Proud of Them Kids, Are You?

Do you think we live in a civilized society?

How deep do you think that veneer of civility goes?

I suppose you have heard about what happened last night in Connecticut?

These are college students; the supposed next leaders of the free world. And they descended into anarchy because some people they probably don't know won a game.

Why is that? What about this game was so special it required drinking to excess, rioting, property damage and arrests? What about this game required these 'adults' to 'celebrate' by descending into mobs?

The worst part is that this is not an isolated incident. College and pro sports team seem to have a rabid group of followers who seem unable to celebrate a teams success without violence and destruction. I could prepare a list- a very long list- of all the incidents in the last 10 years where things like this have occurred. I'm sure you could too.

Yet we call ourselves civilized. What will the punishment be for these thugs and hooligans? How many will be expelled from school? How many will do jail time? How many will pay a fine large enough to dissuade future nights like this?

Yes; I know you will point out that this was a special occasion; that this was only a few students; that alcohol was involved.

So I suppose when I next receive a promotion at work I should get drunk and destroy my neighborhood? Why would that not be appropriate? After all, I have something to celebrate.

Walter Williams has said many times; support behavior you wish to encourage, and tax behavior you wish to discourage. By not punishing severely the 'children' for their crimes we are only encouraging them to behave this badly next time.

Why put up with this? What gives them the right to not only destroy property but also break the civilized veneer and create chaos in its place?

James Naismith developed basketball as a way to control a group of rowdies; to give them a controlled way to burn off energy.

I'm he would be pleased to see how well that plan worked out.

Education Does Not Always Pay

First; this is not scientific by any means. But, it is a good illustration of why I have always maintained that a college degree may be nice, but not always a requirement.

Can you believe there are degrees that will COST you money to try and earn a living with? They don't make mention in the article about whether or not the cost includes the cost of the education or not, but I'll guess it does.

The second chart is even more interesting; Arts, Humanities and Education; the three degrees that seem to give you the least return for your buck. They also seem to be the easiest to earn, or to get a PhD in with very little actual intelligence.

Spend 4 years somewhere partying and at the end they hand you a worthless piece of paper.

And then you take that worthless piece of paper and get a teaching job with it.

Do you see why this country is going to Hell in a handbasket?

Because Educator!

I am involved in an email group for a local community that is more our less urban. This community shares a school system- ranked as one of the worst in the state- with a rather more inner-city community. The email group is, for the most part, well educated and financially successful.

And incredibly divided on the local school system. All it takes is an email to the group that mentions the word 'school' and the acrimony flies like rice once did at a wedding.

 Today somebody made the mistake of asking for the name of a good school for dog training, or some such, and the 'debate' was on.

After one well reasoned email explaining why it was tantamount to child abuse to subject your children to this local school, when for a few dollars more you could send your kids to one of the finest systems in the state in a neighboring district, we have this response:

I would have to disagree with you and say that yes, I do and am sending my kids, who are from foster care, to the public school. After careful thought and consideration, my partner and I decided on this District for several reasons:
1) we want our children to be in a diverse school where they're not the minority;
2) the believe that we have the ability and the desire to help improve the school where we live and spend our money; and lastly,
3) we don't want our kids to be isolated and in school with kids whose parents are bigoted, classist, racist neanderthals, who believe that just because they have, they do.

As an educator, I believe we have a responsibility to help prepare out kids for the real world - a world that includes, like it or not, people of different cultures, experiences, and income levels.  Granted you can send your kids wherever you want, and if you have the means, do what you feel is best. We've chosen to help support our own and have even volunteered at the local school to help make it better.  This is not a slam against you or anything you choose to do, but it seems to me if instead of sending our kids away, we all worked to make it better, these conversations wouldn't be necessary.



Wow. All I can say is Wow. Shall we break this down a bit?



I would have to disagree with you and say that yes, I do and am sending my kids, who are from foster care, to the public school.
Right off the bat we have to note that these are not her kids, but some she is being paid to raise; let'em go to Hell.

After careful thought and consideration, my partner and I decided on this District for several reasons:
DING DING DING DING DING; "PARTNER". So an unmarried couple, who are being paid to raise somebody else s kids choose the cheap way out. What a surprise.

 1) we want our children to be in a diverse school where they're not the minority;
Ooops; it seems the DIVERSITY Card has made an early appearance. Can some one explain to me why diversity makes an iota of difference in primary education? Why does your color, culture or social status affect the learning of 2+2=4?

2) the believe that we have the ability and the desire to help improve the school where we live and spend our money; and lastly, 
Admirable sentiment. And typical lefty tripe. Long on good feelings and very short on specifics. 

