FaceBook Killed My Blog, Then Politics Killed My FaceBook

It would seem that the immediate gratification of communicating with each other via social media platforms has really taken a bite out of blogging.  I guess the chance to reach more people is just too enticing.  But, when I think about the fact that I started Your Mother Knows as more or less a diary or repository for my thoughts, I'm not sure why I've drifted from it.

That's not correct- I drifted from it primarily because I have to invest more energy in my writing here versus the hit and run communication that I do on social media.  Hell, Twitter has been the best editor I've ever worked with because only having 146 characters at my disposal means get to the point.



So, I am back again because I absolutely, at this time, EFFIN' hate facebook.  Or more to the point, I hate the way people are being pre- and post election on facebook.  The amount of hysteria, hate, inflammation, craziness, panic, angst, fear is way beyond even what I experienced with Bush Derangement Syndrome. I'd even venture that if you asked any liberal if they'd take the current President Trump or have back President Bush, they would scream, "Bring George Back To The Oval Immediately!!!" That should give anyone perspective on the current level of crazy and backlash against the new 45th President of these UnUnited States.



As a PR person, I'm fully versed in how it feels to stand in front of a group and make a statement only to be blasted in response.  The ability to stand there, not react, and continue to try and discuss takes years to master.  It is very hard not to take it personally.  I'm proud to say for the most part of my career, I succeeded.  Not that I didn't go back to my office muttering, "ASSHATS!!!!," while slamming my office door.  Hell, I am only Human!

Yesterday I signed off of FB wishing everyone well.  I have had enough!  I am over seeing posts suggesting the end of the world and civilized society.  I'm done with reading things that would make one believe that I'm somehow a hideous Human because I voted for Trump. Or that I am somehow morally inferior to my friends on the left. I am finished with reading, "HAPPY NOW?!," every time someone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue so much as picks up a pencil.

Here's what I can say to all my fellow facebook posters:

I can be somewhat concerned over some of the news coming from The White House without wishing they would start Impeachment Hearings for the new president.

I can be Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion because of over-broad abortion policies. I can be Pro-Choice and strongly believe tax dollars should not be used to support clinics that provide these procedures.

I can be Pro-Access without having my taxes pay for your birth control. If you use it, pay for it yourself. I paid for mine.

I can be Pro-Birth and not Anti-Woman.

I can be Pro-Life and see the reasonable desire of some to be peacefully freed from the pain of their failed bodies.

I can be a champion of immigration and still believe it should be done within the legal limits the laws of this country have drawn. I can believe that if you are here illegally and have found yourself facing our legal system, you should be permanently deported.

I can be a conservative in regard to spending and rather socially liberal.

I can be a supporter of the Gay and Lesbian community without being a Democrat!

I can wonder about the complexities of Trans-Gender without judging the individual.

I can be white without being racist.  I can vote for a Republican candidate and support Human Rights.

I can multi-task and hold various opinions and like every other Human Being on this earth, I can be more than one-dimensional on any issue you might wish to discuss and debate.

What I am not willing to do is have every single thought or comment I post on my wall used as fodder for people who simply want to pick a fight.

What I am not willing to do is be judged by Liberals or Conservatives.

I am not willing to fill my day with people who want to live with the drama instead of looking at the facts. Or, shout at me if I attempt to respectfully post the facts.

I am not willing to fill my wall with people who do not want to listen to any opinion that varies from their own.

Or, with people who lecture me on my choices.

I am not willing to deal with people who think access to my page on social media means you can say whatever you want to me! I did not Friend you on facebook to fight!

STOP!  Just stop!!!!  I used to be paid to let people blast me for my comments, but I'm not getting paid any longer to listen to your shit!!!!  I call DONE!

I'm to the point of absolutely wanting to slap people, which is about me, not really them.  People are going to be who they are.  And as infuriating as it is to me right now, they have the right to do and say what they wish. If I don't like it, I have to go.  Exercise my options... vote with my feet.  So, here I am back to my blog once more. Why?  Because I'm a communicator and I have a deep desire to reach out and connect with others. Because I am a writer and the need to hone my craft is a niggling itch that never goes away. Because I am a Human Being and need someplace safe to process my thoughts.

Right now, we have a brand new President in the Oval Office.  Personally, do I like the man?  I DO NOT KNOW because I don't know him, personally.  News flash, neither do you!  Do I think I might not want to have him as a personal acquaintance?  Leaning very much toward, yes.  But, then again, if I knew the man personally, I might change my mind.



Because I voted for him, does it mean that I think him the perfect candidate?  NO.  However, as unorthodox as is his personal style of communicating, he didn't keep me up nights worried as much as the idea of Mrs. Clinton sitting in the Oval.  So, I voted my conscience from strictly a political point of view.

My pulling that lever on election day did not automatically turn me into a hater of Immigrants, LGBT, Muslims, Women, The Environment, Climate Change Theory, Little Children, Education, Social Programs, Those In Need, The Poor, and whatever else you might want to throw into the Shit Stew that is currently life in America.  I am the same person.  The very same person.  If you genuinely were my friend before I voted, you should respect me and understand that we don't have to agree on every single thing.

I am adult enough to understand that I do not have to like a person personally in order to understand they might be the best person for the job.  I may hate their personal style, but their resume of success is enough to prove why they are sitting in the seat.  And, even more, I trust in the Will of The American People and our process of government!

But, our world is not the same place.  Instead we now live in a world where the only thing of value is a person's feelings and their right to hurl them at others!  Their feelings are the only thing of paramount importance.  Their feelings; not yours.  We no longer understand the value of taking a measured stand on issues.  We no longer teach the importance of putting what's best for the majority ahead of what we might want as an individual.  We no longer view the world via a Servant's Heart. We do not know what it means to be a good citizen, instead we just want to be emoting bags of FEELINGS!

We have turned social media into a tool for acting out. We don't use it as a platform to learn from each other or where we share common ground.

I cannot abide the hysteria.  Can't abide the complete and total denigration of a man who has been on the job for about two weeks.  Most of us starting a new job are lucky to remember where the bathrooms are within the first two weeks, but can we give the guy whose office is in a complex as complicated as The White House a chance?!  Oh, HELL NO!  We can't be reasonable.  We can't take a wait and see position.  We can't act like Human Beings instead of a mob out to kill The Monster.

And, the war continues with this next chapter of the presidency with the Democrats and Republicans in Washington just as bad if not worse.  The Democrats are going to fight like fiends against any and everything because that's what their base demands.

We certainly can't be civil in our discourse.  We can't discuss with each other.  We cannot listen to each other.  We don't want to think, analyze, garner facts... we just want to react.

We want the toxic feeling of drama coursing through our hearts and minds- living as if our hair's on fire!

But, I don't.  I don't want it even for a few minutes much less Every. Single. Minute. Of. The. Day. as it is currently in Social Media.

I've lost friends, (by that I mean FB friends, which aren't really real.  It's not like the ones who unfriended me ever spent one real-time minute sitting and looking at me while we talk,) because of a man I don't know personally.  I've been unfriended over my civic duty of casting my vote. I've lost friends who got so mad reading comments made by others on my posts, that they decided I am not worthy of their time and energy. Sadly, I have had one or two people who have known me awhile in real time simply turn on me, too. Was it because I baited them or belittled them? Nope; it was because I had the audacity to give them my differing opinion on the posts on their walls.

