War’s End – Really??

            A couple days ago marked the end of NATO’s involvement in the War in Afghanistan that had been raging for 13 long years. But is it really over?

            The United States is leaving 10,000 troops of about 13,000 troops overall in Afghanistan. These troops are supposed to act as teachers and assistants for the Afghan military.

            This continues long standing tradition of U. S. involvement is war for the past 70 years. The U. S. fights a war and leaves troops ad infinitum. Germany, South Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan. We have left troops in all of them. I, for one, fail to understand the need to keep troops in these countries, especially after some of them become our allies. For a short while maybe, but for what amounts to forever?

            Aside from the perpetual presence of the troops, there is also the staggering cost of keeping them there throughout time. Stopping this would save money which could be put to better use at home.

 

            Message to the government: please don’t tell us the way is over when you maintain troops where the war was fought.

What Took So Long Reverend?

            After the senseless assassination of two policemen in Brooklyn, Rev. Al Sharpton finally spoke out against the violence connected to the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown.

One quote from him said: “Any use of the names of Eric Garner and Michael Brown, in connection with any violence or killing of police, is reprehensible and against the pursuit of justice in both cases”.

I have one question for him. Where were you during the riots the occurred throughout this country in the wake of the two non-indictments? I may be wrong, but I do not recall you speaking out to end the violence.

Further, I do not see anything in his statements that refer to the officers not being black. This one admission would bring him into more positive feelings for Caucasians.

So Reverend, I ask you again, what took so long to come forward and state that the violence after the grand juries decisions that violence is the wrong way to go?

Poorly Planned Cinematic Idea

            When I first heard about the new Seth Rogan / James Franco movie, “The Interview”, on Real Time with Bill Maher a couple months ago, I thought it an interesting concept, but I could foresee the dangers in a movie of this type.

            The basic outline of the film is such that Rogan and Franco are journalists who are recruited by the CIA to post as reporters to get close enough to North Korea leader Kim Jong Un to assassinate him. Just hearing this set off bad vibes in my mind.

            Number 1, bad idea to use a real leader, especially one on the level of Kim Jong Un. A fictional leader would have made a better choice. Who knew at the time if North Korea might undertake and kind of reprisals for even suggesting slaying its ruler? The cyber hacking of Sony Pictures might be just such a reaction.

            Number 2, the idea of using reporters to get to be alone with a leader in order to assassinate him or her, could lead to the end of direct interviews. Interviews may soon be held by webcams.

 

            Number 3, the methods shown in the real world either in war, crimes, gadgets or terrorism are barbaric enough. Leave Hollywood script writers to devise new ways of fighting wars, create more violent crimes, design new contraptions to carry out their plans, or more brutal and sickening forms of terrorism. One example is in the movie “The Dark Night” when the Joker had a live bomb placed into living body. A few months later we started hearing that terrorist organizations might be using this very same method.

            Number 4, would it not be considered that we are the terrorists for wanting to kill another world leader. Does this mean that we our philosophy is “We can do something, but no one else is allowed to”? Poor philosophy, at least, one to which I am opposed.

            Returning to the cyber hacking for a moment, if a warning was issued at attacking any cinema which showed the movie, does it make any sense to pull all of the screenings for fear of an attack on any one or more of the theaters? We were told rightly just thirteen years ago not to bow to terrorists’ demands in the wake of 9/11. But Sony Pictures caved in. Could you imagine that North Korea or any other foreign or domestic entity getting the scripts for new movies through hacking, hating them enough to decide to threaten the studios with reprisals if they are released?

 

            To me, this type of movie falls into the category or ‘could we’ or ‘should we’ produce it. The answer is the latter, and the answer is no, not the way it was designed. It was a decent enough idea, but with all the various parts, it was a dangerous script in today’s world.

Next Financial Bubble Responsibility

            In the aftermath of the financial meltdown a few years ago, everyone was clamoring for someone to be sent to prison. Everyone wanted those people in the big banks who created it to serve time.

            Unfortunately, I don’t see how anyone could pinpoint the guilty party. It was due to the types of investments being made. This was found in the research and investigation on what caused it.

            One big result was the creation of the Dodd-Frank law. In part it restricted certain types of investments. One item concerns derivatives trading by big banks that receive taxpayer backing, or bailouts, can use swaps which are high-risk financial instruments (swaps push-out rule).

