It's a small world after all?

By now, you should know what Uber is but you might not know what UberPool is. Picture sharing a ride with a random stranger.

Last night, I picked up two guys at the Lincoln Memorial. They'd been sightseeing on the Mall all day and were ready to go back to their apartment. One of them, Evan, had just arrived to begin a summer internship at a law firm.

As they're getting in, I got another request to pick up Hannah at the GWU Medical Center. We get there to pick her up and as she gets in, they introduce themselves to each other and out of the blue, Hannah asks Evan if he went to USC. By his tone, I could tell he was surprised by the question but he answered, "Yeah, why? Did you?" Turns out, they were both at USC at the same time, had some mutual friends, and had actually connected briefly through a campus online dating site.

She's originally from Seattle, was a med major at USC, did nursing school at Johns Hopkins, and now works at Children's in DC. He's originally from Georgia, got his degree from USC, but I forget where he said he's going to law school.

The thing that prompted me to blog about this is that of all the hundreds of passengers I've picked up in the months I've been doing Uber and of all the potential passengers that could've been brought together on that particular ride last night, to have what should've been two random strangers actually know each other was freakishly odd.

Will this be the next "Harry Met Sally" kind of story we see on the big screen? I wonder who they'll get to play the Uber driver?

Oh, by the way, they're going out to dinner tonight.

On Couric, Limbaugh, and Truth

If you haven't heard, Katie Couric's in the news. I don't mean she's in the news for reporting the news. No, she's actually making the news these days. It seems she's got a gig doing "independent journalism" but in truth, what she's doing looks less like reporting and more like some Goebbels propaganda.

It's no secret that she's an anti second amendment activist and a recent project she's been working on is meant to promote her cause. However, it turns out that she couldn't make her point without some drastic and deceptive editing of interviews she conducted with gun rights supporters.

But that's not what I'm writing about here. That was just some background. What's really bugging me is that I wouldn't even know about this story if Rush Limbaugh hadn't talked about it on his show. Rush has a policy of not giving MSNBC any free press. Rush has an audience in the millions and MSNBC has maybe a couple of hundred thousand. He avoids running any audio clips of their broadcasts and he avoids talking about them as much as he can and he insists that his ban is helping drive their numbers down.

Whether he's right or wrong, their numbers are definitely down, but I can't help but wonder why he doesn't do the same thing with the rest of these leftist hacks. He's always bemoaning the garbage that's discussed by the "drive-by's" but the fact is, most of us wouldn't even know about it if he didn't bring it up. The only people that get their "news" from those sources are generally the people who also think it's actually truth.

So Rush, if you're reading, just let the hogs go ahead and wallow in their own excrement. Stay away and we won't have to smell 'em.

Mechanics, fishing instructors, what's the difference?

When you have a problem with your car, you take it to a mechanic, right? You probably don't have a garage with a lift or chests full of tools or all the specialized diagnostic equipment. The mechanic's shop's equipped with all these things because that's what he does for a living. And since he has so much stuff, it's not exactly convenient for him to make house calls.

My brother's a mechanic and he's been known to do that from time to time but that's also a matter of convenience. I mean, if the car won't run, how are you supposed to get it to the shop? If the mechanic can come to you, it's so much easier.

The past few years, the world's been given the impression that America doesn't want to make house calls anymore. Our President's throwing the doors wide open and telling everyone, "Come on in! And bring your problems with you. Central Americans, Mexicans, Syrians... we don't care who you are or what your intentions are. We know there are problems where you live and that you want to get away so come here, we'll take care of you."

The thing is, these people still love their homelands. If not, why do you see so many Mexican flags? They don't want to be Americans. If they did, why do we have to press 1 for English?

Wouldn't it make more sense for us to help them fix their own countries? That's what we used to do. We have that reputation. The world knows that just because we invade a country, that doesn't mean we're there to stay.

What ever happened to that old proverb? "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, you feed him for life."

The defintion of poor?

If you're following along at home, you should have an idea by now of what it's like to be an Uber driver. I'm sure every city has its own kinds of people but DC definitely has some good ones. That's certainly a well I'll be able to frequent for blog ideas. Today is no exception.

Yesterday, I picked up a well-dressed, well-spoken, and well-mannered African-American who was probably in his early to mid-30's. He had his young son with him who looked to be not much more than 1 year old. I'm in the habit of letting my passengers initiate conversation, just in case they don't want to talk.

