A Quandry

Years ago, someone I knew worked for a company that had a fleet of vehicles. Their insurance company required a safe driving course for anyone driving company vehicles. The course instructor made a suggestion: it was better to crash your car into a ditch than to have a head-on crash. The lesser of two evils may be the better choice.

Ronald Reagan said "Never say never." His point was that some situations required you to do something different. You don't want to limit your options ahead of time.

This past Tuesday was election day. Here in Houston the ballot had about ten candidates for mayor. With a large number of candidates, it was unlikely that either of the top two would get a majority of votes. A December runoff determines which of the top two candidates becomes mayor.

The top two candidates were liberal Democrats.. For months I saw ads on YouTube for one of the candidates. As election day came closer, his ads seemed a bit more conservative.

Of the other candidates, there were some who appealed more to my view. Other than the top two candidates, none of the others polled in double figures. That left me with the question whether to vote for a candidate of my liking, or to vote for one of the liberal Democrats.

While the candidate whose YouTube ads were not in line with my thinking, the other troubled me more.

Her name is Sheila Jackson Lee.

It was better for me to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than vote for a principled stand. I do not buy into the idea of "Don't waste your vote." In this case, though, I did not waste my vote. I voted for what I believed to be best for where I live.

Yes, it would be nice to get Sheila Jackson Lee out of the House of Representatives. But she is one of 435 in the House. There is only one Mayor of Houston. She could do much more damage as mayor.

I made the right choice.

A story kept hidden?

Before YouTube plays a video it often plays commercials. One commercial I saw was a "featurette" for the latest Martin Scorsese film, Killers of the Flower Moon, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. The film concerns a criminal conspiracy in the 19020's. Whites would marry into Osage Indian families to get shares of property owned by the Osage. The properties in question contained oil fields and were worth a lot of money. The Osage owners of the valuable properties would then be murdered. The land then belonged to the white people.

It was a series of terrible crimes. Those responsible were caught and punished. Hopefully they will burn in hell for their crimes.

This is the featurette:

 

In the featurette, Scorsese said that the story was never brought to national attention. If that is true, then what is this? 

New York Daily News, Sunday, December 19, 1926

 

If a newspaper in  New York devotes an entire page to a story, I think it is safe to assume that the story was brought to national attention.

In 1959, James Stewart played a senior FBI agent named Chip Hardesty. In the film, Hardesty is speaking to a class at the FBI academy. Having been with the agency before since before J. Edgar Hoover took the helm, he had many stories to tell. Those stories, all true, were the subject of the film although, in reality, they involved different agents.

Here is a trailer for that film. Play close attention to what is mentioned at 1:05 into the video.

 

Let's see now, the story was in, at least, one New York newspaper. It was one of the segments in a movie in 1959. Yeah, I guess it was never brought to national attention.

The story of Killers of the Flower Moon deserves to be told. Hopefully Scorsese does a good job with it. I just wish Hollywood would not insult my intelligence while they lectured me from their high-horse.

A matter of interpretation

The Twilight Zone is generally regarded as one of the finest television programs ever to light the small screen, Perhaps I am a heretic, but while there are some very good episodes there is a lot of schlock. The acting is generally good, but many times the production values fall way short and the stories seem forced.

I like stories where people grow, usually when at least the main character is a better person in the end than he was in the beginning. Homer Smith (and most of the other main characters) in Lilies of the Field learns that respect and happiness go hand-in-hand. In Akira Kurosawa's Japanese film Ikiru, the protagonist, Kanji Watanabe, finds happiness before he dies half-way through the film -- the balance of the film occurring at his memorial service when those who knew Watanabe discuss what made him made him change so much in his final months.

One of my favorite episodes of The Twilight Zone, The Big Tall Wish,  was from the first season. It stars Ivan Dixon -- an actor who is always worth the price of admission -- as Bolie Jackson, a never successful fighter with one last chance to make it big. This video review gives an overview of the episode. The video and my comments have spoilers so be forewarned although it is still worth seeing anyway..

I have seen several lists that rank The Big Tall Wish in the bottom third of all episodes. The reviewer in this video rates it highly as do I. However, he sees the episode as most other reviewers see it and that is different from how I see it. Most see it as a paranormal story -- I see it rooted in terra firma. That, to me, makes it better.

Most people see the story as young Henry Temple, brilliantly played by young Steven Perry, as having the ability to make his wishes come true. Henry makes a wish that Bolie wins in this last shot at boxing success, but Bolie rejects the wish and ends up with another in a long line of failures.

