Decoration Day

Memorial Day or Decoration Day as it was often  called some years ago, is a holiday, which like so many others, I think, has been spoiled by moving it to the last Monday in May, so that observers — celebrants — if there are such, can have a whole weekend for the celebration, which then becomes something along the lines of Labor Day:  Baseball, hot dogs and apple pie.

Memorial Day originated probably as Decoration Day when, in the south, people went out the graves of the Civil War fallen and decorated them, mostly one suspects, with flowers.  The observance fairly quickly moved north and eventually became a more-or-less national observance on May 30,  After World War I the observance was expanded to commemorate all of the veteran dead, which is more or less where it is today.

None of this is to suggest that there should be no celebrations on Memorial Day or games, no travel, no weekend fishing, just that moving days to make an observance — any observance — into nothing more important that just one more long weekend is somewhat degrading to remembrance and maybe to the people involved, which is what has happened.  

Of course some of us still go out and place flags and perhaps flowers at the graves U.S. servicemen and former U.S. servicemen, but making it into another long weekend spoils the focus.  This is not to suggest that we should run around with long faces and spend the day praying at graveside, or go around hugging veterans, who would probably be embarrassed.  But the focus should be at least to some extent on the men and women, who over the years have preserved this nation through the sacrifice of their lives, their limbs of even just years of their youth.

It wasn't — or doesn't seem — too many years ago when many or perhaps most men in this country were military veterans.  This no longer is the case and even though men are still required to register for the draft, no one gets drafted.  Our military services are now made up of volunteers,

Our veterans from Vietnam, many of whom were draftees who really didn't want to go to war, received no welcome when they came home;  in fact they were often vilified, especially by young (college) people.  They were the targets for all kinds of insults and even attacks.  To a lesser extent this also had applied to returning Korean War vets and no one wonders how long it will be until the young elitists begin — if they haven't already — calling troops in the Mideast "baby killers" and worse.

Without trying to justify Vietnam for example it should be noted that when, under political pressure, our troops were withdrawn from Vietnam, and almost immediate bloodbath followed.

So, anyway, why should we care about veterans, especially those didn't go to Korea or Vietnam or Iraq or any of a dozen other places.

Well, the men and women serving in the armed forces from about 1946 to about 1990, whether at home or overseas, are almost certainly the reason the world has so far escaped nuclear war.  I'm think here especially of SAC (Strategic Air Command) aircrews waiting on the flight lines for orders to go; and the Navy with its battle groups constantly on patrol around the world.  Then there were Marine Corps and Army men and women, any or all of whom could have been sent off to some distant and probably very dangerous place on very short notice.

These are the forgotten troops, the peacekeepers who kept the peace just by being available, but they were the reason that even though there were abundant nuclear weapons available, not one was used.  Ronald Reagan's MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) was nothing new; it simply sort of codified what came before.

I'm really rattling on here, but the point is that willing or unwilling members of the large veteran population in the United States are — or were — the reason that the people who complain about our "vicious" troops somewhere in the world are still free to do so.

Memorial Day, even though it has been reduced to nothing more than a long weekend, should still be a time to remember why we still have a free nation.

Politrickle issues

I feel like I need to write about political stuff, but with the onset of very annoying cold or something I don't really feel much like thinking and sorting. Sorting? You know, sorting lies.
If you're not up to dealing with lies or evasions or something resembling double talk, it is probably impossible to deal with politics.

Politics seem to be all about what are called "issues."

Sounds important, but what are issues?

I'm not sure. However, I am pretty certain that "issues," as defined in politricks — oops, that's misspelled. It should be politics. Or should it? Politricks? Maybe that should be the buzzword. "Politricks" is all about issues. Or maybe one just grows out of the other.
But issues are not real things. Issues, most of them, are created, often from some existing activity, but some, seemingly out of the air. They're made up.

The party or group with the most politricks (issues) gets the jump on the others.
Look at the last Congressional election, it and the presidential election preceding it. George Bush was returned to the White House, but how? Having won the office in the preceding general election the Republicans seemed to feel they were fat cats. Fat cats don't do much but sit around, look good and eat.

