breeding is verified.
* Donate in Fido's name- Some owners dedicate money to causes, human or animal, in Fido's name. Why not donate in the owner's name instead? Perhaps Fido's feelings will be hurt if he is seen as a stingy Scrooge Canine.
* Micro chipped Pet Id's- Just what a pet bird or lizard needs...a jeweled studded micro chipped ID tag. It might make him the next bird brained blinged rap artist
* Pet Fur Yarn- I am not sure a cat would like this one as much as the owner (but then all these crazy gifts are really for humans anyway) The owner collects all that cat hair and has the raw stuff prepped and spun into balls of knit table or crochetable yarn. Hehe Want a cat hair sweater for Xmas?
* Pet Books- No, no. These books that are about or centered around animals aren't for the pets to read or be read too. They are for the pet fanatic owners...who probably would benefit greatly also if someone gave them a book on obsessions...about their pets.
* Dremel Toenail Clipper- A rotary toe nail trimmer for the dog or cat? Haha What is the owner supposed to do before trimming the reluctant pet's toenails? Maybe it comes with pet tranquilizers to knock out Fido before the clipping. otherwise, he's not going to cooperate while you attempt to clip.
* The Furminator- It's a grooming tool to help reduce the shedding the pet normally does by removing the undercoat and loose hair. It is said to reduce shedding up to 90%.
Hmmmmmmmmm Heck with the dogs, the smart lady will use one of these on her human honey.
Who says a dog's life is a bad one....Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as gods. I think both the humans and cats have never forgotten this.
Gingerbread
In one of his less famed plays, William Shakespeare wrote, "And I had but one penny in the world, thou should'st have it to buy gingerbread." I am not sure I would spend my last coin on a gingerbread sweet, but it might not be a great mistake if I did. Gingerbread, the food most identified with our modern Christmas is something I and many others crave at Christmas time. Yes, I've already had a few gingerbread cookies. I like the thin ones with plenty of ginger inside.
First, some history of gingerbread foods that I researched. An early form of gingerbread can be traced to the ancient Greeks and Egyptians who used it for ceremonial purposes. I suppose the strong odor and the fact that ginger is a preservative in food made it appropriate for that. Supposedly, gingerbread made its earliest an appearance in Europe when 11th-century crusaders brought the spice back from the Middle East for the wealthy family cooks to experiment with. Thank goodness they did.
As ginger became more affordable to the common people, gingerbread sweets caught on. Early European recipes mostly consisted of ground almonds, stale bread crumbs, rose water, sugar and, naturally, ginger. Take out the rose water and add some eggs and it's close to what we use today in making gingerbread. When the cookies were baked bore the likeness of new kings, emperors and queens, or religious symbols. In a sense they told stories of hat was going on in the kingdoms. The finished cookie might be decorated with edible gold paint (for those who could afford it) or flat white icing to bring out the details in relief.
Later in England, the bread crumbs were replaced with flour and eggs were added to soften the gingerbread.. But many people today still use stale bread crumbs when making gingerbread. And finally, the Germans made gingerbread a passion and art. They also created the gingerbread house that we love today and tied it to Christmas. I always look in my local store for lebkuchen (the soft gingerbread cookie) from Germany and those thin, crispy pierniczki from Poland.
I know you might hate gingerbread. Some people don't even like the smell, but that is a minority point of view. My preference for ginger is in sweet foods, not entrees. I think it is because my earliest childhood memories of Christmas foods include some ginger based sweet. We tend to most like the foods we ate and enjoyed in childhood. My favorite Christmas sweets besides gingerbread include fruitcakes, peppermint candy canes and mints, decorated Christmas sugar cookies, buche du noel logs, Stollen cake, Panettone My least favorite Christmas sweets include eggnog, plum pudding, wassail, and mince pie. naturally, I ate most of the favorites often in childhood and had little contact then with the least favorites.
I hope this has stirred your Christmas sweet tooth a little and you'll either head for the nearest kitchen to make something sweet and Christmasy or buy an eat an already made Christmas sweet a favorite. Ho Ho Ho
First, some history of gingerbread foods that I researched. An early form of gingerbread can be traced to the ancient Greeks and Egyptians who used it for ceremonial purposes. I suppose the strong odor and the fact that ginger is a preservative in food made it appropriate for that. Supposedly, gingerbread made its earliest an appearance in Europe when 11th-century crusaders brought the spice back from the Middle East for the wealthy family cooks to experiment with. Thank goodness they did.