3) we don't want our kids to be isolated and in school with kids whose parents are bigoted, classist, racist neanderthals, who believe that just because they have, they do.
The Money Quote. The "You-don't-agree-with-me-so-you-are-every-evil-thing-I-can-think-of" response. Apparently having the ability to select a better education for your child, and having the ability to pay for that education makes you all sorts of nasty things. Go ahead; sacrifice your children on the alter of political correctness so this silly twit won't call you names anymore. Oh and you have more money than I do and I am bitter about it.


As an educator...
I rest my case; no further review is required. We MUST support the public schools, no matter how much damage they have done and will do, because EDUCATOR. That means whatever opinion you have on schools is wrong, because EDUCATOR. I spent $200,000 getting a degree that pays me $40,000 and that makes me smarter than you, because EDUCATOR.

Face it; we cannot force a child (or an adult) to learn anything we can present the information, and can ask them to learn, but they will only absorb what they want to learn. Books, computers, iPads, PowerPoints, movies or filmstrips; the presentation of the information is incidental to the child's desire to learn.

Abe Lincoln educated himself with borrowed books and the back o a shovel to practice on, because he WANTED to learn. He may have learned faster with an iPad, but the tools didn't effect the basic desire. Drug dealers who couldn't pass 5th Grade math can run a successful business because they learned what they wanted to and what they needed to along the way; the same way every past generation learned what it needed to survive and prosper.

We don't need to spend millions of dollars on schools; we don't need computers and iPads and tutors and hundreds of hours of testing.

We need to convince the child that the information we are giving them will be worthwhile retaining.

It is that simple.

And that hard.

Is That High Legal?

I was listening to Sean Hannity on the way home today, and he had a debate going on between a Doctor who's name I can't recall and one of his regular guests on the dangers of Marijuana.

This Doctor was an idiot.

It was his contention that occasional, recreational use of weed is so dangerous that it is lowering the IQ of the kids of the users, by affecting the genome of the parents.

Really? He wants to stand by that assertion?

Basically my belief is that nothing is harmful in reasonable amounts, and everything is dangerous in unreasonable amounts.

Pick a substance. Sugar? The detrimental effects of sugar are well known, when consumed in excessive amounts, yet it is a requirement for healthy living in smaller amounts. Same with salt; to much can kill you; not enough can kill you.

Vitamin A is a required nutrient, yet excessive amounts can kill. Morphine, in limited amounts, is a life saver for pain relief, yet in larger quantities can kill.

Beer was a staple for Medieval monks during Lent, when they were fasting, and was a staple drink of the Puritans at Plymouth Rock, in an era when the water was sometimes deadly, yet when consumed in excessive amounts- deadly.

How about water itself? The very essence of life in some respects, yet when consumed in excessive amounts, murderous.

Coffee; a few cups a day are very beneficial. A few pots a day on the other hand, well, that's a different story.

How about Digitalis? A miracle cure for some forms of heart disease in small amounts, and poisonous in larger ones.

Almost any substance you can name is beneficial in certain amounts and dangerous in other ones.

Even chemicals- and that's what we are talking about; chemicals- produced by our own bodies can be both good and evil.

Why do we make somethings illegal and others legal? Why are some uses of a substance legal, and others illegal?

Who sits on high and makes these seemingly random decisions; Where do they get that authority? Do they have some special wisdom?

As usual, I have more questions than answers.

Maybe its time for a re-examination of how we deal with what is legal and illegal.

Or better yet, let competent adults make up their own minds, and get the government out of the way.

Allowance? What's an Allowance?

I had several things I considered blog worthy today, until late this afternoon when I saw this. It blew everything else out of the water.

Remember one name: Tanya Helfand. She is the attorney- the hopefully soon to be disbarred attorney- that represented an adult child, one who is suing her parents for Child Support.

No; you read that right. an adult child who is suing her parents for Child Support. And Tuition. And her Allowance!

As always, the stories differ some. But some facts are not in dispute.

Last October Rachel Canning turned 18. At that point she moved out of her parents' home. The parents are claiming she left because they were requiring her to adhere to a curfew and do chores around the house.

She is first claiming that they threw he out of the house, and then claiming, through her mouthpiece, “Her home life is an "abusive unhealthy situation,". To be fair, to an 18 year old chores and a curfew are considered abusive.

But; I digress.

Now little Miss Rachel Rich has discovered something her parents apparently never taught her; Money has to be earned. She apparently has no appetite for work, but does have the name and phone number of a shyster willing to risk their license to practice law.

Before I continue, let me explain something. Attorneys are officers of the court, and as such are not supposed to waste the court's time. Attorneys can be sanctioned for doing so. I would think this case fits that bill.