Concurrently, I had several people message me off facebook basically asking why I tolerate people talking to me as they do.  And that's been my conflict; feeling personally savaged while still attempting to stay true to my core belief that dialogue is the only thing that can save us.  That being open is the only possible answer to our annihilation. But, when a young friend of mine, a guy whose take on the world is pretty solid and grounded, texted me to say that he found me way more tolerant and civil than he could ever be, it started my wheels turning...

Am I allowing mySelf to be abused by others simply because I believe so strongly in the importance of letting people express themselves?  The answer came back, "Sadly, yes."  Eventually I picked being kind to mySelf over the need for others to be crazy on something as inconsequential as a social media platform.

So be it. I'm done with it for now.  Eventually, I may go to see what people are posting about their dogs or their kids. I may want to see what new recipe someone has found and really likes.  But not until I can control mySelf and not want to bitch slap people who have been fucky with me simply because they can get away with it.

For believe me, I don't care how passionately you feel about things, I guarantee that you do not have the courage to be in the same space with me and talk like that.  You wouldn't have the nerve because you'd be looking into my eyes and you could not deny that I am a Human Being standing there being excoriated by you...

...over matters that neither YOU nor I have the power to control.  Over matters which, on the day to day, do not change how you live from the time you wake till you crawl back in bed at night.

...over people whom we will never know personally.  Instead, on a stupid social media platform, you'll lecture me from your moral high ground of superiority about how I should be tolerant of all social issues and people while you are completely intolerant of me or others having any opinion that varies from your own.

Hypocrite.  Let me give you a few minutes to yank that blank from your eye before you start searching for the splinter in mine. I want you to see clearly when you see me. As sad as it might be, I can live without you being kind, for which I've given up all hope. But, I cannot and will not abide people who refuse to be civil when I can simply stop your access to my space.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka She Who Is Done With facebook, For Now

How Things Are Worded

I've been absent from my blog for awhile for a variety of reasons, most of them just general life craziness, and being ill for the first few weeks in the new year...but here it is March and I'm just a slacker.  Clearly, I can't multi-task like I used to; but I digress. I need to thank one of my readers, Joan, who sent me an message to make sure things were all right and let me know she still comes looking for blog posts.  That made me feel really good, Joanie, so thanks for that.  I'd like to tell her that it was her comment that got me back here, but I'd be fibbing.  While it did remind me that I've been remiss and make me cringe a bit, it was a disagreement I had today with Michael that brings me to the keys.

He was saying that he is distressed about a story he heard today on the news about how some of the NHS hospitals in England are placing, "still-borns, and (spontaneously or deliberately,) aborted fetuses in their incinerators, even importing them from other hospitals, and in efforts to stay in compliance with green energy mandates, using them to heat the hospitals."  Well no wonder he's distress, that's absolutely terrible and appalling!

And, I got my back up totally, too.  But, perhaps not for the reason you might think. I got angry because the story is, excuse the pun, totally inflammatory!  Let me explain why....

You all remember that I have been the spokesperson and Public Relations Director for a couple of hospitals, right?  Most large hospitals have incinerators on their campuses.  It is a way to stay in direct control of the refuse, garbage, and other waste material that hospitals generate.  It is a way to keep things that may be contagious, contaminated or problematic out of landfills .  But, mostly, it is so the institution stays in direct control of things that are no longer viable or necessary- such as amputated limbs and tissue samples. Hospitals have a moral responsibility to care for the disposal of these Human remains, and most do not take that responsibility lightly.

Now, before you go all crazy, let me tell you that these incinerators are highly maintained and in most cases even exceed the EPA regulations about particulate matter that is released, etc.  The heat is so very high in these incinerators that the burn turns into vapor and the particulate is almost none existent.  If the hospital with an incinerator belongs to a health system that has smaller hospitals as members without incinerators, it's not uncommon for those to transport their medical waste to the incinerator for burning.  There are a great deal of local, federal, and general approvals that must be acquired for this to happen, but it's not unprecedented.  Using their own resources is a cost control issue for the health system, being less expensive than hiring a contractor.

Why do I know this?  Because one of the hospitals in which I worked, was built smack in the middle of many neighborhood communities.  It truly is a community hospital.  And, when stories would hit the media about incinerators and other horror stories, I would have to refresh my knowledge of current EPA regulations and our incinerator's specifications, and be ready to respond to the concerns that our neighbors would have, yet again, thanks to the Media stories.  Not that I blamed them for their concerns, and to be honest, I totally enjoyed dealing with these sorts of scenarios.  We actually invited them to come in to see it if they wished.  When our health system considered using our incinerator for some of the waste of our member hospitals, we gained legal approvals, but met with so much resistance from our local communities and neighbors, that we did not pursue it further.

Now with Green Energy regulations taxing the resources of  most companies to remain or even meet incredibly tough regulations, it's not surprising that institutions are looking at the energy they expend to run their incinerators, their facilities, their plants, their operations in order to see how it can be recaptured in terms of benefit to the facility, in this case the hospitals in England have put in place a mechanism to heat their facilities from the heat the incinerator generates.  I say it sounds like an excellent case study in re-cycling!

But while Mother Jones or Greenpeace might find that sort of recycling story of interest, I can tell you the general Media will not.  There's no there, There.  It's a non-story.  But, talk about using babies in your incinerator to heat your building ?  You cruel, unfeeling bastards!  Now that's a story!!!!!

And, that's also crap.  Does the Media care that a gangrenous leg is placed in an incinerator for disposal?  How about a biopsy sample?  Or tumors? Or an appendix, or a ruptured spleen?  NO!  That wouldn't grab your attention.  But fetuses and babies?!  Now we're talking!!!!

Use those words in your story and you get images of sweaty goon-like men standing around tossing Hansel and Gretel into an oven...or tiny defenseless children into the flames of hell!  Worst of all, those poor innocents are simply, uncaringly tossed in with the left over salad from patient trays, and cardboard, and other junk that no one needs or wants.  It's the stuff of concentration camps.  And all to keep your sorry, insensitive butts toasty warm.

All of it- not true.  The people who run incinerators are specially trained.  They know that they are supposed to treat the Human parts with respect.  Most are not burned with the general waste.  They are held until there are enough for a separate burn.  Can I guarantee that Human remains aren't mix in with other refuse to be burned?  No.  I can't.  But, I do know what I know.

At the Catholic hospital for which I worked, the priests preformed a blessing over those parts and remains before being burned.  I always loved that additional reverence, but even at the non-faith-based institutions, the requirement for respect is still there.

At all hospitals, when a woman loses her baby, she is immediately offered professional support.  The labor and delivery staff don't treat those sad cases as less than a baby.  That lose is a baby, no matter what month it happens.  Generally the mother is asked if she would like to have her baby prepared for burial.  Many choose that option, and I might also add that most funeral homes offer their services gratis in those sad cases.

But if a woman undergoes an abortion, or if the parents do not wish to bury their baby, how would the remains be handled?  By the hospital; in their incinerator; with respect.  Even though this is something the average person wouldn't even think about until the Media decides to sensationalize a normal part of back room operations into a horror story.

Or would you and the Media prefer that the hospital simply ship it off to a landfill?  How about those amputated limbs?  Those breast biopsies?

