Christmas may be over now, but you better be careful next
time you say
"Merry Christmas" to a stranger. In this age of "me" and of
"entitlement" it seems some people are offended even by a general
expression of good will during the Christmas holiday season. Take the
case of the American Airline ticket agent who, on Christmas Eve, smiled
and said the forbidden words...Merry Christmas to a Scroogian passenger
preparing to fly from New York's LaGuardia Airport.
You see, according to witnesses, the unidentified passenger became
"irate" when a gate agent wished him a Merry
Christmas as he boarded American Airlines flight 1140 to Dallas Fort
Worth. According to a spokesperson for American Airlines, the offended
passenger boarded the plane and screamed for the name of the offensive
agent who dared to offer him wishes of good will. But he became even
more upset once on board when an equally cherry flight attendant said
those same bad words to him.
"You shouldn't say that because not everyone celebrates Christmas", he
hollered at the flight attendant. Further, American Airlines says
Scrooge became
"verbally aggressive towards the
flight attendant and was asked to leave the plane." At that point the
more sane passengers on board cheered loudly as he was taken off the
flight. They should have given him coal for his stockings and told him
to fly with Rudolph and the other reindeer next time, but instead, in
the spirit of Christmas, the airline allowed him to board a later
flight. No word on whether he was greeted with cheer on that flight.
I wonder if that passenger reflects the intolerance of our age? And
should we be offended at another person's happiness and good will
directed toward us if we are not a believer in their holiday tradition?
Is etiquette no longer to be practiced when our personal beliefs don't
match those giving us well wishes? I would wish you a 'Happy New Year',
but I better not. Just use your imagination.
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
Thursday, December 25, 2014
Meri Kurisumasu
Meri Kurisumasu! I sneaked in a Japanese Christmas greeting.
It's
what they say in Japan to wish revelers a Merry Christmas. Wait! I
think you might have said that exclamation. Yep! I am writing about
Christmas in the most unlikely venue for it, Japan. Surprisingly,
Christmas has become fairly big in Japan, that despite the fact that
there are very few Christians living there. But you know the Japanese
are an open and curious lot. They may have embraced the lay aspect of
Christmas more than any other Asian nation.
Christmas is not a national holiday in Japan, so schools and businesses are normally open on December 25th. The big corporations do the main decorating, lighting their buildings and the trees. Because of a butter shortage last week, Japanese home bakers and retail sellers are in a fritter. No butter means no Christmas sweets. Elaborate and artful "Christmas cakes" are big in the land that loves fancy sweets. Christmas sweets have become a staple of Japan's year-end holidays.
The most adored of them is a variation of the French sponge cake covered with vanilla icing, whipped cream and strawberries. They are sold everywhere from neighborhood convenience stores to the fanciest Japanese bakeries stores. That's why the Japanese government this week purchased a huge shipment of imported butter.
Anyway, it's not just a matter of "let them eat cake" at Christmas in Japan. Parties are often held for children, with games, dancing and that guy in the red outfit (No, not me. I mean Santa.) they call santa-san. In Japan, Christmas in known as more of a time to spread happiness rather than a religious celebration. Christmas eve is often celebrated more than Christmas Day.
Christmas eve is thought of as a romantic day, in which couples spend together and exchange presents, sort of like Valentine's Day. Young couples like to go for walks to look at the Christmas lights and have a romantic meal in a restaurant. And on Christmas day fried chicken is the favorite meal. It is the busiest time of year for KFC in Japan because....well....we all know Colonel Sanders is the real Santa Claus.
Just one more thing. 'O shogatsu' to you. (That's the Happy New Year greeting in Japan)
Christmas is not a national holiday in Japan, so schools and businesses are normally open on December 25th. The big corporations do the main decorating, lighting their buildings and the trees. Because of a butter shortage last week, Japanese home bakers and retail sellers are in a fritter. No butter means no Christmas sweets. Elaborate and artful "Christmas cakes" are big in the land that loves fancy sweets. Christmas sweets have become a staple of Japan's year-end holidays.
The most adored of them is a variation of the French sponge cake covered with vanilla icing, whipped cream and strawberries. They are sold everywhere from neighborhood convenience stores to the fanciest Japanese bakeries stores. That's why the Japanese government this week purchased a huge shipment of imported butter.
Anyway, it's not just a matter of "let them eat cake" at Christmas in Japan. Parties are often held for children, with games, dancing and that guy in the red outfit (No, not me. I mean Santa.) they call santa-san. In Japan, Christmas in known as more of a time to spread happiness rather than a religious celebration. Christmas eve is often celebrated more than Christmas Day.
Christmas eve is thought of as a romantic day, in which couples spend together and exchange presents, sort of like Valentine's Day. Young couples like to go for walks to look at the Christmas lights and have a romantic meal in a restaurant. And on Christmas day fried chicken is the favorite meal. It is the busiest time of year for KFC in Japan because....well....we all know Colonel Sanders is the real Santa Claus.
Just one more thing. 'O shogatsu' to you. (That's the Happy New Year greeting in Japan)
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
Worst Christmas Traditions
First let me write it clearly. I absolutely
love the Christmas holiday
and traditions with it. But there are a few Christmas traditions I
just don't get or want to get. For example, the Catholic tradition of
attending a Christmas Eve midnight mass. Are the Catholics kidding? Who
wants to attend a church service at midnight the night before Christmas
morning when kids are loudly awake at am screaming, "when are we going
to open the presents". I wouldn't even attend a midnight strip show
featuring every woman entered into the Miss Universe contest. It's too
late at night.
Another one I dislike is the Christmas family newsletter that is stuffed inside the Christmas card the family sends out. Ugh! Christmas cars are great because for their brevity. They simply say "I like and remember you". It's enough. But sending out the year-end wrap-up, the summation of twelve months of familial accomplishment; the list of achievements of children and grandchildren far and wide is overkill. More often than not it is a bragging session in which mom regales us with all the wonderful accomplishment of her kids. No thanks to that.
How about those charity solicitors we meet and greet in malls and many other public facilities. I do give to charity during the year, but to harass me in public at Christmas time is too much to take. There's no secret to the timing either. Those organizations that raise money for any kind of charity, religious group, foundation, etc., choose Christmas time because it makes us feel guilty if we don't toss our money into a kettle manned by Santa or some other costumed Christmas based celebrity. People feel moved at the holidays to dig deep and give over and over. If any of those Christmas solicitors come to my door and interrupt my sleep or dinner I feel justified in shooting them on my doorstep and stealing all the money they have collected from other victims of their begging.
I think most of us would agree that a terrible Christmas tradition is the marketing craze at this time of the year. Sellers associate everything with the holidays. But it can be a stretch. That TV add showing Santa using the hemorrhoid cream the sponsor is trying to sell.....it's' too much. A certain amount of commercialism is bound to happen during the biggest holiday of the year. Some businesses survive because of their Christmas sales. But they are overdoing the ads and alleged sales. We should throw our fruitcakes at them if they interrupt us with another advertisement.
And the mistletoe tradition has to go. In today's culture this poisonous, if picturesque, little plant is an invitation to your creepy uncle or that neighborhood sex offender leaning in the dining room doorway and slobbering all over you. Anyone ever go to an office party and experience the sleazy loser at the who slips in a little tongue in your mouth to make your holidays brighter? Mistletoe has outlived it's usefulness. But for those who feel a need for it, I suggest they forget the plant and just visit their local massage parlor instead.
They are upsetting my Christmas with those lousy traditions! I think I better stop ranting and have a Christmas cookie now. Merry Christmas!
Another one I dislike is the Christmas family newsletter that is stuffed inside the Christmas card the family sends out. Ugh! Christmas cars are great because for their brevity. They simply say "I like and remember you". It's enough. But sending out the year-end wrap-up, the summation of twelve months of familial accomplishment; the list of achievements of children and grandchildren far and wide is overkill. More often than not it is a bragging session in which mom regales us with all the wonderful accomplishment of her kids. No thanks to that.
How about those charity solicitors we meet and greet in malls and many other public facilities. I do give to charity during the year, but to harass me in public at Christmas time is too much to take. There's no secret to the timing either. Those organizations that raise money for any kind of charity, religious group, foundation, etc., choose Christmas time because it makes us feel guilty if we don't toss our money into a kettle manned by Santa or some other costumed Christmas based celebrity. People feel moved at the holidays to dig deep and give over and over. If any of those Christmas solicitors come to my door and interrupt my sleep or dinner I feel justified in shooting them on my doorstep and stealing all the money they have collected from other victims of their begging.
I think most of us would agree that a terrible Christmas tradition is the marketing craze at this time of the year. Sellers associate everything with the holidays. But it can be a stretch. That TV add showing Santa using the hemorrhoid cream the sponsor is trying to sell.....it's' too much. A certain amount of commercialism is bound to happen during the biggest holiday of the year. Some businesses survive because of their Christmas sales. But they are overdoing the ads and alleged sales. We should throw our fruitcakes at them if they interrupt us with another advertisement.
And the mistletoe tradition has to go. In today's culture this poisonous, if picturesque, little plant is an invitation to your creepy uncle or that neighborhood sex offender leaning in the dining room doorway and slobbering all over you. Anyone ever go to an office party and experience the sleazy loser at the who slips in a little tongue in your mouth to make your holidays brighter? Mistletoe has outlived it's usefulness. But for those who feel a need for it, I suggest they forget the plant and just visit their local massage parlor instead.
They are upsetting my Christmas with those lousy traditions! I think I better stop ranting and have a Christmas cookie now. Merry Christmas!
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Google Kiling Santa
How times change! I remember at Christmas time how
easy it was
to
convince kids that Santa was a real fat guy who lived in an undisclosed
house with little green and red dressed midgets called elves, who made
toys that ....ok you get the idea. Pretending that Santa was real was
a great way to pass on a tradition and to keep the little ones from
escaping their imagination in lieu of the grim reality of the real life
they soon will have to deal with. After all, Christmas without Santa is
like apple pie without apples.
But alas! I just read that Santa's cover may be blown for this generation of small humans. If you ask parents what they consider to be the biggest threat to the magic of Christmas today, it's not the Grinch that they fear will ruin junior's holiday spirit. It's Google (which is a different kind of Grinch, I suspect). The little ones now have their cell phones and other Internet gadgets and they are quickly adept at finding the answer to the age old question only mom and dad used answer. "Is Santa Real", they now type. The new Christmas song that might some day replace "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" could be something entitled "I Saw My Sister Googling Santa Claus".
Try googling it yourself. I promise not to tell Santa you are suspicious that he is real. If you enter that question into Google you'll get more results than you can handle. It takes only a second for you or junior to see that Santa is just a creation, not of God, but of marketing departments everywhere. Most of the top results do direct curious readers to sites advising parents on how to face up to the question and tell their kids "the truth." But that in itself blows Santa's cover. Our tech savvy children can instantaneously dispel all manner of myth about a fat man flying on a sleigh to deliver toys on Christmas night. How is a parent to fight against the God that most kids worship....God Goggle? It's a minefield for many parents.
The beauty of Santa is the not knowing. Technology is all about knowing, and knowing this instant. I swear, Google is the Grinch to the North Pole. Hmmmm See, I told you cell phones are a menace. How can we let technology destroy the most pervasive fictional character of all time? (I exclude the belief in God as number one in case you are an atheist as well as a Santa unbeliever). Santa is number one in the imagination world. If Googling kills him we will have to invent a a substitute.
Actually, Google may not be the all time biggest threat to the belief in Santa Claus. Throughout history many truth tellers, the churches, older kids, educators, communists Grinches and that blabbermouth uncle we all had have also have tried to pretend Santa is not real! Forget that kind of talk. Child psychologists today say that a child's belief in Santa is a very positive mindset. It's a good thing we parents try to see that our kids hold on to the "Santa is real" sentiment as long as possible. We adults may be the last bastion for saving Santa from the Goggle Grinch.
In defense of itself, Goggle says something like, "What can we do? We want the kids to believe in Santa too. It's just that technology can have undesired consequences." We can fight this Google assault on Christmas. And there's more good news for parents, and children. This year Google says that when the little brats search for Santa's whereabouts, they'll encounter "something quite different." I assume that means camouflage for Santa from the revelation police. Maybe Goggle is starting to believe in Santa too.
Oh, by the way, experts say that kids today are about the same age as kids they were 100 years ago when they first learned about Santa's real or imaginative self- at about age 7. How do I know it? I Googled it. What else.
But alas! I just read that Santa's cover may be blown for this generation of small humans. If you ask parents what they consider to be the biggest threat to the magic of Christmas today, it's not the Grinch that they fear will ruin junior's holiday spirit. It's Google (which is a different kind of Grinch, I suspect). The little ones now have their cell phones and other Internet gadgets and they are quickly adept at finding the answer to the age old question only mom and dad used answer. "Is Santa Real", they now type. The new Christmas song that might some day replace "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" could be something entitled "I Saw My Sister Googling Santa Claus".
Try googling it yourself. I promise not to tell Santa you are suspicious that he is real. If you enter that question into Google you'll get more results than you can handle. It takes only a second for you or junior to see that Santa is just a creation, not of God, but of marketing departments everywhere. Most of the top results do direct curious readers to sites advising parents on how to face up to the question and tell their kids "the truth." But that in itself blows Santa's cover. Our tech savvy children can instantaneously dispel all manner of myth about a fat man flying on a sleigh to deliver toys on Christmas night. How is a parent to fight against the God that most kids worship....God Goggle? It's a minefield for many parents.
The beauty of Santa is the not knowing. Technology is all about knowing, and knowing this instant. I swear, Google is the Grinch to the North Pole. Hmmmm See, I told you cell phones are a menace. How can we let technology destroy the most pervasive fictional character of all time? (I exclude the belief in God as number one in case you are an atheist as well as a Santa unbeliever). Santa is number one in the imagination world. If Googling kills him we will have to invent a a substitute.
Actually, Google may not be the all time biggest threat to the belief in Santa Claus. Throughout history many truth tellers, the churches, older kids, educators, communists Grinches and that blabbermouth uncle we all had have also have tried to pretend Santa is not real! Forget that kind of talk. Child psychologists today say that a child's belief in Santa is a very positive mindset. It's a good thing we parents try to see that our kids hold on to the "Santa is real" sentiment as long as possible. We adults may be the last bastion for saving Santa from the Goggle Grinch.
In defense of itself, Goggle says something like, "What can we do? We want the kids to believe in Santa too. It's just that technology can have undesired consequences." We can fight this Google assault on Christmas. And there's more good news for parents, and children. This year Google says that when the little brats search for Santa's whereabouts, they'll encounter "something quite different." I assume that means camouflage for Santa from the revelation police. Maybe Goggle is starting to believe in Santa too.
Oh, by the way, experts say that kids today are about the same age as kids they were 100 years ago when they first learned about Santa's real or imaginative self- at about age 7. How do I know it? I Googled it. What else.
Thursday, December 18, 2014
Taking The Merry Out Of Christmas
Tis the season to be politically correct. Well,
it seems that way. The
old days when communities loved and shared Christmas have been replaced
in many places with a politically correct approach to celebrating
Christmas. It seems that now, if you are not Christian any sign of
Christmas is "offensive to you because it isn't "inclusive". So the
approach now is to change Christmas celebration to a holiday
celebration. It's not stressful because of the furor of activity and
obligations, no Christmas is is now full of holiday related
controversies and things to fret about because even saying "Merry
Christmas" to someone today might offend them.
Here's a few examples of the un merrier approach to Christmas in the new world order of political correctness.
- In Montgomery County, Md., in response to a request from Muslim community leaders, the education board voted this fall to change "Christmas break" to "winter break". After all, if you don't believe in Christmas your feelings are hurt and they must change the whole holiday to soothe your wounds.
- Some workplaces and social circles are calling their gift exchanges "secret snowman" rather than "secret Santa," as if the gift bearing fat man bore too close an association with Christianity to make his presence palatable. I'm not sure why Santa is even considered a Christian affront, but Christmas haters have made him a religious rather than secular figure.