In the end, Henry grows up a little bit -- but so does Bolie. There is nothing paranormal about the story. When Bolie switches from lying on the floor of the ring to being declared the winner it is not because Henry's wish took hold -- it was because Bolie was lying stunned and wondering "What if Henry's wish could come true?" When, in his delirium, Bolie tells Henry that wishes do not come true he is not telling Henry -- he is telling himself as he lies on the floor of the ring. Bolie goes home and faces the derision of his neighbors who watched the fight on television. He talks to young Henry who realizes that his wish did not come true. It never did nor could it ever come true.

But that does not matter. Bolie has found inner peace. The smile I see on his face looks like the most contented smile he has worn in years. He has a good relationship with Henry and, I sense that he will have a closer relationship with Henry's single mother. Bolie has realized what is really important and how he already has it.

Someone I knew in high school dropped out to be a boxer. I have tried to look him up but have never found anything about him. He was another in a long line of Bolie Jacksons. May they all find peace.

 

It's better to remain silent....

When Roe v Wade was in effect, Mississippi law banned most abortions after the fifteenth week. The Jackson Women's Health Organization said, "No, dammit. We want to do abortions through sixteen weeks." They took the case to court.

Rather than deciding to remove restrictions such as those in Mississippi, the Supreme Court said, "You know, it is none of the Federal Government's business anyway. It is a state matter and state laws can be whatever elected representatives decide." No, the Supreme Court did not make abortion illegal. The Supreme Court said a state can make abortion illegal if it so decides. A state is also free to remove restrictions if it so chooses.

Roe v Wade could still be in effect if liberals were just willing to back off just a little bit. Instead, they went for broke on the issue and lost.

The left is about to do it again.

Many leftists gloat saying that Donald Trump "lost all of his cases contending that the 2020 election was stolen." In reality, those cases were thrown out for technical reasons having nothing to do with the evidence. No court ever heard Mr. Trump's evidence.

The latest indictment de semaine against Donald Trump is that he committed fraud by saying the the election was stolen. The prosecutor contends that even the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (‘CISA’), whose existence Trump signed into law, said there was no fraud or malfeasance during the 2020 election. That is the same agency that later accused two Iranians of hacking into a some state computer election systems and stealing voter information. Either election systems were hacked or they weren't.

There also seems to be a view among leftist government officials that while the First Amendment protects drag shows for young elementary school students, it does not protect speech critical or questioning of the government. The Biden Administration even tried to create an agency to fight what it considered foreign disinformation, with "foreign" and "disinformation" up for the government to define. Apparently, Donald Trump does not have First Amendment rights.

As with the abortion case, the left may be digging itself into a hole. Heretofore they have been able to say that all of Trumps cases were thrown out and that there is no evidence of election fraud. By bringing Trump to trial in this latest case, he will have the opportunity to present his evidence. Not only will he have a chance to prove that there was election fraud, the government may very well have to prove that there wasn't.

That is, of course, assuming that the government will allow Trump to mount a defense. If it doesn't, well then we know where things stand.  

A Sticky Wickesette

Fraser Longden is the Chief Operating Officer of Wickes, a hardware/garden store chain in the UK. Last year they sponsored a float in the Brighton Pride parade that had the slogan "No LGB without the T." Underneath that the poster added "We stand with our trans siblings now and forever." The float also had a poster that said "Ban Conversion Therapy for ALL." It should not come as a surprise that did not go over very well with some Wickes customers.

However, Wickes was not finished. Pink News, an online newspaper with a target audience easily guessed by its name, held an online "trans summit" this week. During that summit Longden said "I don't think I'm ever going to change some of the bigots minds, I'm never going to win that argument with them, so we were doing (the Pride float) to show support to the community." He added "(bigots) are not welcome in our stores."

Wickes float in Brighton Photo: IBC.UK

The London Stock exchange lists Wickes' year-to-date return as -17.25%. The one-year return is -34.20.

 

Of course, Wickes is not the first corporation to give the middle finger to its customer base. In the US it has been suggested that some of these moves are done because large investment companies such as Blackrock require such "Social Justice" positions in order to receive funding. On one hand that seems possible, but these companies taking the loans do need to pay them back. It seems that would be hard to do if a company alienates more than half of its customer base.