As ginger became more affordable to the common people, gingerbread sweets caught on. Early European recipes mostly consisted of ground almonds, stale bread crumbs, rose water, sugar and, naturally, ginger. Take out the rose water and add some eggs and it's close to what we use today in making gingerbread. When the cookies were baked bore the likeness of new kings, emperors and queens, or religious symbols. In a sense they told stories of hat was going on in the kingdoms. The finished cookie might be decorated with edible gold paint (for those who could afford it) or flat white icing to bring out the details in relief.
Later in England, the bread crumbs were replaced with flour and eggs were added to soften the gingerbread.. But many people today still use stale bread crumbs when making gingerbread. And finally, the Germans made gingerbread a passion and art. They also created the gingerbread house that we love today and tied it to Christmas. I always look in my local store for lebkuchen (the soft gingerbread cookie) from Germany and those thin, crispy pierniczki from Poland.
I know you might hate gingerbread. Some people don't even like the smell, but that is a minority point of view. My preference for ginger is in sweet foods, not entrees. I think it is because my earliest childhood memories of Christmas foods include some ginger based sweet. We tend to most like the foods we ate and enjoyed in childhood. My favorite Christmas sweets besides gingerbread include fruitcakes, peppermint candy canes and mints, decorated Christmas sugar cookies, buche du noel logs, Stollen cake, Panettone My least favorite Christmas sweets include eggnog, plum pudding, wassail, and mince pie. naturally, I ate most of the favorites often in childhood and had little contact then with the least favorites.
I hope this has stirred your Christmas sweet tooth a little and you'll either head for the nearest kitchen to make something sweet and Christmasy or buy an eat an already made Christmas sweet a favorite. Ho Ho Ho
Monday, December 21, 2009
War On Christmas
I just glanced at an article in a newspaper that analyzed the so called "War on Christmas". Many people today, in reaction to politically correctness that says references to Christmas must be replaced by "holiday themes" because Christmas is a Christian celebration, support the use of Christmas symbols and traditions and frown on any attempt to ban references to the holiday. That's the alleged "battle'. It seems silly to me that a court or government body would legislate in any way about Christmas. It's a private matter, a mostly secular celebration now and not something that governments should spend time regulating. Most people will express themselves the way they want, so I think trying to legislate expression is a futile attempt.
Why are some non Christians opposed to Christmas holiday symbols beign shown publically? Is it insecurity that their own religious holidays gets smaller notice in thsi culture? Are they really offended by Christmas rituals? In the U.S. courts have long ruled that no particular religion may be promoted by the government ahead of the others. But is placing a Christmas decoration with images of Christianity in a public venue really offensive? Some non Christian religious groups even try to ban Christmas carolers because some of their songs are religious oriented. Perhaps they are confusing tradition with religious proselytizing. Americans are in a war that pits the politically correct against Christmas carolers, some say. They say it's a battle that plays out in the halls of Congress, retail stores and public schools across the country, and it's one that's been raging for years. In truth, I don't see much decline in the number of public "religious based' Christmas activity. It might be a small battle rather than a war.
Those who say "ENOUGH" with attempts to secularize all public Christmas activity believe that if there is not closure to this continuous change in what the government and courts allow for Christmas, then soon it will almost be a completely different event from what we see today, and in the process we would lose the whole emphasis of what the very early beginning of Christmas was all about. Christmas would go from the Christmas spirit to the "holiday" spirit ,and that is a far broader celebration which would would destroy the many unique aspects of Christmas. Are some schools and businesses going too far to "censor" Christmas because they don't know the laws or are overzealous and oversensitive?
Too, why should a society by necessity include other religious traditions in its holiday? Is it necessary to inject Hanukkah or Kwanza into Christmas? War on Christmas? Ho Ho Ho. Maybe there is no such thing at all. For most followers, is the Christmas holiday simply one of the best marketing tools ever invented and no longer religious based? Christmas probably not going to go anywhere anytime soon and as logn as hey don't hide Santa I am ok with it.
Why are some non Christians opposed to Christmas holiday symbols beign shown publically? Is it insecurity that their own religious holidays gets smaller notice in thsi culture? Are they really offended by Christmas rituals? In the U.S. courts have long ruled that no particular religion may be promoted by the government ahead of the others. But is placing a Christmas decoration with images of Christianity in a public venue really offensive? Some non Christian religious groups even try to ban Christmas carolers because some of their songs are religious oriented. Perhaps they are confusing tradition with religious proselytizing. Americans are in a war that pits the politically correct against Christmas carolers, some say. They say it's a battle that plays out in the halls of Congress, retail stores and public schools across the country, and it's one that's been raging for years. In truth, I don't see much decline in the number of public "religious based' Christmas activity. It might be a small battle rather than a war.