            One big bank drew up a proposal a few years ago which was left for dead. The proposal was the elimination of the swaps push-out rule. But it was resurrected at the 11^th hour and included into the budget thanks to Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase.

            Should there be another financial meltdown thanks to the inclusion of this item, we know exactly who to blame and demand justice – all of the Congressmen and Senators who voted for the budget with its inclusion as well as the President who agreed with the CRomnibus.

Torture’s Misleading Results

           The torture report was released a few days ago. We had all been hearing what had been done to the prisoners for a long time, but we did not know the extent. The report showed that it was worse than we thought. But regardless, although torture may result in some results, by and large, it is unreliable.

            The Spanish Inquisition, which started in the late 15^th century, run initially by Tomas Torquemada, utilized brutal forms of torture. They used thumbscrews, boots, the rack, scourging, lashing, flogging, burning of the feet, the garrucha (binding the hands behind the back and lifting the person off the floor) and water torture. There were different reasons for the inquisition. They included religion (find the true Catholics), witchcraft, sodomy, and blasphemy. Torture continued and changed until either the person torture confessed or died. King Ferdinand and Queen Isabela allowed the Inquisition to commence and continue as did the papacy. The Spanish Inquisition continued until the middle of the 19^th century.

            Present day torture was the result of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York City. The goal was to get information on future terrorist attacks of any kind, anywhere. Methods included, sleep deprivation, rectal feeding, threats against the detainees’ families, operating power tools beside the detainees, forced nudity, extended periods of isolation, and waterboarding (same as the Spanish water torture). In addition, the entire program was badly mishandled on various levels, including a complete lack of oversight which allowed these tortures to continue unabated. More information on the Torture Report can be found here.

            In both cases, the torturers continue until they get the answer they want to hear, whether it is true or not. The tortured get to the point that they will say anything to get the torture to stop. This is what makes it unreliable. In both instances, some truth may come, but more will likely be false.

 

            One other point to make. Unlike during the Spanish Inquisition, in the 20^th and 21^st century, torture is a violation of international law. It was wondered how much President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney knew. It has been charged by various people, including Karl Rove, a staunch Republican supporter, that they both knew and approved it. Cheney even said that he would do it again in a heartbeat. The Bush administration even went so far as to say that they did not consider waterboarding as torture. In the five centuries since the Spanish inquisition it was considered torture. As this is a violation of international law, should they not be tried by the Hague for war crimes against humanity?

Questionable Accuser of Cosby

            The statements made by P. J. Masten, a former Playboy bunny, smell of inconsistencies. Not only is she using the same m. o. as the other women who accused Bill Cosby, but her allegations are sound contradictory.

            First she says that she was given liquor and does remember anything after that. That could be a sign of being drunk. (I’m not saying conclusively that she was drunk; I state it as a possibility.) When she woke up she said she was beside a naked man and that she did not remember anything after the drink. She claimed absolutely that she knew she was raped. That sounds conflicting. If she doesn’t remember anything after the drink, how can she be so definitive that it was rape? When someone is drunk, they do not remember what they did, and they are doing it of their own free will and may very well not be recalled.

            She is also the same woman who accused Marv Albert. If she was so definite about Cosby, how could she allow herself to get into the same situation with someone else?

            She decided to say speak about Cosby after 15 year old Judy Huth accused Cosby about a sexual assault at the Playboy Mansion in 1974. This one is really hard to believe because a 15 year old should be at the Playboy Mansion in the first place.

            Then she said that there are at least a dozen other former bunnies with similar stories. This could very well be a comment where the accuser just picked a number and made it large.

            This is one accusation that I cannot believe. Sounds like someone jumping on the bus trying get away with another copycat accusation. I’m not making an absolute conclusion. This is just an opinion based on the accuser’s comments and I am not making a judgment.

Refusal to Accept Grand Jury Decision

            It’s been a week or so since the grand jury in Ferguson, Missouri, decided not to indict the Officer Darren Wilson who killed Michael Brown.

            I mentioned in a previous post that I am not agreeing with either side because I was not there as a witness not was I privy to the evidence, or lack of evidence, given to the grand jury. It may be possible that there was too much contradictory evidence and testimony for the grand jury to believe that an indictment was possible. This is the way the court system works.