But; to continue; she has sued her parent to pay not only her high school tuition, some $5,300.00, but also her college tuition, her allowance and 'Child Support' as well as her attorney fees.

Tuesday the Family Court Judge in the case ruled that they parents do not have to pay her high school tuition bill, but must pay her an allowance and Child Support. The unnamed judge has delayed ruling on whether or not the parents need to pay for her college, but did deny her request for attorney's fees.

Did I mention this is NEW JERSEY? While I am disbarring an attorney for a frivolous waste of the courts time, this nutcase judge is AGREEING with her.

According to her father: "Private school, new car, college education; that all comes with living under our roof".

Oh, but damn the bad luck, all that largesse also comes with rules. Want the goodies without the grief? Hire a lawyer and sue.

Core of this case, in my opinion? What claim on a parents' assets does a competent adult child have?

My answer? None; nadda, zip. A parent is required to raise a child. hopefully they have done a good job and turned that child into a successful adult by the age of 18. A adult who can support themselves; feed clothe and house themselves. Find and keep a job. CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY.

If they haven't; they apparently can get sued for support. And Allowance.

Disgusting.

Here is another problem I see with this scenario as well; does this situation remind you of anything? People who want the goodies without the grief? You know; food clothing and shelter without the issue of needing to actually, you know, EARN any of those things?

Yep. Exactly.

UPDATE: the article I read and linked to yesterday has been changed. Originally it said the judge had approved the allowance and support for our young adult; now it says otherwise. Which is good in a lot of respects, but it does make me look like I have a reading comprehension problem.

I also read a few more details today that really put the slime into this situation. Apparently our plaintiff is living with a friend and their family, and it is the father of this friend (an attorney) who is currently footing the bill for the lawsuit, and recommended the filing of the suit to the plaintiff. The article doesn't describe the friend; that makes me wonder if she is living with her boyfriend's family? And why is Dad pushing this suit?

Something doesn't pass the smell test; at least to me.

Saturday Morning Twofer

Hey; lets do a twofer today, shall we?

I found this video at the The Borderline Sociopathic Blog For Boys.


I was forced to share (FORCED I Say) because of a great line I thought of while watching the video.

Ready? Okay, go watch the video. Yes its stupid; yes its juvenile; yes it looks dangerous. But you have to watch the whole video. Its only a minute and a half.

Don't worry; I'll still be here when you get back.


Okay: seen the video?

Here's what I thought of:

Any landing you can stagger away from is a good landing.

Any landing where you can reuse the PANTS is a GREAT landing!

There now; wasn't that worth it?

Back to the Past, and Back to the Future

This article, Time Travelers: Please Don't Kill Hitler, caught my attention this morning, for obvious reasons. What better way to catch the eye of a history buff than to mention time travel and killing Hitler?

The specific of not killing Hitler is just a general prohibition about not changing the past, as it will change the future. Well, duh.

Doesn't everyone know that? Aren't we all aware of an event in our past that has lead us to where we are?

Personally, I can point to several events, seared... seared into my memory that have made me who I am, and how, Robert Frost-like, a different path would have made all the difference.

Yeah; so?

20-20 Hindsight is not the most optimal method for re-examining our past. Very specific events put us in a position to make a specific decision, and changing that decision would require changing the circumstances; it would not be logical to think we would change our decision without a change in the circumstances.

Years ago I read Ray Bradbury's, "A Sound of Thunder", and the concept fascinated me. The idea that the life or death of one individual creature millions of years ago would change the world we live in. This idea was also dealt with in a Star Trek, the Next Generation  episode, Paralells, where a character gets caught in a time fracture, and all of the various possible histories form that time fracture become not just possible, but active. In the final scene, all of the possible futures are gathered together, hundreds of thousands of variations, just before the fracture is corrected, and the original, I don't think anybody says correct, time line is restored.

One of the questions asked in the article, and answered in some of the comments, is what would you do with a time machine?

Can you imagine being able to revisit yourself at one of those decision points, shades of 2015 Biff visiting 1955 Biff and changing his future, and having a decision that effected your life changed? Would the one visit do it? Or would that single change open up a broad range of new decisions that would need guidance from the future as well? That decision you made at 18 about college or a job is changed, and now your future self is worse off than you are now. Or were then. Or were before you started messing with things,

Or that decision to buy a new car at 25, a decision that you thought didn't turn out so well, is changed; so you continue to drive the beater, until that accident that you walked away from in the new car, leaves you paralyzed in the old one?