I can't speak for how health care is delivered in other countries.  I can only attest to what I know from my own experience here in the United States.  But, I will say this...most Human Beings who decide to make a career in health care, despite how difficult it is becoming, continue to go in each day to make a difference and bring comfort to those who are in need and suffering.  Do they succeed every minute of every day?  No, but they certainly try.  They do not for one moment, take death lightly.  Do they see it all the time and become hardened to it?  Perhaps, but not when it comes to labor and delivery and the lose of one of those babies.  I don't accept that version of this news story.  And, neither should you.

How we word something changes it from something to ponder into something to horrify.  And, with all the harsh things in this world, does the Media really need to make it worse?  NO!  But, then again, I'm not in the Media and worried about my bottom line, the viewer numbers, advertising revenue, and market share.  However, you need to be aware, that those are the criteria that drive all of their stories...not, as you might think or hope, informing you about the world around you.

And, as it relates to this post, there is a reason we say, "You don't want to know how the sausage is made."  There are many aspects to running complex operations that you have never considered or even thought to wonder about.  Perhaps that's all for the better.  But, when the Media brings it up, it's best to always remember The Media has an agenda for putting forth a story.  Always.

Racism 50 Years Later: Where Do We Go From Here?

This Wednesday, the 28th, marks the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s march on Washington and the broadcast of what is now called his, "I Have A Dream," speech.

I find it interesting that, just as we are going to pay tribute to that monumental moment, we are facing some upheaval in the United States that makes one wonder: how far have we really come in terms of race relations?  The media coverage of the George Zimmerman trial turned it into a race bait, even though it is a tragic case of a man and a younger man getting into a street brawl with one of them ending up dead.  It should be about a lot of things that would help us make better choices and better legislation but it didn't.  Instead it became about the color of skin.  It became about a white man killing a black man. Although, what you did not hear very often was that Travon Martin was unfamiliar to a neighborhood watch man, in a neighborhood being plagued by home break-ins and other issues committed by black youths.  The color issue seems to be one of those things that distracts us from the facts and turns a very sad case into something hateful and inflammatory.  Should the black man have been thought of as suspicious by the white man?  In a perfect world, no.  But, in a perfect world, black men wouldn't be committing the crimes that tend to make everyone suspicious of someone they don't know.  Since it was a white man who did the shooting, the media wanted to make this one about race.

Just last week in Oklahoma, a good looking Australian exchange student was murdered by two teenagers.  Why was he killed?  Was it because he was in a neighborhood in which he should have known better not to be?  Or because he was in a brawl?  Or because he said anything hateful?  No.  He was murdered while out for his regular run in a quiet neighborhood.  Why?  Because the ass-hats who did it proudly crow, "We were bored,"  while one danced around and carried on like a fool during the booking process. It may not have been race related, but when you read some of the stuff the shooter posted about hating most white people on his FB and Twitter, it makes it very frightening that a young person would feel these things and act on them.

Are you freaking kidding me?  We had a young man murdered as the result of boredom?  How incredibly awful.  The perpetrators are reported to have been running wild in their neighborhood without supervision of any kind for quite awhile.  The mother is in jail.  A father?  Nope, not around.  It's like these kids had gone feral.  It's interesting, however, that different from the Zimmerman coverage, since these criminals are young black men who killed a man who happened to be white, the media really do want to make certain we don't immediately jump to the conclusion that this was a racist hate crime.  Interesting.

What do these two incidences and how the news covered them, have to do with the 50th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech?  I'd say everything.  I am a 58 year old, white woman who was an impressionable eight year old when The March on Washington happened; I remember it.  And, as a white woman, having the Civil Rights Movement as part of my history, I have always believed it is my moral responsibility to never judge individuals because of the color of their skin.

That hasn't been necessarily easy; I was born in the mid-50s, grew up in downtown Baltimore in the 60s when serious race riots happened in many major cities, and came of age in the 70s when peace and love were important and so was making race a non-issue.  In those early years, although the beginnings of awareness that racism is anathema, names like nigger, spick, cracker, honkie, kike, wop, guinea, dago, mick, bo-hunk, etc, were still used without a trace of discomfort.  They were part of our world.  Hell, we even used phrases like, "jewed him down," when we were crowing about getting something for absolute bottom dollar!

But thankfully, even though it seems slow, we are a long way from those days when how we thought about someone was decided by their color or nationality.  Are we where we should be?  No, but we are far better than we were.  And, with each generation that comes along, color becomes less and less important until it would seem that our children are becoming almost color blind when it comes to people.  Pretty amazing when you consider it.

So, here we are 50 years after Dr. King's speech and I'm really questioning. After all the affirmative action, and social programs, public housing, education, discussion, and now political correctness, are we any better, a half century later?

I say yes and no.  And,  I'm going to be totally Politically Incorrect and add, I am sick to death of  the continual suggestion that white people are racists and that race relations in the U.S. are still awful. Even more, I reject the notion that most white people are racists who have simply learned not to share their thoughts out loud.

I'm also sick of feeling as though race relations rests completely on the white race changing the way we are, the way things are.  We all play a part in the success, or failure, of this issue.  Why don't we spend as much time talking about what people of color should be doing about this issue?  Where are they in meeting whites somewhere in the middle to help things change instead of standing back and waiting for miserable whitey to finally get it?  And, why does it seem that when an African American of notoriety, like comedian Bill Cosby, calls out his own about their behavior, he's called an Uncle Tom or completely dis'd by the black community?

Dr. King, a black father, movingly said, "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."   What a beautiful wish for his children!  All children should have a passionate parent who would dream such huge dreams for them.

Dr. King, I completely agree with you.  And, even though I grew up in a world that didn't always recognize the correctness of this sentiment, I have always tried to meet each Human Being with this in mind. I think the average person does as well.  But lately?  Lately, all I am is very frustrated.

Lately, I am left to question the increasing sounds of people telling me I don't like them simply because I am white and they are not.  IT'S NOT ABOUT YOUR COLOR!  IT'S ABOUT THE WAY YOU LIVE YOUR LIFE!

While I do everything in my power to not judge you by the color of your skin, it's up to you to live your life in such a way that I can only judge you by the content of your character!  You must do the hard work to live your life in a way that requires that others immediately recognize the content of your character.


If you are a woman and have a a child out of wedlock, I think you have chosen a hard life, but I support you in that choice.  I support you having a child and raising it.  I don't insist you be married.  But, if you continue to have children with different men and they don't even know their fathers or share their last names?  What would make you think that is correct?  Currently, the statistic is that 75 per cent of black children are born out of wed-lock or into broken homes. More and more white children are homeless or in terrible situations. More grand parents are becoming the guardians of these children as drug addicted or absent parents drift away.  That is not all right.  I don't care what color you are...it's wrong.

If you are a man having sex without using birth control and your children are scattered all over, who you do not financially and emotionally support, who wouldn't know you were their father if they bumped into you, that's not all right.  I don't care what color your are...it's wrong.

If you decide that it's all right for you to call each other nigga because you are black, but want to hurt a white person who uses the word, it's wrong.  You don't have the right to use that word in songs and in public if you have determined it's hate speech.  I don't care what color you are, if the word is hateful, it's wrong to use it.

If you act out in public with your pants down around your thighs so that your ass is out and I see your underwear, you act in a way that is disrespectful to yourself and those around you.  It is not a fashion statement, it's stupid.  I don't care what color you are, it's wrong.