            Yet the fallout from the decision is continuing and it is getting worse instead of better.

            I had said that Brown’s mother wanting a country where all black people can live without the color being an issue. Sounds like someone who wanted calm. But his step-father may now be arrested and charged with incitement to riot.

            Then again, there is the hands’ up gesture saying “Don’t fire”. I believe this is a symbol indicating that the people are absolutely positive that the officer was wrong and Brown was trying to surrender. These people refuse to accept the grand jury’s decision. This gesture has been used by the public, by five members of the St. Louis Rams, and now, unbelievably, by members of Congress on the floor!!
 

            In my opinion, this is a gesture that thumbs its nose at the judicial system. The people are saying they know better than the grand jury. How many of these people actually saw the incident? Probably only a couple. Everyone else got their information from second, third, or fourth hand sources. So how can they know better? I find it disrespectful of the judicial system and the members of Congress should know better. I think this also borders on racism.

            It may be that the gesture is a sign that people are tired of police violence and believe that the criminal system is broken. But this is a case of a grand jury sifting through what they are given and coming to a conclusion based on what they are given. Is police violence getting out of hand? probably. But that is a discussion for another post.

            If you will remember the case of O. J. Simpson, the white populace did not riot or perform some kind of body language when he was acquitted. The judicial process continued and Simpson was eventually found guilty.

            Like it or not, these expressions are wrong. It is serving only to divide this country and it intensifies racial split in society. If there is to be another trial, and I strongly believe there will be one, let judicial process advance. Hopefully, at that time, the evidence will be more conclusive and definitive.

Old Habits Refuse to Die

            I will state right at the outset that I do not have the wisdom, the intelligence or the information to make an appropriate and legitimate decision in the case of Officer Darren Wilson’s shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

I was not part of the grand jury and thereby did not hear the multitude of evidence given both pro and con to make any judgment in the case no matter what has been printed or discussed in the media. Nor can I begin to imagine the kind of pressure these people were under by the community in Ferguson and like communities around the country. To everyone, there was one and only one outcome that could be accepted – that the officer was guilty. This is the latest in a series of similar crises over the years.

In this passage I will not render any determination or opinion as to the grand jury’s finding. However, I will address the outcome that occurred away from the court.

            In a previous post, I indicated that the tone of racism has been an ongoing issue around the country and especially in the South since the Civil War. As an example, I’ve heard in clips of the way some white people in the South talk about President Obama. They hate him, not because of any policies, but because he is black. There can be only one reason to me, and that is the way that they are taught at home and perhaps in school. The kind of education that exists reflects the attitudes that people have toward each other.

            The family of Michael Brown indicated that they want a country where all black people can live in a nation without being impaired by their skin color. I absolutely agree with the sentiment. But someone needs to tell me how this is at all possible when we see the result being the jury’s decision going opposite of the community’s passion. As we have seen in similar episodes in the past, immediately after the issuance of the decision, we saw arson, gunfire and looting. People were stocking up on guns before the decision was made public. How can anyone looking in from the outside take any stance other than the negative picture of the black people? The nature of education indicated above must change if we are ever going to make any progress and put the heinous issue of racism behind us.

            I for one am passionate with the desire for a time when we can get past this. When I look at people of other colors and creeds, I do not see a black man, a white woman, an African child, an Australian individual, etc., etc., etc. I see a person. That is all we should see. I may be an idealist in this matter, but I’m a realist.

Racism is ugly, sickening, disgusting and revolting. We must, as a society, find ways of putting an end it.

Politically Disrespected

            As everyone can tell, President Obama is having an extremely difficult time trying to get anything done. This has been going on since he first took office. Mitch McConnell has refused to deal with the President, and John Boehner has refused to approve anything that the President wants.

Here are three examples. First, when jobs were at a premium and no one was hiring, the President wanted a jobs program to fix and improve the country’s infrastructure. This could have helped to correct two birds with one stone. Boehner and McConnell refused outright saying that that they did not want to spend any money. Who got hurt the most? The people.

Second, the Affordable Care Act, which intended to give millions access to health care. The bill was legally passed as there was a Democratic controlled Congress. The Republicans gave every excuse and horror story they could, even trying to repeal it over 50 times and sending it to the Supreme Court who upheld it (for now). Many Republican governors refuse to allow their constituents access to health insurance under the law. Now they want to sue the President.