He started off asking me about my day and when I asked him about his, he explained how grateful he was to have received  a check in the mail but that it was too late for him to make it to his bank so he had to catch an Uber to go downtown to find an open bank.

About 20 minutes there and 20 minutes back gave us quite a bit of time to chat. Turns out, he's the oldest of 8 kids, he's an Army reservist, he served a tour in Kabul, and he's suffering a mild case of PTSD. Something that stood out was him talking about a class he attended at some point and how he was influenced by something the instructor taught.

He said that the instructor asked the class to define "poor." He remembered that many of the responses had to do with a lack of material possession and a few referenced what might be called a poverty of relationships. But he said the thing that moved him and that sticks with him to this day is how the instructor defined it...

"Passing Over Opportunity Regularly"

Raisin Cain?

There's a story on Islam making its rounds. Seems there's a question on the accuracy of an interpretation of an idea within Islamic circles. In case you've never heard this before, many of these radical Islamic terrorists are perfectly willing to die as martyrs by committing suicide in an attack that kills or wounds infidels. They do it with the notion that in so doing, they'll receive eternal rewards in paradise, among which are 72 virgins.

Well, this new story points out that there's a question about the validity of that interpretation. First of all, "experts" aren't in agreement over the number. However, my reason for discussing this is a question over the translation of the word that some believe means "virgins." Turns out, some experts say that the correct translation of the word is "raisins."

Imagine if Achmed, the car bomber, wakes up in paradise thinking he's going to be surrounded by beautiful women and instead, gets a pile of dried up, wrinkled grapes.

I read several articles on this issue to research this post. Some of these people go at each other like a bunch of Calvinists jumping on some Armenians. (Sorry, that's an inside joke. Maybe I'll explain it later.) They're pretty passionate about their opinions, that's for sure. But even after Rush Limbaugh made light of it yesterday, I'm left with an awkward feeling that EVERYONE is missing a very important point.

Does it really matter how that should be translated or is there a bigger question that needs to be addressed? I mean, think about it, what's more important; the reward these nuts get or the idea that they're being encouraged to kill other human beings? If these Islamic "experts" are so hung up on what clerics are teaching, why don't they start with that?

Is it time for another "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ" moment?

One article inspired my posts on individualism vs collectivism. This morning, I read a warning to the droves of young people being wooed by Bernie Sanders and his utopian message. It does a great job detailing just how ugly collectivism can get but it doesn't really address why.

Socialism/communism/whatever-you-want-to-call-it comes with a compelling draw, especially to the downtrodden. If you're poor and hopeless, of course you're going to respond favorably to a "Robin Hood" who blames the rich for your woes. It's not that hard for Robin Hood; he just has to find enough people with hungry bellies and get them to look in the windows of those drinking champagne while he whispers, "Rise up!"

Robin Hood might be a power-hungry despot just using revolution as a means to an end but then again, he might be sincere. But when you realize the real reason why these revolutions all end in tyranny, you have to ask what difference does it make why Robin Hood wants revolution.

So why do all of these collectivist experiments eventually slide into oppression? Simply put, because of you... and me and everyone else. Human nature must be one of the most reliable forces in the universe. You might not be able to consistently and accurately predict what an individual will do in a given circumstance but you can do it with the masses.

Yes, the revolution's foot soldiers can be inspired to rise up and crush the bourgeoisie, but when they're finished, they get disenchanted when they realize they're no better off than they were before. So, if Robin Hood wants to keep his own place, now he has to keep the mob from killing him... he restricts their speech, movement, association and assembly, he limits their resources, and most importantly, he takes their guns.

Mohammed vs the world

I used to get my news from the pages of The Free Lance-Star but these days, most of what I learn comes from my facebook time-line. Occasionally, some of what was in the paper actually came from my own hand. Over the years, I think I've had more than a dozen letters to the editor published. I was reminded of one today when I ran across this story from Breitbart.

This Czech lawyer might get labeled by a lot of different groups but the only label I have for her is accurate. In her speech, she gets much more critical of Islam than I did in my letter but I was restricted to 300 words. The common point for both of us is that Islam isn't compatible with Western ideology. That point can be made without being critical of Islam, so saying so shouldn't be characterized as Islamophobic.

Fundamental Islamic doctrine calls for rule by an Islamic state around the world. It allows for Jews and Christians to remain so, as long as they pay a tax to the state. It doesn't allow for Buddhism, Hinduism, atheism, or any other ideology. In an Islamic state, an atheist would have to convert to Islam or be executed.