So many decisions; so many futures. And imagine the effect on the 25 year old you. First you have to accept that the geezer in front of you is actually the future you, and then you have to accept that his advice to not purchase a new car is valid, and then you act upon it, only to be revisited by the same geezer, this time in a wheelchair, telling you to forget the previous advice he gave you, and now he wants you to buy the new car? Do you believe him this time? How many more trips will be required to get your future to turn out the way you want it to?

Isn't that kind of what we have tried with our children? We see how our future has turned out; we see where the bad decisions were made, and try to force our children to make different choices than we did, so their future will turn out better than ours. We are that old geezer, hawking different options than what the geezer made in his youth, and having just as much faith that the decisions made will be correct for their future.

So; do we try? Do we attempt to steer our children down a different course than we took, not knowing for certain that future events will play out to detriment or benefit, based on that decision?

Besides, we may remember as a pivot point some choice we made, but it may have been a completely different decision, one we see as a good choice, that may have actually have not been so. Or it may be a choice we made, long since forgotten, that has had more effect of our current selves than we may know.

Kind of like stepping on a butterfly, 80 million years ago. You never know how it will affect the future, if at all. 

Need a Rocking Chair?

I'll bet he doesn't.

This video makes me feel like I have spent too much of my life sitting still, and I am few years short in age from the hero of this video.

I don't use the word hero lightly. Heroism isn't always a single instant; sometimes it is a lifetime.

A blogger I visit regularly- Sippican Cottage- tends to find videos like this; maybe he has time to hunt for them. 

Go ahead; watch the video. I'll be here when you get back.

Here we have a man who is working daily, just as he has for more than probably 80 years. Still going , and not intention of stopping. Working at a physical job. One that men 50, 60 even 70 years his junior wouldn't do. He has made a living working hard. He probably isn't rich by Wall Street standards, but he probably is by Arkansas standards.

He has a job he loves- I can't imagine doing something I hated at his age, and family around him.

There is a commercial I have seen on TV once or twice that talks about retirement, and defines it as paying yourself to do what you want to do, by saving for it now.

And then you run into Mr. Bump, who, at the age of 95 is still letting somebody else pay him to do what he wants to do.

Now that is what I would call an embarrassment of riches.

Is It Education or Not?

I have been reading Walter Williams work for years. If he doesn't hit the bullseye it is a rare thing, and then he is usually in the 9 point ring.

This column is no different.

Why can't these children pass a standardized test? Particularly if hundreds of thousands of other children can?

Lets take a look at the variables. There are basically 3 people involved; the teacher; the pupil and the parents. Yes; I am counting parents as one individual; it will be rare instances when they don't think as one mind when it comes to educating their young.

First stop is the teacher. How many of their pupils passed and how many failed? If the ratio is 10 passes to one fail, or even 7 passes to 3 fails, I doubt this is an issue with the teacher; she or he has been able to connect with a majority of the students and the failure is the aberration.

But what if the ration is 1 pass to 10 fails, or even 3 passes to 7 fails? This is beginning to look like a failure to connect; to instill the needed information in the children. But; there were still children able to pass. Why?

Next we need to look at the student. Some kids want to learn, and will learn anything they are taught. They don't look to see if any of the information is relevant or useful; they soak it up and spit it out as required. Some kids can learn, but choose what they want to learn. They pick up what has been shown to be relevant and useful to them, and reject everything else. Then there are the children who need special attention; they need to be introduced to information on an individual basis, usually, but not always, because of a special need in either mental or physical development.

Then there is the final variable; the parents, or all to often parent. Is school a needed component; do they feel the need for education, or is school just a place that will babysit the little bastards for free for 6-8 hours a day? These attitudes are passed on to the children and will influence their attitudes toward education.

Is the parent willing and able to help the child in the evenings? Parental reinforcement is important for the child to retain what they have learned. If a single parent is overwhelmed it doesn't help the child's ability to learn or study.

Or is the parent involved in the education process? Helping with homework, checking papers when they come home, attending parent teacher conferences? Paying tuition?

Educating a child is a three legged stool; if any of those legs fails, the education fails.

That being said, why were the teachers cheating?

Obviously because the goals couldn't be met by normal methods. Which leg failed?

Unfortunately, there probably isn't a blanket answer, but dozens of individual ones.

Which is another problem with the modern education system; they throw blanket solutions onto individual problems.

The individual answers are as individual as the pupil; the pupil teacher relationship; the community and the community's relationship with the school. We gauge the effectiveness of a school based on a test that has been determined to fit all fifty states; all 3090 Counties, Parishes and Boroughs and the thousands of school districts and hundreds of thousands of schools, teachers and millions of students.