Third, Congress refused for years to take up the issue of immigration. It got to the point where the President took the issue into his own hands and decided to invoke his right of executive action which has been done by every President for over 50 years and set a law. (Whether the bill is right, wrong or both may or may not be discussed in a future post.) The anger from so many Republicans was so great that they want to sue to President instead of working with him to fashion a comprehensive bill.

In these three examples, it is shown just how much the Republicans disrespect Obama. They call him an Emperor because he is making laws without consulting Congress. Let’s take a quick look at the facts. This makes about 175 executive actions issues by Obama. Yet Bush 43 issued 275 executive actions. So, it is okay for Bush but not for Obama. And Bush was the President who had documents changed so he could validate he desire to go to war in Iraq, a war in which not only did this country not belong, and which destabilized the Middle East and allowed ISIS amongst others to form. To this the Republicans did not object. But I’m digressing.

Here is a question to ask, have there been other presidents who have so badly disrespected? Of course there were. There have been a several but let me mention three.

First there was John Quincy Adams, the sixth President. Here’s a little background. The presidential election at the time was different. There was only one political party in 1826 and after the votes were counted, no candidate had a clear majority.  The four men still standing, were included Adams, Andrew Jackson, and Henry Clay. The vote went to the House of Representatives. Clay suddenly put his support behind Adams, and Adams won on the first ballot. Then Adams made Clay Secretary of State. The Jackson Democrats accused Adams of making a corrupt choice. Thanks to this and Adams’ disposition, he could not get anything done during his term in office. 

Second was Abraham Lincoln. To make it short, when Lincoln was elected to office, the Southern states started to secede and the Civil War shortly began.

Third was Bill Clinton. During the Monica Lewinsky affair, which should have been kept personal and handled with within the family, the Republicans wanted to remove him from office and eventually tried to impeach him, which he was not was voted not out of office.

For lack of a better word, the ‘war’ between the Republicans and the Democrats started under President Reagan, when he continued to deride the Democrats for getting in the way of his policies. It was heightened under Bill Clinton with greater intensity (see above). The war has continued to grow and stands in the way of anything getting done. This country could have been out of the recession much faster if only every one decided to work together.

In my opinion, and I am not alone, the opposition and intensity of the disrespect shown to Obama is so great that it borders on racism. It started right after he took office by the birthers who demanded he show his birth certificate, then calling for the long form. A ridiculous demand as he was born in Hawaii which was a state when he was born. The South hates him, probably as a lingering effect from the Civil War. There were many other demands and may be so intense because he is the first black president.

I’m not saying I agree with everything that President Obama has accomplished, but he has persisted despite the harsh opposition from Congress. The entire situation makes me sick.

 

Election Results Point to a Bleak Future

             In an earlier blog of mine, “Who is at Fault for a Stagnant Government”, I had made the case for the reason why nothing ever gets done in any level of government. The blame gets put right at the feet of the people, both those who vote and those who don’t.

            In the election last Tuesday, only one third of the eligible voters actually voted. Those who did made what could only be described as illogical and nonsensical decisions.

Let’s first take a quick review of the campaigning. The Republicans ran on what amounted to no platform at all. The Democrats, despite the accomplishments of President Obama during his six years in office, decided to distance themselves from him. They did not seem to have any firm platform either. Also, they did not campaign on what the Republicans negative stance had been for years on numerous topics.

The result was a tremendous win for the Republicans. Included in the winners were numerous incumbents. Many of the incumbents are those who hold beliefs and have acted contrary to the progress of this country. And the public have an 8% approval rating for Congress and they vote for the incumbents who create the stagnation? Where is the logic in this?

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback took his state from one with a tremendous surplus and turned it into a sinkhole of a deficit, because he ended corporate taxes. Yet the voters returned him to office because his opponent had a lap dance decades ago.

Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton who opposes everything scientific, refutes climate change and evolution, voted for higher loan rates on student loans, in favor of outsourcing, and many other things which move this country in the wrong direction, was also re-elected.

Michael Grimm from Staten Island, with a 20 count indictment for fraud, was re-elected.