If you find yourself in school and you don't do everything you can to maximize the opportunity you are being given, it's wrong.  If the school you are in is broken or not teaching you, go find a mentor, go find a tutor, go find an adult who will help you.  Don't sit there and say, "It's not my fault they're not teaching me anything," go look for someone who would be more than happy to help you!  Hell, call me, I'm happy to tutor you!

If you can do something to help your neighborhood come together and begin to regain its peace and sense of community, but instead you run in gangs, take part in drive by shootings that kill innocent children, sell drugs, and terrorize people, it's wrong.  If you don't help people in need, beginning with your family and extend a helping hand to those around you,  I don't care what color you are, it's wrong.

If you have the opportunity to form a committed relationship and a secure family instead of using each other like sex toys and spreading unwanted children all over the place, and you don't do it, it's wrong.  I don't care what color you are, it's wrong.

If you don't look for a connection with the God of your understanding, and instead act in a godless, miserable way, spreading hate, fear and crime, I DON'T CARE WHAT COLOR YOU ARE, IT'S WRONG!!!!

And, I'm not racist expressing these ideas.  Nor am I wrong to call "Bullshit," on those insisting that I am intrinsically racist simply because I was born white.  If you believe that, aren't you acting in a racist way, or am I missing something?!

So, as I see it, here's the challenge, (and the liberating thing is that this whole racism issue is no longer just the white race's issue to correct,) because...

...I can very successfully not judge you by the color of your skin.  Thanks to Dr. King and other people who were part of the Civil Rights Movement who helped us all to understand the importance of this.  BUT, only you can decide to live your life in a way that compels me to respect you, by the content of your character.

We have a lot of work to do in this country, but it's the work of all.  It's no longer enough to point a finger at Whitey and say it's their work alone.   If we want racism to vanish so that we're not having this same conversation at the 100th anniversary of Dr. King's speech, it's not enough for only white people to hold themselves accountable.  People of color must also work within the framework of our collective society to bring about the change that is needed.  And, if we really wish to eradicate racism, we must teach children that it's not enough to be color-blind; they must live their lives justly so that the content of their character is the only measure.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly 

Let's Call It What It Truly Is

Last night, viewing the "debate" left me disliking both of these men completely.  This morning I woke up realizing that I shouldn't be simply disliking these two, but instead really direct my mail to the correct address.  I should have the chance to bitch-slap the organization, The Commission on Presidential Debates.  They are morons...not that these two are off the hook for not refusing to participate in last night's forum the way it was set up.

What something is called matters!  Don't hand me a pig's ear and call it a purse!  I know the difference.  So should most people.  Let me be clear:

As defined by Webster's:

debate n :  a contention by word or arguments as the formal discussion of a motion...  b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides.

discussion n :  a consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate.

town hall meeting :  from Wikipedia : an American English term given to an informal public meeting derived from the traditional town meetings of New England. Everybody in a town community is invited to attend, voice their opinions, and hear the responses from public figures and elected officials about shared subjects of interest. Attendees rarely vote on an issue or propose an alternative to a situation. It is not used outside of this secular context.

Okay, now that we're clear, let's get back to the ridiculousness that was presented last night.  The second Presidential DEBATE was presented as using a TOWN HALL MEETING  format, where about 80 undecided registered voters were randomly chosen to be on the stage with Governor Romney and President Obama.  The intention was to have these voters ask questions that they wished answered; the questions were chosen in advance by the moderator.   With me so far?

It was supposed to lead to DISCUSSION between these two and the questioners who represent us, in terms of things we feel are important and would like to hear their ideas and notions.  It would give these two candidates the opportunity to more clearly define the differences between their view of the issues.

But, what we got was throw away moments of an American citizen honestly, and with commitment, asking their question only to have these two boobs use them as a springboard to go at each other.  There was no true exchange...no discussion...no respect...no better understanding of the people who were there, either of the people who asked the questions or these two who totally missed the point of the evening.

Shame on the Commission for setting this thing up for big failure in the eyes of any who watched this train wreck.  And, rather than thinking either one of the sparring partners came out the winner, as far as I'm concerned, they both lost.  And I lost an hour and a half of my life I'll never get back.

To my mind, the one who would have come out the winner, would have been the man who was smart enough to give a real rat's ass about, not only the question, but the questioner.  The winner would have been the one who momentarily connected to the man or woman standing there with major nerves jangling at the notion of asking a powerful person a question on national television.  The candidate who would have carried the night would have made that questioner feel important rather than a toss off.

The one who could have truly won the debate last night would have been the man who decided to stop fighting the guy standing next to him and concentrated, instead, on being in true COMMUNICATION with the individual who had asked the question.  The winning candidate would have stayed on the question instead of using it as a weasel hole to launch off into what else they wanted to say instead of answering what was courageously asked of them.

The winner would have demonstrated true care and commitment to being the leader of the free world by giving a damn about the citizens sitting in the circle around them instead of using them as fodder to spew their agenda.

But neither of them was smart enough to forgo their need to beat the other guy senseless and care more about the people.  Which, sadly, is the way most people running for political office at that level behave more times than not.  Especially in a public forum.  Does an individual give up their Human capacity to genuinely LISTEN, and thereby demonstrate the ability to truly care when they go into politics?!  Sadly, it seems they do.

Do I blame President Obama and Govenor Romney?  Not really.  After all, they are being constantly prepped for a DEBATE and this one was called The Second Presidential DEBATE.  No, I blame the Commission for calling it one thing, yet setting up as another thing by staging  it as a TOWN HALL MEETING.  Setting up the citizens on the stage as well as us in the viewing audience to hope against hope that these two men would rise to the occassion of being able to decern and give a damn about the difference.

Stop using the town hall format as a platform in a nation debate!  They are mutually exclusive concepts; set up this way they do not foster better understanding of the candidates.

Today, spokespeople of both parties will be on the news shows and talking head moments crowing about how their guy won last night.  They're all spinning it today.  I should know, I was part of the Spin Doctors as my career.

But the truth?  The real truth?  Both Romney and Obama failed because they were too determined to hammer their ideas and what they thought you should know rather than listen and connect to even one of the citizens who were part of the process with them.  They were too concerned about the smack-down between each other instead of taking the opportunity to show how they could and would genuinely care about the citizens they say they wish to serve.

Simply saying the questioner's name and thanking them for their 'important' question before you launch off on what you want to say instead of answering the question and connecting with them as a Human Being does not constitute truly caring!!!  Don't pander!  We know when you're doing it and we don't like it!!

So, shame on both of them.  Shame on the Commission on Presidential Debates, and shame on the moderator who allowed her bias to slip out too much.  I am, once again, totally disgusted with the political process.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly

I Was Young Once And Liberal

Definition of liberal n :  one who is liberal: as one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or ways.

Interestingly enough, in older dictionaries, the definition also includes:  lacking moral restraint.

Am I the only one who had a father who said words to this effect:  "It's easy to be liberal when you're young because you're doing it on someone else's dime!"  I hated it when he would say things like; it seemed so snide.  When I was old enough to begin looking at the world around me; take account of my world view; wonder about the rightness/wrongness of the world, there was more than one occasion when Dad and I simply had to end our discussions with the live and let live philosophy.  The, "we'll have to agree to disagree," rule was often invoked.  But, I'm awfully glad that he continued to spar with me and make me think.  I like to believe that my bright-eyed, optimistic, youthful exuberance for the ability to positively impact wrongs and make change, helped him maintain equilibrium in his thinking.  Maybe even keep him on his toes while we verbally squared off!  At the very least, keep him hopeful that things can always be made better.