What passes for being educated as a 19 year-old college freshman and a 19 year-old plumber's apprentice are completely different; what type of education is needed for various positions in the labor force or even for various disciplines in education are different as well.

But instead of giving kids a basic education they can take anywhere, we insist on believing that every child should have a liberal arts education; one that requires the study of information that will not have any benefit to the child's abilities as a productive element of society.

Teach a child not just to read, but to comprehend; Teach him to add, subtract, multiply and divide. Teach him the basics of his county's history, and his part in keeping that county strong. Everything else he needs to know he can learn; he now has the tools.

Sounds simple doesn't it? Yet there will be arguments; What constitutes history? Is the history? One of our great conquest or one of our domination and destruction of what was already here? What of science? do we teach evolution of creation?

And again the broad blanket of a one solution gets thrown; but no one-size-fits-all is true. It has always been my experience that one-size-fits-all fits nobody well, and everybody poorly.

Why can't the parent's decide what the education will consist of?  It is there children being educated, and it is their money paying for it.

Besides, what it takes to be educated and employable in the woods of Kentucky is completely different than it is in the jungles of New York.

And you may be able to cheat on a written test; the final exam life gives is usually requires a bit more study.

And is completely different, depending on where your feet are.

If You Don't Laugh, You Ain't Normal

That first post was short, but with a long video.

So how about another short post with another long military related video.

I found this over at the The Borderline Sociopathic Blog For Boys site; always very entertaining.

I did spend a few years serving, but I don't remember anything like this video happening. But then maybe we were this young and dumb.

Or, maybe its because I see lots of Green- Army and Marines.

Didn't see any blue in here at all.

But then again I could be prejudiced.

I'll Take the Ferrari, Thanks

I was perusing Instapundit this morning and saw this headline: "When Going to College is Like Buying a Ferrari on Credit.". Yeah, that caught my eye. It linked to this article on The Blaze, which references an article by Glenn Reynolds, aka Instapundit. If it wasn't such a good article I'd make some comment about shameless self promotion.

It is especially timely because I was talking to my nephew last weekend, and he mentioned some schools he was interested in, and at one of them a four year degree costs $200,000.00.

I checked. You can't get a Ferrari for $200k. At least you can't get a NEW Ferrari for $200k. That amount of cash will get a very nice 2 year old Ferrari however.

The thing is, the government will lend an 18 year-old kid that $200,000.00 IF he spends it at a college of their choice.

They will not lend an 18 year old kid that amount for a used Ferrari.

I think that's a shame. How about a little analysis?

Lets say I buy an indocrina... I mean 'Education' with that money. What will that education be worth in 10 years? How about a show of hands? How much of what you learned during your four years of undergrad do you still remember and/or still use? And I mean what you learned in THE CLASSROOM! How many of you are earning a living based on the field your degree was in? How many of you are using your Geology Degree as a basis for your management position in the growing field of fast food?

Now lets buy that used Ferrari!

First; having a car like that will open lots of doors. Not a member of the Hill 'n Dale Country Club? Roll up in a Ferrari; I'll bet they let you in. Roll up in your 10 year old beater Taurus and flash you degree from the University of Beer and Broads; my guess is they will hand you an employment application. For kitchen help.

Roll up to ANY hot spot in the city: Ferrari- you have a girl. Degree- you may get a free beer and some commiseration from the bartender, using his $200,000.00 Humanities Degree to mix drinks and change out empty beer kegs.

I could go on (And on. And on. And on...) but you get the picture. Plus; most, if not all Ferraris appreciate in value. Historically, the older a Ferrari gets the more it is worth. So your $200k investment today will net you double that in 15 years. Give or take.

Economists talk about something called 'Opportunity Cost of Money'; spending your cash one way means, as money is individually finite, you cannot spend it another way. Meaning every dollar you spend on rent is one less dollar you have for beer. Or vise versa. Every dollar you spend repaying that $200,000.00 in student loans is one dollar less you have for a house payment, car payment, 401k funding. Or beer.

I'm not against a college education. In fact, for certain positions I am positively for it. What I'm against is the ubiquitous nature of the college degree. One purchased at fantastic cost, on credit, and never used.

What are you buying for your Two Hundred Thousand Dollars and no sense (pun intended)? The piece of heavy stock paper with you name on it (which cost the college $1.45- it pays to buy in bulk) or the education that you allegedly obtained in your chosen field of study?

So; just how often will a discussion of the finer points of Women's Studies come up in the slack times between asking "do you want fries with that?"

I know some folks in the Payday Lending field. Before you can borrow $200 they must fully disclose the terms, interest rate and how much you will be paying back.

When you borrow $200,000.00 in student loans, some student- working at the school to avoid student loan debt- will advise you to "sign here to pay for next semester".

