Living Proof that We can Rise Above Our Differences ....

A brightly shining light leaves our realm of existence this day.  You will be greatly missed Mrs. Barbara Bush, but your legacy will live on in your words and your actions.  You were living proof that we can rise above our differences --especially political ones-- and work together in order to get meaningful things done for our nation.  You are truly an inspiration and a legacy of hope for unity in our nation, Barbara Bush!  Safe travels as you embark upon  your next great adventure.  May God Bless and keep those you love and leave behind.

 Image Source

Wherein lies the HOPE for Mankind???

Watching the movie "Atomic Blonde" makes me think that life was so much simpler back then, around the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall and the ending of the Cold War.  In the 80's and 90's it was so much easier to identify "right from wrong" and "good from evil." So it seems, but perhaps that's just because we're viewing past events through the lens of History? Although these days, even our history seems malleable.  Truth now depends upon your perspective? And nowadays everything comes riddled with the added bonus of layer upon layer of obfuscation, compounded largely by our technology.  We now have social media, where everyone has a supposed platform to express opinion and share truth, but the tech actually regulates what gets promoted and shared as "truth."  Then we have multiple media outlets competing with one another in a  24-hour news cycle --in both on-line/print content, as well as television/cable broadcasts-- where far too many of these outlets masquerade as purveyors of honest journalism while spewing veiled propaganda 24/7... I kind of miss the days when omission was 'sin'.  Bottom line, these days you really have to work to get at a version of truth where national and global events are concerned. Quite frankly most people are too busy just trying to make ends meet while chasing after a veritable banquet of bright-shiny distractions to even ponder the notion of searching for truth.  Leaves me wondering: wherein lies the hope for mankind?  For I find it hard to fathom that in the world of the 1980's and 90's that a cruel and brutal dictator like Bashar Al-assad of Syria would be able to repeatedly launch chemical weapons attacks against his people --among these defenseless women and children-- over the course of near-on an entire decade, while the world just stands silently by.

4/10/18  The narrative of absolutes rears its ugly head yet again, this time on the Right.  With the prominent  question for restraint being  "What exactly are U.S. interests in Syria?"  The answer: probably none, at least w.r.t. to our borders or our country's national security.  The problem is that what is going on Syria, what has been going on for over 8++ eight years, is a crime against Humanity and those in a position to act in defense of the innocent have a moral obligation to do SOMETHING.  I agree this shouldn't be a U.S. only issue.  The world's leaders need to act together, in unison --not piecemeal or unilaterally-- in order to bring the reign of Bashar Al-assad to an end.  That being said, it will probably be up to the United States to provide leadership in this united effort.

I also have to wonder, why does Russia still have its seat on the U.N. Security Council? If the United Nations is to have any legitimacy moving forward they must punish Russia for its repeated failure to live up to its promise (obligation) to have successfully overseen the removal of chemical weapons from the Al-assad regime --dating back to their initial obligation back in 2013.  The punishment for Russia's failure in this respect should be that Russia loses its seat on the Security Council, whether this removal be for the short term or long term.  Perhaps Russia can do something to eventually earn its seat back in the long term?  I mean if the U.N. is merely to be a venue for the airing of grievances on the world stage, with no teeth for enacting meaningful and timely responses to real world crises then why are we pouring billions of dollars into its upkeep and operation?  Seems kind of pointless to me? Surely a "grievance only" board should at the very least cost a whole heck of a lot less than what we are currently paying.  In the aftermath of yet another chemical attack upon the people of Syria, I think the U.N. is at a crossroads.  They either stand for something and have the power to enact meaningful change or they don't. It's pretty black and white from where I'm standing. What say you???  I can think of at least a dozen other ways the money we pour into the U.N. could be better spent. 

Side thought:  The country of Jordan has repeatedly stood against terrorism and mad dictators in the region for decades now.  And their country is pretty small compared to Syria.  If Assad is ousted, perhaps the time has come to carve up Syria and hand its control over to more stable actors, someone who will act in the better interests of the beleaguered Syrian people?  Surely the Syrian people could not do any worse than Assad, the lone exception being a vacuum filled by Islamist extremists? In an effort to avoid the later, I vote for giving Jordan control of a huge chunk of Syria. Maybe Turkey gets another piece?

4/15/2018  Reassuring that the United Kingdom, France, United States, Jordan, Turkey and UAE worked in coordination to strike strategic chemical weapons targets in Syria over the weekend.  May God Bless and keep the Syrian people during these troubled times.

"We the People" are Children???

Michelle Obama, former First Lady, summed up the current philosophy of the Left (Progressive Liberals) vs. the Right (Conservatives) rather nicely in her comments to a crowd at XXXXX when she referred to the relationship between the U.S. President and the country as being one of "parent vs. child" in nature.  This analogy sums up the basic distinction between "Left" and "Right" these days rather brilliantly, in my humble opinion.  The Left has come to believe --for I don't believe they always felt this way-- that "we the people" are basically stupid and incapable of making important decisions in our own everyday lives.  Contrasting this viewpoint, the Right believes you have the right to make your own choices, sometimes including mistakes, in pursuing your own personal version of "Life, Liberty & Happiness", as long as you don't break the laws we've established in the process of this pursuit.  As such, the Right believes the laws we create should be kept to the minimum needed to "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."  Where we have provided for the latter with the framework given by our U.S. Constitution.  

Image Source: Library of Congress by way of boweryboyshistory.com

 I don't know about you, but I prefer to live my life as a grown-up, and contrary to popular belief these days being a "rebel" has never meant getting in line and shouting out contrived mantras, in unison, in the absence of any meaningful facts or logical reason.  If you're truly a rebel, then I challenge you to USE YOUR BRAIN, not just your voice.  Dare to do your own legwork in gathering facts to illuminate both sides of truth.  For there are always at least two sides to every truth. Then once you have your facts don't just focus on "what's wrong", focus on detailed solutions for fixing what's wrong.  A true rebel has at least considered the other side of an issue before daring to go in the opposite direction of the traditional or popular opinion.  Rebels seldom follow the herd, Left or Right.  Guess that's why I've settled into being an Independent these days?  Anyway, my point is that only when we are willing to consider another perspective will we be in any position to engage in a dialogue with the potential to advance beyond mere words into timely and meaningful action.  If you "don't like America" --what we stand for or what we've become-- then why not use your brain, not just your voice, in order to be conduits for beginning conversations across American that will engage others in meaningful discussions and debate --actual conversations, not just one-sided shouting matches.  For I have come to believe that only honest conversations can begin to bridge the ever-widening chasms of our nation's divide.  