These aren't meant to be criticisms of Islam. In fact, if you asked an Islamic cleric, he'd probably proudly inform you that this is all true. But therein lies the problem. Western governments, including our Constitution, are built to protect freedom of thought. A Christian and an atheist may not share beliefs but neither one of them are looking to incarcerate or kill the other over their disagreement.

So, if Muslims don't seek to operate within our Constitution, why should they be protected by it? Do they have the right to restrict our rights?

Team Cap or Team Iron Man?

I'd seen all of the Marvel movies so far and I hadn't detected any in-your-face political subtext until I saw the newest Captain America tonight. But I don't think it's a bad thing, at least not in the way they address it.

Collateral damage.

If you are now or ever have served our country in the armed forces, I'm sure those two words send chills down your spine. I've never served but I do think of myself as an astute student of history and from what I can tell, there are four ways to view collateral damage.

I shudder to imagine that anyone would relish it but understanding human nature, I have to accept the possibility that there are some who do. The horror stories of Nazi Germany suggest as much.

Another kind of person may be indifferent to it. They may not get a thrill but they have no remorse. "It's a means to an end." "You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs."

The third kind of person would say it's horrible and tragic but unavoidable. Maybe they are callous enough to say it's the cost of doing business or maybe they view it as a noble sacrifice. Either way, they regret it but accept it.

The final group says we can't accept this. We have to find another way. They would rather "fall-on-their-sword" than harm an innocent.

Without giving away any spoilers, that's the moral of this story; how should the Avengers deal with collateral damage? How should we?

I can say that I'm one of those third kind of people. In fact, what nailed it for me was this line from the movie by one of the heroes:

"If I can do what I do but don't, when something bad happens, it's my fault."

Mellonomics

I spent two posts talking about fountains to get to Andrew Mellon. Most of my conservative friends understand how tax cuts have positive effects on the economy. In recent history, we've studied them under Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush.

Well, Andrew Mellon might be considered the father of the modern tax cut. The US income tax had only been around about a decade when he got appointed to serve as Secretary of the Treasury under President Harding. During his nearly 11 year tenure, he pushed Congress to enact a lot of legislation that effectively lowered the top bracket from nearly 75% to less than 25%. At the same time, the bottom bracket went from 4% to 0.5%.

The things that opponents then and now consistently contest are that tax cuts are an expense that we can't afford and when we give such big cuts to the "rich," we're doing it on the backs of the "poor." If you believe that, you should probably stop reading now because you're an idiot.

One of Mellon's inspirations was Henry Ford. Ford was selling his cars for $3000. Ford's genius was to reduce the price to $380. If you're one of those idiots I mentioned before but you're still reading, you probably think Ford was crazy and you're wondering how it turned out for him.

Well, Ford's increased volume at a lower profit margin more than made up the difference... he made MORE money by REDUCING the price?

Taxes work like that, too. If the "rich" don't get punished so badly for making money, they're going to try to make as much as they can. And while they're at it, they're going to hire the "poor" to help them. We don't have to take their money; we just need to encourage them to spend it.

Another wet one

OK, I have to confess, that last post about fountains was secretly a staging point for this post. I really wanted to write about Andrew Mellon (of Carnegie and Mellon fame) but I had to explain why first.

About a year ago, before I was driving for Uber, I was working for a utility construction company and we had a job near the intersection of Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues in Washington. The small triangle they form is between the Newseum and the National Gallery of Art. In that triangle, there's a little park with an old fountain.

A year ago, that fountain wasn't working, the vegetation was overgrown, and the sidewalks were crumbling. The fountain appeared to be a huge bronze casting and there was a bench on one side with an inscription explaining the origin of the fountain.

Andrew Mellon was a contemporary of John D. Rockefeller and Henry Ford and at one time, was the third richest man in the world, just behind the two of them. He also served as the Secretary of the Treasury to three Presidents and became a generous philanthropist in his retirement. One of the things he did was donate his vast art collection and millions of dollars to build the National Gallery of Art. This fountain was paid for by his friends as a memorial to him.

Years ago, there was an episode of The West Wing filmed on the location and at that time, the fountain was still in service. However, at some point since, it had fallen victim to neglect.

Until now.

Over the past few months, someone has restored that little park and brought that beautiful fountain back to life. The next time I'm there on a sunny day, I'm going to get a picture of it for facebook.