My father was never dismissive of my thoughts simply because I was young with less life experience. He told me not to give up on anything I believed was just, right, fair, but he did show me where just wishing something was so wasn't enough to get it done.  Because he didn't treat me like an idiot or condescend, I always gave him the benefit of the doubt.  I recognized his intelligence, wisdom, and deeper experience.  Still, the 70's were a breeding ground for social upheaval and dissonance; the never trust anyone over 30 philosophy was rampant, so our points of view were vastly different on many things.  Not unlike our world today, it gave us lots and lots to discuss and argue.

I believe that my father was one of the best parents in the universe. Even more, he was a mentor.  A strong advocate.  A teacher.  A guide.  He did way more right than wrong in terms of my up-bringing.  However, the one thing I wish he had done better was teach me how challenging it can be in terms of living in the real world.  I wish he had been more open about money and finances.  I wish he had been more forthcoming about the financial struggles our family faced.  How difficult it can be to own and operate a business successfully.  I wish I understood sooner that things just don't happen without someone making sure they happen, like:  The lights and heat are on because someone paid the utility bill.  I ate regularly because someone worked to make certain we had food in the house.  I was blessed with a great education because someone made sure that tuition was paid, or that appropriate financing was secured for the tuition; financing that would have to be re-paid by a person who understood their responsibility to the contractual agreement.

I wish, instead of adopting the usual mind-set of most parents, the one that says "make sure my child always feels safe and secure," he had talked more about the need for someone, somewhere to secure that our world was orderly, our needs were met, because someone worked to pay for it all.

Because conversations like that didn't happen often, I didn't give it much thought.  The inner workings of the need to contribute and understand what heavy lifting it takes to keep your loved ones together body and soul just wasn't something I pondered.  By nature, I am a grateful person, so I always said thanks for things but you can't thank someone when you aren't even aware of the gift.  Know what I mean?

I am still very liberal in terms of my thinking when it comes to the Human condition.  But, as I've grown older and struggle, like most of us with finances and the rising cost of breathing in and out, I'm so not liberal in my thinking when it comes to money, government, or funding what so many now consider their right, their due, their fair share.  I'm just not.

And, I must admit it bugs the hell out of me because despite my best efforts of making sure, "I'll NEVER think like you do, Dad!!!"  Well, here I am.  I'm not Jimmy Dietor, but I sure the hell am Jimmy Dietor's Daughter. So, how do I say what's on my mind now without sounding like a condescending old, F**k?  I don't know...but I have to say it regardless.  So here goes:

We have done our younger generations a serious dis-service.  Our children should be part of  a discussion about our family bills.  It's all right to talk about our monthly expenses and when we're a bit strapped for cash.  It's a good thing to let our kids know when we need to tighten our budget or when we can celebrate better times with a treat for all.

We should have made basic finances, how to budget, and money management a major part of educational curriculum.  We should teach our children to get right with money and understand how it works.  We should stress how each of us needs to invest in ourselves and work toward feeling successful. 

Instead, because we've taught them to expect they should always have everything they want or need without regard how it is paid for, we have raised them to believe they have more RIGHTS than privileges. We now have people who can no longer differentiate between the two.  It's becoming increasingly problematic.  Let's be clear what is the difference:

right n:  Something to which one has a just claim; the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled.
privilege n:  A right or an immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor.

A right comes to you simply because you are.  A privilege is something you earn or is given to you out of the generosity of another's purse or belief that you are worthy.  And, while in practice they do seem closely related, they are not interchangeable concepts.

As Human Beings, as Americans, we have very few RIGHTS; those we have are incredibly significant.  Read the Constitution and our Bill of Rights is spelled out.  You will not read any where in it that you have a RIGHT to a life made better or easier and paid for by others.  It simply is not there.  It's not an over sight; it's not meant to be cruel.  It's that the writers of the Constitution understood the concept of manifest destiny and embraced personal freedom to create our lives as we see fit.

We The People! We make up the government.  There's no separate entity, called The Government that has an unending privy purse ready to make your life easier.  When you say The Government should pay for something, you're actually saying, "The people of the U.S., more specifically, the Tax Paying Citizens of the U.S. should pay for my fill-in-the-blank!" It doesn't work that way.  Nor should it. 

When I hear younger people say, "I have the right to health insurance and I'm not asking anyone but the insurance companies to do their part,"  or, "I have a right to affordable education and paying for my college degree shouldn't be something with which I am burdened," I want to ask, "Really?  You don't think you should pay for these things yourself, but you think I should be required to buy it for you?" And how do you think that's going to happen? Companies are profit centered entities.  We can discuss how much profit is too much and whether they should be more service minded and caring; I probably will agree with you.  But, at the end of the day, they are profit driven businesses.  If they don't make money, they don't stay in business.  And, if they are forced, through laws, to pay for your health care, your birth control, your education, or your fill-in-the-blank to which you think you are entitled, those costs will be passed along to others in terms of hidden fees and higher premiums, higher costs and taxes.

At what point does your belief that you have a RIGHT to things for free or at no cost, justify that the price tag be passed along to the rest of us for payment ?!  Or, had you simply not considered it? If there is a bill involved, someone, some where must pay the bill.  Nothing is free.  But, you have to be open and fair enough to wonder who is expected to pay for it if you're not willing.

Recently, a friend of mine said, "If  I see someone hungry and I have enough to share, then I'll share it. The only thing over which I have any real control is myself."  For me, that's true liberal thinking at its finest.  I am liberal enough to want to help everyone in need.  But I am conservative enough to understand that I only have resources to help some and that I can only do so when I have enough to share.  My liberal way of thinking means that I search for ways to help others, but first I must meet my obligations to myself and my family.  At the same time, I'm conservative enough in my thinking to say, "My willingness to help another is my choice; I will not have it mandated through government policy that is too far-reaching and invades my personal space and life!"

I wish we would return to the days when people understood that they need to invest in themselves first before they look to others to invest in them.  Return to the days before we constantly looked for government to take care of us.

conservative n:  marked by moderation or caution.  Relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners.

So after trodding the earth for awhile, here's where my journey has brought me:  If I wish to be liberal in my thinking of Human Beings and  be willing to respond to need when I encounter it, I must be conservative in my views of what I can do and also what I need.  I must be conservative in my view of finances and money so I can meet my financial obligations and help those truly in need.  I must be conservative enough to believe that I have very few rights but am lucky to have privileges.  I must be conservative enough to understand that I must make my own way, and trust that if I do right by others and am liberal in my willingness to help, those good intentions and acts will be returned to me.

Go ahead Daddy....where ever you are, you can laugh.  I get it.  I'm now with you on this topic.  I am finally a liberal conservative; or maybe I'm a conservative liberal.  However you say it, you knew I'd eventually figure it out.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka Jimmy Dietor's Daughter

Thanks for NOTHING U.S Air!!!

By now you all know I'm a marketing genius, even if it is only in my own mind where it is sunny all the time and things run with precision, fairness, and customer service is a top priority.

So give me a minute while I take this company name and change it immediately to U.S. Unfairways. And, make certain you know we will never again book with this outfit of "you are just a little person and we don't have to help you because we are the big air line and you need us more than we need you." Okay U.S Air, have it your way, but just remember you asked for this.