In addition, many states had propositions which the voters approved. But they also elected officials who stances block those very propositions. Where’s the sense?

The Republicans now have a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Now think about those things that they have been trying to do for years – repeal the Affordable Care Act, substantially reduce social security benefits, make major cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and food stamps, continue to go to war in the Iraq and Afghanistan, are against a woman’s right of choice, ignore the needs of the poor, are against unions, not repairing the infrastructure, etc. If they get even some of these things done, the poverty level could increase to well over half the country. This country might be considered as a third world country.

Keep in mind -- this was from only one third of eligible voters. What about the other two thirds? These are the people to blame even more.

With a populace this great, the election could easily have changed dramatically. They could have given the Republicans an even larger majority or given the majority to the Democrats. Even with the gerrymandering, you still vote for whom you want. Being a citizen, you have an obligation to vote. In my opinion, you don’t have the right to complain afterwards about Congress because you did not care who was put into office.

Bottom line, the people do have the power, but they do not know how to use it. A majority of the people is biased toward one party or the other, or prefers to leave people in office no matter how bad they are for whatever reason they care to offer. If I were to give an approval rating for the voters, it would be 2%, as they are the ones who ultimately cause the problems. For this reason I am not overly optimistic on the future.

Assisted Suicide

            There has been much written and said recently about assisted suicide. Is it right or wrong? The moral and philosophical sides have been much written about recently and I do not see the reason the rehash it. I just want to ask a couple simple questions in this whole debate.

            First, is this “death with dignity”? The Church has said that there is no dignity in taking one’s own life because it is a sin against God and creation and that it is a false sense of compassion. I fail to see how this is a false sense of compassion when it is all about compassion.

            Think of it this way. When you have an animal for which you care, be it a dog, cat, horse, et al. If the horse breaks a leg, do you leave it to suffer since it can no longer walk? If your dog is suffering with advanced arthritis and cannot move, do you leave it when it cannot get to its food and water or go for a walk? If your cat has a disabling disease that cannot be cured, do you let it suffer?

            The answer to all of these questions is the same – no. You put the animal down to end its suffering. This is a tremendous act of compassion, and needless to say, an extremely difficult thing to do to the animal and which had been faithful companion for which you have loved and cared for a long time. Though it may not exactly be assisted suicide (to my knowledge, no other animal other than man performs suicide), it is a manner of ending the life.

            This leads to the second question. Does the person who knows there is no hope and no chance of survival wants to continue living through the mental and physical pain for who knows how long until the end finally comes? Does this make any sense? Logically, no.

Assisted suicide amounts to the same thing as putting down an animal. It is sparing the person the agony of the final days or weeks or months or years of torment. Why do many people not want assisted suicide? Probably because they don’t want to let their loved one go. They want them around for as long as possible because they cannot stand the thought of being without them.

Nobody gains from being kept alive through this time. It is emotionally draining for both the patient and the family. There is no need for this. Then again, I can see only one place where someone or something gains by keeping the person alive. This is the health care industry who, through keeping the person alive, continues to collect the many thousands of dollars in hospital and other costs.

Brittany Maynard did the right thing as far as I am concerned. She knew she was dying and did not have long to live. For her and her family, this was a win-win decision. The only loss of course was her death, but in all other ways, the right thing was done. She was the one who not only died with dignity, but showed the utmost in compassion to her family by sparing them her final days of agony.

Getting Ahead on Nothing

            Today, November 13, I opened the New York Daily News and found on page 3 a virtually nude frontal photo of Kim Kardashian, with a couple dots covering the most revealing areas. This has gone way beyond good taste and common sense, for both the paper and the person.

            For the paper, it is as if it is now a soft porn tabloid. Since this is a paper read by all ages, this is definitely extremely poor taste and should stop immediately.

            As far as the person is concerned, I have two overriding questions – exactly what does she do? For what is she famous? The answer that I can give to both, in my opinion, is – nothing.

            She was in a reality series (reality series – another item which is not actually reality [something I may come to in another post]) with her family. Beyond that, she seems to exist only in one photo after another, day after day, month after month, ad infinitum, ad nauseam. It’s as if the day is not complete without at least a couple hundred pictures being shot before she can call it a day’s work. If you can call it work. I don’t believe you can call her a model, but the jury is still out on that.