Water, water everywhere

Do you realize how many fountains there are in DC? I love water fountains. Not only can they be mesmerizing to watch but who doesn't feel relaxed by the sound of moving water? (...unless you have to pee)

I've always known there were a lot of them in our nation's capital, but since I started driving for Uber and especially since Spring has sprung, I've been learning just how many there are. Downtown, it seems like there's one on every corner.

The Neptune Fountain in front of the Library of Congress and the WWII Memorial fountains have to be among the boldest and best known but you would not be doing yourself a disservice if you ever made an effort to expose yourself to others of these works of art spread around the federal city.

One of the amazing things about them all is who has paid for them. Yeah, there are some that were funded by tax dollars but I'm not outright opposed to that. It's only foolish if we had to borrow the money to build them. But these things were built during better times, when America was strong and flush with cash. In fact, not only is it fiscally smarter doing stuff like that then, it also has to help politically by showing off to any potential enemies just how strong we are.

Some of the fountains being built today, not only do they bring a contemporary feel to the city, they're also privately funded. Builders are often adding water features to make their properties more appealing to prospective tenants. However, many of the best fountains have been built through charitable giving. The WWII Memorial did get some public funding from the feds but a lot of the money came from private and corporate donations.

Of crime and punishment

In my last post, I introduced Austin Peterson and the Libertarian Party to my labyrinthine train of thought and now, that's taken me down a new rabbit hole. One of the planks in the Libertarian Platform is criminal justice reform. In some ways, they share the position with the Democrat Party.

What I mean is that some view the American criminal justice system as simply a racist nation's way of ridding society of undesirables by rigging the system is such a way that certain groups are targeted, tempted, and trapped for crimes they're more likely to commit that other groups. Meanwhile, other groups are more often guilty of particular crimes that receive lighter punishment.

There is demonstrable evidence to support their claims but the real argument isn't over the problem. It lies in the solutions. Some propose that we lighten the consequences for the crimes that these supposed "victims" are committing. A few might suggest that we stiffen the punishments on other criminals to level the playing field.

Whatever you think, it's certainly a contentious matter and not one that should be quickly dismissed. The reason is that if the government can target a particular group, what's to stop it from targeting any group? Right now, society looks unfavorably on illegal drug use but what if we ever reached a point where society looked unfavorably on Christianity?

One thing is sure though; the solution has to be better than ignoring the problem. That could lead to anarchy. Just consider what may happen if we bypassed the entire criminal justice system altogether. What if no matter what the crime or the punishment were, the executive had the power to change the sentence by decree? (see Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe's recent action on felons' voting rights)

Do you trust a man's wisdom that much?

Third party musings

It would be fair to say that I'm no fan of Donald Trump. I think he's a vulgar, unprincipled, pompous blowhard with no discernible attributes that qualify him to seek the Republican Presidential nomination. Unfortunately, there were enough GOP primary voters who disagreed with that assessment and voted for the guy anyway, giving him the prize.

So, like many people across the country, I'm faced with a quandary. I won't even consider voting for the lying and corrupt socialist who's masquerading as a Democrat but I don't know how I can vote for the lying and corrupt Democrat who's masquerading as a Republican.

For the first time in my life, there may be the potential for a legitimate third party contender to make an impact. The Libertarian Party will soon have a nominee and it looks like it will either be former Republican Presidential washout, Gary Johnson, or Fox News contributor, Austin Peterson.

From his past forays, I know enough about Johnson to say that I think I'd just as soon vote for Trump. However, Peterson is only 35 and as such, he's relatively unknown. I know he's a sort of internet and social networking guru. I think his biggest claim to fame is that he practically turned Judge Andrew Napolitano into a social network phenom.

Does any of that qualify him to be President? I don't know but what qualifies Trump? What qualifies Hillary Clinton? This is where due diligence comes into play. Are you the kind of person who will sign the contract to but a car without doing any research on it? Or do you do some homework and maybe even compare it to other brands first?

Are we ready to hand the keys over to someone who would be the youngest American President in history?

Happy Birthday, Israel!

How often does someone get a second birthday? Around 3,800 years ago, God made a promise to a man named Jacob and in the process, changed his name to Israel. That moment could be marked as the official creation of the nation of Israel.

Of course, through the lens of hindsight, we know that Jacob's progeny didn't always live up to their end of the deal so God had to enforce some consequences and Israel nearly got erased from history. However, 68 years ago today, Israel had a second birth.