Honestly, shouting "impeach 45" at the top of your lungs isn't really going to accomplish anything.  Donald J. Trump is our President for the foreseeable future and whether he succeeds or fails has a direct impact on our nation as a whole.  With this in mind, why would you be rooting for our President to fail when his failure most likely will translate into a net loss in the average citizen's bottom line?  If you have a specific issue that's bothering you --aside from "impeach 45"-- research it, talk about it, and then reach out to your elected officials with concrete grievances and potential resolutions.  Only meaningful conversations will finally begin to move our country forward into a position of not only strength, but into a position of long-term sustainability and prosperity for all, not just the privileged elites.  A part of me has come to wonder, of late, if perhaps these very elites want us to be divided and in conflict with one another because this keeps us distracted so that we won't focus on what's really going on behind the scenes by those wielding power.  Some of us seem to have forgotten this, but those politicians working in Washington, D.C.:  they work for us, "We the People."  And it's up to us to hold them accountable and not just at the ballot box.  Why not try writing to your Congressmen and other elected officials or try calling them as well.  Maybe attend a local town halls, or start a petition to address a pressing issue facing your community.  While you're at it, might I suggest a letter/email to your Congressman asking him/her why they are only scheduled to work for another 75 days for remainder of the calendar year?   

So that's my challenge to you, be you Left or Right or in the middle-leaning ideologically speaking: let's get some honest non-bubble (outside of like-minded bubbles of isolation) conversations going across our nation.  I don't want to live in a world where debate/dialogue and well-intentioned dissent --on either side-- have become relics of the non-technologically driven past.  That would be true tyranny.  We gain nothing by shutting down free speech, even speech we do not personally happen to agree with.  The time has come for Americans --most especially those of the millennial generation-- to toughen up!  If you want to make it in the REAL world you have to learn that just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean that they are wrong or intent on harming you.  Learning to "use your words" for the purpose of discussion is one the most useful skills you will ever learn in life.  Dare to step outside your protective bubbles of isolation, you might actually gain some useful new insights.  Let's use our brains, our voices and our technology to prove the progressive Left wrong.  Let's show the progressive Left that we are not children, and more importantly that we will no longer be so easily led.  Let's work together to find solutions and a way forward from new and enlightened perspectives.  Together, I think we can actually work to help make our nation whole once again.  For in the absence of unity, America will never be great again and I suspect those with an eye toward retaining power know this.

Does being an actual American citizen really even matter anymore???

I used to think an uninformed electorate was the greatest danger to our representative democracy. These days, however, I'm thinking that a misinformed electorate, in this age of fake news, false narratives and ideological absolutes is perhaps the greatest threat to our modern-day democracy.  That being said misrepresentation of citizens vs. non-citizen w.r.t. our elected officials may pose yet an even greater threat to our representative democracy. The inclusion of non-citizen in headcounts used to determine representation allotments in federal government, namely the number of Representatives apportioned for each individual state actually shifts the power wielding dynamics in the U.S. House of Representatives.  This is because the way our representative democracy works the States with more people have more representation in the U.S. Congress --there is equal apportionment in the U.S. Senate-- and hence a greater voice w.r.t. to determining voting outcomes.  It's actually kind of scary when you stop and think about it? This citizen misrepresentation --inclusion of non-citizens in census headcounts-- has the potential to transform our electorate in the long term. In the short term it provides a false representation of congressional districts, which in determines the way our representative officials (U.S. Representatives) are elected. Post-election this misrepresentation determines which issues are important to the citizens represented by a given congressional district. Left unchecked, the transformation afforded by the misrepresentation of actual citizens, both in terms of headcounts as well as illegally voting in our elections, could likely result in a profound and perhaps irreversible shift in the way America, as a country, is run.

I have to sincerely wonder:  in the absence of true representation in our government does being an actual American citizen even matter anymore??? I mean, think about the power a state like California wields in the U.S. House of Representatives when the determination of their representation (#of Representatives apportioned to them in the House) is based largely upon inflated numbers due to the counting of non-citizens.  This is absolutely why the U.S. Constitution calls for a census every 10 years.  It is also why the "citizenship question" was added to the census by our Founding Fathers back in the day.  Frankly, this feigned moral outrage at returning this centuries-old question to the census --after it was removed by the Obama Administration-- is completely ludicrous.  The Left is just ticked, I think, that someone is finally catching onto the many ways they've tried to rig the system in favor of their retention of power.  Perhaps the Left's response to this question also goes a long way toward explaining their stance on immigration and sanctuary cities as well? It's never really been about compassion for the immigrants; if it was then the Democrats would have come to the table in this most recent round of budget negotiations and worked with President Trump on his offer to legalize 1.8 million immigrants --way more than the actual 0.6 million DACA immigrants who have signed up for the program. The illusion of compassion is just a false front to cover up the heart of the matter which boils down to pure numbers and a retention of voting power the left needs to retain power, particularly in the U.S. House of Representatives?

If being a U.S. citizen is to matter anymore, then we have to un-rig the system and start restoring some accountability to the system.  The census "citizen question" is really the only way to have any accountability where determination of representation of citizens in their government is concerned.  Without true representation of citizens in their government our voice, our vote becomes watered down and the voice of "we the people" is no longer heard*.  You absolutely can live and thrive in America as a non-citizen, but you don't have the right to a voice in our federal government in the absence of citizenship.  That's why citizenship is sacred.  It's a contract between "we the people" and those we elect to represent us in our government, as provided by the framework of our U.S. Constitution.  Following this framework is not being cold or heartless, that's just what it takes to keep America strong and headed on the right path for our sovereign nation.  It's also why those living here who want to have a say in our government should embrace legal means available to them for obtaining their own path to citizenship. We will always welcome new and diverse members who want to use legal means to become an integral part of the American 'dream' and way of life.  That being said, in the absence of enforced borders, sensible immigration controls and immigrants who are vested in contributing to our nation: what is to stop the U.S. from eventually becoming like the countries so many are fleeing from?  Especially when some local governments, states and a handful of rogue justices think they can pick and choose which federal laws they will enforce vs. actively thwart.  Bottom-line, realistically speaking the system we currently have is simply not sustainable in the longer term, regardless of whether or not "this [particular] year's 'illegal immigration' numbers are down or not."  Do the math.

Much like our nation's debt, the time to act on sensible immigration reform (&enforcement) is NOW.  These two key issues alone have the power to bring America to her knees.  Sometimes, I cannot help but wonder if the Left is thinking:  if you destroy it, you can rebuild it [America] in your chosen image???