You may recall that, last September, my family vacation to the Outer Banks was canceled when a hurricane decided to not only cause damage to buildings, it actually took out the road to Hatteras Island. I was totally bummed because it has been years since my family was able to vacation together and it would have been the first time to vacation with Laura's babies. Sigh...

Luckily, we took the insurance out on the rental so all of us got most of our money back, minus the insurance fee. So the rest of the family was okay, but Michael and I had booked flights into a nearby airport and rented a car to drive to the beach house instead of spending close to 12 hours in the car. Getting that part of our expenses back proved difficult straight off the mark.

Because the hurricane caused such wide, multi-state damage, the airlines and other businesses offered refunds on travel plans that got canceled. When we learned about this, we contacted U.S Air about a refund, and that's when all the 'fun' started. Somehow, according to them, we weren't eligible because the airline determined that the airport wasn't in the "hurricane circle." So, NO we weren't eligible for a refund. With exceeding patience, Michael suggested they look at a map because we were booked to fly into the airport closest to our destination which was smack in the path of the hurricane. There was a great deal of back and forth until finally, they agreed to give us a voucher for the almost $550 we had invested.

I needed to tell you the amount so you understand I'm not whining about just a $69 fair that used to be offered when South-West Air used to make it possible for us to be "Now free to move about the country!" So, after that major back and forth, we had until April 19, 2012 to rebook a flight. We didn't get our money back but at least it was something.

Now here's where it gets complicated:

What with the arrival of Argyle into our clan, Michael's work schedule, and life getting in the way, it became obvious that we wouldn't be able to use the voucher before the time ran out. We talked it over and decided it would be a really nice gift for Melissa so she could go to Florida and visit with Evan. She's been through so much in the past year and she adores her little brother. We just wanted to give them some time together.

But U.S. UNFAIR says, "NO!!!" The voucher is not transferable, even to a child. NO!!!!! Even though we called to see if someone, somewhere could help. NO! was their answer. Okay, that was a long shot, but we can understand; everyone has rules and the airlines are struggling so we understand.

Next, Michael suggested, "Look, I'll stay home with the dogs and you use it to go down to Matlacha, (which is pronounced Matt La Shay, who knew?!,) and spend a few days with cousin, Val. In all the years since Val and Tom moved to Florida, I've never had the chance to visit with her. I thought, "Wow, wouldn't it be nice to spend time with her outside of the tragic, hard times we see each other when she comes north to take care of family funerals, etc?"

But, it didn't work out because she and Tom were traveling when I could use the voucher to come for a visit. Sigh.

Then one night recently I said to My Lion, "Hey, why don't you call Evan and see if he has any leave time and you go down and visit with him and I'll stay here with the dogs!" Yes, I do want to go see my Boychic, but we just can't ask the neighbors to watch the dogs again what with just getting home from the business trip AND because Argyle really is a fist-full at 5 months AND he still has trouble with the whole no potty in the house thing...

"You and Evan haven't had guy time alone in so long, it might be fun to just spend some time with him!" So that's that, right? WRONG.

We checked with Evan; he couldn't get leave but he does have his days off during a week, so he and Michael decide on dates and set the plan in motion. Immediately after that it went straight down hill...

...because when he contacted U.S UNFAIR, they will NOT let him use the voucher by himself because the original flight was booked for two people and could only be used by two people! WTF?!!!! They've had our money for an entire year...they could sell the second seat again and make additional money. The amount would cover a round trip for a father to spend a few days with his son in the military and NO, we can't use the voucher for him to do that?!

NO! They did offer to 'peel off,' (their nasty term not mine,) the second person and allow Michael to use a one person portion. BUT, that would cost us $300 additional to make it a round trip. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?!!!!

Michael asked to speak with someone higher up the chain and when that person got on the phone, he explained the entire situation, and that the "PEEL OFF" would end up costing him money when all he wants to do is use the $550 which they have had for over a year, to go and see his son in the Air Force before he is possibly re-deployed. Why is it so hard for them to allow us to use what we already purchased?!

"Well, Mr. Frock these very special deals we offer on air fairs (really, he acts like $550 is a pittance,) come with significant restrictions. I'm afraid our computer will not allow us to change it so you can use it as a single fair. The best I can do for you is give you the email address of our customer service center that handles these cases and perhaps they can extend the voucher further so that you and your wife can book a future flight."

All right, not what we wanted to hear but at least he was the only person in the long stream of NAY SAYERS who offered us a glimmer of hope. Michael thanked him for his time, and after hanging up, he sends off an extensive email explaining the entire issue and, as directed, asking for an extension.

This morning, the terse reply is NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, we're out $550 of our money. Thanks to the intractable, unreasonable, impersonal U.S Unfair, Melissa couldn't go see her brother, Michael can't go see his son, and as it turns out, even if my cousin had been available for me to visit, I would have run into the same issue of being a sole traveler and wouldn't have been allowed to use it either.

We promised U.S. Air that we will NEVER book a flight with them again. And, we promised U.S UNFAIR that we would tell all we know about this major cluster F**K of attempting to deal with them to use OUR money.

U.S UNFAIRWAYS, let me make sure you can hear me:
NO! You are not nice to work with and,
NO! I won't use you again and,
NO! I wasn't kidding when I told you I'd make certain I tell everyone how you all have behaved. YES, I am a Woman of My Word!

U.S. UNFAIR, you SUCK!!!!!!

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka She Who Has Been Ripped Off & Is PISSED!

Charity vs. Socialism

I suspect that this blog post may lose me a few readers; I'll have to live with that. Because this is such an intensely emotional topic, I've stayed silent for a very long time. Not because I don't have my opinions, but more because I couldn't clearly articulate my thoughts.

I am liberal in my views about people being happy in their lives and life-styles, but I admit to being fiscally conservative and worried that there is way too much government involvement in my personal life. Trust me, I like money as much as the next guy; day to day living is made easier with it. And, one of the best lines I ever heard about money was from my friend Bernie who said, "While it's true that money can't buy happiness, try living without it!" Amen, sister, Amen.

But as it relates to current affairs, I can't in good conscience not weigh in. Not especially after a flip cartoon has gone viral on Facebook and other places. For me, it's the last straw. So get ready. Read at your own peril.

The cartoon I'm talking about is one of a man speaking with Jesus and he is saying, "But, Jesus if we feed all these people, won't that be so...social...socialism?!!!" Kill me now. Really? Really?? Now we want to bring Jesus into this? Shame! Because most of those who use this cartoon to prove a point against the Unfeeling, Uncaring Economic Establishment, also believe religion is the opiate of the people and will have none of it!

You are hereby put on notice: You can't have it both ways!

Okay, I'll play your silly game: Going along with the notion of "What would Jesus do," this man who fed the masses with the loaves and fishes is also the man who preached very clearly, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." Meaning, these two states are clearly separate and both must have their due.

He's also the man who was reticent to do this miracle of the loaves and fishes just as he was to call attention to himself by changing water into wine at the wedding feast at Cana. He did not see it as his place to make global, sweeping changes to the state of things. He did preach that we should all examine our conscience and act on a situation presented to us in order to deepen our sense of understanding and compassion.

The Christ was NOT a socialist; he was not political in any way, (much to dismay of many of his disciples, like Judas, who were hoping he was going to liberate the Jews from the Roman occupation.) What The Christ was, is a highly evolved thinker, and an active thread of Spirit who understood the soul-stretching qualities of compassion, faith, and charity. He taught us that the earthly body and life should not be our only concern and what we should really be doing is expanding our connection with Spirit.

