The Role of Medical Research

Perhaps I am one of the few that overlooked the fact that health research rarely included women.  While that finally changed in 1993, knowledge about drugs and other devises for women still lag behind men. One explanation for that neglect was relevant to the exposure of drugs and other medical care.  As a result, understanding how best to treat women, and especially women of color, lagged behind. Failure to study medications and other interventions in a broad sampling has contributed to women expressing adverse effects from medications at twice the rate of men.  That is finally beginning to improve.

Art by Lyn Fenwick

However, thinking about the means by which research has been done lead me to disturbing history.  During WWII Nazi's conducted human experiments on people.  The Tuskegee Syphilis Study from 1932 to 1972, by the U.S. Public Health Service, misrepresented what they were doing.  Thank goodness that has been stopped by The Declaration of Helsinki which serves as the global cornerstone for human research ethics.  In addition, there are Institute Review Boards and independent review Committees and strict Information Laws insuring informed full understanding.

 

My research led me to the question of the need for voluntary individuals that are willing to participate in clinical trials.  Their willingness to explain why they would participate surprised me. A test was done to research that very issue.  The analysis included six possible reasons for potential motivation:  Improvement of one's own health, Access to innovative therapy, Helping future patients, Encouragement from loved ones, a Physician's recommendation, and Contribution to the development of medical knowledge.  From some of their responses I found that the most important influence was the Physician's recommendation, however, the desire to contribute to the development of medical knowledge was a high intention. Ironically, the test also found that the lack of support from family was the lowest response.     

After doing all the research historically, I could not ignore that today Americans are facing a reversal in protecting the health of working families.  However, it is not only impacting the poor.  Access to medical care is impacting hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes, many of which have closed.  The impact is staggering.   

This blog began about the delay in medical research for women, but what I discovered in my research is that we are face is bigger issues.  Women and minorities may still be further behind because attention to them was delayed. But now even larger issues about health and care exist.  I fear that broader problems are distracting the efforts to expand research or simply maintain the medical care we had before.  Too many distractions seem to be neglecting important things.       

Have We Lost a Sense of Decency?

 There is an advertisement on television in which a group are seated in a semicircle, and the leader asks. 'Who wants to share what you're holding' to which a man responds by appearing to relieve his private   discomfort.  I feel uncomfortable describing such an inappropriate advertisement, but it is an example of the deterioration of simple rules of ethics, courtesy, and respect that are being ignored.  I am no prude, but I find myself watching television with the silencer in my hand during the commercials.  

Recently on the news they showed people in expensive cars taking over intersections to dangerously slide circles at high rates of speed.  I know that kids racing their hotrods' dangerously is nothing new, but these cars were new, very expensive cars.  It seemed unlike racing hotrods.  The drivers in those expensive cars dominating the intersection seemed to be doing more than just showing off their cars.  They seemed to be saying "I am rich and I can get away with this."

Curse words on television are no longer unusual.  Obvious lies are just shrugged off.  Such things that once would have been criticized and regarded as vulgar are accepted.

Those crashing into stores to steal expensive things of all kinds do not seem to be dressed in shabby clothes.  They do not seem to be stealing because they are in desperate need.  "Ram Rads" as they are called, are now organized, not just a bunch of kids but a boss that plans the Rad and pays the kids for what they can carry out of the store.  The master mind behind the crime stays elusive, while kids seem to see what they are doing as more of a prank than breaking the law, laughing as they race out of the store with as much as they can carry.  Why are kids so willing to participate in the Rads.

I have noticed more and more shops installing locked shelves, requiring shoppers to find a clerk to unlock the merchandise.  These are not happening only in expensive jewelry stores.  They are happening in stores in which we regularly shop.   

I know that generational changes have existed throughout my life, and probably ever since humans learned to walk on two legs, but this seems different.  It seems disrespectful to honest shoppers, as well as inconvenient to go in search of a clerk in order to buy a tube of lipstick.  On the other hand, reducing thefts might reduce the current necessity of raising prices to cover the expense of thefts.    

So, what is my point?  Is it really nothing new?  Am I just observing it from the perspective of an older person, making more of it than it deserves?  My opening question is "Have We Lost All Sense of Decency? Are the things I regard as common decencies and mutual respect impossible in our crowded world of today, where we no longer know our neighbors?  Is it inevitable that a frightened homeowner would shoot a young man pounding on the wrong door late at night by mistake?  