I ran across this interesting story that looks at Israel's "Independence Day" from the perspective of Christians living there. It was fascinating to try to view the parallels between them and us. Israel is pretty much a nation built on immigration, like the US. In Israel, the predominant people group has had to learn to co-exist with various other minority groups, like the US.

Among these minority people groups, there are some who willingly co-exist peacefully while there are others who seek to become the predominant group and perhaps ever get rid of the current majority. Is there a parallel here? You be the judge.

One thing is certain though, Arab Muslims living in Israel would celebrate the destruction of the same people who give them more freedom and a better quality of life than they could experience anywhere else in the region, even with their ideological peers. What does this say about the difference between Islam and Judaism?

And what does it say about American Democrats who seem hell-bent on denying the rights of Israel while sucking up to Muslims and refusing to acknowledge the connection between terrorism and Islam? And finally, what does it say about the American Press who seem to be ignoring all of this?

As for Friday the 13th

While channel surfing, I noticed that on several stations, they were running Friday the 13th marathons. Maybe I was a little bit out of it but it took a few minutes for me to figure out why. I mean, it's not like it's Halloween. Why on Earth would they be showing...?

Oh. It dawned on me what the date was. Anyway...

It gave me an idea for a post. Are you superstitious? Do you fear Friday the 13th? Personally, I can't think of any bad luck I've ever had on Friday the 13th but there have been several Saturday the 14ths that've caused me to wonder who hates me.

The most memorable one happened in the mid 80's. My best friend growing up lived on a farm. His family had several large bird houses where they raised quail and pheasants. They also ran a hunting preserve so sometimes they would put some of the birds out in the fields for hunters but many of the birds they would sell.

Once, I had the "privilege" to travel with my friend and his dad up to New Jersey to deliver a few hundred birds to a customer. We were in their pickup going up the hill on the Delaware River Bridge when the truck broke down about a hundred yards from the crest. I don't know how high that bridge is but it was high enough to make me pretty scared with the wind blowing and the trucks blasting by us.

Of course I survived or you wouldn't be reading this but it was still a pretty harrowing experience. There have been other Saturday the 14th incidents that led to a broken finger and a blown motor but it's going to be hard to surpass that Saturday afternoon walking on that stupid bridge.

Addiction and detox

I've never been drunk or high in my life. At times, I've been around others who were and I enjoyed being in their company... sometimes. I understand the effects that drugs and alcohol have on our minds and bodies but I've never been attracted to it. That's not to say that I look down on anyone who does. I just never acquired a taste for it.

Knowing what I know, I've always been intrigued by accounts of detoxification. I enjoy the bio-pics of entertainers overcoming addictions, like Walk the Line (Johnny Cash) and Ray (Ray Charles). These men had tremendous talent and for all I know, it may have been enhanced by their addictions. I'm not an expert so I can't say but it's obvious that their addictions did harm their personal lives.

I can't imagine how someone going through the process of breaking an addiction feels but I understand what's happening to them physiologically. By it's very nature, an addiction is the result of the body becoming dependent upon regular consumption of a substance. That bond between mind and drug is not easily broken. For whatever period of time it takes to rid the body of all traces of the substance, the mind cries out in demand for more. however, if the individual can survive that process, the sober mind will return and can regain control.

Right now, this country is getting ever more addicted to socialism. Mot many are willing to admit there's a problem but the body is crying out. I'm wondering if electing Donald Trump isn't America's way of checking into rehab. If so, we're about to begin a painfully chaotic detoxification period but if we can see it through, America could come out the other side stronger and wiser than any other nation in history.

On Confederate memorabalia

We'll be celebrating Memorial Day in a few weeks and I intend to do a dedicated post for the occasion but there are other things I'd like to say on the topic so let me get started here.

Confederate history and heritage are a big deal where I live. Within 20 miles of my home, there were 6 Civil War battles and over half of all Civil War battlefields are within 100 miles. Robert E. Lee and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson were fellow Virginians and their battlefield strategies influenced modern day warfare. As a result, here in Virginia and throughout the South, they and others have been lionized with memorials.

However, their "cause" was marred by association with slavery. That's manifesting itself today in calls to purge society from all of these tributes. The logic is that if someone defended the institution of slavery, they were by default, a racist, and not deserving of such honor.

Personally, I agree with the idea of not publicly recognizing the Confederacy itself. The Confederacy was formed to defend slavery, was rightfully defeated, and is unworthy of honor. For that reason, I think it's a bad idea to use public funds to create a Confederate Memorial of fly a Confederate flag in a state-recognized setting.