- The U. S. Congress is another "workplace" where holiday politics are getting weird. The congresswoman in charge of House mailing standards, Rep. Candace Miller, R-Mich., has reminded members that it's now OK to use greetings such as "Merry Christmas" and "Happy Hanukkah" in mailings to their constituents, thanks to a rules change enacted last year. So now Congress has to give permission to even utter the word "Christmas". But there is a catch. This applies only if the greetings are "incidental with no Christmas references as to "colors, illustrations and greetings" on the calendars some members like to send out.
- In towns all over America there are legal fights over manger displays or references to Christmas at a county courthouse or some public facility somewhere. It seems that even the phrase 'Have a Merry Christmas" on the side of a public building is offensive to those who don't like Christmas. It's a case of changing the meaning of majority by putting the preference of one non believer ahead of the sentiments of the rest of the community.
- Rhode Island's governor has drawn protests for insisting on calling the State Christmas tree a “holiday tree”.
- In some stores employees are told to never use "Merry Christmas" when speaking to a customer. Instead, it has to be "Happy Holidays" or the unemployment line will be the store gift to the employee. Ho Ho Ho.... I mean, Ha Ha Ha.
- “Ho Ho Ho”, the traditional laugh of jolly old St. Nick is now considered obscene in some politically correct circles. Some business, schools and other institutions are cautioning about that merry laugh. They say that smiling and uttering a “ho ho ho” could frighten children and be derogatory to women.
- Some schools have a "holiday tree" instead of a Christmas tree and holiday instead of Christmas play performances.
- City councils across the country are banning Christmas to avoid offending Jews, Muslims, pagans, atheists and other non Christians because..well it hurts their feelings, I guess.
- A number of commercial establishments in the empire have removed the word Christmas from their greetings in an effort to comply with political correctness.
Had enough! Well, those are just a few examples of how the crazy politically correct crowd is hijacking Christmas. If you want a few more try one of the sites that monitors it site http://www.akdart.com/christmas.html
Modern society seems to produce an endless collection of inanities, absurdities and just plain idiocies. Changing Christmas into a politically correct one is a sure sigh of that. All I can do about it is to just smile and utter "Merry Christmas" to everyone I meet.
Here's a few examples of the un merrier approach to Christmas in the new world order of political correctness.
- In Montgomery County, Md., in response to a request from Muslim community leaders, the education board voted this fall to change "Christmas break" to "winter break". After all, if you don't believe in Christmas your feelings are hurt and they must change the whole holiday to soothe your wounds.
- Some workplaces and social circles are calling their gift exchanges "secret snowman" rather than "secret Santa," as if the gift bearing fat man bore too close an association with Christianity to make his presence palatable. I'm not sure why Santa is even considered a Christian affront, but Christmas haters have made him a religious rather than secular figure.
- The U. S. Congress is another "workplace" where holiday politics are getting weird. The congresswoman in charge of House mailing standards, Rep. Candace Miller, R-Mich., has reminded members that it's now OK to use greetings such as "Merry Christmas" and "Happy Hanukkah" in mailings to their constituents, thanks to a rules change enacted last year. So now Congress has to give permission to even utter the word "Christmas". But there is a catch. This applies only if the greetings are "incidental with no Christmas references as to "colors, illustrations and greetings" on the calendars some members like to send out.
- In towns all over America there are legal fights over manger displays or references to Christmas at a county courthouse or some public facility somewhere. It seems that even the phrase 'Have a Merry Christmas" on the side of a public building is offensive to those who don't like Christmas. It's a case of changing the meaning of majority by putting the preference of one non believer ahead of the sentiments of the rest of the community.
- Rhode Island's governor has drawn protests for insisting on calling the State Christmas tree a “holiday tree”.
- In some stores employees are told to never use "Merry Christmas" when speaking to a customer. Instead, it has to be "Happy Holidays" or the unemployment line will be the store gift to the employee. Ho Ho Ho.... I mean, Ha Ha Ha.
- “Ho Ho Ho”, the traditional laugh of jolly old St. Nick is now considered obscene in some politically correct circles. Some business, schools and other institutions are cautioning about that merry laugh. They say that smiling and uttering a “ho ho ho” could frighten children and be derogatory to women.
- Some schools have a "holiday tree" instead of a Christmas tree and holiday instead of Christmas play performances.
- City councils across the country are banning Christmas to avoid offending Jews, Muslims, pagans, atheists and other non Christians because..well it hurts their feelings, I guess.
- A number of commercial establishments in the empire have removed the word Christmas from their greetings in an effort to comply with political correctness.
Had enough! Well, those are just a few examples of how the crazy politically correct crowd is hijacking Christmas. If you want a few more try one of the sites that monitors it site http://www.akdart.com/christmas.html
Modern society seems to produce an endless collection of inanities, absurdities and just plain idiocies. Changing Christmas into a politically correct one is a sure sigh of that. All I can do about it is to just smile and utter "Merry Christmas" to everyone I meet.
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Christmas Novelty Songs
Listening to Christmas music on radio recently reminded me that novelty
music is big on holidays. There are many novelty Christmas tunes, not a
bad thing, I think. The novelty songs tend to be humorous, something to
balance all those traditions serious, spiritual songs. On the whole,
novelty Christmas music ranges from naughty to nice, from annoying to
charming, from the clever to the bizarre. How can you not like that?
Need some examples? Well, here they come. Give Santa some extra bourbon in his egg nog if he listens to those songs. They, uh, don't exactly define the true meaning of Christmas. Anyway, here are, in no particular order, some of my favorite and some of the ones in which I will I plug my ears if played. Next to each is a Yu Tube link for you to get a sample of the many novelty Christmas tunes people either love or hate.
- 'I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas' is my choice for the worst Christmas song ever to become a hit. Possibly the strangest and Christmas single title ever. Gayla Peevey was an American child star from Oklahoma, and this song, which was written in 1950, had very serious intentions. It had been brought to Miss Peevey's attention that the city zoo had no hippopotamus, and so someone at Columbia records had the bright idea of putting together a campaign aimed at "buying Gayla" a hippo for Christmas. The song was recorded to accompany the campaign and, after raising several thousand dollars, a baby hippo was given to the zoo. The song has become a Christmas radio staple and is so grating that suicides might be attributed to frequent listeners.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyijq_u1ypg
- 'I'm Getting Nuttin For Christmas' is sentiment we can all relate to. It's one of those cute songs that are supposed to charm the listener. The little bad boy who sings the tune was Barry Gordon who was 7 years old at the time. He croons about all the bad things he did all year and tells us because of it, "I'm Gettin Nuttin For Christmas". Maybe we ought to send this tune to Justin Beiber or those terrorist Isis leaders. Someone ought to warn them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK06SgtXin0
- The Chipmunk Song, 'Christmas Don't be Late' can be blamed on a<> fellow named Ross Bagdasarian who was fooling around with tapes when he accidentally played one at the wrong speed. The result was that the speeded up vocals sounded just like "chipmunks" and it is one of the biggest selling Christmas novelty songs ever recorded.. The Chipmunks paved the way for some of pop's most famous sonic experiments, from the Beatles' use of backwards tapes to the Bee Gees' very high voices. This song annoys so many people that another Christmas novelty song called "Chipmunks Roasting Over An Open Fire' was recorded in spite of the rodent singers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whY9MKlvisI
- 'Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer', by Elmo and Prats is not a tune for the spiritual type. In 1979, a San Francisco veterinarian called Elmo Shropshire was moonlighting in bluegrass band when he came across a song written by his friend Randy Brooks. 'Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer' tells a cautionary tale of festive excess that any drink driving campaign would be proud of. It details how Grandma falls over in the snow after too much eggnog and is found with "hoof prints on her forehead." It became a phenomenon and another reason to hate eggnog.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzV9DIL_vrM
- 'Santa Baby', by Eartha Kitt is a greed parody (is not Christmas also the greedy season). It not only defines a a materialistic holiday at but also paints women as seeing Christmas as a search for a Sugar Daddy Santa, as the true meaning of the holiday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFMyF9fDKzE
<>
-The Singing Dogs version of 'Jingle Bells' ... From the decade that spawned more novelty Christmas records than any other, the 50's, this one can make anyone hate the holidays. a genuine classic. The famous tune of the title was recorded using an entire choir of real life "singing" (barking dogs). These were the days before samplers and fancy modern technology, so the studio process involved recording hundreds of hours of mutts, feeding them (the barks, not the dogs) through a variable frequency oscillator, then editing them together to fit a backing track. This one is "Ruff ruff ruff, ruff ruff ruff, grrruff ruff ruff ruff ruff!" to listen to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xam01uaj6Vg
- 'Run Rudolph Run' by Chuck Berry was an early record to what was otherwise a great career. Rumors are that even Rudolph runs and hides when this song is played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVu4c7dhDRE
-'I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus' is around in many forms but is defined by the Jimmy Boyd original. In the song, the boy sees Santa kissing mom. Oh, maybe it was Bill Cosby, not Santa who was doing the kissing. This one is so sweet and innocent diabetics are forbidden from listening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7t8YTbQSQc
- 'Snoopy's Christmas' by the Royal Guardsman can be excused as a reflection of the 'Peanuts' comic strip frenzy in which it was written. The Guardsman did little else after that song, but made a comeback in December 2006, when they released a new Snoopy song, "Snoopy vs. Osama", which became a hit......proving the old axiom that one should never overestimate the taste of the consumer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbhzqoYYROA
-Bizarre is the best way to label 'Santa Claus Has Got Aids This Year', by Tiny Tim. This one was recorded before the AIDS epidemic was out leashed, so forgive the writer and performer. And, the performer (the equally bizarre Tiny Tim) wasn't referring to the disease, but rather to a diet bar called "Ayds". It was a classic case of the worst timing, and the coincidence makes for a hilarious Christmas song.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU8IQqcq270
- 'Santa Claus and His Old Lady' by Cheech and Chong is a hilarious chatter song by two stoned out druggies with lyrics like this- "Once upon a time, about, hmmm, five years ago, there was this groovy dude and has name was Santa Claus, y'know? And he used to live over in the projects with his old lady and they had a pretty good thing together because his old lady was really fine and she could cook and all that stuff like that, y'know. Like, she made da best brownies in town, man! Oh, I could remember 'em now, man. I could eat one of 'em, man."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSH9ryRzHQ4
Need some examples? Well, here they come. Give Santa some extra bourbon in his egg nog if he listens to those songs. They, uh, don't exactly define the true meaning of Christmas. Anyway, here are, in no particular order, some of my favorite and some of the ones in which I will I plug my ears if played. Next to each is a Yu Tube link for you to get a sample of the many novelty Christmas tunes people either love or hate.
- 'I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas' is my choice for the worst Christmas song ever to become a hit. Possibly the strangest and Christmas single title ever. Gayla Peevey was an American child star from Oklahoma, and this song, which was written in 1950, had very serious intentions. It had been brought to Miss Peevey's attention that the city zoo had no hippopotamus, and so someone at Columbia records had the bright idea of putting together a campaign aimed at "buying Gayla" a hippo for Christmas. The song was recorded to accompany the campaign and, after raising several thousand dollars, a baby hippo was given to the zoo. The song has become a Christmas radio staple and is so grating that suicides might be attributed to frequent listeners.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyijq_u1ypg
- 'I'm Getting Nuttin For Christmas' is sentiment we can all relate to. It's one of those cute songs that are supposed to charm the listener. The little bad boy who sings the tune was Barry Gordon who was 7 years old at the time. He croons about all the bad things he did all year and tells us because of it, "I'm Gettin Nuttin For Christmas". Maybe we ought to send this tune to Justin Beiber or those terrorist Isis leaders. Someone ought to warn them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK06SgtXin0
- The Chipmunk Song, 'Christmas Don't be Late' can be blamed on a<> fellow named Ross Bagdasarian who was fooling around with tapes when he accidentally played one at the wrong speed. The result was that the speeded up vocals sounded just like "chipmunks" and it is one of the biggest selling Christmas novelty songs ever recorded.. The Chipmunks paved the way for some of pop's most famous sonic experiments, from the Beatles' use of backwards tapes to the Bee Gees' very high voices. This song annoys so many people that another Christmas novelty song called "Chipmunks Roasting Over An Open Fire' was recorded in spite of the rodent singers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whY9MKlvisI
- 'Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer', by Elmo and Prats is not a tune for the spiritual type. In 1979, a San Francisco veterinarian called Elmo Shropshire was moonlighting in bluegrass band when he came across a song written by his friend Randy Brooks. 'Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer' tells a cautionary tale of festive excess that any drink driving campaign would be proud of. It details how Grandma falls over in the snow after too much eggnog and is found with "hoof prints on her forehead." It became a phenomenon and another reason to hate eggnog.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzV9DIL_vrM
- 'Santa Baby', by Eartha Kitt is a greed parody (is not Christmas also the greedy season). It not only defines a a materialistic holiday at but also paints women as seeing Christmas as a search for a Sugar Daddy Santa, as the true meaning of the holiday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFMyF9fDKzE
<>
-The Singing Dogs version of 'Jingle Bells' ... From the decade that spawned more novelty Christmas records than any other, the 50's, this one can make anyone hate the holidays. a genuine classic. The famous tune of the title was recorded using an entire choir of real life "singing" (barking dogs). These were the days before samplers and fancy modern technology, so the studio process involved recording hundreds of hours of mutts, feeding them (the barks, not the dogs) through a variable frequency oscillator, then editing them together to fit a backing track. This one is "Ruff ruff ruff, ruff ruff ruff, grrruff ruff ruff ruff ruff!" to listen to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xam01uaj6Vg
- 'Run Rudolph Run' by Chuck Berry was an early record to what was otherwise a great career. Rumors are that even Rudolph runs and hides when this song is played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVu4c7dhDRE
-'I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus' is around in many forms but is defined by the Jimmy Boyd original. In the song, the boy sees Santa kissing mom. Oh, maybe it was Bill Cosby, not Santa who was doing the kissing. This one is so sweet and innocent diabetics are forbidden from listening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7t8YTbQSQc
- 'Snoopy's Christmas' by the Royal Guardsman can be excused as a reflection of the 'Peanuts' comic strip frenzy in which it was written. The Guardsman did little else after that song, but made a comeback in December 2006, when they released a new Snoopy song, "Snoopy vs. Osama", which became a hit......proving the old axiom that one should never overestimate the taste of the consumer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbhzqoYYROA
-Bizarre is the best way to label 'Santa Claus Has Got Aids This Year', by Tiny Tim. This one was recorded before the AIDS epidemic was out leashed, so forgive the writer and performer. And, the performer (the equally bizarre Tiny Tim) wasn't referring to the disease, but rather to a diet bar called "Ayds". It was a classic case of the worst timing, and the coincidence makes for a hilarious Christmas song.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU8IQqcq270
- 'Santa Claus and His Old Lady' by Cheech and Chong is a hilarious chatter song by two stoned out druggies with lyrics like this- "Once upon a time, about, hmmm, five years ago, there was this groovy dude and has name was Santa Claus, y'know? And he used to live over in the projects with his old lady and they had a pretty good thing together because his old lady was really fine and she could cook and all that stuff like that, y'know. Like, she made da best brownies in town, man! Oh, I could remember 'em now, man. I could eat one of 'em, man."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSH9ryRzHQ4
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Dying Christmas Traditions
The rise of communication technology is effecting quite a bit
of our
long held traditions. I thought about that as I pulled out my Christmas
card list today and noticed it is a list that is shrinking rapidly.
Just about five years or so ago I sent Christmas cards to somewhere
between 30 and 40 people. But now it approaches 10 in number, as more
and more people have altogether stopped sending out Christmas cards.
The custom of sending Christmas cards was started in the Britain in 1843, at a time when letter writing was the principal method of communication between people who were separated by distance. But who writes snail letters today? Not many. Our rapid communication mediums have made the hand-written letter a dinosaur, so it follows that sending out Christmas cards would soon also become an extinct practice.
My way of determining whether I'll send out a Christmas card is to base it on whether or not I received one back last year from those on last year's list. If I don't receive one I trim that person my list faster that you trim your X mas tree (that's one tradition still holding strong). I am ambivalent about the list shrinkage because, though I find receiving a Christmas card fun and meaningful, it is an arduous task to send them out. My generation is old enough to remember as children how our parents sat at the kitchen table hour after hour sending them out. So we are imbued with the Christmas card gene. But most of us have been so spoiled by instantaneous communication devices that we now see little sense in mailing out hand written cards.