Perhaps doing the best we can do is becoming the best we can do. However, I still believe that we can pay attention and stop admiring those who get ahead by stepping on other people.  If children see parents saying, 'He's a rascal, but he gets things done," those comments are likely to make more impact than parents intended.  Remember when collage sports were intended to be about sportsmanship for the players rather that a takeover by adults who saw a way to make money.  Remember when parents made time in the evening to play board games with their kids and their kids thought that was fun.  Remember when parents and kids were not so busy.  Probably only my generation remembers those things. 

That's a shame.  

 

Our Constitution is Not Broken

 The founding Fathers carefully structured a plan to run the government for decades, but did the 250th  Celebration represent a farewell, having gradually drifted away from the ethics and unselfishness our constitution requires.  It worked when strongminded men of character voted as they saw best.  However, they debated vigorously, and listened to the ideas of others, and sometimes found something better.  Other times they saw that ideas would not work but alterations would.  The point was that together they could find ways to satisfy more than just the strongest. 

That system worked best with less power in the presidency, after all, America was born to escape a King.  Congress was supposed to be the most powerful branch of government, because individually they represented the people.  The more power in the President, the less power of the Congress, and the more power of political parties, the reduction of the power of Congress speaking for the citizens that elected them.  The Founding Fathers saw the system they created as the best representation of their voters. 

Today there are those that feel our constitution no longer works.  For example, each state has two senators, although some states have much smaller populations. Yet, if the present system were based on population, small states would be constantly crimpled.  

There is also the changed competition of the world, making it impossible for the hardest working Senator to be deeply informed about every issue.  Senators cannot be well informed about AI, our heating Planet, whether farmers are helping or hurting the nation's soils, the cause for children falling behind, use and abuse of medicines, efficacy of vaccines, and other countless important issues.  Has the system the Founding Father's devised become obsolete or is it only that the safeguards the Founding Fathers established have gradually been ignored? Has what the Founding Fathers established slipped from congress and wrongly been assumed by the President?

Once the Senate was called "the world's greatest liberating body."  Under Article 11, Section 2, the President nominates his choice of whom he wants, but the members of the Senate have the final say and responsibility of determining qualification.  Both Parties should want qualified nominees.  However, I have watched many reviews of candidates chosen by presidents, and the bias of the examiners seems obvious. This should not be entirely the President's choice.  This examination is important, and both parties should remove their political bias and determine for themselves whether the candidate is capable. That is their responsibility, regardless of their political party.   We voters may tend to see the election as over, but perhaps all of us need to be more concerned about the President's choices and let our Senators know how we feel.

  Our Constitution is not broken. Rather, those given the responsibility to protect and defend are failing us.  The World is more complicated than in Washington's time.  There are more issues, and the world moves faster.  However, the responsibility of those we elect have better travel, better access to information, better staff, better ability to travel home, better health and better opportunities.  The people we elect are what makes the Constitution work, and if it isn't working, what makes you think a different Constitution would do any better.  Perhaps it is us, not the Constitution, that needs some respect of the laws the Founding Fathers wisely provided for us in order to heal the Nation.              

  

Missing the Best to Give More

My husband and I have had a wonderful life.  However, career moves that gave us the opportunity to live in several states may have made us less aware of the changes in America.  Perhaps we saw the changes as being regional changes rather than the overall changes in America.  Before Law School, I was a teacher, teaching both elementary and high school in three different states.  The career changes and the moves made me unaware of great changes in education.  I fear that two important changes have had a negative result.

One of those changes was dropping the teaching of cursive writing.  That may seem the least of education problems, but learning cursive writing had a greater impact than most of us realize.  Writing cursive stimulates a sequence of thousands of tiny micro-movements, each letter of a different shape requires the brain to utilize various problems, with fingers, wrists, and other parts of the brain working together.  Typing uses the same single movement. I have fussed about the loss of grace in penmanship, but I did not realize that an even greater loss was the reduced stimulation of the brain.  Furthermore, tests have shown that when students type, most of the brain goes silent. 

Changes in teaching and utilizing reading have changed, especially in upper grades, reducing assignments of reading to a few pages, rather that entire stories or books.  Young people are arriving at college unable to read more than a page or two, apparently struggling to retain attention to read more.  I cannot even imagine how chopping books into pieces serves a justifiable purpose.