Not only must there be continual photos of herself, but of her child, North. That’s another one. How can anyone name a child North? I hope the child comes to her senses one day and changes her name. I can just see her going hiking and someone asks in what direction they should go and someone says northwest, and she yes, “What do you want?”

            Not only does Miss Kardashian, or Mrs. Kanye West, dress in outrageous clothes, but now she is dressing he daughter in the same brazen outfits. To me, this is extremely poor taste in fashion. I can’t imagine what the child must feel, if she does understand it yet.

            Going back to the photo in the Daily News, just why is it necessary for her to be pictured like this? Granted fashion has nothing to do with this. But to go nude? I am afraid to find out what the next step will be. I see no reason other than to try to get even more millions of people into her circle of admirers. I, for one will never be included. I find it ridiculous to go to such lengths just to increase a fan base for someone who, going back to my initial question, does what exactly?

            She has a multitude of fans. I will never question that. To me it is the manner and the reason why they are fans. I am not one and I don’t foresee ever becoming one. For me, in order to have a fan base, you need to do something to be admired. Therefore, either I am missing the point with Kim Kardashian or I am right and have missed nothing. That is, she is famous for doing nothing except for being very attractive and that people want to emulate her.

The Dangers of the Cellular Phone

            The cellular phone first found on television in the mid-1960s, first on “Get Smart” then on “Start Trek”. Then in the 1970’s the technological revolution took hold and many devices seen on TV started becoming reality. Initially, it was just a phone. But as time progressed, more and more things were added to the device. It became among other things, a game console, a camera, a computer using Word and Excel and many more things. In other words, it became an item that is about the most important thing in our lives. It became a way to instantly stay in touch with everyone immediately. Further, it became a toy and a terrible distraction.

            You constantly hear about people walking in the street on the phone. They are so immersed in the phone that they forget where they are and where they are going. They step off the curb in front of an oncoming vehicle.

            People have their device turned on and forget to turn them off. They go to a movie, a Broadway show, or some other place where they are told to turn them off. But they don’t and the phone rings (and I use that loosely with the multitude of ringtones) at the worst time, disturbing everyone nearby, as well as the actors on stage.

            Texting is a quick way of staying in contact with a quick message. Yet when people do it when walking or driving, people get hurt or die.

            The same goes for the camera. When told there is no photography, they still take pictures when and where they should not.

            There are many other instances where this device has become a distraction, none more than getting in the way of social interaction. Young people especially have their noses so far into these appliances that they do not spend as much time with family members or anyone else. They do not know how to act with each other. Even my wife spends so much time with the smartphone that she is constantly recharging it.

            As I said, the cellular phone has become so important in our life that it is and indispensable piece of equipment. But at the same time, it is used to often that it has become a distraction and a danger to life and limb. People need to remember their priorities and use it safely.

Ebola Paranoia

            Let me say right at the outset that, yes, Ebola is an extremely dangerous disease and is very contagious.

            Many of the world’s greatest pandemics originated in Africa, including the Black Death and AIDS. Ebola can be added to that list.  Naturally there is a great concern. The paranoia comes from the simple fact that people refuse to get the important information as to how the disease spreads.

            The politicians at every level who are supposed to lead the country, and the media which is supposed to responsibly inform the public, refuse to do their homework. They all give inaccurate information, demand a 21-day incubation period, and everyone gets afraid. This amounts to nothing more than fear mongering. Naturally since people would rather take this information from where it comes, and don’t do their own research. Therefore, you see irrational decisions being made and violence from fear.

            The people who best know about how this disease spreads are the health care workers. They know the disease is not contagious for up to 21 days. It is only when a high temperature occurs along with the release of bodily fluids, either through regurgitating or defecating, that it becomes contagious.

            Craig Spencer came back from West Africa and closely monitored his health. When the symptoms emerged, he went right to the hospital. The bowling alley where he stopped need not have been closed. Kaci Hickox refused to be quarantined for the same reason; she knew what to look for. And the judge agreed with her. So she went biking and walking. To date, Spencer is recovering nicely and Hickox has yet to show any symptoms.

            Calm and rationality are what are desperately needed in this situation. We are beyond the Middle Ages when today’s knowledge was not available. But Washington and the leaders around the world and the media prevent that from happening.