But when it comes to recognizing individuals, I think we have to evaluate the person as a whole on their own merits. For example, through his own words, Jefferson Davis, even in defeat, can be shown to be a vile racist with no redeeming virtues worthy of honor.

However, upon his surrender, Robert E. Lee humbled himself in defeat and went on to serve our nation as an educator. Why can't we honor him for his contributions to the United States and his devotion to the service of her people?

Time for a primer

Something I'm discovering to be tough in this little blogging project is finding a lowest common denominator for the level at which I want to write. There are some topics where I'll admit a high amount of ignorance while others I might be able to call myself an expert. However, this blog isn't just about what I know; what you readers know is also important.

I can wax poetic on something but if you don't have a clue about it, you won't get it and you'll stop reading. So, my challenge is giving enough information to let you know what I mean while simultaneously making my point with brevity. If I ever post something that makes you wish you could raise your and ask a question, you can. Just leave a comment on the blog and I'll be happy to explain.

There have probably been posts to date and there will certainly be some in the future that could create this kind of issue. Please, don't be shy. I said at the outset that my goal is to make people think and I know when I think, I have questions and unless I get answers, I won't learn much.

This makes 40 posts for my blog, well on the way to my goal of 365 in a year. There are roughly 11 views per day so I know someone is reading. I have several drafts in the works but while working on one in particular, I realized that there will be a wide range of understanding on the selected topic so I have to be sure that I craft it in such a way that almost everyone will get it.

I know I said I want to create "dumbfundities" but I don't want to create confusion.

As in the days of Daniel

"(They) answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods" -Daniel 3:16-18

Ol' Nebby K thought pretty highly of himself to have built a statue of himself and then order everyone to worship it. If you can imagine that kind of vanity, it's not so hard to imagine the rage that followed.

Despite the theories behind "progressive-ism," mankind hasn't changed much, at least not in the past 2500 years. There are still vain men in power and there are still men faithful to God facing persecution for not bowing to that vanity.

This post was prompted by an article about a Harvard professor seeking to lord it over evangelicals but that's not by any means the only example. In the past couple of decades, there have been countless cases of scientists and teachers being ostracized for their lack of faith in evolution. And in the past few years, the high priests of climate change are calling for the heavy hand of government to come down against the infidels to their religion.

At some point, persecution of Christians is to be expected, Jesus prophesied such things for anyone willing to follow him. However, he also spoke of a harvest. That implies that no amount of persecution could crush the church. The outcome of the account of Nebuchadnezzar's fiery furnace gives us more reason to believe that.

That Harvard professor might feel snug and smug in his ivory tower but his will is no match for God's.

Mum's the word

This is where I could share a funny story of Mom having to do with Diet Coke or a chandelier...

But I won't.

For one thing, I value my own life too much to risk that kind of harm. But mostly, I love Mom just enough that I don't really want to cause her that kind of public embarrassment. So, those stories shall remain confidential.

Besides, in my relationship with her, how we've gotten along hasn't had near the impact on me as how I've observed her relate to others. I've got a reputation for being sarcastic, even snarky, and for being a straight-shooter.

I don't get that from her.

When dealing with others, you'd be hard pressed to find a kinder, gentler soul. She exemplifies politeness to strangers and is a real butterfly in social settings. Her impact on me is that I shudder to think how prickly I'd be without her influence on me.

That's not to say she won't speak her mind, even if she's wrong. She's passionate about several things, one of them being how she thinks her children should comport themselves. Any doubt on that could be quickly dispelled by asking my brother. In fact, in the past couple of years, I think she's beat herself up pretty hard over her relationship with her own mother.

Some reading this already know that my Granny passed away last December. What you may not know is the devotion Mom showered on her as she slowly deteriorated. Mom has a lot of painful memories of the struggles she had as a caretaker but the memory I have is that she never gave up.

As frustrated as she was, she remained diligent. Granny was never lacking in anything, especially chocolate milkshakes. That's what I love about my Mom.

Trumped!

I've stayed away from commenting on the GOP primary until now because...

I was mad!

And too busy. The showdown in Indiana Tuesday came at a bad time for me. I've been working on meeting requirements for an Uber bonus so I haven't had much screen time to keep up with the blog. But hey! That's good for you! All of my thoughts have just been stewing and they're primed and ready to go now.