 

There must be something else going on. It is no secret that many "Social Justice Activists" are anti-capitalistic. Is it possible that these company-destroying moves are calculated to weaken the capitalist system?  Perhaps their thinking is that if they sink these companies they sink the Western economies. Yes that seems like a conspiracy theory, but it sure makes more sense than companies doing it because the don't like a majority of their customers.

 

In 1987, the US stock market lost more than 20% in one day. I remember Paul Harvey rejecting the doom and gloom, saying it was small businesses that kept the economy rolling -- and they were not affected that much  by the stock market.

 

But maybe COVID was designed to take care of them.

What goes around....

When we lived in Germany in the mid-1960's, the Armed Forces Network did not yet have television in our area. In it's place we listened to AFN radio, saw lots of movies, bought lots of records, and checked out lots of records from the library in the form of Broadway musicals.

One of the musicals we checked out was the 1961 production of Carnival. For some reason that recording struck a chord with the whole family. In 1972 my mother ordered the album from a record store.

One night over the Christmas break I was listening to the album. I made myself a promise that if I ever had the chance I would be in a production of that show. Of course this was one of those things people people promise themselves so they feel better about themselves knowing that the odds of ever having to live up to that promise are slim to none.

Two weeks later I was sitting in class listening to the morning announcements.

"On January 17, auditions will be held for the spring production of Carnival."

The current situation with illegal immigrants reminded me of that. Leftist cities thousands of of miles away from the southern border have been falling over themselves declaring how they are proud Sanctuary Cities and welcome illegal aliens with open arms -- unlike those hateful states actually on the border and having to deal with the fallout. Citizens in those northern cities had nothing to say one way or the other, but they keep voting for the civic leaders who make such claims so they must approve, at least tacitly. If they didn't agree they could have always voted for more conservative officials -- but they didn't.

Previously we saw the Sanctuary City of Martha's Vineyard ship out illegal immigrants that had been sent their way as soon as the Army trucks could get there to take them.

New York officials have commented on how their resources are stretched to the limit because of the migrants being shipped to the Big Apple.

Chicago is facing up to the problem by pretty much taking resources from the citizens of the city and using them to take care of the illegals instead. Reports indicate that the city is spending more money on the illegals than it did for its citizens.

The citizens of Chicago are getting very upset. There is nothing like making a promise then having to live up to it. The question is whether this will prompt them to vote differently in future elections.

While that may be the question, there is no doubt as to the answer.

Conservative Media Complex

Generally I like Andrew Klaven. I find a lot of his funny stuff funny. I find a lot of his serious stuff thought provoking.

There is one thing, however, that bothers me about Andrew Klaven -- from day to day he seems wet his finger and stick it in the air to see how he feels about Donald Trump. If Trump is riding a wave of success, Klaven supports him. If Trump seems to be running into problems, Klaven is against him.

I could tolerate it if Klaven was always against Mr. Trump. Initially Klaven was a never-Trumper. I would disagree and cringe at Klaven's anti-Trump tirades.When Trump started to get things done, Klaven was on the Trump bandwagon.

Andrew Klaven -- Photo YouTube

 

This week I watched a video where Klaven said that Trump had worn out his welcome and should just go away. In other words,  we should abandon someone who has been targeted for years because he continues to express frustration at having been targeted for years.

What was it about Trump that made it possible for him to get things done? Could it, perhaps, be his strong will and his goal-setting? It certainly was not his shy, retiring personality. I know of no one who has accused him of being easy to please or being the most morally upright person who ever lived. I have seen many people stand up for Mr. Trump's honor. He respects and stands up for the "little guy." It is lying blowhards he fights tooth and nail.

 

Donald Trump -- Photo: Magster.com

I saw that champion for the common man, Karl Rove, on Fox News. He said that Trump is the only Republican that Joe Biden could beat in 2024. 

 

Karl Rove -- Photo: Fox News.com

And coalition forces are nowhere near the Baghdad airport.  

Is it that no other Republican candidate will generate enough hatred from the Deep Swamp to inspire enough people to engage in massive voter fraud? Don't bet on it, Mr. Rove. The Democrats have had almost twenty years of practice and have all but made it an art form.

Not to put words into Steven Crowder's mouth, but perhaps we should heed his warning to be wary of mainstream conservative media.

The Clockmaker

I never knew just where my parents bought the old grandfather clock, I just knew that they bought it when we lived in Germany while my father was stationed there with the US Army.