[*Of course, government will likely have to put someone in charge of following up on claims of citizenship in order to have 100% certainty as to the accuracy of the data supplied by individuals.]

Investment in "our future"?

The latest omnibus spending bill passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by a ham-strung President leaves my mind absolutely reeling?!  The signing of this Bill into law is the kind of moment when space and time --past, present and future-- collide to create lasting ripples in the ever-expanding universe.  I guess my initial optimism, when Congress succeeded in passing a 2-year budget authorization --something not done since 1996-- a few weeks back, was premature.  Don't get me wrong, I am overjoyed that our military men and women are getting a long overdue pay increase.  Also relieved to see that our decaying and antiquated military is now on a firm standing for a much need reconstruction and modernization expansion.  This new budget, with increased military spending, will go a long way towards strengthening our national security.  That being said, curbing a decline in our military might is only half of the national security equation.  Our nation's outrageous and growing national debt poses an equally dangerous threat to our nation's security.  This is why it is imperative that all unnecessary spending on pet/"pork" projects be zeroed-out in Congressional budgets moving forward [Carly Fiorina talked about this in the 2016 Republican Primary, the need to return to a zero-baseline budgeting to account for where each and every dollar of spending is going].  The time to get our fiscal house in order is long past overdue, and the "pork" spending tacked onto this most recent omnibus spending bill in the 11th hour truly sickens me.  I had hoped for a time that with Republicans in control of both the House and Senate that we would finally begin to reign back in unnecessary spending toward the end of getting a handle on our nation's ever-expanding debt. At the very least, I thought that never again would Republicans pass a massive bill without "knowing what's in it", but I guess the lessons learned from Obama-care were short-lived? Not to worry though, Congress gave themselves a pretty decent pay-raise?!?

Trump should have vetoed this spending debacle and then drug the lazy-inept Congress back to Washington D.C. to clean up their mess.  Surely, the military could have waited another week or two after waiting this long? But then, I forgot how terrible the Republicans are when it comes to playing "Chicken."  And what about those 'humanitarian' Democrats fighting for the rights of innocent children brought into the U.S. through no fault of their own? The Democrats dropped DACA recipients faster than a hot potato when the opportunity to advance their own political agenda --national insolvency-- came around.  DACA recipients and immigrants alike really need take a long hard look at the party that claims to support them.  Thankfully, I think people are finally starting to realize the Democratic party is just using them to get votes in an effort to maintain a stranglehold on power while throwing out crumbs every now again to keep their voting base in line.

Nancy Pelosi was quoted in a press briefing after the Omnibus Bill's passage as saying "This Bill is an important investment in our future."  When what this Bill actually does is saddle our future [our children] with an insurmountable legacy of debt, while pushing our nation ever closer to the edge of insolvency.

If I were President Trump I would call on Republicans in the U.S. Congress to publish a complete list on the "us.gov" website of all the "pork" contained within this monstrous bill, along with the name of the Congressman/woman responsible for the unnecessary addition to our national debt.  The only way to truly clean up "the swamp" is to restore accountability to government.  By publishing this list, "we the people" can see who to hold accountable for unnecessary expenditures and who to vote out of office in the next election cycle.

3/29/2018  Heard today that Congressman Ron DeSantos, of Florida, is working with other members of the House of Representatives to introduce legislation that would amend the U.S. Constitution to allow for a Presidential line-item veto.  This news troubled me at first, mostly because my mind wondered at all of the many opportunities for abuse in the scenario of a full blown line-item veto, but apparently this newly proposed amendment would only grant the President the power veto line-items pertaining to spending. That is to say that this line-item veto would allow the President to put an end to "pork" spending measures tacked onto a bill in the 11th hours, thereby helping to reign in unnecessary spending in an effort to begin getting a handle on our national debt.  Apparently the last attempt to introduce a line-item veto --in the 1990's By Newt Gingrich-- passed with a 2/3rds majority vote.  The problem was that this change was not put forth in the form of an actual amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but rather as a statutory power.  This is the reason the initial push for a line-item veto was not upheld by the Supreme Court.

Living in a World Where Facts No Longer Matter???

Bi-fracated, meaning this is the world we presently find ourselves living in? Left vs. Right.  Black vs. White.  Men vs. Women.  Religion of faith vs. Religion of ideology.  A world of absolutes with little middle ground?  Like minded people only choosing to speak with like-minded people, in protective bubbles of isolation.  Wonder sometimes if we, as a society, have completely lost the ability to actually engage and debate one other with facts these days.  People no longer seem willing to talk with one another about the things that truly stand to have an impact on the world in which we live anymore.  We just talk at one another, past one another.  I had thought civil discourse was no longer possible in the divided state of America, but recent forums at the White House hosted by President Trump have given me hope that perhaps all is not lost?

Personally, I blame social media conditioning in large part for this bi-frication of America.  Social media is literally rewiring people's brains.  It's shortening our patience tendons and attention spans, such that we no longer have time for actual phone calls, meaningful face to face conversations or hand-written correspondence.  Social media consumes hours of our time as we mindlessly digest mostly useless information --kind of like the 'emotion' neutralizing pill in the move "Equilibrium", where modern-day social media tends to neutralize independent thought.  Social media fuels our desire to be heard and "Like[ed]", to BELONG.  Sadly, far too many of us are addicted to the dopamine hit of being heard, Liked, to the extent that the ability to listen seems rapidly on its way to becoming a lost art-form. 

Also have to think that perception is easier to sway --and hence people/populations are easier to influence and control-- in the on-line forum.  He who controls the content now controls the outcome? To live in a world where the facts no longer matter, where reality is malleable, fungible? Witness media outlets claiming to be purveyors of news, when the majority fail to cover major news stories that do not fit their ideological narrative and what they do cover is mostly opinion given under the guise of 'news'... I am left wondering when rational, logical, flesh and blood people are going to wake up, re-engage with hearts and minds and say enough already???? Especially where our children and their safety in our nation's schools is concerned.  At the end of the day passing new gun legislation won't guarantee our children will be safe.  Only hardening the soft targets of our schools will do this.  Have the gun legislation conversation, but in my opinion that is an entirely separate issue.  Focusing on the guns first takes the focus away from where it should be: 100% preventing another shooting from happening in the next 365 days.  Let's start by actually enforcing the laws we already have on the books and then hardening the soft targets of our children's schools. Then we can move on from here. Historically speaking, meaningful action seldom happens in like-minded bubbles of isolation. Meaningless --non-fact based mantras-- fueling an innate human need to belong, with little effort or thought being put into coloring outside some lines in order to find new solutions to real-world problems isn't going to fix what ails us as a nation and a society.  I challenge you to put down your mouse and engage in at least one meaningful, real-world conversation today.  Baby steps.  Maybe together we can change this world of ours for the better one 'un-click' at a time.  And when you do happen click, why not use your clicks to contact your U.S. Senators and Representatives with real-world concrete solutions that will help to move the discussion --on keeping our children safe in their schools-- forward into meaningful and timely action.