He appears to have been an individual who lived in the world as it was while hoping to grow spiritually from the experiences it offered. He did good works, cured many, provided us with miracles to consider our potential, but he did not insist that the good works be mandated by an governing body. He also said, "The Poor will always be with you." Which means that he understood that all of us at one time or another will be poor, either in spirit or physically. It also means that The Poor are our opportunity to grow our sense of compassion and love by addressing their needs as we can. Or not; it's our individual call.

But, before I go much further let's make sure we're all working with the same understanding of the words socialism and charity.

As defined by Webster's Dictionary:
Definition of SOCIALISM
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

To my mind, the third definition is what's afoot here. And, if I had not spent time in Russia, I would not understand the impact of that sort of transition. But I did spend time there, and I did see what the years of Communism did to the country. I did hear the tales of what is was like to live in a place where Socialism leads to misery.

As my one Russian friend said, "Yes, the notion of equality for all meant that we were all equally miserable. Contrary to what we were told, it did not make for an elevation in our status as citizens; Socialism lead us all to our lowest common status. Marx and his people were exempt from the horrors of the system they started. They lived well while most of us starved."

When I asked Kira to explain further or give an example she said, "Dalink, do you know why Russians starved and suffered through bread lines? Look around at how vast our country is, there is farmland everywhere. But, we had no equipment and no one would farm it because the Government came and took what the farmers produced, "For the People," and did not pay them. They told the farmers what crops to plant and how much and regulated all parts of their living until the farmers couldn't farm or wouldn't farm because they could not make a living."

She continued, "So the farms went fallow and there was none who would take it up because there was no way to make it work. Now my country must start over again. Almost from the beginning, but there still are few farmers and much more land than farmers to tend it."

Another friend of mine, Ludmilla, still shared her family home with a man who had been placed in it during the Communist regime. I absolutely couldn't get my head around that as she explained, "I cannot get him to leave. I have slowly bought my flat back but he doesn't care because he has lived there for years and has no intentions of leaving. I must pay rent and for food and utilities and all the things that the Communist said they would take care of. Thank goodness Communism is ended, but now I must buy these things and the money is not there. It is very hard to make it work. This man, I have no legal recourse to remove him. If he does not wish to go, I will have to wait until he dies."

Yep, the third definition is the one you should be worried about the most...

Because let's be clear: Charity that is mandated by a government is not charity; it is socialism. A government established program that makes certain that everyone has equal status is not Nirvana, it's Socialism.

As defined by Webster's Dictionary:
Definition of CHARITY
1: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity
2: a) generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also aid given to those in need, b) an institution engaged in relief of the poor, c) public provision for the relief of the needy
3: a) a gift for public benevolent purposes, b) an institution (such as a hospital,) founded by such a gift
4: lenient judgment of others

The word most often associated in these various definitions is, gift. A gift is something that you decide to give to another. It's not a mandate. It's not a requirement. It's not a legal or governmental parameter. It is your choice.

While it might be expected, such as someone might expect that they get gifts on their birthday, if no one gives them a gift, the birthday boy or girl cannot go to the government and insist that they make amends and/or make us give them a gift.

Okay, so now that we're clear on the difference between these two words, let's keep going with this discussion. Feel free to give me your thoughts on all of this, so we all can learn by sharing.

Currently, with the whole Occupy Wall Street efforts, people are attempting to bring into clear focus the growing divide between the Haves vs. The Have Nots. I get it. While I don't agree with the tactics, I'm sure parents felt the same way when I and my friends were out protesting the Vietnam War.

The need for change is always brought about by civil unrest, it seems. Protesting and making public statements is also part of that. So for those who are genuinely there to express their concern and the need for change, good on you. But, let's face it...there are hundreds who are there just because it's a way to vent anger and hatred toward who and whatever. Some aren't even sure why they're there except that it's a happening. Some are there because they don't know what else to do to impact this issue and move things in a positive way.

But, mostly it's about fear and frustration. It's about seeing that others seem to have way more than you do and thinking that's not fair. It's about feeling like David facing off against the Goliath of big business and banks. It's about worrying how you're going to find a job in this crappy economy. It's about bills you can't pay. Or being in debt that you don't want to take responsibility for now that you're drowning. It's about being strapped with a home that's lost a significant part of its value and/or being upside down in a mortgage. How are you supposed to survive? Why doesn't someone do something to help you? What's to keep you alive body and soul?

AND ALL OF THESE ARE VALID CONCERNS, but they're not going to be answered by taking money from those who have it and giving it to those who don't. They're not going to be answered by impinging on the ability for businesses and individuals to make as much money as they can. It's not going to be answered by more government involvement and regulation. They're not going to be answered by the Liberals' insistence that the government Level The Playing Field and give to those who don't have money from those who do.

Don't you understand that when the thought, "The government is just going to have to pay for this because I/we need it," what you are doing is forcing your needs/wants/ desires onto every other citizen? WE are the government. Our taxes are the funds for all of these programs, bail-outs, welfare, student loans left unpaid, bankruptcies, and mortgages that are foreclosed upon.

If you need help, it should be my choice to help you! It's not your right to expect that simply because you need it, it should be provided!

It's about you becoming right with the idea of money and understanding it for what it is. It's about more of us becoming better educated about how money actually works. It's about seeing how the money is made by individuals and organizations. And it's about following the American dream of doing the same. It's about the opportunity to rise UP to affluence and success.

It's about adjusting our thinking about what are truly personal rights. It's about taking responsibility for the financial choices you made and honoring them. The government is not the answer. You are the answer. If you want to be the master of your own destiny, you can't ask the government to step in and micro-manage your destiny when you don't like how it's going. The United States of America was founded upon the principles of opportunity....all of us have opportunity. Some of us run with it and some of us don't. It has little to do with how hard someone's circumstances are and how easy someone else's might be.

If we are so concerned that we no longer understand how to be charitable and seem to be cold and uncaring, I'm with you on that. We, as a nation, are forgetting what it means to be charitable. ALL of us are forgetting it. Not just the ones who have the money, as the Liberals would have you believe. In fact, it's still true that the wealthiest of Americans are giving record amounts of money to charities and causes. But the rest of us? Not so much. "I don't have enough money to take care of myself in this economy! You can't expect me to give money to others!" It's time to rethink this comment.

While money is often the indicator of charitable behavior, it is not the entire answer. Charity of spirit and willingness to extend ourselves to others in any way possible is also part. By volunteering our time. By being a mentor. By being neighborly. By checking on an elderly person who lives near and seeing what you can do to help them. By offering to help a young mother with her children. By offering a neighbor who doesn't drive if they would like to go with you when you go to the grocery store. By hosting a pot luck dinner where everyone brings what they can and many are fed for just a small investment. By doing unseen acts of kindness. By becoming an active member of your community.

We say, "Charity begins at home." That's so very true. For those of us who are loved, we first learn to be charitable by how we deal with those who occupy our home space. We have our parents then teach us what it means to be charitable to those who live near us. We join civic groups; we go to houses of worship; we become a good neighbor.

Oh wait, most of us don't do those things anymore. Religious custom is fading for a vast majority of us. That's fine with me, if you don't want to go to a religious address, but each of us must find an alternative means of connecting with others and become aware of those who are in need. We must find a way to become a charitable part of community.