I believe children are still curious and eager to learn the magic of those letters on a page.  Why are we missing that opportunity when children are eager to learn.  To quote Anna Quinden, "Books are the plane, and the train, and the road.  They are the destination and the journey.  They are home."  

Christopher Robin

Perhaps we are overlooking opportunities starring us in the face.  Are we giving children toys that talk rather than letting them make up their own words and their own stories.  Perhaps we are diminishing imaginations that would help children get ready for learning.    

I wrote this blog a few days ago, and since then Dolly  Parton has passed away.  She was a Hero for encouraging youngsters to read, and through her Imagination Library a gift of over 325 million books were gifted to children.  

Now, instead of encouraging children, it appears to me that too many people are actively involved in banning books when they should be delighted to see kids reading them.  When I see parents actively, and too often successfully, getting books that were childhood favorites removed from schools and libraries I want to cry.  As an adult I have collected many of those wonderful books and have gifted them to new babies.  I stopped collecting several years ago because I found too many children's books dull, obviously trying to impose a message rather than telling a good story.  When books like Charlottes Web, The Giving Tree, and Where the Wild Things Are, are banned, no wonder children stop reading.  My advice to new parents is to find the Classic Books from generations ago and read them to your children.  They can still be found in used bookstores, and many are being published anew.

I know that teachers have their hands full, doing their best.  Perhaps we have lost focus on the basics, in order to crowd in the overwhelming requirements now demanded.  Perhaps by wanting to give our children the best, we have lost track of giving them the more important things that we have left behind.         

 

 

Whose Responsibility is it?

In 1997, Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gengrich, gave his advice to the newly elected members: "If you want to be a player, ''you've got to vote with the Party."  He was not the first to say that, and he will not be the last.

 Unfortunately, that is exactly what George Washington feared.  He warned that political parties could destroy the young republic, if  instead of citizens working together for the public good, parties would divide them, creating chaos and anomality among the people.  Going in that direction, the nation would be weakened, and those seeking power could use their weakness to assume power.  Washington warned: beware Cunning, ambitions, unprincipled old men.  My only correction of his quote is that those he feared do not have to be old nor men!

Does that mean that our population has outgrown the ability to function?  We rarely know those running for election personally.  What candidates say on television has probably been drafted by professionals.  Are we left with nothing better than voting by party rather than the individuals.

Last night I visited with a candidate running for office.  He is obviously a well-trained speaker, and that was impressive, but I was more impressed when he said that he would not always vote as the party wished.  I have blogged before about research determining large amounts of outright lying by those running for and in office. Last night the candidate did not sound like a liar.   

I have had the privilege of speaking directly with an important person in a high office, and I am confident that he sometimes has voted against his principles.  Is it impossible to remain in office ethically? If so, Washington's fear has come true.

However, the truth is that we need political parties. Voters are not in a position to personally know the experience and ethics of every person on the ballot.  Then how can we stop the power of well-funded, political parties taking over?  Third parties have not fared well, but maybe the time has been reached that voters are becoming discussed with the 2-party system.  More importantly, we voters need to do our homework.  We need to show up at rallies not to just cheer for the well-coached candidates but rather to come equipped with well-prepared questions, and if the candidates ignore our questions, or give non-answer-answers, press them for a real answer or look elsewhere to find candidates willing to answer questions.  

Our Constitution is truly under threat.  We have a responsibility to show our children how it is supposed to work, not only just with candidates but also with those in office.  Let them know that their responsibility is to the constitution more than to any person or political party.     

     

 

Thinking of Others

Two years before the Vaccine.

 In a 1955 interview, Dr Jonas Salk was asked who owned the patent for his polio vaccine.  It was the same day his polio vaccine was officially declared safe and effective.   He replied, "Well, the people, I would say.  There is no patent.  Could you patent the sun?"  Six pharmaceutical companies began producing his IPV, (Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccine) but Salk did not profit.  His goal was the elimination of polio, and that required availability universally at low cost or no cost.  

The example he set for the world must be remembered by all of us, that when we make a decision about our own health, we are impacting others.   You might ask, what business is it of theirs?  This blog shares answers to that question. 

Our American approach to freedom of choice for ourselves is something we value.  Yet, decisions about how we feel and act about our own health with regard to contagious diseases can never honestly be no one else's business.  Remember back to school, lining up in a row to pass by for shots?  I still have a faint reminder on my shoulder from one of those shots.  