First things first, despite the spin, even in these latest states, Trump hasn't won anything that impresses me. Yes, he won by "YUGE" margins in the Northeast states. But if you looked closely enough at the returns, you'd see that all the votes cast in the GOP primaries combined didn't add up to what Bernie Sanders got for a second place showing in the Democrat contests. In other words, if everyone voted together in one primary, Trump came in a DISTANT third to Clinton and Sanders.

If you really want to see how "popular" Trump is compared to Cruz, consider this: In the 5 states that voted April 26, including Trump's home state of New York, Trump got less than 1 million votes... COMBINED! In Texas alone, Cruz got nearly 1 1/4 million. Overall to date, Trump has received about 10.7 million votes, Cruz 7.3 million, and all the other candidates combined have won about 9.3 million.

Whether you like Cruz or not, he was campaigning for the support of many of those 9 million voters whose candidates didn't make it all the way. That's the way the system is set up but Trump saw his weakness in that area so he did what he does best. With his lies and name-calling, he managed to convince enough Hoosiers that Cruz was the liar.

Imagine that!

Time to roll up the sleeves

What is government? I ask because listening to people talk about it, I get the impression that the predominant view is that "government" is some powerful alien that conquered us and now we're forced to live under its oppressive rule. The catch is, I seem to remember learning something about "government" getting its power from the consent of the governed.

Abraham Lincoln was fond of Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence. He had a tremendous influence over the early development of the Republican Party because of his view that slavery was antithetical to the ideals laid out by the founders. He had other inspirations as well, but Jefferson's work was forefront when Lincoln remarked that the government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people."

So with that said, again I ask, what is government? If it's "of the people," I assume that means that the government is run by people of the nation, not by outsiders. If it's "by the people," I assume that means that its power is granted to it from the people. And finally, if it's "for the people," that should mean that the only reason the government exists is to serve the people.

But if all of this is true, why do so many people complain about the government? Are they just a bunch of masochists? I mean, I think the complaints are justified; the government does do some pretty stupid stuff, but it's your government. If you have a problem with it, in a way, it's your fault.

Now, is all of this to say, "Shut up and get over it?" Not exactly. Instead, think of this as my way of saying, "Stop being so ignorant of what the people we put in government are doing! Go fix it!"

'Oh stay, O pride of Greece! Ulysses, stay!

I'm a "ditto-head." That's an affectionate term Rush Limbaugh has for those who regularly listen to his program and agree with him. During the current Presidential election campaign, more so than ever, Rush has been having to explain why so many people are attracted to the message of the Democrat Party and reject what is actually best for th country.

Sure, the Democrats seem to be compassionate because they demonize the rich and make promises to the poor. Who doesn't love Robin Hood? Well, the Sheriff of Nottingham didn't but nobody cares about the villain.

But what if we're being duped? What if Robin Hood was the bad guy? Well, trying to dissect a fictional story to determine such things is an exercise in futility. However, real life is very real and questions of a "true or false" nature have serious ramifications.

In other posts. I have and will continue to highlight problems with socialism, or collectivism, if you will. But widespread awareness of the reality that socialism doesn't work doesn't change the fact that so many people still believe it's the best way to run a society. The question that I've never heard Rush satisfactorily answer is, "Why?"

The conclusion I draw is that a soothing lie is more desirable than a painful truth. Yes, the benevolence of socialism is a lie. However, the alternative is that we all have to work for a living, that we're all responsible for our own fates, that we're not victims and nobody owes us a thing. Though that's the truth, it's a painful and unacceptable reality to many.

Ultimately, the only hope we have of avoiding the rocks is if the masses realize that the sirens of socialism, while singing their beautiful song, are only luring us into decay and destruction.

More on Ind. vs Coll.

I've been analyzing an article on the topic of individualism vs collectivism. It's a subject that gives me a lot of ideas so I want to come back to it again.

Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives are fond of saying that government shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers. Briefly, what that means is that they shouldn't be giving grants or subsidies or tax breaks to individuals, companies, or fields. This gives the recipients an unnatural advantage against their competitors. In the absence of such aid, they would be subject to the usual ebb and flow of the economy.

In those past posts, I've yet to stake a position on the question of which is proper, individualism or collectivism. All I've covered so far is that each has its faults and merits. Don't expect anything different here.

For example, almost 200 years ago, the country moved its resources and goods around almost exclusively by water. Whether it was sailing ships, steam boats, or canal barges, government policy everywhere supplemented the private sector to build and maintain canals, wharfs, and ports. To a small extent, they still do but that was eventually surpassed by the favor shown towards the railroads. And later, that was overtaken by the highways and airways.