Those who say "ENOUGH" with attempts to secularize all public Christmas activity believe that if there is not closure to this continuous change in what the government and courts allow for Christmas, then soon it will almost be a completely different event from what we see today, and in the process we would lose the whole emphasis of what the very early beginning of Christmas was all about. Christmas would go from the Christmas spirit to the "holiday" spirit ,and that is a far broader celebration which would would destroy the many unique aspects of Christmas. Are some schools and businesses going too far to "censor" Christmas because they don't know the laws or are overzealous and oversensitive?
Too, why should a society by necessity include other religious traditions in its holiday? Is it necessary to inject Hanukkah or Kwanza into Christmas? War on Christmas? Ho Ho Ho. Maybe there is no such thing at all. For most followers, is the Christmas holiday simply one of the best marketing tools ever invented and no longer religious based? Christmas probably not going to go anywhere anytime soon and as logn as hey don't hide Santa I am ok with it.
Christmas Tree Rentals
The environmental greeners are at it again. They are renting Christmas trees this again year in many U.S. cities to help "save the environment" again. They seem to save the environment allot, but I wish they would first try to save their own sanity and come to some sense of reason. I have doubts they could even accomplish that.First...about the claim that using fake trees is more environmentally sound...Artificial trees are manufactured using a polyvinyl chloride (or PVC), which is a petroleum derived plastic. The raw material for fake Christmas trees is both non-renewable and polluting. The artificial tree results in the unhealthy emission of a number of carcinogens, such as dioxin, ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride. So don't tell me you are a planet saver when you use a fake tree!
Renting out live Xmas trees, picking them up after the holiday and replanting is supposed to stop the waste in cutting down the trees (even though the trees are farmed and replaced with new seedlings every year, resulting in no net loss of trees). The good thing about renting a live Xmas tree is that the cost is that on average only about 20% higher than buying a cut tree that must be discarded after Xmas. Also, there is no mess with needles when using alive tree. I once had a live Christmas tree, a smaller one that I bought, and I planted it in my backyard after Christmas. But the heat and humidity of New Orleans eventually killed it.
Those artificial trees are not my style. I never had one and plan to never ever have a fake tree. Christmas trees are the most important Christmas decorations in the home, so why put an aluminum tree there? And shopping for a real tree each year is fun. I hate the idea of not having that job at Christmas. I even like hauling it home and setting the real tree in the Xmas stand. It is always hard to get the tree straight and most often there are imperfections. But there is a sense of personal investment a real tree gives that is absent with artificial ones. And no smells come from a fake tree! What better than the fresh smell of a real tree or even the decaying one if it eventually 'goes bad' before New Years Day.
So I like the real tree and the growing use of live potted trees that can be rented or bought and replanted. Don't tell me artificial trees are better. The next thing you'd probably say is that Santa is a fake too. Bah Humbug to that!
Renting out live Xmas trees, picking them up after the holiday and replanting is supposed to stop the waste in cutting down the trees (even though the trees are farmed and replaced with new seedlings every year, resulting in no net loss of trees). The good thing about renting a live Xmas tree is that the cost is that on average only about 20% higher than buying a cut tree that must be discarded after Xmas. Also, there is no mess with needles when using alive tree. I once had a live Christmas tree, a smaller one that I bought, and I planted it in my backyard after Christmas. But the heat and humidity of New Orleans eventually killed it.
Those artificial trees are not my style. I never had one and plan to never ever have a fake tree. Christmas trees are the most important Christmas decorations in the home, so why put an aluminum tree there? And shopping for a real tree each year is fun. I hate the idea of not having that job at Christmas. I even like hauling it home and setting the real tree in the Xmas stand. It is always hard to get the tree straight and most often there are imperfections. But there is a sense of personal investment a real tree gives that is absent with artificial ones. And no smells come from a fake tree! What better than the fresh smell of a real tree or even the decaying one if it eventually 'goes bad' before New Years Day.
So I like the real tree and the growing use of live potted trees that can be rented or bought and replanted. Don't tell me artificial trees are better. The next thing you'd probably say is that Santa is a fake too. Bah Humbug to that!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)