My own daughter and her generation don't give a thought to Christmas card exchange. They exchange greetings all year with...uh...texts and whatever else they do with the cell phones and other devices they are hooked up to 24 hours a day. Convenience, speed and trendy eventually assault all tradition for "the next generation". Which brings to mind some other Christmas traditions I see are dying this very day.
Remember the days when people popped popcorn and strung it to be hung on Christmas trees as a decoration? Not there anymore! What about those Christmas carolers who used to come to our homes and serenade us with a Christmas carol tune or too. Not there anymore! Oh, and when is the last time you heard about families sitting around a music box and listening to Christmas music? Not there anymore!
While I wrote my Christmas card greetings for my diminishing Christmas card list members I thought about which Christmas tradition would be the next one to vanish. Maybe it might be hanging mistletoe. In this age we are far too concerned with germs to kiss strangers. And there is always a climate Nazi ready to say we are "killing the planet" when we uproot mistletoe. Soon, it might not be there anymore! Or maybe we won't chop down or purchase a real Christmas tree. According to research, largely because of environmental concerns, the number of families with artificial trees is already far greater than we who have real ones. The Christmas tree soon might not be there anymore!
All traditions eventually die. Society tires of them or just replaces them with something new that is seen as better. It's not entirely good or bad to lose tradition, for to not lose them might mean progress in other areas is held back. But for those people who value no Christmas tradition at all, I send my Christmas wish....that they all receive a traditional Christmas fruitcake this year. That should be punishment enough.
The custom of sending Christmas cards was started in the Britain in 1843, at a time when letter writing was the principal method of communication between people who were separated by distance. But who writes snail letters today? Not many. Our rapid communication mediums have made the hand-written letter a dinosaur, so it follows that sending out Christmas cards would soon also become an extinct practice.
My way of determining whether I'll send out a Christmas card is to base it on whether or not I received one back last year from those on last year's list. If I don't receive one I trim that person my list faster that you trim your X mas tree (that's one tradition still holding strong). I am ambivalent about the list shrinkage because, though I find receiving a Christmas card fun and meaningful, it is an arduous task to send them out. My generation is old enough to remember as children how our parents sat at the kitchen table hour after hour sending them out. So we are imbued with the Christmas card gene. But most of us have been so spoiled by instantaneous communication devices that we now see little sense in mailing out hand written cards.
My own daughter and her generation don't give a thought to Christmas card exchange. They exchange greetings all year with...uh...texts and whatever else they do with the cell phones and other devices they are hooked up to 24 hours a day. Convenience, speed and trendy eventually assault all tradition for "the next generation". Which brings to mind some other Christmas traditions I see are dying this very day.
Remember the days when people popped popcorn and strung it to be hung on Christmas trees as a decoration? Not there anymore! What about those Christmas carolers who used to come to our homes and serenade us with a Christmas carol tune or too. Not there anymore! Oh, and when is the last time you heard about families sitting around a music box and listening to Christmas music? Not there anymore!
While I wrote my Christmas card greetings for my diminishing Christmas card list members I thought about which Christmas tradition would be the next one to vanish. Maybe it might be hanging mistletoe. In this age we are far too concerned with germs to kiss strangers. And there is always a climate Nazi ready to say we are "killing the planet" when we uproot mistletoe. Soon, it might not be there anymore! Or maybe we won't chop down or purchase a real Christmas tree. According to research, largely because of environmental concerns, the number of families with artificial trees is already far greater than we who have real ones. The Christmas tree soon might not be there anymore!
All traditions eventually die. Society tires of them or just replaces them with something new that is seen as better. It's not entirely good or bad to lose tradition, for to not lose them might mean progress in other areas is held back. But for those people who value no Christmas tradition at all, I send my Christmas wish....that they all receive a traditional Christmas fruitcake this year. That should be punishment enough.
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Another Dark Friday Ahead
What used to be called "Black Friday", the unofficial start
in the
United States to the Christmas holiday season, has morphed into more
than the day after Thanksgiving of Friday shopping. Retailers who have
to leave their families during the Thanksgiving holidays have stopped
referring to Black Friday. They now have names for each of the four
days of frenetic shopping. Thanksgiving Day, what used to be a day
when all stores were closed so families could gather around a big meal
and give thanks for the blessings in their lives, is now "Gray
Thursday". Then there is the previously mentioned Black Friday and,
what is called now "Super Saturday" and "Cyber Monday".
Super Saturday is for those who were unable to shop on Black Friday ot Thanksgiving Day. Cyber Monday is the day when all the alleged sales can be purchased on line. This brings me to the question of the day. Why all the hordes of people at malls and other stores if those same people can buy the same things at the same price on line on Monday? Too, why all the fuss about artificial Christmas sales on those four days when every day prior to Christmas, for another month of so, there will be new sales offered to attract those same shoppers? Running to a mall at 4 am in order to be first in line at a store, to buy something that can be bought for about the same price, seems a bit illogical to me. But then, I only shop when I have to, not for "fun".
I suspect the word fun might explain the crazed pre Christmas sales, or maybe it's just a trendy thing to do. Americans are like sheep sometimes. They follow the lead when doing so garners attention to them. Or maybe this shopping addicted insanity is a social bonding experience where the shoppers, exhausted and dazed, see other shoppers in the same condition and feel better for suffering in packs. Hmmm Perhaps they actually like the experience, a sado masochist one of sorts. What we find is fun varies according to our perspectives.
Surveys have also shown that despite the steady streams of people flowing into stores on Black Friday, not all of them drive home with trunks full of holiday presents. For instance, one study conducted by researchers at Indiana University found a consistently low rate of purchase among Black Friday shoppers. This tends to affirm the idea that Black Friday, ironically, isn't about buying those presents. It's more a bonding experience by the herd....sort of like cattle drifting aimlessly on the plains, achieving little. But i n the days before malls were open during Thanksgiving Day and weekend, all of the great deals were on Black Friday, but now the shopper sees some great deals on Black Friday and lots of offers throughout the season. So what's the point?
Maybe I should skip all the shopping and just give out fruitcakes for presents. That would teach them!
Super Saturday is for those who were unable to shop on Black Friday ot Thanksgiving Day. Cyber Monday is the day when all the alleged sales can be purchased on line. This brings me to the question of the day. Why all the hordes of people at malls and other stores if those same people can buy the same things at the same price on line on Monday? Too, why all the fuss about artificial Christmas sales on those four days when every day prior to Christmas, for another month of so, there will be new sales offered to attract those same shoppers? Running to a mall at 4 am in order to be first in line at a store, to buy something that can be bought for about the same price, seems a bit illogical to me. But then, I only shop when I have to, not for "fun".
I suspect the word fun might explain the crazed pre Christmas sales, or maybe it's just a trendy thing to do. Americans are like sheep sometimes. They follow the lead when doing so garners attention to them. Or maybe this shopping addicted insanity is a social bonding experience where the shoppers, exhausted and dazed, see other shoppers in the same condition and feel better for suffering in packs. Hmmm Perhaps they actually like the experience, a sado masochist one of sorts. What we find is fun varies according to our perspectives.
Surveys have also shown that despite the steady streams of people flowing into stores on Black Friday, not all of them drive home with trunks full of holiday presents. For instance, one study conducted by researchers at Indiana University found a consistently low rate of purchase among Black Friday shoppers. This tends to affirm the idea that Black Friday, ironically, isn't about buying those presents. It's more a bonding experience by the herd....sort of like cattle drifting aimlessly on the plains, achieving little. But i n the days before malls were open during Thanksgiving Day and weekend, all of the great deals were on Black Friday, but now the shopper sees some great deals on Black Friday and lots of offers throughout the season. So what's the point?
Maybe I should skip all the shopping and just give out fruitcakes for presents. That would teach them!
Best And Worst Places For Old Age
Here's something about growing old, or rather
growing old in the
right place. It matters as much where you live if you are an oldie as
it does where you live as an infant. Both situations are more fragile
than the other age categories. Today, there are almost 900 million
people who are at least 60 years old globally, or about 12% of the
world's population. By 2050 statisticians say that more than 2 billion
people will be 60 years of age or older. That's 21% of the projected
world population. In the United States, 27% of all Americans will be at
least 60 years old. Hmmmmm I better get me some of those Depends adult
diapers before they sell out!
Anyway, 'Help Age International' (an agency that keeps track of heath of people world-wide) has released it's "Global Age Watch 2014 Index". It ranks the social and economic well being of older residents in 96 countries. The report rated each country on four broad factors important to an aging population: supporting income security, fostering good health, employment and education, and the overall environment for older residents. Norway was rated as the best country for older people to live in, with the other Scandinavian countries right behind. They all have big, no cost to user, social welfare programs that include for oldies. The United States was 8th of 96 countries on the list, strangely with medical care accounting for both a high rating (U.S. medicine is rated the world's best) and low rating (because it is also the world's most expensive to users).
Now for where you don't want to live during old age. Afghanistan was rated the worst country for older people for the second consecutive year. The other bottom ten mostly were African and Midwestern nations that were very poor and war torn. Being a wealthy nation or free from economic poverty or war issues is not enough for a country to rate well on that index. For example, the ability of older people to continue working and ensuring that they do not feel socially isolated, are examples of important factors that are included in the ratings.
It appears to me that the affluence of a nation is the best guarantee of a higher rating, but then we don't need a survey to tell us the obvious.
Anyway, 'Help Age International' (an agency that keeps track of heath of people world-wide) has released it's "Global Age Watch 2014 Index". It ranks the social and economic well being of older residents in 96 countries. The report rated each country on four broad factors important to an aging population: supporting income security, fostering good health, employment and education, and the overall environment for older residents. Norway was rated as the best country for older people to live in, with the other Scandinavian countries right behind. They all have big, no cost to user, social welfare programs that include for oldies. The United States was 8th of 96 countries on the list, strangely with medical care accounting for both a high rating (U.S. medicine is rated the world's best) and low rating (because it is also the world's most expensive to users).
Now for where you don't want to live during old age. Afghanistan was rated the worst country for older people for the second consecutive year. The other bottom ten mostly were African and Midwestern nations that were very poor and war torn. Being a wealthy nation or free from economic poverty or war issues is not enough for a country to rate well on that index. For example, the ability of older people to continue working and ensuring that they do not feel socially isolated, are examples of important factors that are included in the ratings.
It appears to me that the affluence of a nation is the best guarantee of a higher rating, but then we don't need a survey to tell us the obvious.
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Thanksgiving List Of This Year's Thanks....Sort Of
I like the concept of Thanksgiving Day because it almost forces people
to reflect on their lives, to gather with family and friends and
even....maybe....but not likely to happen...to ignore their cell phones
for a few minutes. But what I don't like about it is the aspect of
orally stating what one is thankful for. "For what are you most
thankful this year," is the refrain. I roll my eyes and try to explain
that is a question best asked and answered by the individual.
Otherwise, it becomes a less than serious list of hackneyed thanks that
we hear constantly during the Thanksgiving holidays.
So here I am today in reply to that dreaded question to give a more unconventional list of my thanks in hopes that after doing so I will never be asked the question again. There will be no "I am thankful for my health" or "that my child is so much more perfect than I". Nothing so banal or maudlin. No, I have a more realistic list and...well...I'll just shut up and give it to you now. Here is my list of thinks I am thankful this year.
- My bowels still work fine and I am still happily retired from any meaningful labor
- The illusion of the sanctity of the Obama regime is worn off and he has been exposed as the scoundrel he is
- Those daily updates and reports on the Kardashian are diminishing
- No one caught me with my unzipped this year, I think
- Those hot 20 year old girls I leer at that used to slap me for doing so, now see me as an old man who is harmless enough for a smile back
- That I have learned to tune out, almost ignore all the phony, trendy "issues" that way too many people take way too seriously and without challenge. Those global warming, war against women, income inequality, gluten and the rest....I just give my stupid smile and change the subject to something more serious, like which Hollywood celebrity had the best boob transplant. Substance wins every time.
- That I am not married to Rosy O'Donnel. Yuk
- That I am still the last human holdout for a non cell phone life.
- No prostate exam this year!
- I'll probably be lucky enough to die before I have to change that light bulb on the 20 meter ceiling. But then, I always root for my bulbs to live longer than I
- That I love red meat and hate tofu
- That I have no nude pictures posted on the Internet and that my photo has yet to appear on the post office wall of 'Top Ten Wanted' criminals
- That I have celebrated my old age fat with a diet of donuts and all the other good stuff my doctor says is bad for me.
- That I am not longer young and stupid. Being old, stupid but experienced triumphs every time.
Oh, and before I go..thank you for being bored enough to read my list. Happy H Thanksgiving.
So here I am today in reply to that dreaded question to give a more unconventional list of my thanks in hopes that after doing so I will never be asked the question again. There will be no "I am thankful for my health" or "that my child is so much more perfect than I". Nothing so banal or maudlin. No, I have a more realistic list and...well...I'll just shut up and give it to you now. Here is my list of thinks I am thankful this year.
- My bowels still work fine and I am still happily retired from any meaningful labor
- The illusion of the sanctity of the Obama regime is worn off and he has been exposed as the scoundrel he is
- Those daily updates and reports on the Kardashian are diminishing
- No one caught me with my unzipped this year, I think
- Those hot 20 year old girls I leer at that used to slap me for doing so, now see me as an old man who is harmless enough for a smile back
- That I have learned to tune out, almost ignore all the phony, trendy "issues" that way too many people take way too seriously and without challenge. Those global warming, war against women, income inequality, gluten and the rest....I just give my stupid smile and change the subject to something more serious, like which Hollywood celebrity had the best boob transplant. Substance wins every time.
- That I am not married to Rosy O'Donnel. Yuk
- That I am still the last human holdout for a non cell phone life.
- No prostate exam this year!
- I'll probably be lucky enough to die before I have to change that light bulb on the 20 meter ceiling. But then, I always root for my bulbs to live longer than I
- That I love red meat and hate tofu
- That I have no nude pictures posted on the Internet and that my photo has yet to appear on the post office wall of 'Top Ten Wanted' criminals
- That I have celebrated my old age fat with a diet of donuts and all the other good stuff my doctor says is bad for me.
- That I am not longer young and stupid. Being old, stupid but experienced triumphs every time.
Oh, and before I go..thank you for being bored enough to read my list. Happy H Thanksgiving.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Veterans Day
We just went through another Veterans Day holiday and I have a few
observations about it. First, I am a veteran of the navy. I write this
because some people, many people, think only a military veteran can
comment about veterans. It's sort of like saying one must be a
mechanic to have an opinion about a car. That kind of illogic is what
we get on Veterans Day. If you're not a veteran your supposed to shut
up, aside from verbally "thanking the veterans" for their service.
That thanking thing baffles me. Why does serving in a military deserve special thanks? We don't thank teachers, or plumbers, or fireman or sanitation people. Yet they are as essential to a nation as are members of the armed forces. Sure there is a much greater danger in joining the military. But every person who enlists in the military in the United States does so voluntarily. They place themselves at risk and receive many benefits- a free education inn the military or after, early retirement with very generous benefits, great health care for the soldier and family members, the chance to travel to many places round the world that most non military workers can not afford to see on their own, specific job placements that translate well to civilian jobs after discharge from the service etc.
I think Veterans Day today has been taken over by politicians, who use it as a platform to promote themselves. The average politician uses the transfer propaganda technique on Veterans Day by claiming an identification to the veteran. Voters see the politicians slobbering all over the veteran in praise of him, yes, "thanking the veteran for his service" loudly and often enough to win points with voters. Hmmmmm Maybe all politicians should be banned from any Veterans Day celebrations.
Some people are bothered by all the fuss we make over veterans of the military. They claim it is a war-like crush that sends the wrong message to citizens, that those of us who serve in a military and fight in wars are somehow, braver, better and more important than non military citizens. I'm not sure that opinion isn't a bit of a stretch in the other direction. In my view, if we wanted to honor our military citizens we should honor them at Labor Day, with every other occupation that is honored. That might promote the idea that all occupations are equally important to a nation and that claiming any one of them is better or more important than the rest is disrespectful to the others.