5 mph Reduction Means Little

Mayor De Blasio signed into law the new speed limit for New York City, changing it from 30 mph to 25 mph.

Let’s think for a second how fast that is. A person can walk fast at 4 mph. For a car, that is going extremely slow. Hence, the 5 mph difference amounts to next to nothing.

Why did the mayor want this law passed? Because it seems that he blames drivers for the number of accidents and fatalities on the roads with bikers and pedestrians. This is amounts to flawed reasoning. Let’s look at all three participants.

Drivers – There are many who drive a bit over the limit. There are many who say to themselves when the light is about to change: “I’m going to make that light”, and go through right after the light changes to red. They are in too much of a hurry to want to wait a few seconds. There are many who also go through stop signs; they slow down but either don’t stop or cut off the pedestrians. There are also those who refuse to wait for the bus under the el. They cross the double yellow line to pass the bus, putting everyone in danger ahead of them.

Bikers – Many bikers follow the traffic laws and stay in the bike lanes and who know to bike in the directions of the traffic flow. Then again, there are those who speed around, weaving through traffic, especially those who must make deliveries as fast as they can. Here again, we have the drivers, of any kind of vehicle (no exceptions), causing problems. They love to park in the bike lanes and block the bikers, forcing the bikers into traffic.

Pedestrians – This is the most free-moving of the group. People will cross the street when and where they want. Many times you see them daring drivers to hit them. Then again how many are on their phones and are oblivious to the traffic?

The bottom line is that everyone – drivers, bikers and pedestrians – all have their own minds. Everyone is going somewhere and everyone is trying to evade one another. Therefore I would ask the mayor to explain what 5 mph for drivers will accomplish. The answer is nothing.

The Joy of Reading

            It’s hard to believe. When I was young I never liked to read.

I would be given homework assignments in public school to read a book for English or history. Nothing was interesting. So many times I started reading the book. Often I put it down quickly.

Once I went shopping with my mother in Korvette’s in 1970. We were in the book section. I was in the fiction section and came across a book called “Whom the Gods Would Destroy” by Richard Powell. I read the inside flap – historical fiction about the Trojan War. For some reason, this sounded interesting.

At the time I was going to Kingsborough Community College at the Masonic Temple in downtown Brooklyn. I took three buses there and back. I took this book with me. For some reason, I just could not put it down. I was enthralled with the way the Trojan War was brought to life by the author.

I actually realized that reading was fun.

Since then, I have always found something to read on various subjects. Through my mother, I found one author she enjoyed, Jean Plaidy, who wrote numerous books about English royalty. She wrote various series from the Normans to Victoria. I got them all - over 90 books. Still not all read. I found several other authors I enjoyed, including Ian Fleming, Clive Cussler, Steve Berry, Steven Saylor, W. Michael & Kathleen Gear. I’m always reading in the train. I get two plus hours of reading done every day.

The trick for me was that I was able to read what I wanted, not what I was told. When I realized that, the floodgates opened.

Remember, you may not like what you are instructed to read, but you will find something on your own that you like for fun or information.

Who’s at Fault for a Stagnant Government?

            A common complaint is that nothing gets done. Congress doesn’t act, and doesn’t want to work with the President.

            Congress’s approval rating down to 8%, the President’s rating down to 40%. Both continue to fall. Who is really to blame for this situation?

            It has to be no one else but the voters themselves!

            Think of it. Republicans continue to make ridiculous laws, want to cut social security, are against a woman’s right to choose, issue of immigration etc. The Democrats don’t seem to want to fight the Republicans to get things done. This is at every level of government. The only way to affect change is to change the politicians. BUT voters still keep them in office, even those who break the law.

            Why? Various reasons.

Many people vote down party lines. The other candidate is an unknown. TV, radio and print ads are the same every year, accusing each other of something heinous. This is nothing but mudslinging. Some are even racist. There is little or no information as to what they would do and the voters do no research about them. There are no term limits so politicians are not afraid of being voted out of office.

Basically, people fear change. And because they either fear change or don’t care, they become apathetic. Add up all those people who don’t vote, you realize that those vote could actually affect the outcome of the election.

If a better functioning government is desired, people must embrace change, and vote out those who do nothing. The worst possible thing to do is not vote.