3/14/2018  Logic and reason prevailed today, as the U.S. House of Representatives was able to pass the "Stop School Violence Act" by a vote of 407 for the bill and 10 against.  This bill will immediately allow school districts across the nation to begin taking the steps necessary to harden the soft targets of our schools.  The bill had 75 member co-sponsors, demonstrating the broad support for taking immediate action, without the unnecessary delay of including gun legislation in this initial bill.  Congress will likely have the gun-control legislation debate, but it will thankfully be conducted as separate issue, thereby allowing for immediate meaningful action that will help to keep our students safe in their school environments.  Hoping the U.S. Senate will now follow suit in order to make this bill into law! Here are "Stop School Violence Act" bill details.

Our Children Are Our Future

Mourners attend a candlelit memorial service, Thursday night for the 17 victims of the shooting at 

Stoneman Douglas High School. Photo: Greg Lovett / "The Palm Beach Post"

Tragic school shooting in Parkland, Florida, really hits close to home for me and my family.  Leaves me wondering not so much about the guns, but rather wondering about the way our schools choose to conduct their daily business.  Our children are our future and yet we do so little to ensure their well-being in their daily school environments. Security protocols were much more stringent for my children at the elementary and even junior high levels, but when you get into the high school level security seems to become virtually non-existent.  This is absolutely crazy, because in the high school environment threats can now not only come from without, but also from within --witness the tragic school shooting in, Parkland Florida on Valentine's Day.

I don't see why we cannot secure our children the way you do a medium to large business, with proprietary concerns.  That is to say, each student and teacher should wear a digitally programmed access ID card, to be worn on their person and visible at all times.  If you don't have a card, then you don't have access period.  That way, the office has a digital footprint of who is on campus at all times. Furthermore, each school should have security checkpoints at all major entrances, where visitors can sign in and receive a temporary badge and where security personnel can check bags as needed.  A security camera system would be nice in all schools as well, but this may not be possible in all cases due to prohibitive costs. Perhaps some Federal money, ear-marked for education, needs to be diverted into a fund for setting up security protocols in our high schools?

I'm not saying we should turn our schools into prisons, however, I sincerely believe we should put some much needed accountability into the system where protecting our schools is concerned, particularly at the high school level.  Even if you took all the guns away, I strongly suspect a hurting child intent on inflicting violence upon others would find another method for unleashing their intended violence.  In light of this fact, establishing a secure environment, with real-time eyes and ears on the ground is the only way we can keep our children safe.  Isn't it high time we had this serious action-oriented discussion???

2/16/2018 I was initially hesitant to comment on the shooter in this case until I had some more information.  I can see now why my sixth sense hesitated.  As much as I grieve for the loss of young, innocent lives in this tragic school shooting,  I cannot help but think our system failed this young man.  He was clearly alone in the world and hurting and his 'salvation' was nowhere to found?  We need to do more as a society, as educators, parents and mentors to look out for these children who have been dealt unfair blows.  We need to do more to extend a hand out and up, to offer hope in hours of darkness, to provide safe spaces with answers and a path forward in times of need.  We need to teach our children not to be so judgmental, to call out others who treat their peers with cruelty and disdain.  We cannot live in a world where such little value is placed upon any human life?

I am also thinking that those who would so readily surrender their right to bear arms --as guaranteed by the 2nd amendment of our U.S. Constitution-- naively put way too much faith in those who seek power.  Benjamin Franklin's famous quote is echoing loudly within my mind as I type here in the early a.m. hours "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety."  Our founding fathers got this.  They realized that absolute power has a tendency to corrupt in the long run and  that's why they gave us the 2nd amendment. These brilliant men --and the women behind them-- foresaw that in the absence of a right to bear arms, there can be no true consent of the governed. History has demonstrated, time and time again, that quick response emotion-driven fixes often fail to address vital long term consequences. At times like these I have to wonder if the latter is a fundamental difference between modern-day Republicans and Democrats?  The former possess the ability to identify and anticipate long-term ramifications of policy issues, while the latter cannot???

3/6/2018 Watching the Boston Bruins play the Detroit Red Wings in hockey this evening.  Quite an amazing game.  Was pulling for Detroit to win.  Red Wings really gave Boston a run for their money, especially in light of the fact that Red Wings had their starting goal tender playing his debut NHL game.  Sadly, Detroit doesn't have a great record in over-time where they lost.  But still was a great game.  During the first intermission I heard that Stoneman Douglas High School --site of tragic Valentine's Day school shooting-- went on to win the Florida State Championship in hockey just 10 days after the shooting incident.  The Panthers made a surprise visit to the team and brought the Stanley Cup for a visit. Triumph in the face of adversity.  How awesome is that!

Veritas ...

"Veritas" ... The word which has been echoing loudly throughout my thoughts and dreams over the course of this weekend.  It occurs to me that media is being presented ONE FINAL opportunity to redeem themselves, with respect to speaking absolute truth to real power.  We've had enough smoke, mirrors and perceptive spin, where convenient truth is concerned.  History is knocking loudly at the doors of the mainstream media and if they fail to answer honestly this time, then they are as good as dead where credibility is concerned.  Moreover, History will not remember them kindly and their misdeeds will be eternally etched within the volume of Time.

Image Source

U.S. Congress Poised to Finally Pass a Long-term Budget

I wholeheartedly applaud the Congress for finally getting about the business of doing their constitutional duty, that is to provide the framework for a long-term federal budget.  It gives me hope to see the end of this era of short-term budget resolutions --where each side holds the budget process hostage in a partisan effort to advance their pet projects-- might actually be coming to a much needed end.  These short term CRs have been preventing the Congress from doing their job properly since 1996.  The current budget agreement would span almost a full  two-year period, from I understand.  This is truly remarkable and long overdue!

I am glad the leaders in each chamber are succeeding in keeping immigration out of the current negotiations, because the reality is that immigration IS NOT a budget issue.  I agree with Speaker Ryan that the Congress needs to pass a long-term budget so that they are then free to pursue a separate comprehensive immigration reform bill, which would include DACCA considerations.