How many 18 year-olds would hesitate to sign if they knew the money they were borrowing today would still be coming out of their paycheck when they they are 40?

And that this debt will cost them that used Ferrari?

How Much Did You Miss Yesterday?

Was yesterday a bust-ass day or what?

Half a dozen bloggable things happening and I, to use my Dad's phrase, felt like death warmed over.

I'm a little better today, but not by much. Now I'm only a near death experience warmed over.

Rand Paul hit Hillary rather hard yesterday, didn't he? Not hard enough, but still, harder than anybody else did.

And he's right. We not only no longer keep score in kid's sports, apparently we no longer keep score in government.

Who was responsible for the four deaths in Libya? What  is/will be their punishment?

What are we doing to make sure this does not happen again?

All questions that should be asked and answered.

But won't be. We don't want to ruin somebody's career over a little thing like this, now do we?

Even Hillary's. She will bail on the job of Secretary of State- a 'post turtle position' for her for sure. And don't even get me started on Kerry's "QUALIFICATIONS"- and retire to her estate in New York or somewhere, and start showing up at shopping malls and diners in Iowa in a couple of years.

And no one will ever mention it was her inadequacies and errors that cost us the lives of 4 Americans, including an Ambassador.

And then we have Biden hinting he will be in the running in 2016. Why? is he looking for another 4 years as Vice-President?

And last, but by no means least, we have Leon Panetta stopping on his way out the door as Secretary of Defense to announce the end of the ban on women in combat roles.

Really? Talk about dumping a hot mess into the lap of whoever is next Secretary. Who is the current sacrificial lamb? Is it still the RINO Hagel? But that description even gives RINO's a bad name. When was the last time we actually had a Democrat as Secretary of Defense? The middle of the Clinton Administration? 20 some years ago?

Why don't any Democrats want the job? Too much responsibility? You can lose a few diplomats an still keep your job. Lose a dozen young men and there is Hell to pay.

And of course they won't change the standards; any woman wanting a combat MOS will need to meet the same standards as the men currently do.

Yeah; that'll last. Only until the first batch of 250 women wing up producing 5 qualified applicants.

Three of which who will withdraw when they break a nail.

And then watch the race to the bottom.

I'll be blunt; I have never served in a combat unit. But I have served in the military, and I have seen what happens to a group of young adult males when a few women have been dumped among them.

It ain't pretty. The men lose all control and the women gain it. And nobody can resist following their instincts to protect the weaker sex.

It wasn't just in the military; I saw it happen in the workforce too. Not as pronounced- because the folks are older, in general- but still the same jealousies and conflicts.

Comparisons will be made to the integration of the services during the Truman Administration. Some of them may be valid, but I really doubt there were breakdowns in unit cohesion because the new arrivals stopped dating one fellow soldier and started dating another, or a breakdown in discipline because of an over protective attitude toward the black unit member.

Hopefully we can start reversing the damage before it's too late.

But I am starting to have my doubts.

News of The Day

News you can use; without comment.

More Beer

This article really demonstrates part of what I have been saying for years; nobody really liked most of the corporate beers. They just didn't have any alternatives.

Now; we have alternatives. Like we talked about in this post about Beer, people have wanted better beer for years. Now we can get it.

The one interesting point is about Michelob. Back when getting a Guinness was a pipe dream, beer aficionados drank a lot of Michelob. It was a better beer than the normal brews.

And then we were able to get Guinness.

So what happened to Michelob? Was it the ability to get better beers that has caused its slide (Sales loss (2006-2011): 72.0%, according to the article), or was it the cheapening of the Michelob brand that caused it? Beers like Michelob Ultra.

But they also produced some better beers, like Amber Bock that I really enjoyed and a very drinkable Porter.

Could be one or the other or both. It wouldn't be the first time a good product was squeezed from both sides. It was more or less a niche beer that has had its niche disappear.

It was a good domestic large beer. Now if you want a good beer, you go microbrew; if you want a large beer you go (hold on while I pause for an involuntary shudder) Bud Light.

I find it interesting also that the  'cheap crap' beers have also lost sales. Old Milwaukee; Milwaukee's Best and Amstel have all lost between 35% and 58% of their sales. Is that a reflection of increased taste among beer drinkers for better beer, or a loss in sales to cheaper drunks, as cash strapped budgets looked for cheaper alternatives? Hard to say.

But this article from 2010 basically says that the loss in top shelf booze is more than made up for in the increased sales in lower priced stuff. Is there enough room in there for a few former beer drinkers?

My guess is yes.