That thanking thing baffles me. Why does serving in a military deserve special thanks? We don't thank teachers, or plumbers, or fireman or sanitation people. Yet they are as essential to a nation as are members of the armed forces. Sure there is a much greater danger in joining the military. But every person who enlists in the military in the United States does so voluntarily. They place themselves at risk and receive many benefits- a free education inn the military or after, early retirement with very generous benefits, great health care for the soldier and family members, the chance to travel to many places round the world that most non military workers can not afford to see on their own, specific job placements that translate well to civilian jobs after discharge from the service etc.
I think Veterans Day today has been taken over by politicians, who use it as a platform to promote themselves. The average politician uses the transfer propaganda technique on Veterans Day by claiming an identification to the veteran. Voters see the politicians slobbering all over the veteran in praise of him, yes, "thanking the veteran for his service" loudly and often enough to win points with voters. Hmmmmm Maybe all politicians should be banned from any Veterans Day celebrations.
Some people are bothered by all the fuss we make over veterans of the military. They claim it is a war-like crush that sends the wrong message to citizens, that those of us who serve in a military and fight in wars are somehow, braver, better and more important than non military citizens. I'm not sure that opinion isn't a bit of a stretch in the other direction. In my view, if we wanted to honor our military citizens we should honor them at Labor Day, with every other occupation that is honored. That might promote the idea that all occupations are equally important to a nation and that claiming any one of them is better or more important than the rest is disrespectful to the others.
Anniversary Of The Fall O The Berlin Wall
This year is the year of the 25th anniversary of the end of
communism
in Eastern Europe, as symbolized by the tearing down of the infamous
Berlin Wall. Those of us who remember the October and November 1989
months in which the Soviet Union let it's satellite Eastern European
countries go their own way, recall that the end of Communism meant a
possible end of conflicts among nations. It of course, did not.
For decades, the wall, built by East German officials allied with the Soviet Union, stopped a flood of East Germans from going to the West. The communists used to claim that their was was not meant to keep the locals from defecting to the west, but rather to keep westerners from coming in and "infecting" the communist state or just because westerners would flood the communist countries in order to enjoy "the glories of communism" . That's somewhat like Islamic militants enslaving their populations with intolerant, hateful versions of the religion because "God wills it".
Anyway, built in the 1950s, the wall was shored up over the year while East Germans brutally punished those who tried to escape the country. More than 136 people were killed or died while trying to cross into West Germany. Over the years the wall was fortified and became a symbol of how thugish rule can overwhelm the desire for self rule and freedom of choice.
Today's version of the "Berlin wall" might be the fanatical Islamic Muslim enslavement of whole populations in Muslim countries, as in the Isis movement and an innumerable number of other maniacal Islamic sects who have over run mainstream Islamic governments. There may be no physical wall, yet the control the militants have over their populations is even more brutal than the old Soviet communists.
The Soviet Union fell due to internal, structural decay. The great irony of it was that despite all the threat of war between the Soviet communists of the era and the west, not a single shot was fired between the two. Today, the west engages the Islamic militants with gunfire in an attempt to control it. But that policy has brought forth little success. Perhaps the west should disengage and simple wait for the corrupt Islamic movements to self immolate. The very nature of them makes them hard to sustain, and surely Muslims in the enslaved regions will eventually push for their end.
Whatever, government structures come and go. When Islam liberalizes and expels the nuts who have temporarily taken mainstream Islam as its prisoner, there will probably be a new world threat/annoyance to take its place.
For decades, the wall, built by East German officials allied with the Soviet Union, stopped a flood of East Germans from going to the West. The communists used to claim that their was was not meant to keep the locals from defecting to the west, but rather to keep westerners from coming in and "infecting" the communist state or just because westerners would flood the communist countries in order to enjoy "the glories of communism" . That's somewhat like Islamic militants enslaving their populations with intolerant, hateful versions of the religion because "God wills it".
Anyway, built in the 1950s, the wall was shored up over the year while East Germans brutally punished those who tried to escape the country. More than 136 people were killed or died while trying to cross into West Germany. Over the years the wall was fortified and became a symbol of how thugish rule can overwhelm the desire for self rule and freedom of choice.
Today's version of the "Berlin wall" might be the fanatical Islamic Muslim enslavement of whole populations in Muslim countries, as in the Isis movement and an innumerable number of other maniacal Islamic sects who have over run mainstream Islamic governments. There may be no physical wall, yet the control the militants have over their populations is even more brutal than the old Soviet communists.
The Soviet Union fell due to internal, structural decay. The great irony of it was that despite all the threat of war between the Soviet communists of the era and the west, not a single shot was fired between the two. Today, the west engages the Islamic militants with gunfire in an attempt to control it. But that policy has brought forth little success. Perhaps the west should disengage and simple wait for the corrupt Islamic movements to self immolate. The very nature of them makes them hard to sustain, and surely Muslims in the enslaved regions will eventually push for their end.
Whatever, government structures come and go. When Islam liberalizes and expels the nuts who have temporarily taken mainstream Islam as its prisoner, there will probably be a new world threat/annoyance to take its place.
The Era Of Jealousy
This might some day be called 'The Era of Jealousy'. Jealousy
is the
emotion of the day for many today who feel their lack of whatever they
want is really the fault of those who have much less want and who make
a good target for the have-nots. Perhaps we are so jealous today
because the idea is reinforced so often. Our communication technology
makes it so much easier to have a grievance today, given that there are
always places one may log onto to commiserate about their jealousy.
One of the biggest jealousy expressions is the rants against "the rich". It's true that the gap between the richest and the poorest has gotten even wider this decade, but that's because it is far easier to become instantly wealthy today. Maybe those who complain about the wealthy having too much power and success should instead themselves attempt to become one of the rich they hate. But then, once they became rich they probably would not hate the rich anymore. Someone computed Bill Gates wealth and said that if he spent $1 million every day, it would take him 218 years to exhaust his funds. Good for him. He can't take his money with him when he dies so I hope he enjoys spending it or giving it away (as so many of those "evil rich" do). I think the jealous crowd more should concentrate more on making their own money, rather than attack those at the top who already do.
The strange thing about jealousy today is that it is far less personal jealousy, as in "I am jealous that Ann is so pretty", and more in a general class jealousy, as in "White people have everything laid before them while black people can't make it because whites won't let them". So the jealousy tends to be general and class oriented. It is also expressed abstractly rather than concretely. That's why politicians like President Obama shamelessly promote class jealousy with phony political campaigns centered around "The War on Women", "Income Inequality", "Equal Rights For Minorities" "Class Warfare" etc. Sadly, those kinds of sentiments do attract the jealous voters.
Are the jealous today motivated by envy of the haves, or do they just want what they see as their fair share ("If you got it, I want and deserve it it too")? Conversely, the ones they are jealous about want to keep what they have because they feel they have earned it. But human beings have different abilities, due both to birth and through hard work. They have widely varying degrees of intelligence and energy and are honest and hard-working to very different degrees. They can be ambitious and daring or not, curious or lethargic. For these and many other reasons, their contributions to making the world a better place differs. And a s a result, their rewards do too. It's not nice to be jealous of that.
One of the biggest jealousy expressions is the rants against "the rich". It's true that the gap between the richest and the poorest has gotten even wider this decade, but that's because it is far easier to become instantly wealthy today. Maybe those who complain about the wealthy having too much power and success should instead themselves attempt to become one of the rich they hate. But then, once they became rich they probably would not hate the rich anymore. Someone computed Bill Gates wealth and said that if he spent $1 million every day, it would take him 218 years to exhaust his funds. Good for him. He can't take his money with him when he dies so I hope he enjoys spending it or giving it away (as so many of those "evil rich" do). I think the jealous crowd more should concentrate more on making their own money, rather than attack those at the top who already do.
The strange thing about jealousy today is that it is far less personal jealousy, as in "I am jealous that Ann is so pretty", and more in a general class jealousy, as in "White people have everything laid before them while black people can't make it because whites won't let them". So the jealousy tends to be general and class oriented. It is also expressed abstractly rather than concretely. That's why politicians like President Obama shamelessly promote class jealousy with phony political campaigns centered around "The War on Women", "Income Inequality", "Equal Rights For Minorities" "Class Warfare" etc. Sadly, those kinds of sentiments do attract the jealous voters.
Are the jealous today motivated by envy of the haves, or do they just want what they see as their fair share ("If you got it, I want and deserve it it too")? Conversely, the ones they are jealous about want to keep what they have because they feel they have earned it. But human beings have different abilities, due both to birth and through hard work. They have widely varying degrees of intelligence and energy and are honest and hard-working to very different degrees. They can be ambitious and daring or not, curious or lethargic. For these and many other reasons, their contributions to making the world a better place differs. And a s a result, their rewards do too. It's not nice to be jealous of that.
Make A Difference Day
Did you miss it as I did? I just read that millions
of people took part
in the nation's largest day of volunteerism, something a called 'Make A
Difference Day'. We were supposed to volunteer for various
charity/public service projects. Hmmm Why do we need a special day for
that? Aren't we supposed to do that year round when we have the time
and inclination?
They volunteered and actually worked in such jobs as cleaning parks, working with local animal rescues etc. Nice. Anyway, here in the U.S. where Make a Difference Day started and is far bigger, individuals, corporations, universities, communities, states and nonprofit organizations The event started in 1992 when Gannett Corporation, through it's popular newspaper U.S.A. Basically, it asked people to spend a day doing something good for someone else. The response was overwhelming and has since expanded. Hmmmm Maybe I can get them to mow my lawn.....
Charity is great, and one can not be truly fulfilled in life if selfishly sealed from sharing and contributing. But the fact that organizations have to ask/beg people to volunteer is a great difference from earlier generations which practiced a more silent and consistent volunteerism. So because we might today be too absorbed with ourselves or with work, or with the gadgets and distractions of modern life it might be a good idea after all.
Make A Difference Day is a chance for humans to come together for the common purpose of doing good and helping others. Uh, instead I should have written for a MEANINGFUL common purpose. The word meaningful seems to be shrinking in our world of spending hours each day playing with our cell phones or other electronic devices that in actuality separate us from each other more than bringing us together.
So maybe we ought to spend a few minutes each day picking up trash, pulling weeds on public property, donating food to the local food bank or whatever else might make someone we don't know a little more happy to be on this earth.
They volunteered and actually worked in such jobs as cleaning parks, working with local animal rescues etc. Nice. Anyway, here in the U.S. where Make a Difference Day started and is far bigger, individuals, corporations, universities, communities, states and nonprofit organizations The event started in 1992 when Gannett Corporation, through it's popular newspaper U.S.A. Basically, it asked people to spend a day doing something good for someone else. The response was overwhelming and has since expanded. Hmmmm Maybe I can get them to mow my lawn.....
Charity is great, and one can not be truly fulfilled in life if selfishly sealed from sharing and contributing. But the fact that organizations have to ask/beg people to volunteer is a great difference from earlier generations which practiced a more silent and consistent volunteerism. So because we might today be too absorbed with ourselves or with work, or with the gadgets and distractions of modern life it might be a good idea after all.
Make A Difference Day is a chance for humans to come together for the common purpose of doing good and helping others. Uh, instead I should have written for a MEANINGFUL common purpose. The word meaningful seems to be shrinking in our world of spending hours each day playing with our cell phones or other electronic devices that in actuality separate us from each other more than bringing us together.
So maybe we ought to spend a few minutes each day picking up trash, pulling weeds on public property, donating food to the local food bank or whatever else might make someone we don't know a little more happy to be on this earth.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Thou Shalt Not Smell Thy Working Place
Something is smelly here! I just read that an employee of the Social
Security Administration was formally reprimanded this month for
excessive workplace flatulence, Yep, he farts too much. The SS sent the
guy a five page letter announcing a sanction that included a log of
representative dates and times when he was recorded “releasing the awful
and unpleasant odor” in his Baltimore office. I wonder who had the job
of recording his blasts.
They accused him of “conduct unbecoming a federal officer". And that he "had created an “intolerable” and “hostile” environment for coworkers, several of whom have lodged complaints with supervisors. Is passing gas a constitutional right or reason to punish the farter? The worker says he didn't mean to do it, but has a lactose intolerance problem that makes him constantly smell the work place. Regardless, the guy has a reprimand letter in his (smelly) file now, and those can be used to support firing a worker if another incident arises or if the employer just wants a "breath of fresh air" and figures removing a farter could achieve that.
Hmmmm Most government workers are expected to fart around all day at work on their computers, playing games and goofing off. I don't know what the big deal is about blasting a few while farting around at work.. Either they build that guy an airtight cubicle so he can fart his day away, or they might give him a disability pension to let him fart off at home with his wife. I just hope the airlines put him on the no fly list before he shows up in the seat next to me. It's bad enough I pollute the air with my diarrhea of the mouth. Putting him on the same flight with me would be cruel and unusual punishment for the other passengers.
Really, I think the government should probably reassign this guy to find a work position more suitable to his affliction. How about these five alternative spots?
- Send him to Congress. Congress smells so bad now they might not even notice his farting
- Let him interrogate, in a small and enclosed space, terrorist suspects.
- Give him his own reality TV show with Kim Kardashian as co star. Could be called 'Farting Paradise'.
- Declare him to be a weapon of ass destruction.
- Make him an instructor teaching women how to fart. No man has ever heard hear a woman fart.
To avoid making a further stink about this I will depart and wish you a flatulence free day.
They accused him of “conduct unbecoming a federal officer". And that he "had created an “intolerable” and “hostile” environment for coworkers, several of whom have lodged complaints with supervisors. Is passing gas a constitutional right or reason to punish the farter? The worker says he didn't mean to do it, but has a lactose intolerance problem that makes him constantly smell the work place. Regardless, the guy has a reprimand letter in his (smelly) file now, and those can be used to support firing a worker if another incident arises or if the employer just wants a "breath of fresh air" and figures removing a farter could achieve that.
Hmmmm Most government workers are expected to fart around all day at work on their computers, playing games and goofing off. I don't know what the big deal is about blasting a few while farting around at work.. Either they build that guy an airtight cubicle so he can fart his day away, or they might give him a disability pension to let him fart off at home with his wife. I just hope the airlines put him on the no fly list before he shows up in the seat next to me. It's bad enough I pollute the air with my diarrhea of the mouth. Putting him on the same flight with me would be cruel and unusual punishment for the other passengers.
Really, I think the government should probably reassign this guy to find a work position more suitable to his affliction. How about these five alternative spots?
- Send him to Congress. Congress smells so bad now they might not even notice his farting
- Let him interrogate, in a small and enclosed space, terrorist suspects.
- Give him his own reality TV show with Kim Kardashian as co star. Could be called 'Farting Paradise'.
- Declare him to be a weapon of ass destruction.
- Make him an instructor teaching women how to fart. No man has ever heard hear a woman fart.
To avoid making a further stink about this I will depart and wish you a flatulence free day.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Suspended For Having An Imagination
A 7 year old boy was suspended from school for throwing an
imaginary grenade at imaginary bad guys. Did the school do the right or
wrong thing? I hope you didn't have to think too long about that before
saying, "Of course not". In Colorado 7 year old Alex Watkins, a student
at Mary Blair Elementary School, was reportedly alone while playing a
game in which he was trying to “rescue the world.”
So he imagined he was throwing a grenade at the bad guys to do it.... oh my....he even made a grenade sound when he tossed the imaginary grenade into a box. “I was trying to save people and I just can't believe I got dispended," Alex said. It’s called ‘rescue the world.’ I pretended the box, there’s something shaking in it, and I go ‘pshhh.” Wow! He's so young he thinks he got "dispended' instead of suspended. Can that 7 year old destroy the world the way Mary Blair School administrators think?
But the school( and every public school in the state of Colorado) has a list of “Absolutes,” that when violated may lead to suspension. This list includes “no weapons (real or play).” The list is intended to make “Mary Blair a safe environment,” say school officials. I am not sure how old 7 year old Alex is, but I think the adults who run the politically correct schools are damaging those kids way to much with such stupidity as the "absolute policy". The days of playing at recess in schools, of using our imaginations and developing well because of it are no politically incorrect behavior.
And to think as a child we used to play cowboys and indians with both imaginary and toy weapons. In today's politically correct schools I would probably be put to death for that.
Maybe it's time they started teaching and stopped turning kids into institutionalized robots.