The above being said, I am a bit confused by the language of some of the dissent I am hearing from members of congress on both sides of the aisle.  Some members are speaking as if this budget is actually an appropriation, that is to say dollars being 'physically' distributed into various department accounts.  My understanding, however, is that the current budget provides only allocations (i.e., ceilings on spending), thereby providing the framework for future appropriations discussions on actual spending.  Such that to my way of thinking, you ought to take the good favor of Democrats and Republicans actually coming together to accomplish something very powerful and you move it across the finish line --preferably before midnight tonight, because there are real people on the other side of these negotiations who stand to lose a lot from further delay. There is plenty of time for grand-standing on deficit spending during the later appropriations process.  Fund the shredded military budget, provide for disaster relief and worry about entitlement reforms later.  Am I completely off-base here???

2/12/2018  Some update terminology FYI:  This most recent 2-year Congressional Bill was an "allocation spending bill", meaning it set the framework (most notably ceilings in key budget areas) for a two-year spending plan.  Future Congressional negotiations will dole out the actual currency to each department, states and municipalities.  This is where the real wheeling and dealing will ensue.  For in order to truly address deficit spending some hardcore, long-term entitlement reform will need to take place. Furthermore, just because a ceiling was set in a given area, does not mean that the Congress needs to appropriate funds that will reach a given ceiling --although, historically Congress does tend to spend what they allocate.  But the good news is that the U.S. Congress finally did it! Congress men and women, Democrat and Republican alike, somehow managed to put aside bi-partisan feuding long enough to reach an agreement on a long-term spending bill.  Rather miraculous, in and of itself, if you ask me --since this has not happened since 1996.  No more government shutdowns every few months.  The U.S. Congress can finally set about seeing to the business they were elected for.  Nicely done!

When the TRUTH Hunts You Down .....

It's all coming out now ... "Graham-Grassley Memo", preceded by the House Oversight Committee "FISA Memo."  Both memos detailing what happens when no-one is watching the guardians?  We wind up with a fourth, heretofore unaccounted for and unaccountable branch of the federal government.  That should scare the heck out of every law-abiding citizen in America, but it probably won't because most people don't seek truth.  There are far too many other bright, shiny distractions to chase after? Then of course, there is is also the fact that you have to be willing to look beyond the smoke and mirrors spin of the left-biased mainstream media.  Smashing the mirrors and looking beyond the smoke, that's where you'll find the true rebels in America these days.

A word of caution to the Trump Administration: You can almost guarantee that pressure for President Trump to testify before Special Counsel Robert Mueller will now intensify, from both the Democrats and left-biased mainstream media, in light of damaging information coming out that points to top-level abuses of power --if not outright criminal misconduct-- on the part of holdover (appointments during Obama Administration) senior FBI and DOJ officials.  The left will be wanting  to find anything and everything to use as fuel for a timely distraction FIRE from the emerging truth.  Where this emerging truth seems to be pointing to the fact that the only real "collusion to influence the recent 2016 Presidential Election" came from the left, including the aforementioned senior FBI and DOJ holdovers (most notably James Comey, former FBI Director), with the trail leading all the way back to the Hillary Clinton, the DNC and even several Obama State Department Officials.

If President Trump is smart, he will state unequivocally that "in light of everything that is coming out now, w.r.t. to the FISC and related information, I have decided to postpone my interview with Mueller's team until we get to the bottom of real evidence of collusion during the 2016 Election." Then to this end, Jeff Sessions needs to immediately appoint a Special Counsel to open a new, all encompassing investigation to follow-up on this new paper trail of abuse and misconduct at the highest levels of the FBI and DOJ. Congress can investigate and call for resignations, but it cannot prosecute.  The DOJ, under the guidance of the Attorney General, has to step up to the plate when it comes to prosecuting individuals for any criminal misconduct.

later p.m. ... The narrative of absolutes is rearing its ugly head already.  Former VP Joe Biden is claiming, in his most recent interview, that any investigation of the FBI is "full-throated" and disparaging to the entire FBI.  When the truth is that the factual evidence (i.e, legal documents and testimony to Congressional committees) suggests we have a real problem at the senior-most levels of the FBI, dating back to the Obama Administration during the course of the 2016 Presidential Election.  The problem is with the "suits" at the FBI, not the boots and most honest media coverage has gone out of its way to make this clear distinction.  The evidence presented to date --and there is likely more to come-- represents a serious danger to our constitutional democracy, because the abuses outlined by the evidence clearly demonstrate that our FBI was allowed to operate unchecked, in a weaponized fashion toward the end of influencing a presidential election and likely undermining the subsequent legitimacy of President Donald Trump.  At the very least, we need to clean some serious house and then close gaping process loop-holes, starting with the defacto rubber-stamping of FISC warrants.  Someone in this "secret court" needs to be looking out for the accused (i.e., ensuring evidence presented for the warrant has been thoroughly verified), the American citizen who is about to unknowingly lose all his/her rights to privacy and due process.  At the end of all this, any reasonable person --with half a brain-- is left wondering who else has this weaponized FBI spied on??? And if there is perhaps any correlation between this conjecture and the fact that 9 Republican chairs have announced plans to step down at the end of their term, while 34++ Republican Congressmen plan not to seek re-election.  Does not "Democracy die in darkness"? And of course the million dollar question, I suppose is "what did the President [Obama] know, and when did he know it?"

Super Blue-Blood Moon on the Eve of the SOTU

Thought it was a noteworthy coincidence that President Trump presented his first official "State of the Union" address on the eve of a spectacular triple-featured Lunar event, an event that has not occurred in the last 150 years.  You see, last night happened to be triple-featured Moon: 1) A rare Blue Moon (2nd Full Moon in a given month); 2) Super Moon (Moon at point closet to Earth in its slightly elliptical orbit, which makes the Moon appear to be significantly closer and brighter); 3) Total Lunar Eclipse.  The last feature is what gives the moon its red colored appearance, as the shadow of the Earth cast onto the moon makes the moon appear reddish in color; hence the term "Blood Moon."

Image from Phys.org

I'll share my thoughts on the President's speech a bit later, save to say that I found it highly ironic that the Left, along with a complicit mainstream media, were carrying on about a supposed evidential "divisiveness in the President's speech" --which ironically is a claim that post polling by CNN poll did not even support.  I just found the post-speech discussion by Democratic officials and left-leaning media outlets to be highly inaccurate, given the fact that almost everything in the actions of the Democrat Officials present for the State of the Union exuded divisiveness.  I mean, if you can't stand in support of two African-American families who lost their precious sixteen year-old daughters to immigrant gang violence, if you cannot stand for the lowest African-American unemployment (6.8%) in our nation's history or jobs coming back to America by the hundreds of thousands, along with rising wages, then what exactly can you stand for???  The Democrats did not even stand in support of a shout-out to one of their own, Congressman Steve Scalise, who is still in the process of recovering from a gunshot wound suffered this past summer.  The optics just looked incredibly bad for the Democratic party and it leaves me wondering, what exactly do Democrats stand for these days?