The wooden case was in good shape. The brass cases of the three weights were a bit worse for wear having received a number of dents and dings over the seventy years since the clock's manufacture in the mid 1890's.

When the movers packed our belongings for our return to the United States, the weights were wrapped up and placed in a box separate from the rest of the clock. The pendulum was wrapped in paper and placed inside the case of the clock. When our possessions were delivered, a mover took paper from the clock case.

"The pendulum is in that paper," my mother told the man.

"No it isn't," he replied.

My mother tried to argue the point but the man refused to check to see if the pendulum was, in fact, wrapped in the paper.

We never saw the pendulum again. The clock stood lifeless for six years until after my father retired from the Army.

There is something about the chimes of a grandfather clock. If you are not used to them, the chimes every fifteen minutes are an annoyance. Once you get used to them, their absence makes for a disconcerting silence.

Even though a new high school was being built just a few blocks away from our house, it was not going to be ready for me to attend. My graduating class was the last to be bussed from the east side of town to the older school on the west side.

One afternoon I got off the bus as usual. As I walked the block to my house, I saw a brown, eleven-year-old Chevy drive slowly down the street. Behind the wheel was a tiny, shriveled old man peering about as if he were looking for an address.

"I hope he is not looking for my house," I thought.

As I rounded the slight bend in the street, I saw the old, brown Chevy parked in front of my house.

When I entered the house I found the man talking to my mother. After a few minutes the man went over and started inspecting the grandfather clock. He took off his coat and opened the door to access the inner workings of the clock. On his arm I saw a neatly-done tattoo of what appeared to be a series of numbers.

I had seen pictures of tattoos before. I may personally have seen tattoos myself, but I had never seen a tattoo like this.

The man took the mechanics of the clock along with the beat up weights. He brought them out to his car and drove away.

From time to time, a parent has to explain thing to an offspring. My mother explained to something that hopefully no parent will ever have to explain again outside of an historic discussion.

I knew about the Holocaust. I knew that my father had been with Patton's troops when they liberated a concentration camp. However, I thought that was all part of a distant past. I had never come face to face with that terrible legacy.

While I felt shamed by my first reaction to the man, I also felt gratitude that the man had survived.

Losing the meaning

 Today as I was scrolling through YouTube I saw a suggested video with the headline:

Suspect killed while trying to rob $40 from food truck, family says

Let's overlook that the headline suggests it was the family of the "suspect" who said that the suspect was killed while trying to rob a food truck. (It wasn't. It was the family of the operators of the food truck who said the suspect was killed while trying to rob the food truck, but I do understand that headlines have to be quick and dirty.)

For reference, here is the video in question:

 

I understand and thoroughly agree with the use of the word "suspect." Unless you are a certain former President who shall remain nameless, everyone is entitled to the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty." However, in the video, the "suspect" is not named. The video says someone tried to rob a food truck, stuck a gun inside and pulled the trigger only to have the gun jam, then was shot by the intended victims. As the "perp" was not named, why not just say "man killed while trying to rob food truck?"

Beyond that, though, look at what the headline says. "Suspect killed while trying to rob food truck...." What good does it do to call him a suspect then declare that he was trying to commit a robbery? That defeats the purpose of calling him a "suspect." Perhaps "Man shot while allegedly trying to rob food truck" would work better. It remains non-judgemental about the man's actions.

I have seen news stories that said "The suspect was arrested for allegedly (insert crime here). Either Joe Blow is suspected of committing a crime, or Joe Blow allegedly committed a crime. He is not suspected of allegedly committing a crime.

Someone I know once worked under a news director who said "Police don't look for suspects. They look for the person who did it." Very wise words. If the person is not named then why pussyfoot around? Someone committed or tried to commit the crime.

I am not the greatest wordsmith to ever sit at a keyboard, but I do wish that people who write for a living had a better understanding of how to use their most important tool -- language.

I Found the Elusive Lewy!

Here he is, in all his pendulum action glory.  His bend deotherleg is beyond compare.  And, oh bruther, those pants.  I can't take my eyes off those pants (believe me, I wanted too!) Those pants are a federal crime (if they aren't, they should be) and my G-d man you have no socks on.  And your pants are too short. And as much as I hate that, I am fascinated by this video LOL!

The holy trinity:  Pendulum/Compression/Rotation.  Everybody dance now. 

With acknowledgements to: Oleg Astakhov, "Dance With Oleg"