The party really didn't set much up. Both Bush presidential elections were close, but then the party controlled the Congress. Not by much. Then it came time to try and reelect the president (or get a new on).

The party really didn't set an agenda and almost lost the office because the other side figured a way to bring up some issues. They weren't especially good, but the race was very close and, although the Republicans retained control of the Congress, but only until the next congressional election.

The Republican Party once again had no agenda. They had won the preceding (Bush) election and were home free. Or were they. They probably won that that round on an issue they didn't consider terribly important and currently are completely discounting, probably to the delight of both Democratic candidates. The big difference between Bush and his opponent was the "life issues."

These include, but are not limited to abortion, euthanasia and fetal stem cell research. For Catholics, for example, the "life issues" are not negotiable. They are not supposed to vote for a candidate who supports things like abortion. If you could get all the Catholic voters in the country to support one candidate, that candidate could probably be elected. And there also are the evangelical Christians, most of whom have the same attitude toward the life issues. Between the groups there are a lot of votes. Yet no one has called out for them. It's surprising, too, because the next president will almost certainly have the opportunity of picking a new Supreme Court justice.

I think the biggest "politrick" right now is the climate thing.
Global warming? Global cooling?

Anyone who can read this has access to a lot of information on the web and incidentally there is some weather stuff not put there by Al Gore.

This old (literally) planet has been around for more than four billion years, which I think that most of us would consider is a long time. During that period, the Earth, which was probably pretty warm until it got an atmosphere, cooled enough to allow life to exist on it. Sometimes we forget that we live in an ice age. If we didn't we wouldn't be here.

We have always had this idea that we should be in control of things. Now we're trying to control the climate, which is the absolute height of arrogance. This earth, which a rather exciting old man I knew years ago called a spinning ball of mug, is here because of the Sun, we continue to exist because of the Sun, which does far more than merely light the world and give those of us who are careless springtime sunburn cases.
The cry right now seems to be against carbon dioxide, which is interesting and becomes a truly great politrick: We can't live without carbon dioxide. Atmospheres enriched with carbon dioxide provide bigger and better crops. I've heard and read all sorts of things about minimizing carbon dioxide. We're trying to convert motor vehicles to ethanol. But burned ethanol emits carbon dioxide, too. And production requires a lot of grain. Which should primarily be a food source.

You may have noticed that everything getting more expensive. Food prices have really starting soaring lately, partly because the raw materials for food have become more expensive. There is a practically worldwide shortage, now, of grains.

All because someone has played the ultimate politrick and convinced thinking people who should know better that gasoline and diesel engines are turning the earth into a cinder.
Actually Earth temperatures have not risen in ten years.

About this blog

I'm new to blogging, so, despite the personal description above, I'd like to make some comments about this blog and some lesser comments about the writer.
For a number of years I wrote columns for daily newspapers in different areas of the western United States, and for one three-days-a-week paper for a few years. Mostly the papers were metropolitan dailies of various sizes.
So anyone can assume that I have opinions, sometimes pretty strong opinions. Right now — this instant as I am hammering at my Mac — the opinions are focused on about what everyone else is focused on or should be:
The political races; the war called variously the "War Against Terror" or the "War in Iraq" or maybe just the war; the terror(!) generated by the weather terrorists (if you come back to this you'll probably get several doses of my opinions in that regard); and many other things, some related, some not. Oh, and I forgot (wow, a lie already!), I will probably push my writing a little. As noted above somewhere, I write novels and will no doubt introduced readers to them with the suggestion of course that they purchase and read them.
Some special interests that appear in my novels: Travel in the West, geology and paleoanthropology, history, especially American history, literature in general, maybe even some religious stuff. Other interests, not necessarily appearing in other current writings might include sometimes motion pictures (generally "oldies"), the evil beings that inhabit computers when you are tying to use them, maybe even some humor. Coming from me, who is sometimes regarded (politely) as an "old sober sides," that might be funny indeed.
Some current bugaboos are the climate controversy and of course the election campaigns. Perhaps because I am veteran (no questions, please) the war, which may not address, remains, always, a major concern.