I'll leave you with NASA's Super Blood Moon Photo Contest Winner.  And if you happened to miss the incredible "Super Blood Moon" or if it was not visible in your area: Here is a link to a replay of last night's live-stream event hosted by Gian Masi.  A special expression of gratitude to Gian Masi and collaborating team of astronomers for making the effort to bring this amazing stellar experience to stargazers across the globe by way of live-streaming video.  Truly breathtaking real-time images! Thank you for sharing!


2/7/2018 It's all coming out now ... "Graham-Grassley Memo."

Schummer-Shutdown ...

"The Schummer-Shutdown" ... Kind of sounds like some line dance, doesn't it???

 Image Source

Timing is everything, I always say. With this in mind, I strongly suspect the Schummer-Shutdown has less to do with core budget issues or even the non-budget issue of DACA, than it does with creating a much needed public diversion from "The FISA memo", which was finally released to select members of the U.S. Congress (those on intelligence and judiciary committees, I believe).  From what I'm hearing this memo makes the Nixon "Watergate" scandal pale by comparison.  This memo needs to be declassified and then released for "we the people" to see.  The American people deserve to see the lengths corrupt government officials, acting on behalf of their political party/ideology, will go to in order to retain their vice-grip on power.

At least the Trump Administration has chosen not to weaponize this current government shutdown, unlike his predecessor had.  That being said, our military men and women need to be paid!  Also thought it was brilliant for the Republicans to counter-pose the DACA conversation--for illegal immigrant children-- with extended funding for CHIPs which provides health insurance coverage for citizen children.  Glad Republicans have not caved and given the Democrats a "clean DACA bill."  If Democrats get their clean bill, Republicans will lose any and all bargaining power needed to address a long overdue sweeping immigration reform.  One last thought, Mitch McConnell is absolutely correct.  This era of continuing budget resolutions has got to come to an end!  Congress needs to get busy doing their constitutional duty and finally pass a long-term budget, covering the next two years.  Only then will the U.S. Congress be in position to truly address the business they were elected by "we the people" to do.  In absence of a long-term budget agreement, the U.S. Congress will remain in this endless loop  of shutdown football every few months, with varying factions holding the government hostage in order to advance their pet-projects at the expense of the nation's security.

President Trump is a Master at Making the Media Dance ....

I seriously have to wonder sometimes if President Trump doesn't wake-up each and every morning and say to himself:  "Gee, I wonder how I can make the media dance today?"  Because Trump does indeed make the media dance with his unconventional verbiage from the highest office in our noble land.  President Trump, the intentional Pied Piper???

Image Source: Trip Advisor

I really have to laugh watching the latest looped-reel of countless news analysts and political commentators, practically beside themselves, being bleeped while uttering the earth-shattering phrase "Shit-hole."  I mean seriously, it's a word .. a word most of us --if we are being totally honest-- have used at some point in our own lives.  Is it a wholly presidential word? Probably not, by conventional standards, but then again who exactly is operating under the illusion that Donald J. Trump --President or not-- is actually in anyway conventional??? Certainly not the people who elected Trump into office.  Those people wanted a hard-headed hitter who would break down the barriers of the politically correct status-quot in order to get meaningful things done.  Furthermore, I suspect as long as President Trump continues to get meaningful things done  (e.g., unleashing true energy independence, lowering energy costs, revamping an outdated and over-burdensome  tax code, making the cost of doing business in U.S.A. competitive with rest of the world, creating millions of new jobs, renegotiating bad trade and other deals, standing up to terrorists, unleashing the military and decimating ISIS, helping to facilitate a resumption of talks between North and South Korea, reinvigorating the NASA and U.S. Space Program) for "we the people", most of us realists --antithesis of idealists--out here will be willing to give Trump a pass for the less-than conventional things he may say and tweet from time to time ... even if the off-rails media fails to ever cover Trump's accomplishments.  The wordsmiths among us may refuse to recognize the President's meaningful accomplishments to date, but those of us who have the ability to see behind the smoke and mirrors of a purely rhetoric-based  coverage of the Trump Administration do, in point of fact, actually see the progress President Trump has made thus far, on our behalf, nonetheless.

As for the predictable claim that President Trump's alleged "shit-hole" remark was "unequivocally racist", I have three things to say:

1) "He probably should have said "third-world" country, but if you look third-world up in the Urban Dictionary it actually says "s***hole." ~Tyrus

2) Referring to the factual living conditions within a given country, where the majority of the population has little if any ability to control said conditions, is not racist.  Trump's alleged choice of words, while vulgar, were merely an accurate reflection of the facts with respect to less than ideal, real-world living conditions in certain parts of the world.  Although succinct, I think we can all agree that if the word "shit-hole" was used in any Presidential meeting it was indeed a poor word choice.  That being said, President Trump's remark was pertaining to specific countries with less than ideal living conditions; his remark was not in any way intended to be denigrating of the people living therein. To claim otherwise, by hurling the term "racist" at the President is misleading, not mention dishonest.  Such tactics are merely a convenient tool used to subvert actual facts to the contrary, by playing to pure emotions in order to effectively bring the conversation to an abrupt close (i.e., "Trump said a bad word which we have interpreted to be racist, so the deal's off.")  "Racist" seems to have become the great-silencer these days, often being employed by liberals who don't have any meaningful facts to support their own side of a given argument.  By employing the silencing charge of "racism" liberals hope to circumvent any meaningful conversation, where a meaningful conversation might actually wind-up making real progress toward the end of addressing real-world issues, such as a long-overdue, sensible (balanced with merit-based) and comprehensive immigration reform.  In this light don't you have to ask yourself, which truly 'speaks' louder: mere words (rhetoric) or concrete, substantive solutions (action)?

3) I also find it striking that despite the left's repeated claims that 'President Trump is a confirmed racist', African-Americans are actually doing way better under a President Trump administration than they did under President Obama's administration.  Wages for African-Americans went DOWN $900.00, annually, under President Obama's tenure, while unemployment for African-Americans hit a record 16.8%.  Under President Trump, in just under a year, wages for African-Americans have gone UP $1,000 annually, while unemployment for African- Americans has hit an all-time low of just 6.8%.  Seems to me the numbers alone just don't support the left's ongoing claims of racism.  Something African-Americans can actually take to the BANK.