Bud Light is sort of an anomaly in this report, with 39.15 million barrels sold last year it is the undisputed king of the hill in Beer sales.

Its not really hard to figure out why. Most sports stadiums and arenas sell it almost exclusively. If you want to drink beer, you (please allow a short break while I pause for another involuntary shudder) drink Bud Light.

I'm sorry; I just don't under stand how anyone with a single functioning taste bud can drink that swill. I seriously would rather drink dishwater than Bud Light. That's not a recent opinion; I have never liked Budweiser or Bud Light.

I guess it has something to do with having an edjamikated beer palate.

I was, you may recall, raised on Weidemann.

Shopping

 

Tonight I decided to take the Young'un shopping. She had money in her pocket from some work she did a few days ago and had decided that her backpack was no longer serviceable.

Some of her friends (she is about a month short of 8) were carrying a new style of book bag called a Messenger style; meaning that instead of having two straps and holding the weight on your back, this one had one strap and hung off your side.

Rumor had it- one of her friends at school had told her- that the local Kohl's had them for $4.99. And she had $10.00. So we went to Kohls.

Now I am not much of a shopper. I have a store I go to when I need clothes, because no place local has my size in dress pants or shirts. And I go to Wal-mart. Kohls is unfamiliar territory.

So first order of business was to find out where the backpacks were. The Young'un is a take charge person, and has no problem asking questions. The first person we saw who worked there did not know where the backpacks were. The second person did. Allegedly. He sent us to the far northwest corner of the store. after a few minutes fruitless search we asked again for the backpacks.

Guess what? Their in the southeast corner of the store, right next to the door we entered. so we trekked all the way BACK across the store, to between menswear and shoes, in the luggage department.

And this is where the world ended.

They didn't have any Messenger style book bags. And then the tears started. Her friends lied to her. Her friends HATED her. She hated her friends because they lied to her. But she kept looking. And found a $25 Nike bag.

When I refused to buy it,  Then I was the one that hated her and had lied to her. Her backpack was old (we bought it at the start of the school year, when it was 'the bomb') she needed a new backpack, and this one was pink.

My reminders that we had come into the store for a $5.00 book bag did not mean we would buy a $25.00 one as a consolation prize were not even listened too. The whole world and God Almighty were all against her. The world would end and she would not have a good book bag.

DRAMA DRAMA DRAMA!

I have raised 5 sons. In over 25 years of raising 5 boys from infancy to adulthood I did not have as much DRAMA as I have had with this Young'un in the last year.

I took her to get a pair of shoes a few weeks ago. With her Dad and her Uncles it was a 5 minute trip. Here's the price range and here's your size; pick out a pair of shoes. They picked out a pair of shoes and out the door we went. With the Young'un it took 25 minutes just to narrow down the selections to a couple of hundred pair, most of which were too big; too small or too pricey. We literally spent 45 minutes in the shoe aisle at Wal-Mart AND DID FIND A PAIR TO BUY!!!!!

I decided right then and there, and I do mean RIGHT then and RIGHT there never to shop with her again.

I didn't think tonight would be a shopping trip. But it was.

So right here and now I am making a vow.

I am not going to step into a store with the Young'un again. I want to enjoy the few remaining hairs I have left.

Friday NIght at the Movies XI

I watched Peggy Sue Got Married Friday night. Lots of interesting things going on right there, and lots of sweet cars. It is 1960 after all.

I had never seen it before, but it was about the only thing on Netflix, so what the Hell? If it's junk I can turn it off.

Like I said; lots of interesting things going on in this movie. But the one that caught my attention was this; can you imagine trying to find your desk in home room 25 years later?

Or take an algebra test?

Certain things just make you stop and think.

Now: solve for y in the following equation:

Ah... who am I kidding? I could even write an algebraic equation, much less solve one!

The CMA Awards

Last night the Country Music Association gacve out their yearly awards. I didn't watch the show, but I did pull up a list of winners (scroll to the bottom) this morning.

And my first thought was:

Who in Hell are these PEOPLE?!?!?!

Toby Keith I like, and I have heard of Blake Shelton. And Willie Nelson of course.

And Believe it or not, Mac McAnally, mostly because of his work with Jimmy Buffet.

Where are Brad Paisley and Alan Jackson? George Strait? Reba McIntire?

Now I know why I don't listen to Country Radio anymore.

Remodel, Finale

I should really say Finale; we still have a few small things to do, but yesterday was the end of the trim work. We hung the crown molding.

As a devoted fan of This Old House I have watched crown molding go up many times. I knew the tricks. or so I thought. My son was willing to try it on his own, until after he had cut and hung the first piece. Then he called me. I figured we would start about 10 and be done about 12. Its a small bathroom; just 5 feet by 8 feet; shouldn't take long.