So he imagined he was throwing a grenade at the bad guys to do it.... oh my....he even made a grenade sound when he tossed the imaginary grenade into a box. “I was trying to save people and I just can't believe I got dispended," Alex said. It’s called ‘rescue the world.’ I pretended the box, there’s something shaking in it, and I go ‘pshhh.” Wow! He's so young he thinks he got "dispended' instead of suspended. Can that 7 year old destroy the world the way Mary Blair School administrators think?
But the school( and every public school in the state of Colorado) has a list of “Absolutes,” that when violated may lead to suspension. This list includes “no weapons (real or play).” The list is intended to make “Mary Blair a safe environment,” say school officials. I am not sure how old 7 year old Alex is, but I think the adults who run the politically correct schools are damaging those kids way to much with such stupidity as the "absolute policy". The days of playing at recess in schools, of using our imaginations and developing well because of it are no politically incorrect behavior.
And to think as a child we used to play cowboys and indians with both imaginary and toy weapons. In today's politically correct schools I would probably be put to death for that.
Maybe it's time they started teaching and stopped turning kids into institutionalized robots.
I wonder what happened to common sense. When 7 year olds play we should regard them as normal. Alex isn't a 15 year old who threw a live grenade, he's still a baby. Imagination is a critical part of childhood. To deny it is abuse. School officials and the state legislature in Colorado should be ashamed of implementing such a stupid policy.
I suggest a firing squad be formed to deal with all of them ...and I don't mean an imaginary one.
Friday, October 31, 2014
Zombie Times
Halloween these days brings out more zombie
wannabe's, for this is the
age of fascination with zombies. Now zombies are all the rage. There
are more zombie themed movies and books than religious ones. Perhaps
the zombies have area chanting "God is dead'. Anyway, I think you'll
see more zombie costumes at Halloween than the traditional ghost or
pumpkin outfits. Sigh....those zombies are even killing off the sexy
French Maid costumes that I like.
Interest in this kind of zombie appeal may partly reflect a need to escape real fears by imagining a worse one. Since the world lives in uncertain times, facing economic, environmental, political and spiritual problems that seem insurmountable replacing the real worries with zombies is an alternative. The zombie narrative shows us concrete fears that we can face vicariously through the survivors trying to fight off the zombies. There's an appeal in that. It's not fun to fight real enemies because we have no control over what they may do.
I think people want to be a zombie for the day because they are more fascinated with the end of the world now than in the past. We do live in a spiritual and emotion doom, detached from reality by our electronic devices that created a shallow and distorted orientation of what is real. Our collective visions of the future have changed drastically, so we escape the world by becoming zombie and other apocalyptic characters. Those Halloween costumed zombies may no longer necessarily imagine the type of positive future that was more prevalent in centuries past.
Zombies are the most vivid manifestation of a painful end of the world. There is now a cultural fixation on fictionalizing our own death, very specifically the mass scale destruction that zombies represent. We use the zombie fiction not only to emotionally cope with the possibility of the evil and doom we feel awaiting us, but even more to personally escape reality. Yes, I know zombie affection is also just adult play. But as Freud would say, we are what we are obsessed with. The old institutions and ways now failing us were once stable and reassuring but are now mostly gone. So zombies and other escapism's (need I cite cell phones as one).
The increase in zombie appeal Zombies are important as a reflection of ourselves. Even a simple Halloween costume reflects us, sends a message about what we think about.
But even, in contrast to the zombie script, if as a society we have lost a lot of our belief in a good future and instead have more of an idea of a disaster to come, we still think that we are survivors. We still want to survive in some form.
Interest in this kind of zombie appeal may partly reflect a need to escape real fears by imagining a worse one. Since the world lives in uncertain times, facing economic, environmental, political and spiritual problems that seem insurmountable replacing the real worries with zombies is an alternative. The zombie narrative shows us concrete fears that we can face vicariously through the survivors trying to fight off the zombies. There's an appeal in that. It's not fun to fight real enemies because we have no control over what they may do.
I think people want to be a zombie for the day because they are more fascinated with the end of the world now than in the past. We do live in a spiritual and emotion doom, detached from reality by our electronic devices that created a shallow and distorted orientation of what is real. Our collective visions of the future have changed drastically, so we escape the world by becoming zombie and other apocalyptic characters. Those Halloween costumed zombies may no longer necessarily imagine the type of positive future that was more prevalent in centuries past.
Zombies are the most vivid manifestation of a painful end of the world. There is now a cultural fixation on fictionalizing our own death, very specifically the mass scale destruction that zombies represent. We use the zombie fiction not only to emotionally cope with the possibility of the evil and doom we feel awaiting us, but even more to personally escape reality. Yes, I know zombie affection is also just adult play. But as Freud would say, we are what we are obsessed with. The old institutions and ways now failing us were once stable and reassuring but are now mostly gone. So zombies and other escapism's (need I cite cell phones as one).
The increase in zombie appeal Zombies are important as a reflection of ourselves. Even a simple Halloween costume reflects us, sends a message about what we think about.
But even, in contrast to the zombie script, if as a society we have lost a lot of our belief in a good future and instead have more of an idea of a disaster to come, we still think that we are survivors. We still want to survive in some form.
Bad Taste In Halloween Costumes
It's strange at Halloween time. People feel a little less
inhibited by
the concept of the holiday, which is good. But some take it a little
too far. Take the Halloween costume, for example. There are some odd
selections being made for Halloween costumes. Maybe the worst this year
is the Ebola genre. There is the hot and sexy Ebola nurse outfit, the
Ebola family costumes, the runaway Ebola patient costume, the anti
Ebola clothing suit, and there is even an Ebola T shirt for Halloween.
It's a black shirt with the lettering "Ask Me About Ebola!" across the
chest.
Bad taste knows no ends in this age, but what is even more interesting is that most of us are not offended by those kinds of costumes. I remember the Boston Marathon Bomb Victim costume last year. It was well received and worn by many. The National Retail Board estimates that this Halloween Americans will spend $2.8 billion on Halloween outfits, with $1.4 billion of that amount on adult costumes to outfit approximately 75 million grown-ups. That equates to two thirds of American adults buying costumes for themselves. So the bad taste is coming from the adults who are supposed to teach their little brats the opposite.
Bu the, it is a mostly harmless affliction, and Halloween is for fun and sometimes for a little bad taste that comes with imagination and fun. And isn't shock what Halloween is about? Since society is far more lax now than in former generations as to what is appropriate and what is not maybe offensive is the new Halloween norm. Whether it's a costume about political commentary, a sexual costume, or some other offensive social commentary, a Halloween costume is meant to arouse fear, laughter, or some other emotion.. Costumes are sometimes offensive. That might be the whole point of those that tread the offensive label.
Happy Halloween....and watch out for that Ebola monster.
Bad taste knows no ends in this age, but what is even more interesting is that most of us are not offended by those kinds of costumes. I remember the Boston Marathon Bomb Victim costume last year. It was well received and worn by many. The National Retail Board estimates that this Halloween Americans will spend $2.8 billion on Halloween outfits, with $1.4 billion of that amount on adult costumes to outfit approximately 75 million grown-ups. That equates to two thirds of American adults buying costumes for themselves. So the bad taste is coming from the adults who are supposed to teach their little brats the opposite.
Bu the, it is a mostly harmless affliction, and Halloween is for fun and sometimes for a little bad taste that comes with imagination and fun. And isn't shock what Halloween is about? Since society is far more lax now than in former generations as to what is appropriate and what is not maybe offensive is the new Halloween norm. Whether it's a costume about political commentary, a sexual costume, or some other offensive social commentary, a Halloween costume is meant to arouse fear, laughter, or some other emotion.. Costumes are sometimes offensive. That might be the whole point of those that tread the offensive label.
Happy Halloween....and watch out for that Ebola monster.
The Right Apple To Eat
It's apple picking season here in Oregon. The states of
Washington and
Oregon produce more apples and more varieties of apples than any other
in the U.S. So I go wild this time of the year buying and using endless
varieties of apples. Most places have the standard eight or so
varieties for sale. But we have old ("heritage") kinds that are the
passion of the Hood River apple growers, about 40 minutes from my
home. Not only do they grow the kinds of apples found 100's of years
ago, they also experiment with new varieties.
It seems that the modern apples is one which has been bred to have along shelf life and to be durable in grocery stores. They taste ok, but the "heritage" or heirloom" and newer kinds of apples do have a wide range of flavors, as to tart, sweet, and somewhere in the middle. When I go to a farmer's market I seem to always find a new kind of apple. I buy one, taste it and promptly forget the name the next time I want to eat one. But that's nice. In this age of homogenized foods it is pleasant to have so many varieties that one forgets which of them he or she wants. That may not be exciting, but it does make me more interested in apples, and that's a good thing.
When eating or cooking with apples the type used or eaten really does matter. We have one here that was locally invented called the Graven stein. The first time I tasted it I hated it, given it is very tart. I like my eating apples to be sweet. However, I have tasted the Graven stien in cooked apple desserts and find it very appealing when mixed with the right amount of sugar and spices.
When cooking you have to use the most appropriate apple to make the recipe work. One that is too sweet or tart, has too much juice inside or is too mealy can make the apple dish taste much less appealing or can ruin the consistency of the dish. For example, my favorite apple dessert to make an eat is an apple crostata. Gala or Pink Lady apples make it work very well, but if I use a more watery or tart apple it hardly resembles the dish I want.
Uh, I have motivated myself for apples, so I shall leave you now and head to my favorite apple seller and buy the apples I need to make fresh applesauce. It's easy to do, and makes the dish taste far better than the jared apples sauces we like from our grocery stores. this one is amore adult version. If you're interested in trying to make applesauce yourself, the recipe is use is below.
Uncover the pan and mash the apples lightly with a wooden spoon or a silicone spatula. Cook uncovered for 5 minutes to evaporate some of the excess moisture. The applesauce should be thick. Remove from the heat and serve warm or chilled.
It seems that the modern apples is one which has been bred to have along shelf life and to be durable in grocery stores. They taste ok, but the "heritage" or heirloom" and newer kinds of apples do have a wide range of flavors, as to tart, sweet, and somewhere in the middle. When I go to a farmer's market I seem to always find a new kind of apple. I buy one, taste it and promptly forget the name the next time I want to eat one. But that's nice. In this age of homogenized foods it is pleasant to have so many varieties that one forgets which of them he or she wants. That may not be exciting, but it does make me more interested in apples, and that's a good thing.
When eating or cooking with apples the type used or eaten really does matter. We have one here that was locally invented called the Graven stein. The first time I tasted it I hated it, given it is very tart. I like my eating apples to be sweet. However, I have tasted the Graven stien in cooked apple desserts and find it very appealing when mixed with the right amount of sugar and spices.
When cooking you have to use the most appropriate apple to make the recipe work. One that is too sweet or tart, has too much juice inside or is too mealy can make the apple dish taste much less appealing or can ruin the consistency of the dish. For example, my favorite apple dessert to make an eat is an apple crostata. Gala or Pink Lady apples make it work very well, but if I use a more watery or tart apple it hardly resembles the dish I want.
Uh, I have motivated myself for apples, so I shall leave you now and head to my favorite apple seller and buy the apples I need to make fresh applesauce. It's easy to do, and makes the dish taste far better than the jared apples sauces we like from our grocery stores. this one is amore adult version. If you're interested in trying to make applesauce yourself, the recipe is use is below.
Chunky Applesauce
Ingredients
- 4 Fuji or Braeburn apples
- 1/4 cup sugar
- 2 teaspoons fresh lemon juice
- Pinch of kosher salt
Instructions
Peel, quarter, core and coarsely dice the apples. You should have about 4 cups. Transfer to a saucepan, add the sugar, lemon juice, salt, and 1/4 cup water, and stir well. Place over medium high heat, bring to a boil, reduce the heat to low, cover and simmer until the apples are tender, about 30 minutes. If the apples begin to dry out before they are ready, add a little more water.Uncover the pan and mash the apples lightly with a wooden spoon or a silicone spatula. Cook uncovered for 5 minutes to evaporate some of the excess moisture. The applesauce should be thick. Remove from the heat and serve warm or chilled.
Friday, October 24, 2014
No Free Speech Allowed On College Campuses
The attitude of the college campus today is quite different
from past
eras. And I don't like it. Maybe it's because when I was a college
student the college campus had become ( but only for a few decades
longer) a truly democratic and tolerant place. The college ideal of
free speech really existed then. Prior to the mid sixties or so most
college campuses were a bit too conservative and intolerant of
difference. The sixties changed that making them open to every idea and
tolerant of others. But today, the college campus in the U.S. is often
the most intolerant and liberal gone mad place in society. It is a pity
because liberalism is so out of control on campuses today that students
and campus employees who object and speak out against it are not only
marginalized, but harassed.
Sigh...I fear their is far too little freedom of thought on many college campuses today. Instead, the schools are an almost mindlessly politically correct state of ultra liberal views. The Obama administration is riding to the rescue of this insanity as it promotes phony after phony (but vote getting) ideas on campus. The young being liberally inclined are sponges to those ideas. College students have learned the Obama mantra that when they make victim hood a coveted status it confers privileges for them. The liberal political faction has taken the college campus away from the ultra conservatives who controlled it (also badly) for so long as Obama and the ultra liberals have decided it is academia's turn to be broken into a liberal herd of sheep who bleat non sequiters like the imaged "The War on Women", or "Corporate abuse of the poor".
On most college campuses today campus speech codes punish "unpopular speech". That would mean any speech that approves of traditional values or opposes the latest trendy liberal doctrine. "Diversity" is enforced, which means that anyone who is not a white, liberal, male is said to be a victim of hate and discrimination and therefore must be given copious amounts of extra "help" to overcome the imagined discrimination. The liberal college campus and its almost entirely liberal faculty impose their politically correct world on the students, like it or not. This is not good.
This intolerance on the college campus is organized around the principle of "racial and gender equality", which we should all be for, but whose idea is distorted to mean a special privilege class and a very repressive attempt to tell college students what and how to think. Stalin would be proud! The radical ideology on most campuses says there is no mainstream, no commonality about us. Instead, it has invented and enforces a multiculturalism that always looks for differences, and uses those to divide and conquer the college student. So we have victory for mindlessness, unthinking, unchallenging student. The commandment every freshman is assaulted with even before setting foot in his or her new school is, "Thou shalt not disturb the politically correct college bubble".
I think that when you create such an atmosphere and use repression to tell the student what he or she is to think, and establish codes to enforce the political correctness, you have a highly degraded college experience for everyone.
Need some examples? Try these (there are many more).
-At Duke University there is a campaign to remove the phrase, “Man Up” (and others) from the vocabularies of Duke students because that phrase supposedly de legitimizes homosexuals and oppresses people.
- International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde was forced to withdraw from giving the commencement address at Smith College following protests from students and faculty who hate the IMF. (There have been over 60 cancellations or withdrawals of commencement speakers in the past 5 years because the speakers were said to be "offense' to liberal college students)
- University of California-Santa Barbara women’s studies professor Mireille Miller-Young attacked a 16-year-old holding an anti-abortion sign in the campus "free speech zone" (on today's college campuses, if you speak against the prevailing liberal view on campus you must do it in those zones. Free speech elsewhere is not allowed)
- Brandeis University decided not to give Ayaan Hirsi Ali an honorary degree because she has written books critical of Islam's treatment of women. (On most college campus it is good to vilify Christian religions but a mortal sin to ever say anything bad about Islam)
- The U.S. Justice Department recently sent a memo to all colleges that receive federal funding detailing the new policy for prevention and punishment of sexual harassment on college campuses. (“Offensive” speech is now determined solely by the complainant, meaning that reason, community standards, and adjudication to make a ruling on sexual harassment can't be the standard. The complainant now has all power. If she claims that an elderly man greeting her with the statement, “I like those shoes,” degraded and objectified her, she wins.)
- A University of Nebraska graduate student who faced suspension for keeping a photograph of his wife in a bikini on his desk. No, I am not kidding!
- A janitor at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis nearly lost his job after coworkers complained about him reading a book that made reference to the Ku Klux Klan on the cover. The University charged that the janitor was “trying to disrupt the campus environment.” (The book in question – “Notre Dame Versus The Klan” is anti racist. It celebrates the efforts of Notre Dame to keep the KKK out of South Bend.)