I have to admit, I didn't actually vote for President Trump, but his ability to cut through the crap in order to actually get things done, in a Washington D.C. that has been plagued by stagnation in years past, is slowly winning me over.  The fact that the left doesn't seem to have many (any?) coherent counter-arguments to Trump's positions and subsequent actions --aside from obstruct and resist-- doesn't do much to currently persuade me to support the ideas being put forward by the left.  I'm simply not buying into the unhinged emotion-driven rhetoric in their arguments to date.  Until the arguments on the left begin to show a bit more substance and reason*,  I'm going to have to continue to give President Trump the benefit of the doubt.  But who knows, the left could actually come around to embracing the notion of using logical facts and reason in order to make their case.  Stranger things have happened .... Here's hoping?

*[(e.g., DACA is not binding law, it was put into place in the absence of Congressional vote, by way of Executive Order --"the President's pen"-- at the end of President Obama's first term in office, never to be successfully revisited by President Obama or the U.S. Congress until Trump pushed the rescind-button.  President Trump wants to make DACA-like protection into actual binding law, by way of Congressional legislation which is really the only binding way to do so.  This was President Trump's reason for rescinding President Obama's non-binding Executive Order, in order to prompt binding Congressional action.  In this light, Democrats should be willing to meet the President halfway in coming to the table, in good-faith, in order to finally address long-overdue comprehensive immigration reform.  To my way of thinking, Republicans would be fools to give Democrats a "clean" DACA bill, given the Democrats obstructionist congressional voting record during the current legislative sessions thus far.  DACA is the ONE bargaining chip the Democrats have, and as such they should play it wisely lest they be made to look the fool to the American people.  I don't actually think the Democrats have enough support from the American people to actually shutdown the government over DACA, but we shall see how the chips play out.  Sometimes the Republicans aren't very bright where chip-playing is concerned.  Also think the circuit court's ruling to the effect that Trump cannot rescind a previous President's Executive Order --keep in mind, the U.S. Constitution does not in any way provide for the use of  Executive Orders-- actually does a disservice to the Democrats cause because they are no longer operating under an impending deadline which would have bolstered their position and argument for immediate action. Not to mention the fact that the courts are supposed to interpret and rule on the actual laws of the land, where Executive Orders kind of operate in a nebulous grey-area, are inherently vulnerable and subject to the whims of subsequent Presidents.  Remind me again, what is the check-and-balance on rogue justices who repeatedly make activist rulings, purely along party lines, in support partisan ends?]

Net Neutrality Needs to be Revisited By U.S. Congress

Have been talking with many millennials lately and they are extremely upset with the revocation of "net neutrality" in favor of Big Business.  Most millennials use the internet as an integral part of the their everyday lives.  In fact, the internet is where most millennials seem to get their primary news and information from, in favor of alternative sources such as magazines, newspapers and television/cable.  To most millennials the thought that some company can now limit their access to information or charge more for certain types of information literally scares the hell out of them.  Furthermore, millennials blame President Trump and his administration for failing to adequately address their concerns on the matter and rightly so.  I've heard time and again from the FCC and other Big Business advocates that "net neutrality is complicated", while these same individuals fail to offer any tangible facts or evidence in support of this claim.  Furthermore, the fact the the FCC Director used to be a Big Business, high-powered lawyer for Verizon doesn't do much to give confidence to millennials or "we the people" that a revocation of net neutrality is in their/our best interests.

To my way of thinking, President Trump, if you truly want to show that you can be a President for ALL of "we the people", and not just the president for those who put you into office, then you should take seriously the concerns of those of us who fear only the worst from a repeal of net neutrality.  You should immediately call for Congressional hearings on all matters relating to the internet (e.g., consumer privacy protections, as well as net neutrality).  Let the experts speak before the U.S. Congress, sharing facts and data in a transparent fashion for all of "we the people" to see.  Then, if at the end of testimony actual legislation is found to be warranted --in order to protect all citizens while using the internet and to provide equal access to internet content for all-- then Congress can move to enact the needed legislation that would provide for a permanent framework for regulation of the internet on behalf of "we the people."

I think an on-line petition to this end should be started, along with letters written to the President and members of Congress.  What say you???  Surely, if the U.S. Congress of the 1990's can visit music lyrics and the need for labeling music albums for rating "content violations", then surely the U.S. Congress of 2018 can visit consumer protection issues related to accessing the internet and content therein.

And on another matter close to millennials hearts, Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, of the U.S.  Justice Department might want to think through a bit more thoroughly his decision to revoke the Cole memorandum which had directed --under President Obama-- Feds not to interfere with state laws concerning marijuana legalization and use thereof.  Seems to me the Justice Department has more pressing matters to attend to these days (e.g., Russia probe wrap-up, Clinton investigation follow-up, unseating Deep State actors, immigration, heroin and opioid epidemics), especially when the majority of Americans, per on-going polling, seem to be in favor of marijuana legalization.  From a cost-benefit perspective the Justice Department and the Trump Administration stand to lose a whole lot more than they could ever possibly gain by moving forward with federal prosecutions for marijuana use in states that have legalized the product.  Timing is everything???  See Attorney General, Jeff Session's memo here.  And yes, Congress could eventually legislate on the matter, removing Federal laws from the books, but for the time being, I think the U.S. Congress already has a pretty full plate.  


2/14/2018 The recent abuses by senior level individuals at FBI, DoJ and State Department (by Obama Administration holdovers) that have been brought into the light --abuses which weaponized the intelligence apparatus and which threaten our very democratic republic and the constitutional democracy upon which the latter is founded-- coupled with the unprecedented number of Congress men and women renouncing their committee chair positions and not seeking re-election (34++ by my last count) makes me think that not only "net neutrality" but also consumer privacy protections --which were rescinded over the summer-- all need to revisited in order to minimize opportunities for nefarious individuals to gather dirt with which to influence our duly elected officials.  Perhaps legislation needs to be passed that would require all ISP's to provide VPN bundled with their internet access?  We live in a world much in need of good and women to run for public office, but with the potential for abuse of what should be private information --given the above gaping holes-- we may not wind up with those individuals most highly capable being willing to run for office or if they do run and are elected they may be compromised by blackmail for less than criminal offenses.  If information is truly power, then we must respect the potential for abuse of information, at all levels, in today's highly technological and globally connected world. 

Old Lang Syne???