Well; except we ran into a problem or two.

Crown molding didn't seem that difficult to hang, and the last few pieces weren't. But that first piece; WOW.

Maybe a few explanations are in order. Most molding on walls is hung flat; like baseboards and chair rail. Where two pieces meet a simple miter joint is used. I say simple, but they are not simple to cut, sometimes. But a simple miter basically divides the 90 degree angle into two 45 degree angles, one 45 degree cut on each piece to be joined, and when put together they fill the 90 degree corner.

A miter will work well on either an inside corner or and outside corner (an inside corner is like one in the corner of a room; an outside corner is one that protrudes into a room). But there is a second method of creating an inside corner called a cope joint. A cope joint is where one piece of molding is left at a 90 degree angle and the piece that joins it is cut on the end to match the profile of the molding it is meeting. It sounds hard, but in practice isn't, because of a few tricks.

Coping crown molding is very similar, but completely different. I worked at least an hour on the first cope cut; cutting, test fitting, cutting again; test fitting again. Cutting AGAIN, and test fitting AGAIN. I could never get the joint to match up. Then I tried matching my cope cut up with a piece of molding  not mounted on the wall. It matched perfectly. Then I moved my piece of molding around on the wall until I had a perfect match. I the realized the molding my son had hung wasn't at the right angle.

Crown isn't hung flat; it forms a 45 degree angle around the 90 degree angle of the wall and ceiling. The piece I was working off of wasn't at 45 degrees. By now I had a perfect left miter and a perfect right miter, so we pulled down the piece that was up and used our cut pieces to align it perfectly.

From then on it was smooth sailing. The first cut took over an hour; the last one took about 5 minutes. Because we put crown in the shower stall as well as the rest of the room we wound up with 6 cope joints and 2 outside miters. From first cut to final nail was about 4 and a half hours; twice what I originally thought. But from second piece of molding to final piece of molding was about an hour and a half. So I guess I have a 3 hour learning curve.

It was also made easier by my son having hung the first piece. If I would have hung it it would have taken a couple extra hours to convince me I had done the first one wrong.

All the while we worked my son kept telling me he could never be a carpenter; he didn't have the patience. Well; I didn't either at his age.

I Have a New Hero

102 years old, and still drives.....

Her 1930 Packard. 3 speed unsynchronized transmission, no power steering, no power windows.

My new hero.

I wonder if she has a Great-Granddaughter my age?

Yeah; It's Been That Kind of a Day

Yesterday was a day of complete rest. I guess I still hadn't recovered from the long weekend I had last weekend.

Or maybe I'm coming down with something. Half the people in this house are sneezing and the other half have a hacking cough. I don't have either.

Yet.

I did mange to get a bit of writing done, so that's something. Not that I was really happy with it. What I wrote is very workman like; it gets the story across, but not the emotion I want. It is good enough for a first draft, but now I need to go back and make the words dance. I can do it; I have faith in myself.

Speaking of faith, I saw a sign tonight on the way home advertising a Tent Revival. I just wonder how many folks will show up, and what the age range will be. I would guess the audience (congregation?) will be 90% women; 75% over the age of 60 and 100% devout, or at least intending to look that way. A church I pass on the way home had a sign up at one point that said "Church isn't a museum for saints; its a hospital for sinners". I have to agree.

The problem any more is too many people don't recognize they are sick I guess. I suppose I could be defined as one of them. I have never lost my faith in God, but I sure have lost my faith in Religion. I don't believe the selling of indulgences has ended; just taken a different form; almost like your faith in God has something to do with your dedication to the Religion.

That might be the other part of it. Religion is a Community, and a Community is made up of people. You can't just pray on your own; you have to become a part of the Community. Sorry; not a big fan.

Kind of like working from home; you are just as productive, or more so, but nobody can verify that you actually worked as hard and long as they did, so it doesn't count. To them anyway.

And the same folks that will smile, nod and shake you hand in the Pews, will run you over in the parking lot.

But such has it always been so, right?

But then an organized religion does have benefits. Time honored rituals and practices; ancient prayers murmured countless times by countless generations; the same procedure as old as time itself, provided you are using the Roman calendar, and the idea of Anno Domini.

I forget what book I was reading, but a couple of characters were talking about the concept of magic, and the idea that previous generations may have been able to perform spells; something the current folks can only dream about. The second character responded that each age gains a little knowledge, and loses a little knowledge; who can say what we have gained can equal what we have lost.

I say that knowing I am not the only one of my generation to have lost a faith in religion. The problem is now how to pass on the faith in God, without the rituals.