You have to find a way to develop a charitable nature, not just fixate on financial concerns. We must teach each other what charity means by our actions, not by Occupying Wall Street. And, please, stop looking to the government to mandate your financial security.


This little girl is Merlin. She is Michael's foster child. About nine years ago, a speaker came to the church he attended to talk about their charitable work with children. He decided he would make the monthly contribution to their efforts. Merlin is his assigned child. Very few people, up until I just told you, even know he has done this.

On a regular basis, we get a letter updating her situation. When she was very small, her aunt wrote these letters which are translated into English for us. They are full of small details about how Merlin is a good girl and likes school, etc.

Now, Merlin writes to us about her days and sometimes sends a drawing. It's very sweet. In all cases, the letter is full of statements of gratitude to, "Godfather Michael" for his support and care. In the letter that held this picture, she talked about being excited with her new school clothes!

And, here's the thing that illustrates true charity to me. Michael started this when he was making next to nothing as a new funeral director, (this industry, sad to say, pays terrible wages in general,) and he was paying a mortgage, child support, the rent on his apartment, and all that goes with life.

Still, he decided that he wanted to help a child thousands of miles away because, as financially strapped as he was, her circumstances were much more dire. We are spiritually richer for his decision. Even the months in this economy, when we aren't sure how we'll pay all of our bills, he still honors his commitment to this girl.

The poor will always be with you. It's time for all of us to decide if the fact that we might be economically poor means that we are also going to be made poor in spirit.

Bad economies and world crisis come and go. Your spirit's richness and depth depends entirely on you and your willingness to grow it. No government can make your life better if you aren't willing to understand that being rich has little to do with economics, and everything to do with your ability to care and reach out to others. And, most importantly, your willingness to reach for more and better for yourself, despite the odds that seem against you.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka She Who Is Rich

Forever Bond

See that picture? No, that's not my attempt at being pictorially creative. If you want to see good photography, go visit my friend Sarah at Cottage Garden, or Beth at Be Yourself... Now those gals got the eye!

No, that photo is a shot viewed through my front window and that haze is not a ghost. That, for lack of a socially acceptable description, is dog snot. Yep. My windows run almost to the floor; the Scotties think they are the best ever. They can patrol the community from the comfort of home.

I used to clean the windows regularly. After all I don't want people to think I'm a lousy housekeeper. What would the neighbors say?! But, you know what?

UNCLE! I give up! You win, I loose, I'm not doing this anymore! I'm yelling, "Leave IT!" But, not at the dogs, nope...at me. Put down the glass cleaner and step away!!!!! Unless I'm going to hobble the dogs and stake them down in the center of the room, what's the use?!

Did you ever use that product called Gorilla Glue? It's amazingly strong glue, isn't it? Well, just so you know, I'm shortly going to be a mazillionaire when I trademark, the incredible, bonds like nothing you've ever seen, sticks to anything, won't rub off, lasts for a life time, Scottie Snot Glue!


You heard it here first! Oh, before you go, say hello to the Chief of Quality Control. Sheeze...

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka Rory & Fiona's Mom

I Must Get This Off My Chest

While I am proud to live in a country where Freedom of Speech & Expression are protected, and while I absolutely agree with all citizens of the United States having access to that protected freedom, let me say this...

Any man who says he is a holy man, and publicly would set fire to the Quran, or any other holy book, is NOT a holy man.

In a world where anger and hatred seem to be running rampant, no holy book, work, image, or idea is without merit. We need all of them for contemplation and balance. You do not have to believe what your neighbors believe. You do not need to understand it. You simply must be grateful that Good Books are a part of our values. All roads lead us to someplace. All of them.

I do not ask you to believe in God/Goddess and completely accept your views if you don't; each of us must believe what we truly believe. I simply wish for all of us to believe in goodness and the rightness of our Human Nature and support each other along our journey to enlightenment.

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka She Who Hopes All Good Things

Stop Touching Yourself and Just Sing!

Nothing like starting the new year off with a good rant.

So, the other night we're standing around waiting for the ball to drop and wondering who all of these performers are 'singing' and dancing on the stage. One person commented, "I am so getting old...I have no idea who these people are. More so, I don't really care who these people are."

I'm fairly certain I heard some poor misguided, socially stunted adult say something similar when I was young and thought, "You poor bastard..."

Well, count me a poor bastard in 2011 then. I'm perfectly all right with it if you do. I've earned the right to be one!

As I watched, I wasn't so concerned that I was out of touch musically, as much as I was becoming offended by all the touching that is de rigueur when one is supposed to be singing!

For goodness sake! Is this a porno we're watching, or is it supposed to be a performance of a hit single that we're watching?! For so many of singers these days, they're one in the same! News Flash! Handling your girl parts does not sell the song any better! Oh wait...maybe it does. Grrrrrrrr.....

I am so far from being a prude that it's not even funny. I'm all for sexual expression, etc...but if I wanted to see this much body stimulation, I'd go to a strip club and watch people grinding or swinging on a pole!! I don't want to watch it on New Year's Rockin' Eve, or any time I'm supposed to be watching someone sing. Yuk!

I wonder, does Andrea Bocelli get the itch to grab himself when he's singing?! How about Chris Botte....maybe not a good example as I don't think he can play a trumpet and rub himself at the same time. Michael Buble' grinding his mic stand? NO! You don't see that and still their music is worth my time as a listener!

How about an image of Povaratti touching his nipples? Could you ever get that out of your brain once it was seared in by witnessing it! NO! Your head would explode! And, watching these performers today is no less a bio-hazard!!!

Maybe it's ghetto and gangsta' rap that started this trend....but now all seem to think it's the only way to perform. The Queen of Burlesque, Blaze Starr didn't ever touch herself as much! And a crotch shot like the one Beyonce is providing here, makes Sharon Stone seem like a piker!

We wonder why young people are so inappropriate at times in public, or at home for that matter, without the sense of decorum that make them fit to live in civil society. But, all one needs to do is watch how we've confused the performing arts with a strip tease, and you've got your answer.

Young girls now think the only way to look on-trend is to look slutty. That's not news, we've been fighting that one for decades. What is news is how young the itch to slut starts...now around ten or so! Why can't we allow our children to know the glories of being one of God's/Goddess creations without looking like the lead act of a strip show?!

The male singers are no better....I'm surprised they don't need a cream to sooth their mangled private parts from all that grabbing and thrusting. PLEASE! Your junk is not that enticing to females. Trust me when I tell you that we don't think they're all that marvelous looking. Really? Do you have to do that?! There are children in the room. Their are seasoned adults, aka poor bastards, in the room who just don't care to witness how enamored you are of your package.

I think all of these younger performers must have a chiropractor on staff to put their spines and hips back into correct positioning after they've done a show. It's enough to cause whip-lash. Not in them, in me as I quickly and continually turn my head to avoid the image onslaught.

We can thank this guy for the trend toward self expression a la strip club style. Two decades ago when he first thought to scratch his itch on stage, it was a bit scandalous. That one move made Elvis Presley's gyrations in the 50's pale in comparison. Iconic sensual images such as Marilyn Monroe, standing over the street grate to get her skirt swooshed up seem sophomorically quaint....no longer titillating. Oh, Michael Jackson, of all the things you could have left behind as part of your legacy?

Yeah, thanks a lot, Mike. Would you all please stop touching yourselves and just sing?!!

Namaste' Till Next Time,
Holly aka Poor Bastard!