My point is that we, the people, are essentially the "lords" of this democratic republic and we ultimately decide what works best. Granted, we don't always get it right. Throughout our history, we've come up with ideas that needed help to get off the ground and those running the show gave the help but even still, the idea never took off.

In the end, we are free to pick winners and losers, if we want. We just have to be prepared that sometimes, we get behind a loser.

The Flood: pre-meditated or a fit of rage?

If you don't believe the Bible, if you don't accept the Genesis account of Noah's flood, you might want to skip this post. For everyone else, this one's inspired by the soon-to-be-opened Noah's Ark exhibit in Kentucky.

According to Genesis, the flood occurred roughly 1650 years after creation but I've always wondered about the nature of the flood. Was it just a supernatural event that God sent at that time or was it more like a ticking time bomb that God set up at the beginning?

My understanding of scripture is that "In the beginning," God created everything to be perfect and that there was no death. Adam was designed to live forever, provided he remained within God's grace. Some people try to refute the long life spans described in Genesis but I think they fit perfectly with the assumption that Adam's DNA would also have been perfect. It wasn't until after the genetic bottlenecks following the flood and Babel that lifespans rapidly deteriorated to the limits we know today.

However, scripture also teaches us that God knows all; past, present, and future. So, before He created man, He knew man would rebel and He knew that ultimately, He'd end up sending the flood.

So, the point I ponder sometimes is did God create the Earth with the mechanisms that brought about the flood already in place, like a booby trap waiting to be set off when time ran out? Or was the flood an extra-ordinary act where God moved to enact His will?

To Christians, it doesn't really matter because we're still the beneficiaries of God's grace. However, we're instructed to "always be prepared to give an answer" and for the deep-thinking skeptic, I'd imagine this is a tough question. For that reason, I think God understands my curiosity.

Obama's third term?

Always one to observe proper manners, I typically avoid bringing up politics in polite conversation but whenever prompted I like sharing a theory with people who like to hear what I think. It revolves around the current presidential campaign.

As President Obama was in the process of securing his re-election bid, many suggested that at least he'd be gone after 2016. I said then and I still suggest that I'm not so sure.

The first version of my theory was that he would run for a third term. Naturally, many balked at that suggestion because the Constitution only allows for two terms. My response was that in order to be successful, he would only need three things; first, a blatant disregard for the Constitution, second, 51% of the voters supporting him, and third, a Supreme Court unwilling to oppose him in the event of a lawsuit. At the time, that idea provoked quite a bit of thought.

Some time has passed since then and he hasn't made the moves (yet) that would put him in a position to pursue the Democrat nomination. However, other events have transpired that led me to alter my theory a bit.

Imagine this scenario; the two nominees, (Trump and Clinton, for the sake of discussion) get together for the final debate weeks before the election. It's held at a college campus in a major city in one of the swing states. Not only are the nominees there, all of the leaders from both parties are there to watch. In the middle of the debate, terrorists detonate a nuclear device in that city, killing many, including both of the nominees. In the aftermath, President Obama is forced to declare martial law and suspend the upcoming election indefinitely.

The again, maybe I've just read too many Tom Clancy novels.

One for the dogs

To kick off my second month, I want to get a little lighthearted. In case you didn't know, I'm the proud papa of a couple of Labrador retrievers, both girls, one 8, the other 6. The older one is a black lab and we call her Bonnie. The 6 year old is a chocolate and her name is Reese.

I've been around dogs before and have even had a couple of dogs in the past but this is the first time that I've ever actually shared a home with a dog. It didn't take very long for me to accept them as family and I'm pretty sure that they accept me as a part of their pack.

Anyway, I thought it'd be fun to share some "dog" quotes I've collected over the years. Enjoy!

The reason a dog has so many friends is that he wags his tail instead of his tongue. -Anonymous

There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face. -Ben Williams

A dog is the only thing on Earth that loves you more than he loves himself. -Josh Billings

The average dog is a nicer person than the average person. -Andy Rooney

If your dog is fat, you aren't getting enough exercise. -Unknown

Women and cats will do as they please and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea. -Robert A. Heinlein

If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. -Mark Twain

Dogs are not our whole life, but they make our lives whole. -Roger Caras

If you think dogs can't count, try putting three dog biscuits in your pocket and then give him only two of them. -Phil Pastoret