The lesson of all this is that today it's left wing paternalism that has taken over the U.S. and it's college campuses, even on what should be a free speech center, the college campus. Colleges today are teaching college students to practice intolerance under the justification of preaching “tolerance” in the liberal bubble of the college campus. The dull conformity and repressive regulations that characterize college campuses today suffocate students and take away the joy and enthusiasm of students and faculty who have independent minds, active imaginations, and appreciation for the pleasure of free conversation. Freedom of speech and thought has been one of the great gifts of college life.
Years ago, we all got to expect that censorship would come from the right wing, but to expect it from the left wing, the Obama world, from the politically correct people on the campuses is just sad. We should speak out against it.....uh, if that's allowed
Sigh...I fear their is far too little freedom of thought on many college campuses today. Instead, the schools are an almost mindlessly politically correct state of ultra liberal views. The Obama administration is riding to the rescue of this insanity as it promotes phony after phony (but vote getting) ideas on campus. The young being liberally inclined are sponges to those ideas. College students have learned the Obama mantra that when they make victim hood a coveted status it confers privileges for them. The liberal political faction has taken the college campus away from the ultra conservatives who controlled it (also badly) for so long as Obama and the ultra liberals have decided it is academia's turn to be broken into a liberal herd of sheep who bleat non sequiters like the imaged "The War on Women", or "Corporate abuse of the poor".
On most college campuses today campus speech codes punish "unpopular speech". That would mean any speech that approves of traditional values or opposes the latest trendy liberal doctrine. "Diversity" is enforced, which means that anyone who is not a white, liberal, male is said to be a victim of hate and discrimination and therefore must be given copious amounts of extra "help" to overcome the imagined discrimination. The liberal college campus and its almost entirely liberal faculty impose their politically correct world on the students, like it or not. This is not good.
This intolerance on the college campus is organized around the principle of "racial and gender equality", which we should all be for, but whose idea is distorted to mean a special privilege class and a very repressive attempt to tell college students what and how to think. Stalin would be proud! The radical ideology on most campuses says there is no mainstream, no commonality about us. Instead, it has invented and enforces a multiculturalism that always looks for differences, and uses those to divide and conquer the college student. So we have victory for mindlessness, unthinking, unchallenging student. The commandment every freshman is assaulted with even before setting foot in his or her new school is, "Thou shalt not disturb the politically correct college bubble".
I think that when you create such an atmosphere and use repression to tell the student what he or she is to think, and establish codes to enforce the political correctness, you have a highly degraded college experience for everyone.
Need some examples? Try these (there are many more).
-At Duke University there is a campaign to remove the phrase, “Man Up” (and others) from the vocabularies of Duke students because that phrase supposedly de legitimizes homosexuals and oppresses people.
- International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde was forced to withdraw from giving the commencement address at Smith College following protests from students and faculty who hate the IMF. (There have been over 60 cancellations or withdrawals of commencement speakers in the past 5 years because the speakers were said to be "offense' to liberal college students)
- University of California-Santa Barbara women’s studies professor Mireille Miller-Young attacked a 16-year-old holding an anti-abortion sign in the campus "free speech zone" (on today's college campuses, if you speak against the prevailing liberal view on campus you must do it in those zones. Free speech elsewhere is not allowed)
- Brandeis University decided not to give Ayaan Hirsi Ali an honorary degree because she has written books critical of Islam's treatment of women. (On most college campus it is good to vilify Christian religions but a mortal sin to ever say anything bad about Islam)
- The U.S. Justice Department recently sent a memo to all colleges that receive federal funding detailing the new policy for prevention and punishment of sexual harassment on college campuses. (“Offensive” speech is now determined solely by the complainant, meaning that reason, community standards, and adjudication to make a ruling on sexual harassment can't be the standard. The complainant now has all power. If she claims that an elderly man greeting her with the statement, “I like those shoes,” degraded and objectified her, she wins.)
- A University of Nebraska graduate student who faced suspension for keeping a photograph of his wife in a bikini on his desk. No, I am not kidding!
- A janitor at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis nearly lost his job after coworkers complained about him reading a book that made reference to the Ku Klux Klan on the cover. The University charged that the janitor was “trying to disrupt the campus environment.” (The book in question – “Notre Dame Versus The Klan” is anti racist. It celebrates the efforts of Notre Dame to keep the KKK out of South Bend.)
The lesson of all this is that today it's left wing paternalism that has taken over the U.S. and it's college campuses, even on what should be a free speech center, the college campus. Colleges today are teaching college students to practice intolerance under the justification of preaching “tolerance” in the liberal bubble of the college campus. The dull conformity and repressive regulations that characterize college campuses today suffocate students and take away the joy and enthusiasm of students and faculty who have independent minds, active imaginations, and appreciation for the pleasure of free conversation. Freedom of speech and thought has been one of the great gifts of college life.
Years ago, we all got to expect that censorship would come from the right wing, but to expect it from the left wing, the Obama world, from the politically correct people on the campuses is just sad. We should speak out against it.....uh, if that's allowed
Campaign Telephone Calls
This time of the year all across the
country there are many elections
to be conducted for most offices, excluding the presidency (That one is
in November of 2016). As in most democracies, money drives the
elections. The candidates with the most money contributed to their
campaigns have a big advantage over those who have not the financial
backing to conduct a highly visual campaign. I think that the amount
money spent to get elected is obscene. If buying elections was the
goal of democracy, then we might say that our campaigning is perfect.
But in a democracy, the best candidate is supposed to be noticed and
elected. I think that rarely happens here and in other democracies.
How automated and high tech are these campaigns today? Well, I frequently get robo computer calls that expect me to listen to a computer which tells me why I should vote for a particular candidate or issue on the ballot. I doubt many people are convinced by that kind of computer generated telephone campaign, but then the real purpose of them is to just say the candidate's name to imprint it on the voters mind. In that respect it is annoyingly effective. What is outrageous is that many of the computer calls arrive at dinner time, when the politicians know most of us are at home after work and available to take their calls. We have a "do not call" list in the United States that one can put him or herself on to block any commercial calls from getting through to a person who does not want to listed to commercial calls. But guess who the politicians exempted from the block when they created the law that blocks annoying calls.? Yep, political calls are one of the few categories that are exempt from "do not call" blocking. No politician ever passes a law that inconveniences him or her self.
I dislike the live person campaign calls to my home too. In those instances a candidate pays other people to call and to pretend to understand the issue for which they want the voter to side with them. Most of the callers are teenagers paid a minimum wage to make the calls. Teenagers understand little about politics. I even get calls made from my former state of Louisiana asking me to vote in those elections, even though I have lived in Oregon for four years and can't vote in Louisiana elections. Maybe the same people who update those kinds of call lists also are the ones who also update our Microsoft Windows operating systems. They are, uh, a little behind the ball. No matter how many times I tell them that , "I don't live in Louisiana and can't vote in your election. Take me off your call list.", I still get plenty of those calls.
On those occasions when I answer the phone and am asked to participate in "a poll" about the election (the polls are just questions asked to maneuver a voter to agree with the caller's position in order to persuade the voter to vote the way the caller's candidate wants) I try to get the caller "off script" with my answers. It's a bit of revenge for intruding on my privacy at home with political campaign calls. I never let them think I agree with their candidate or issue.
I think next time I get a call I'll just tell them that if they give me a $100 I' ll vote whatever way they want me to. That should chase them away. Oh, maybe it won't. After all, it's politics.
How automated and high tech are these campaigns today? Well, I frequently get robo computer calls that expect me to listen to a computer which tells me why I should vote for a particular candidate or issue on the ballot. I doubt many people are convinced by that kind of computer generated telephone campaign, but then the real purpose of them is to just say the candidate's name to imprint it on the voters mind. In that respect it is annoyingly effective. What is outrageous is that many of the computer calls arrive at dinner time, when the politicians know most of us are at home after work and available to take their calls. We have a "do not call" list in the United States that one can put him or herself on to block any commercial calls from getting through to a person who does not want to listed to commercial calls. But guess who the politicians exempted from the block when they created the law that blocks annoying calls.? Yep, political calls are one of the few categories that are exempt from "do not call" blocking. No politician ever passes a law that inconveniences him or her self.
I dislike the live person campaign calls to my home too. In those instances a candidate pays other people to call and to pretend to understand the issue for which they want the voter to side with them. Most of the callers are teenagers paid a minimum wage to make the calls. Teenagers understand little about politics. I even get calls made from my former state of Louisiana asking me to vote in those elections, even though I have lived in Oregon for four years and can't vote in Louisiana elections. Maybe the same people who update those kinds of call lists also are the ones who also update our Microsoft Windows operating systems. They are, uh, a little behind the ball. No matter how many times I tell them that , "I don't live in Louisiana and can't vote in your election. Take me off your call list.", I still get plenty of those calls.
On those occasions when I answer the phone and am asked to participate in "a poll" about the election (the polls are just questions asked to maneuver a voter to agree with the caller's position in order to persuade the voter to vote the way the caller's candidate wants) I try to get the caller "off script" with my answers. It's a bit of revenge for intruding on my privacy at home with political campaign calls. I never let them think I agree with their candidate or issue.
I think next time I get a call I'll just tell them that if they give me a $100 I' ll vote whatever way they want me to. That should chase them away. Oh, maybe it won't. After all, it's politics.
Ebola Hysteria
I am fed up with the irrational and distorted Ebola
stories. If one
watches media often today he or she would think that civilization is
imperiled by the outbreak in a part of Africa for a weak strain of the
Ebola virus. But wait! Don't let news reports infect your brain with
nonsense. According to the Disease Control and Prevention's National
Center for Health, statistics indicate that the actual risk a person
faces of contracting Ebola, which, like the virus itself, is so tiny,
it's downright microscopic. Here are far more common ways a resident of
the U.S. could die this year.
• Heart disease — A U.S. resident circa 2005 faced a 1-in-5 chance of dying of this in his or her lifetime,
• Cancer — 1-in-7 lifetime odds of dying from this.
• Stroke — 1-in-23
• Accidental injury — 1-in-36
• Motor vehicle accident — 1-in-100
• Assault by firearm — 1-in-325
• Natural forces (heat, cold, storms, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, lightning strikes, etc., combined) — 1-in-3,357
• Drowning — 1-in-8,942
• Air travel accident — 1-in-20,000
• Asteroid impact — 1-in-147,717
• Tsunami -1-in-500,000
What about the risk from Ebola? Well, the lifetime odds of dying from the disease is so small it is hard to compute, but it is far less likely than a person winning a multi million dollar power ball lottery. Since Ebola's first outbreak in the 1970s through the one raging today, according to the World Health Organization, the total number of deaths attributed to Ebola has been 5000. That's it!
So, if the odds are far more likely to die in a car accident than of Ebola, H1N1, tsunamis or a natural disaster, why does Ebola seem to worry so many people so much? Familiarity with an agent of death can be one factor affecting our perception of risk. With cars, we take so many trips over our lifetimes that our brains learn not to be afraid of what might happen in the event of an accident. But the mass hysteria the media causes by introducing Ebola to us creates an irrational fear in us. Ebola for many people is new and not something they have personal experience with, so it's perceived as riskier.
Too, the lack of control over something like Ebola makes us fear it more.....like the small child terrified of "the monsters hiding underneath my bed". We don't have any sense of control over Ebola and the media reports it as being out of control. Logically, people should think more about the reality of Ebola and realize that Ebola is not highly contagious, it's being managed carefully, and there're been epidemics in the past. They've all been controlled, and the same thing's even more likely to happen now, given modern medical advances.
What the media should say (and not so much because the story just isn't that newsworthy) about Ebola is what is true. Ebola is hard to catch and transmit compared to other infections because it requires direct contact with bodily fluids . In the six months of the 201) outbreak, there have been 3,431 deaths. That's a very low number for a serious infectious disease . The influenza pandemic spread by coughing of 1919, for example, infected 500 million people across the world, killed 50 to 100 million (5 percent of the world's population in a year) .
Maybe instead we should worry about what needs worry, and that certainly isn't about catching the Ebola virus.
• Heart disease — A U.S. resident circa 2005 faced a 1-in-5 chance of dying of this in his or her lifetime,
• Cancer — 1-in-7 lifetime odds of dying from this.
• Stroke — 1-in-23
• Accidental injury — 1-in-36
• Motor vehicle accident — 1-in-100
• Assault by firearm — 1-in-325
• Natural forces (heat, cold, storms, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, lightning strikes, etc., combined) — 1-in-3,357
• Drowning — 1-in-8,942
• Air travel accident — 1-in-20,000
• Asteroid impact — 1-in-147,717
• Tsunami -1-in-500,000
What about the risk from Ebola? Well, the lifetime odds of dying from the disease is so small it is hard to compute, but it is far less likely than a person winning a multi million dollar power ball lottery. Since Ebola's first outbreak in the 1970s through the one raging today, according to the World Health Organization, the total number of deaths attributed to Ebola has been 5000. That's it!
So, if the odds are far more likely to die in a car accident than of Ebola, H1N1, tsunamis or a natural disaster, why does Ebola seem to worry so many people so much? Familiarity with an agent of death can be one factor affecting our perception of risk. With cars, we take so many trips over our lifetimes that our brains learn not to be afraid of what might happen in the event of an accident. But the mass hysteria the media causes by introducing Ebola to us creates an irrational fear in us. Ebola for many people is new and not something they have personal experience with, so it's perceived as riskier.
Too, the lack of control over something like Ebola makes us fear it more.....like the small child terrified of "the monsters hiding underneath my bed". We don't have any sense of control over Ebola and the media reports it as being out of control. Logically, people should think more about the reality of Ebola and realize that Ebola is not highly contagious, it's being managed carefully, and there're been epidemics in the past. They've all been controlled, and the same thing's even more likely to happen now, given modern medical advances.
What the media should say (and not so much because the story just isn't that newsworthy) about Ebola is what is true. Ebola is hard to catch and transmit compared to other infections because it requires direct contact with bodily fluids . In the six months of the 201) outbreak, there have been 3,431 deaths. That's a very low number for a serious infectious disease . The influenza pandemic spread by coughing of 1919, for example, infected 500 million people across the world, killed 50 to 100 million (5 percent of the world's population in a year) .
Maybe instead we should worry about what needs worry, and that certainly isn't about catching the Ebola virus.
Those Idiotic Donation "Challenges"
I often rant that cell phone addicts are s addicted because
they want
to escape reality and replace it with endless "cell connection" time.
But there are other ways people today are escaping from the "cruel
world" in which we live. It seems that it's a little easier to run away
from a complex world and create a fantasy to replace it. Maybe humans
are creating their own comic book characters within themselves.
One of the escape modalities I notice that is gaining favor here in the U.S. (and starting to in other countries, given the power of internet communication) is the charity challenge. The charity challenge is the activity by which a true need is addressed through rather strange "challenges" that donators to the cause/charity volunteer to undertake. Thus, to find a cure for cancer via donations for funding research (it always seems to be breast cancer, which has a very low mortality rate compared to a host of others of which the givers seem to be unaware) a person is asked to march for a cure, or take an "ice bucket challenge", or some other masochistic endeavor.
It's great to raise awareness for charity because it probably does increase donations. But why must people punish themselves publicly before donating? I find it odd. The most idiotic of those challenges is the ice bucket challenge to find a cure for ALS disease. Ever since its inception in mid 2013, it caught the world by storm. The challenge became a mindless trend do to mindless social media. The rules were simple. Within 24 hours of being challenged, participants are to video record themselves being doused with ice water. The reward is a few seconds of "look at me" and recognition for a particular cause.
Under the rules of the ice bucket challenge participants are supposed to announce their acceptance of the challenge followed by pouring ice into a bucket of water. Then the participant can call out a challenge to other people. It spread exponentially. Many prominent western celebrities took this challenge (it help the career when a celebrity is trendy and politically correct). The likes of Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jennifer Lopez, Justin Timberlake, Steven Spielberg, Robert Downey Jr.,Selena Gomez, Tom Cruise, George W. Bush posted their videos online and supported this good cause. Sigh, how stupid. Just donate money to a cause and skip the theatrics. at least the human sheep aren't being led by a Kardashian girl.