Up late again, migraine and my mind won't shut down.  Did not get to celebrate the 'New Year' this year.  Things went south for us, here.  We did, however, thoroughly enjoy a totally pristine -- just 3 to 4 inches-- white fluffy snow on Christmas Eve and day.  I got my Christmas wish: A White Christmas, despite the statistical odds pointing to the contrary.  Sledding and snowball fights on Christmas Eve was kind of magical.  It was a welcome opportunity to shift gears and recharge. You really can't beat that, so you have to look on the upside, right?  No artist's Birthday celebration either, but then I did not celebrate my actual birthday this year either.  Maybe sometime in the weeks ahead?  Time seems to be a rather fluid concept where my life is concerned.  So anyway, it still feels like I'm stuck back in 2017.  2017 was a LONG year, not an entirely bad year, just a long year.  Leaves me wondering: is a long year better than a short year?  Perhaps a long year gives you more time to get meaningful stuff (or feel free to insert a more colorful expletive here) done? What say you???

One of these days, I'm actually going figure out the meaning of the song "Old Lang Syne".  The lyrics in that song have always bothered me, on some level, for some reason.  Maybe, I'm just reading them wrong or reading too much into them? Anyway, how many of you actually took the time to take stock of 2017.. Reflected back on the good as well as the bad?  If you did you probably wound up searching for answers at the bottom of a bottle or glass --be it punch or otherwise.  2017 was one tumultuous year to say the least, but that being said it wasn't all bad.  Seems to me we have had accountability restored in the White House and that surely goes a long way to returning power to "we the people", in my humble opinion. President Trump is not your typical politician, but in many ways that's a good thing because he doesn't waste time tip-toeing through the politically correct tulips.  Trump just tells it like it is and then proceeds to get meaningful stuff done.  With President Donald Trump WSWYG (what you see is what you get).  I have to respect that on some level, even if I'm not always fond of the Presidential Tweets.  That being said, the biased mainstream media has absolutely LOST ALL perspective where President Trump is concerned, because a Twitter account and colorful, fluffy language --what the media would desire to see as per the previous President ... But don't forget President Obama's calm, collective and repeated assurances that wound up being flat-out lies (e.g., "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" and "If you like your health insurance, you can keep your health insurance)-- does not a meaningful Presidency make.  Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather have brutal honesty over colorful and deceptive lies any day of the week.  Contrary to what the liberal mainstream media and elites --on both sides of the aisle-- believe, "we the people" are not stupid and many of us are no longer willing to be blindly led, while being told what to think and say (i.e., politics of belonging).  The time has come for true rebels, rebels of independent thought, reason and action to speak boldly and to begin coloring outside of the feel-good 'belonging lines', while firmly rejecting the narrative of absolutes.

With the media's off-the-rails coverage of the Trump Presidency it seems to me 2017 has ushered in the final death-blow to objective journalism.  How SAD is that?  Objective journalism used to play a vital role in support of our representative democracy.  These days, however, many journalistic voices do little more than stir and feed frenzy toward overt political ends.  So very sad!  Our founding fathers would be greatly disappointed in the America of today, in this respect, I think.  At the end of the day rhetoric may serve set the tone, but in the end it is actions --and not words-- that speak volumes to what is being done on behalf of "we the people" (e.g., record-breaking stock market highs, millions of new jobs, unemployment at all time decades low, energy independence becoming a reality --thereby lowering energy costs for everyday hard-working citizens, while stimulating the growth of new businesses-- and how about that historic revamping of the tax-code to the benefit of over 80% of Americans, which along with trade deal re-negotiations will likely bring back hundreds of thousands jobs back from overseas).  Granted we still have a long road ahead, but from where I'm standing we're off to a great start.

My biggest hope for 2018 is that the mainstream media will finally screw their heads back on straight and begin to give the Office of the President of United States the respect it is due.  That the media will finally begin covering the substantive actions of the President and his administration, instead of endlessly obsessing over the President's rhetoric, while "we the people" must continually suffer through the media's inane attempts at varying degrees of interpretation of the 'true meaning' behind Trump's words with the non-bonus of their quasi psycho-analysis of the  man behind the words.  Trump is his own man and he's redefining what it means to be Presidential in terms that work for him and the way he does business.  You don't have to like President Trump, but the Office he holds demands a certain level of respect, which heretofore has been sorely lacking, and that in and of itself portrays the entire United States of America in a really bad light to the rest of the world.  To my way of thinking true patriots want whoever is in office to do well, because that winds up benefiting the country as whole.  We seem to have lost sight of this important fact somewhere along way?  Something is terribly wrong when you want your political opponents to fail miserably, at the expense of the country, just so your party looks to be a better alternative in upcoming elections.  I think the American people are beginning to see through this smoke and mirrors and tactic.  Now that "we the people" have had a long over-due taste of actual accountability, I suspect we are not likely to relinquish it anytime soon.

On that note, I'm off to hopefully find a few hours of sleep --hopefully in the absence of dreams and visions.  Can't quite bring myself to utter the predictable phrase "Happy New Year."  Maybe tomorrow. For now, let me just wish that you find satisfaction --and maybe even joy-- in the singular moment presently unfolding right at hand.

1/6/2017(8) Well, what do you know ... Most people don't get the song "Old Lang Syne" either according to CNN polling data/article.  CNN was kind enough to provide us with the full lyrics for this 'time-honored' song --considering it was written in 1788 by Scotsman Robert Burnes.  Reading the lyrics for this song does little to ease my own confusion or dislike of this poem-song.  How about you?  If I were to modernize this song a bit, I suppose you do wind up with the 70's Dan Folgelberg song "Same Old Lang Syne", which starts off with the lyrics "Met my old lover in the grocery store. The snow was falling on Christmas Eve. I stood behind her in the frozen foods and I touched her on the sleeve." Maybe it's just me, but isn't it healthy to review and questions our "time-honored" traditions now again?  If less than 3% of the general population knows the lyrics and almost no one really understands them, maybe it's time for some new lyrics??? I'd like to challenge some of our many talented contemporary lyricists or musicians to come up with some more modern, more readily understandable (not to mention easier to remember) lyrics for this ballad.  Hey, it could happen .... My wish for 2018???  My starting pass for new lyrics is here.
1/11/2018   I finally find myself in actual 2018.  Yeah?  Another one of my tangible wishes for 2018 is that some artful communicator will give a TED talk on how to have a meaningful political discussion with someone who might not agree with your own positions, on key issues, 100% right out of the gate.  Think this insight would be extremely useful in the divided America we find ourselves in today.  Given the right skills and an open mind-set, I remain ever-hopeful that meaningful political dialogue can be restored in our nation once again.