One huge negative to this kinds of masochistic donation is that trendy can lead to another affliction that might need a cure- blindness to truth. One such truth is that bad charities use challenges as a way of subtly tricking the naive to donate their money to a less than worth organization that may pocket more of the donations that it should give to researchers.
As easily led as people are by today's addiction to social media triviality we might see even more extreme "challenges" in the coming weeks. How about this one. At the next party you attend, surreptitiously pee on someone's leg to raise awareness for urinary tract infections. Or, how about shooting yourself in the head to promote gun safety?
One of the escape modalities I notice that is gaining favor here in the U.S. (and starting to in other countries, given the power of internet communication) is the charity challenge. The charity challenge is the activity by which a true need is addressed through rather strange "challenges" that donators to the cause/charity volunteer to undertake. Thus, to find a cure for cancer via donations for funding research (it always seems to be breast cancer, which has a very low mortality rate compared to a host of others of which the givers seem to be unaware) a person is asked to march for a cure, or take an "ice bucket challenge", or some other masochistic endeavor.
It's great to raise awareness for charity because it probably does increase donations. But why must people punish themselves publicly before donating? I find it odd. The most idiotic of those challenges is the ice bucket challenge to find a cure for ALS disease. Ever since its inception in mid 2013, it caught the world by storm. The challenge became a mindless trend do to mindless social media. The rules were simple. Within 24 hours of being challenged, participants are to video record themselves being doused with ice water. The reward is a few seconds of "look at me" and recognition for a particular cause.
Under the rules of the ice bucket challenge participants are supposed to announce their acceptance of the challenge followed by pouring ice into a bucket of water. Then the participant can call out a challenge to other people. It spread exponentially. Many prominent western celebrities took this challenge (it help the career when a celebrity is trendy and politically correct). The likes of Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jennifer Lopez, Justin Timberlake, Steven Spielberg, Robert Downey Jr.,Selena Gomez, Tom Cruise, George W. Bush posted their videos online and supported this good cause. Sigh, how stupid. Just donate money to a cause and skip the theatrics. at least the human sheep aren't being led by a Kardashian girl.
One huge negative to this kinds of masochistic donation is that trendy can lead to another affliction that might need a cure- blindness to truth. One such truth is that bad charities use challenges as a way of subtly tricking the naive to donate their money to a less than worth organization that may pocket more of the donations that it should give to researchers.
As easily led as people are by today's addiction to social media triviality we might see even more extreme "challenges" in the coming weeks. How about this one. At the next party you attend, surreptitiously pee on someone's leg to raise awareness for urinary tract infections. Or, how about shooting yourself in the head to promote gun safety?
Hong Kong Protests
Those protest for more democracy in Hong Kong are
interesting. But no
one can be surprised that the ex British colony, which long has had way
more freedom than China itself, would eventually call for more freedom
than the Chinese dictators want to allow. Online, Chinese censors have
removed information and images about the protests and newscasts in
mainland China pretend there are no protests there. It's another
reminder to those who think China is past the brutal dictatorship
phase, that it clearly is not.
The number of posts deleted from the Chinese Web provider Sina Weibo has hit a record high for 2014. Chinese citizens who show public support for Hong Kong's pro democracy movement face swift reprisals. Police have arrested at least a number of people in several mainland cities over the past few days for posting pictures online or showing their support in other ways (This according to the human rights group Amnesty International). Many more have been called in for questioning about their protesting. The rounding up of activists in mainland China only underlines why so many people in Hong Kong fear the growing control Beijing has in their city's affairs. The dictators in China allow plenty of freedom, but none that involves a threat to their power to control both China and Hong Kong.
Why the protests in Hong Kong when that city has way more freedom and autonomy than any place in China. Hong Kong people are fed up with worsening conditions under the Chinese government's 'one country, two systems' model. They also have great access to travel abroad and information that displays a different image of the Chinese government and Chinese society than that which they are asked to believe when watching mainland Chinese news reports.
All displays of freedom in Hong Kong are carefully kept out of sight and out of mind elsewhere in China......as much as possible. I wonder how the dictators in China can stem the tide of democracy, not only in Hong Kong, but in China itself . The implementation of capitalism years ago has already broken part of the dike. The internet is also a forced for more democracy because it shows the world as it is, not as a dictator wants the people to believe it is.
It should be interesting how the mainland Chinese dictators stop the protest. And the will, for the survival of their power depends on it. The old model of brutality, as in the Tiananmen Square massacre is too unpleasant now that cameras would capture in full detail all the violence the government might use. And the protesters have learned from the past that the best way to confront the dictators is to do it peacefully, to not give them an excuse to slaughter them with the military and police.
It's nice to see China evolving more and more to democracy. The world would be a better place if China would quit the dictatorship and instead enter into the modern world.
The number of posts deleted from the Chinese Web provider Sina Weibo has hit a record high for 2014. Chinese citizens who show public support for Hong Kong's pro democracy movement face swift reprisals. Police have arrested at least a number of people in several mainland cities over the past few days for posting pictures online or showing their support in other ways (This according to the human rights group Amnesty International). Many more have been called in for questioning about their protesting. The rounding up of activists in mainland China only underlines why so many people in Hong Kong fear the growing control Beijing has in their city's affairs. The dictators in China allow plenty of freedom, but none that involves a threat to their power to control both China and Hong Kong.
Why the protests in Hong Kong when that city has way more freedom and autonomy than any place in China. Hong Kong people are fed up with worsening conditions under the Chinese government's 'one country, two systems' model. They also have great access to travel abroad and information that displays a different image of the Chinese government and Chinese society than that which they are asked to believe when watching mainland Chinese news reports.
All displays of freedom in Hong Kong are carefully kept out of sight and out of mind elsewhere in China......as much as possible. I wonder how the dictators in China can stem the tide of democracy, not only in Hong Kong, but in China itself . The implementation of capitalism years ago has already broken part of the dike. The internet is also a forced for more democracy because it shows the world as it is, not as a dictator wants the people to believe it is.
It should be interesting how the mainland Chinese dictators stop the protest. And the will, for the survival of their power depends on it. The old model of brutality, as in the Tiananmen Square massacre is too unpleasant now that cameras would capture in full detail all the violence the government might use. And the protesters have learned from the past that the best way to confront the dictators is to do it peacefully, to not give them an excuse to slaughter them with the military and police.
It's nice to see China evolving more and more to democracy. The world would be a better place if China would quit the dictatorship and instead enter into the modern world.
The Value Of Down Time
The current generation of kids might be called The
Cell Phone
Generation. They never stop chatting and texting on theirs, to the
exclusion of allot of real time face to face communication. In light
of that, researchers are wondering if those kids spend so much time
corresponding via
text rather than talking face to face that they were losing the
ability to read these important cues. If you ever observe a group of
kids today you'll notice they are far more engaged with their phones
than with each other.
So one researcher wondered what would happen if 50 sixth graders were sent to a nature camp with no access to computers, tablets and mobile phones? The study, published in the journal 'Computers Human Behavior' suggests that after just five days their ability to understand nonverbal social cues improves. Non verbal social cues are the emotional information we pick up from people around us that is not communicated through words. It includes facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice and body posture.
So the little brats don't necessarily lose their ability to communicate normally when they bury their heads in their technology.
The researchers found that a public school that sends its sixth grade class to a wilderness camp near Big Bear for five days. At the camp, the students have no access to electronics. When the class of about 50 children arrived at the camp, they were asked to take two tests to measure their ability to read nonverbal social cues. In the first, the kids were asked to assess the emotions portrayed in 48 photos of people making faces. In the second test, they watched a video with the sound turned off, and then made a judgment about the emotional state of the actor.
At the end of the five day camp, the students were asked to take the tests again. The researchers report that over the five days the kids went from making an average of 14.02 errors on the face recognition test at the beginning of their camp stay to 9.41 errors by the end. For the video component, they went from getting an average of 26% of the emotional states correct to getting 31% correct.
Just five days away from the phones brings back normal perception. To test it further the researchers gave the same test to a control group of 54 sixth graders from the same school who had not yet attended the camp. That group had an average of 12.24 mistakes the first time they took the face recognition test and 9.81 mistakes when they took it again five days later. For the video test, the students' scores stayed flat, getting an average of 28% of the emotions correct both times they were tested. Though the children who were at the camp showed a larger improvement over the five days than those who did not go to camp, the end results were not that different.
The point is that however you can get Junior to stay away from his cell phone the better junior interprets reality. Problem is, mom and dad are also so addicted to their mobile devices that they see non stop cell use as a new norm. Might it be time for schools to go back to the once (brief) time when all cell phones were banned from a campus during the school day? Have a nice day! Just finished
So one researcher wondered what would happen if 50 sixth graders were sent to a nature camp with no access to computers, tablets and mobile phones? The study, published in the journal 'Computers Human Behavior' suggests that after just five days their ability to understand nonverbal social cues improves. Non verbal social cues are the emotional information we pick up from people around us that is not communicated through words. It includes facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice and body posture.
So the little brats don't necessarily lose their ability to communicate normally when they bury their heads in their technology.
The researchers found that a public school that sends its sixth grade class to a wilderness camp near Big Bear for five days. At the camp, the students have no access to electronics. When the class of about 50 children arrived at the camp, they were asked to take two tests to measure their ability to read nonverbal social cues. In the first, the kids were asked to assess the emotions portrayed in 48 photos of people making faces. In the second test, they watched a video with the sound turned off, and then made a judgment about the emotional state of the actor.
At the end of the five day camp, the students were asked to take the tests again. The researchers report that over the five days the kids went from making an average of 14.02 errors on the face recognition test at the beginning of their camp stay to 9.41 errors by the end. For the video component, they went from getting an average of 26% of the emotional states correct to getting 31% correct.
Just five days away from the phones brings back normal perception. To test it further the researchers gave the same test to a control group of 54 sixth graders from the same school who had not yet attended the camp. That group had an average of 12.24 mistakes the first time they took the face recognition test and 9.81 mistakes when they took it again five days later. For the video test, the students' scores stayed flat, getting an average of 28% of the emotions correct both times they were tested. Though the children who were at the camp showed a larger improvement over the five days than those who did not go to camp, the end results were not that different.
The point is that however you can get Junior to stay away from his cell phone the better junior interprets reality. Problem is, mom and dad are also so addicted to their mobile devices that they see non stop cell use as a new norm. Might it be time for schools to go back to the once (brief) time when all cell phones were banned from a campus during the school day? Have a nice day! Just finished
Drink Your Coffee
Here's a quick question for you. Out side of water, what is
the world's
most popular drink? I bet you said "tea". I would have. But it's my
favorite morning libation, coffee. But coffee is one of the more
maligned drinks too. I am sure you have been told nonsense like,
"Coffee has so much caffeine it will keep you awake at night". In
truth, coffee is, on average, just 1% caffeine. But myths about
caffeine in coffee persist. Maybe that's why people think drunks can be
sobered by forcing coffee down their throats. They can't.
Now there is good news about drinking coffee. According to a Cornell University study that was just released, coffee helps prevent deteriorating eyesight. It seems that the study confirmed that coffee is a strong antioxidant that prevents retinal degeneration And previous studies have shown that coffee cuts the risk of such chronic diseases as Parkinson's, prostate cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's and age related cognitive declines. And ignore the idiot you are sitting with who tells you after your 4th teaspoon of sugar is added, "You'll get diabetes from all that sugar". People who drink six or more cups of coffee each day are 35% less likely to develop diabetes. And, Studies have shown that regular coffee drinkers frequently score significantly higher on cognitive ability tests, spatial awareness exams, IQ tests, and short term memory studies.
But the ultimate love of coffee was expressed in the early 1700's when Johan Sabastian Bach (that classical guy) composed the "Coffee Cantata", in which a young woman, Lieschen, pleads with her disapproving father to accept her devotion to drinking coffee. I leave you with a stanza from it.
Now there is good news about drinking coffee. According to a Cornell University study that was just released, coffee helps prevent deteriorating eyesight. It seems that the study confirmed that coffee is a strong antioxidant that prevents retinal degeneration And previous studies have shown that coffee cuts the risk of such chronic diseases as Parkinson's, prostate cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's and age related cognitive declines. And ignore the idiot you are sitting with who tells you after your 4th teaspoon of sugar is added, "You'll get diabetes from all that sugar". People who drink six or more cups of coffee each day are 35% less likely to develop diabetes. And, Studies have shown that regular coffee drinkers frequently score significantly higher on cognitive ability tests, spatial awareness exams, IQ tests, and short term memory studies.
But the ultimate love of coffee was expressed in the early 1700's when Johan Sabastian Bach (that classical guy) composed the "Coffee Cantata", in which a young woman, Lieschen, pleads with her disapproving father to accept her devotion to drinking coffee. I leave you with a stanza from it.
- Better than a thousand kisses,
- Milder than muscat wine.
- Coffee, coffee, I've got to have it,
- And if someone wants to perk me up
- Oh, just give me a cup of coffee!
Living Much Longer
Talk about ambitious! There is a California doctor, Dr.
Joon Yun,
president of Palo Alto Investors who thinks the day when we stop the
aging process may be on the precipice. Called the Palo Alto Longevity
Prize, it offers a $1 million cash award to encourage al those
researchers out there to restore the adult body's youthful state,
perhaps helping to reduce diseases associated with aging and mortality,
and improve longevity. Good luck to that. Or maybe Dr. Yun just likes
the publicity that is coming forth with this contest.
The prize will be divided into two $500,000 awards, given to the first teams to unlock the secrets of the ability of the body's systems to stabilize in response to stressors. Stressors are supposed to make us age quickly. Aren't you glad you read the garbage I send you here. Haha Now that's stress. Any way, when the body ages, its ability to recover from diseases, injuries and lifestyle stresses such as a late night or loss of sleep becomes more difficult. But when we are young blood pressure and elevated blood sugar levels can return easily to normal levels. This ability erodes with age, and the body no longer is able to regulate these changes as effectively, resulting in diseases such as diabetes or hypertension. Supposedly, to control the stressors would add more than 100 more years to our lives.
One prize would be granted to the team to demonstrate it can restore the stressor activity in an aging adult mammal to the levels of a young adult and the second prize would go the first team to extend the life span of a living creature by 50 percent of acceptable published norms. Are you ready for 100 more years of me? I thought so. Let's hope they don't have a prize winner. After all, living twice as long, and in good health, is great physically. But our minds may not be suited for that long a life span. We become bored with life in our final years. Who's to say that boredom won't continue after the discovery. If so, suicide will dramatically increase as we lose any interest in continuing our lives. After you eat apple pie a few times it becomes mundane, so may our daily lives as we wallow in boredom with it. Well, at least we wouldn't have those high health care costs anymore.
Let's see, how many people in human history sought, and believed they could find the cure to aging? No matter. Better to ask how many succeeded. I think we can be sure Dr. Yun can be added to that list too.
The prize will be divided into two $500,000 awards, given to the first teams to unlock the secrets of the ability of the body's systems to stabilize in response to stressors. Stressors are supposed to make us age quickly. Aren't you glad you read the garbage I send you here. Haha Now that's stress. Any way, when the body ages, its ability to recover from diseases, injuries and lifestyle stresses such as a late night or loss of sleep becomes more difficult. But when we are young blood pressure and elevated blood sugar levels can return easily to normal levels. This ability erodes with age, and the body no longer is able to regulate these changes as effectively, resulting in diseases such as diabetes or hypertension. Supposedly, to control the stressors would add more than 100 more years to our lives.
One prize would be granted to the team to demonstrate it can restore the stressor activity in an aging adult mammal to the levels of a young adult and the second prize would go the first team to extend the life span of a living creature by 50 percent of acceptable published norms. Are you ready for 100 more years of me? I thought so. Let's hope they don't have a prize winner. After all, living twice as long, and in good health, is great physically. But our minds may not be suited for that long a life span. We become bored with life in our final years. Who's to say that boredom won't continue after the discovery. If so, suicide will dramatically increase as we lose any interest in continuing our lives. After you eat apple pie a few times it becomes mundane, so may our daily lives as we wallow in boredom with it. Well, at least we wouldn't have those high health care costs anymore.
Let's see, how many people in human history sought, and believed they could find the cure to aging? No matter. Better to ask how many succeeded. I think we can be sure Dr. Yun can be added to that list too.
To Recline On Board Or To Not Recline
You know what the biggest complaint of seated airline
passengers is?
It's the reclining seat, or should the guy or girl in front of you be
allowed to recline his or her seat into your 17 inches of space. It's
causing arguments between passengers, some physical confrontations, a
whole lot of physical discomfort, and has even resulted in complaining
passengers being arrested or planes being forced to land prematurely to
defuse a potentially violent mess on board.
In addition to that seat belt and safety speech we all endure each flight, flight attendants should consider issuing the recline warning to passengers before take-off. It might be something simple like, "Caution: reclining your seat into the already too crowded space of the passenger behind you may cause an unpleasant reaction that is hazardous to your health and airline safety". Just to let the recline passenger know...
I think the reclining seat was once a marvelous pleasure for passengers, but hen the airliners became so crowded and space for the passengers around their seats so small, it might be impolite and even dangerous to recline anymore. But then, the airlines still allow the seats to go back. I always seem to get the type of passenger in front of me who leans back and assaults my knees in the process. But as much as I dislike it and think it inconsiderate, never question his or her right to do so. Other passengers aboard are not as docile as I about this. I have seen some nasty moments between the reclining passenger and the infringed one.
The airlines are to blame for the current seat size but if you ask the airlines abut the reclining seat furor, they avoid the question, stating it is an issue better solved onboard with a little rational understanding. Ha! Rational? Who can be rationale when flying today? It is impossible to be rational when abused so much. That's why one company made allot of money selling a "knee defender" that clips to your seat and prevents the guy in front from reclining into your space.
I guess we passengers should just accept the abuse and move to another seat, if one is available, when the reclining seat becomes a problem. Or we could just stay home and forget the whole thing.
In addition to that seat belt and safety speech we all endure each flight, flight attendants should consider issuing the recline warning to passengers before take-off. It might be something simple like, "Caution: reclining your seat into the already too crowded space of the passenger behind you may cause an unpleasant reaction that is hazardous to your health and airline safety". Just to let the recline passenger know...
I think the reclining seat was once a marvelous pleasure for passengers, but hen the airliners became so crowded and space for the passengers around their seats so small, it might be impolite and even dangerous to recline anymore. But then, the airlines still allow the seats to go back. I always seem to get the type of passenger in front of me who leans back and assaults my knees in the process. But as much as I dislike it and think it inconsiderate, never question his or her right to do so. Other passengers aboard are not as docile as I about this. I have seen some nasty moments between the reclining passenger and the infringed one.
The airlines are to blame for the current seat size but if you ask the airlines abut the reclining seat furor, they avoid the question, stating it is an issue better solved onboard with a little rational understanding. Ha! Rational? Who can be rationale when flying today? It is impossible to be rational when abused so much. That's why one company made allot of money selling a "knee defender" that clips to your seat and prevents the guy in front from reclining into your space.
I guess we passengers should just accept the abuse and move to another seat, if one is available, when the reclining seat becomes a problem. Or we could just stay home and forget the whole thing.
Respect For The Aged Day
Some news for OLD PEOPLE like you! The Japanese are known for
quite a few traditions,
some good and some
bad. But one that seems a good idea is 'Respect for Old Aged Day'.
Oops! I see it just passed and missed it. It's not nice when an old
timer like me missed that one. I should blame it on my failing memory.
We oldies love to use that excuse. Oh, wait..... I forget to zip my
fly again and wanted to take care of that.
Anyway, that holiday is a new one, but it's catching on so much that other nations are thinking about celebrating it too. It was established as a national holiday in 1966 to express respect for the elders in the community, and to recognize and thank them for their contributions to society and last but not least, celebrate their long lives. On Respect for the Aged Day, the media in Japan fawns over the old crowd, does feature stories on the oldest person in Japan, and encourages the average citizen to do something nice for grandma and grandpa. You know, like stop putting grandpa in that chair that slopes so you can collect the change from his pocket when he is hoisted out of the chair.
Besides robbing grandpa the holiday encourages family members to visit the graves of deceased elders to show respect, cleaning the site and adding flowers. Respect for the Aged Day is also when we are supposed to talk to the family about the things elders have done to make life on earth more pleasant. Uh, you can leave out those stories of grandma passing out from too much wine at the family picnic. However, paying a car detailer to clean granny's vomit stains in your car did a great service to the car detail workers employed there.
We are also supposed to do something nice for our elders on that day. I might have trouble finding any one elder to me, but if I do, taking them flowers, making them breakfast or dinner, or taking them out for a day at the movies or to shop are recommended tributes. When you take granny to the mall, be careful that she doesn't collide with a teenage skate boarder or try to flash them for old time sake.
I suspect that this holiday will only work well in Japan. The Japanese culture always revered the aged and there are a lot of oldies in Japan. The number of people over the age of 100 is expected to reach 32,000 next month. One in five Japanese are aged 65 or older and Japanese women can expect to live to see their 85th birthday. In most of the world, the young don't pamper grandpa and grandma. Instead they say a few prayers that those old coots will die so they can get their inheritance. Hmmm I better stop now and check my will. Happy Respect for the Aged day.
Anyway, that holiday is a new one, but it's catching on so much that other nations are thinking about celebrating it too. It was established as a national holiday in 1966 to express respect for the elders in the community, and to recognize and thank them for their contributions to society and last but not least, celebrate their long lives. On Respect for the Aged Day, the media in Japan fawns over the old crowd, does feature stories on the oldest person in Japan, and encourages the average citizen to do something nice for grandma and grandpa. You know, like stop putting grandpa in that chair that slopes so you can collect the change from his pocket when he is hoisted out of the chair.
Besides robbing grandpa the holiday encourages family members to visit the graves of deceased elders to show respect, cleaning the site and adding flowers. Respect for the Aged Day is also when we are supposed to talk to the family about the things elders have done to make life on earth more pleasant. Uh, you can leave out those stories of grandma passing out from too much wine at the family picnic. However, paying a car detailer to clean granny's vomit stains in your car did a great service to the car detail workers employed there.
We are also supposed to do something nice for our elders on that day. I might have trouble finding any one elder to me, but if I do, taking them flowers, making them breakfast or dinner, or taking them out for a day at the movies or to shop are recommended tributes. When you take granny to the mall, be careful that she doesn't collide with a teenage skate boarder or try to flash them for old time sake.
I suspect that this holiday will only work well in Japan. The Japanese culture always revered the aged and there are a lot of oldies in Japan. The number of people over the age of 100 is expected to reach 32,000 next month. One in five Japanese are aged 65 or older and Japanese women can expect to live to see their 85th birthday. In most of the world, the young don't pamper grandpa and grandma. Instead they say a few prayers that those old coots will die so they can get their inheritance. Hmmm I better stop now and check my will. Happy Respect for the Aged day.
Hotel Changes
The world's hotels have been watching the airline industry
as it adds
fees and reduces services in order to both annoy passengers and to take
as much of their money as possible. It's all part of that sinister plan
(a little paranoia can be enjoyable) to make our traveling as
uncomfortable as we can endure. The good news is that some of the
changes the hotels have instituted are probably both sensible, only a
minor inconvenience and long overdue. Here are a few of the changes you
may have seen at those 3 to 5 star hotels you use on your travel routes.
1) Free newspapers are increasingly not being delivered to the hotel rooms of guests. The hotels are now either eliminating them or only providing a free newspaper for those guests who want to pick up one in the hotel lobby. As much as I love and read printed newspapers each day, it makes sense in this on line reading world, one in which fewer and fewer people even glance at a newspaper. This no newspaper policy saves the hotels a little money while annoying only a few customers.
2) The hotel room safe is now a rare sight in rooms. I never used those things, but many do and miss this. Now they have to bring their valuables to the hotel lobby desk to be stored in the hotel safe. I suspect that many of those who bring valuables on their trip will skip the jaunt to the hotel lobby and leave their goodies in their rooms, where some cunning maid or other hotel employee or thief will grab the goodies for themselves.
3) Premium pay channels on the hotel TV are now increasingly not offered at hotels. This means that favorite porno channel will have to be viewed on your computer instead. No problem here. Guests have increasingly used their DVD's or computers to watch whatever video, porno or not, they have time to see while vacationing. TV, like newspapers, is a dying entity. The hotels are probably wise to eliminate the expense of this service.
4) Those rolling carts in the hotel walkways outside your room with toilet paper, soap etc. are disappearing. It seems the cost of "lost" (stolen) goodies from those carts is fairly high, and that having the hotel maids tote them in plastic bags on their cleaning rounds reduces the temptation for you to grab a handful of shampoo, toothpaste and other cosmetics that you already have stuffed in your bathroom at home. The hotels say this is a big savings. You want toothpaste? Bring your own or the hotel will gladly sell you what it used to offer as a complimentary service.
5) Mini bar filled with overprices snacks and drinks are gone. Hallelujah to that! Nothing was ever more annoying to me at my hotel check-out than being asked what things I consumed from the hotel mini bar or refrig. After all, that junk was both unappealing and marked-up in price so high I never, ever used any of it. To find that the guest has been charged five dollars for a small bottle of water he or she did not take is beyond frustrating. The hotels have wised up and reduced the hassle for everyone by now providing empty refrigerators that guests can stock with their own goodies.
6) The free breakfast with a room purchase is going away at some hotels. This can be a good or bad thing, as some people never used their "free breakfast" anyway. The cost was still charged in their room fee despite their shunning the food.
7 ) The hotel concierge, once a free and oft used service for guest, is now asking for a fee for each service offered. I am not sure if this means guests will not tip their concierges less or not at all. But I think using them will now be based on whether they are absolutely needed, not because they are just there. The internet will take the place of the concierge in most instances.
So some changes are for the better and some a liability to the guests. The idea that hotels are now worried about their bottom line as much as the airlines isn't surprising. The difference is that the hotel business is a competitive one, while the airline industry is not. It is a virtual monopoly that abuses passengers as a result. Look for hotel stays to be less pleasant and a bit more expensive. It's just what the guest doesn't need after surviving that terrorist experience about the airplane that got them to their destination site
1) Free newspapers are increasingly not being delivered to the hotel rooms of guests. The hotels are now either eliminating them or only providing a free newspaper for those guests who want to pick up one in the hotel lobby. As much as I love and read printed newspapers each day, it makes sense in this on line reading world, one in which fewer and fewer people even glance at a newspaper. This no newspaper policy saves the hotels a little money while annoying only a few customers.
2) The hotel room safe is now a rare sight in rooms. I never used those things, but many do and miss this. Now they have to bring their valuables to the hotel lobby desk to be stored in the hotel safe. I suspect that many of those who bring valuables on their trip will skip the jaunt to the hotel lobby and leave their goodies in their rooms, where some cunning maid or other hotel employee or thief will grab the goodies for themselves.
3) Premium pay channels on the hotel TV are now increasingly not offered at hotels. This means that favorite porno channel will have to be viewed on your computer instead. No problem here. Guests have increasingly used their DVD's or computers to watch whatever video, porno or not, they have time to see while vacationing. TV, like newspapers, is a dying entity. The hotels are probably wise to eliminate the expense of this service.
4) Those rolling carts in the hotel walkways outside your room with toilet paper, soap etc. are disappearing. It seems the cost of "lost" (stolen) goodies from those carts is fairly high, and that having the hotel maids tote them in plastic bags on their cleaning rounds reduces the temptation for you to grab a handful of shampoo, toothpaste and other cosmetics that you already have stuffed in your bathroom at home. The hotels say this is a big savings. You want toothpaste? Bring your own or the hotel will gladly sell you what it used to offer as a complimentary service.
5) Mini bar filled with overprices snacks and drinks are gone. Hallelujah to that! Nothing was ever more annoying to me at my hotel check-out than being asked what things I consumed from the hotel mini bar or refrig. After all, that junk was both unappealing and marked-up in price so high I never, ever used any of it. To find that the guest has been charged five dollars for a small bottle of water he or she did not take is beyond frustrating. The hotels have wised up and reduced the hassle for everyone by now providing empty refrigerators that guests can stock with their own goodies.
6) The free breakfast with a room purchase is going away at some hotels. This can be a good or bad thing, as some people never used their "free breakfast" anyway. The cost was still charged in their room fee despite their shunning the food.
7 ) The hotel concierge, once a free and oft used service for guest, is now asking for a fee for each service offered. I am not sure if this means guests will not tip their concierges less or not at all. But I think using them will now be based on whether they are absolutely needed, not because they are just there. The internet will take the place of the concierge in most instances.
So some changes are for the better and some a liability to the guests. The idea that hotels are now worried about their bottom line as much as the airlines isn't surprising. The difference is that the hotel business is a competitive one, while the airline industry is not. It is a virtual monopoly that abuses passengers as a result. Look for hotel stays to be less pleasant and a bit more expensive. It's just what the guest doesn't need after surviving that terrorist experience about the airplane that got them to their destination site
Parents Have Their Child Areested For Sexting
More on cell phone insanity...... What happens when parents
give children too much cell phone
freedom?
A lot, some good but mostly bad. It can be downright ridiculous as to
the perspective both the parent and child takes about the necessity or
luxury of the great toy of the 21st century....the cell phone. For
example, in Virginia the other day the parents of a 13 year old
daughter jumped off a higher cliff than their child when they turned in
their 13 year old daughter to the local sheriff after finding nude
photos of her and other teens on her cell phone and tablet.
Yep! Instead of taking the phone and tablet away, they called the police. It makes me wonder whether the 13 year old or the parents are in control there. Surely, having one's child arrested because she did what plenty of 13 year olds will do when given a cell phone is extreme. I'd venture to say that whatever trust the parents and child had toward each other is now long gone.
The unidentified parents said they alerted the local sheriff's office even though she could be prosecuted. They said they did not want a stranger to possibly see the images and track her down. "We did this now to protect her for now and in the future, because this could get worse," the mother said. Hmmm It's an interesting concept in parenting. Let the criminal authorities parent instead of the parent. I find that odd. Yet, in this age in which many elevate a phone to the level of an inherent right, perhaps more parents might think that having the police arrest their daughter is the more sensible alternative to just taking away her phone.
The mother learned of the so-called sexting when her other child heard voices in their daughter's bedroom about 4 a.m. "What scares me is, this is much bigger than we realize. How many others are doing this and you don't realize it?" she said. Um, what scares me is that we have parents as dense as those tow. But then, in the United States one must apply for and receive a license to own a pet. But to have a baby requires nothing more than sperm and an egg.
The sheriff's office of the county where the girl was arrested is still investigating, but the child's lawyer said the daughter could be sent to a juvenile counseling program that would involve her parents. Hmmmm I suggest the parents get most of the counseling. A basic course in making appropriate parental decisions would help. Depending on their ages, the older teens who received the pictures, however, could be sent to jail....uh, I hope without their phones.
Yep! Instead of taking the phone and tablet away, they called the police. It makes me wonder whether the 13 year old or the parents are in control there. Surely, having one's child arrested because she did what plenty of 13 year olds will do when given a cell phone is extreme. I'd venture to say that whatever trust the parents and child had toward each other is now long gone.
The unidentified parents said they alerted the local sheriff's office even though she could be prosecuted. They said they did not want a stranger to possibly see the images and track her down. "We did this now to protect her for now and in the future, because this could get worse," the mother said. Hmmm It's an interesting concept in parenting. Let the criminal authorities parent instead of the parent. I find that odd. Yet, in this age in which many elevate a phone to the level of an inherent right, perhaps more parents might think that having the police arrest their daughter is the more sensible alternative to just taking away her phone.
The mother learned of the so-called sexting when her other child heard voices in their daughter's bedroom about 4 a.m. "What scares me is, this is much bigger than we realize. How many others are doing this and you don't realize it?" she said. Um, what scares me is that we have parents as dense as those tow. But then, in the United States one must apply for and receive a license to own a pet. But to have a baby requires nothing more than sperm and an egg.
The sheriff's office of the county where the girl was arrested is still investigating, but the child's lawyer said the daughter could be sent to a juvenile counseling program that would involve her parents. Hmmmm I suggest the parents get most of the counseling. A basic course in making appropriate parental decisions would help. Depending on their ages, the older teens who received the pictures, however, could be sent to jail....uh, I hope without their phones.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)