In an interview of Robert H. Hopkins, Jr, medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases he said, "One of the most important steps families can take before the new school year is making sure children--and the entire family--are up to date on back-to-school vaccines.  Vaccines help protect students from illness that spread easily in the classroom."

Times have changed since I was in school!  As Americans, we have always valued our rights, but it seems that more recently we guard our rights with greater indifference to the impact on others.  Of course, there are people with medical reasons that prohibit fascinations.  They must rely on community immunity to protect them from the spread of disease.  However, if too many choose not to be vaccinated, the community immunity weakens or fails. 

You might be surprised to learn that Public Health Priorities were first argued in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1905.  The Court ruled the defendant's argument that he had the right to care for his own body did not supersede the protection of public health.  People of faith sometimes objected to health requirements, and in some states, accommodations have resulted in significant numbers of sick unvaccinated school children.  The beliefs of those parents are real, but their decisions can have a greater impact than just on their own children.

Several years ago, a British physician named Andrew Wakefield suggested that single vaccinations were better than combining them.  His insistence brought him nothing but trouble.  

The combined vaccinations have been common in America.  While single vaccinations may be somewhat better, the combined vaccinations also have their advantages.  It reduces the number sticks during a single visit to the doctor.  It reduces the number of health care appointments needed to keep children fully protected.  Also, in families where both are working, one trip to the clinic is appreciated.  

Another important consideration is that the saying "one and done" applies.  Three appointments in a busy family are less likely to be accomplished in a timely way, if at all, than one vaccination.   

                           Happy back to school and be careful to watch for the street crossings!

 

 

 Several years ago, my husband and I attended a party.  The hosts collect art, primarily paintings, but we noticed a small figure of a woman.  Because a three-dimensional form was unusual in their collections, we inquired about it.  We learned that it was a model of a friend.  That was my introduction to the capability of producing three-dimensional forms. Today, there are many uses for 3-D modeling.

Recently, however, what just appeared in the news was a use that went beyond other common uses.  The capability of creating fake nude images without the consent of the person whose head is being used to create the fake full body nudity was the issue.  

The immorality of such use seems obvious to me.  However, Elon Musk was taken to court to determine his right to do just that.  The claim of Musk that he had the right to use the woman's head without her permission for his false depiction on the grounds of Freedom of Speech was denied by the Court.    

I could not help but remember that not long ago, Elon Musk was given access to all sorts of private information. As technology makes available so many things that not long ago we could never imagine, we must face those unimagined things.  We have rushed past so many things that can be done without slowing down to consider what should or should not be done.   

Musk's inappropriateness seems obvious.  The First Amendment guaranties all Americans the right of privacy.  The Minnesota judge may have been the first to ban what Musk did, reinforcing the severity of Musk's abuse with a fine of $500,000 per violation.  I am sure that the richest man in the world can afford to pay the fine.  However, he may also have enough money to challenge the ruling.

Other cases involving free speech verses the right of privacy may be on their way.  The clashes of those two rights are not uncommon.  In general, free speech will take priority over privacy claims, particularly when thoughtful information is shared in public view or the issue of political interest is involved.  However, using an image of a person's head fixed to the body of another person went too far.  If this case goes to higher courts, I hope privacy prevails.  As unbelievable things now are becoming possible, our responsibilities as humans become more important and more challenging.       

      

An Important Vote

Recently we had dinner with dear friends, and I was asked about the upcoming election on August 4th, 2026, to determine whether the way in which members of the Kansas Supreme Court are chosen should remain as they are or be changed.  I am embarrassed that I could not answer his question, and of course I soon began some research.  It led me to something called the Triple Play Scandal, involving a sitting Governor and two other men.  

In 1958 the sitting Governor had run for reelection.  He failed to be reelected and the scandal began.  The sitting Chief Justice on the Kansas Supreme Court, a longtime friend of the unsuccessful Governor, resigned his position, and immediately the Lieutenant Governor appointed the failed governor as Chief Justice.  That infuriated many Kansans, although it was not technically illegal.       

 As a result of that embarrassment, applications for members of the court changed.  First, a nine-member nominating committee of attorneys received applications to fill the vacancy.  Second, the committee selects 3 candidates from which the Governor would choose one within 60 days.  One year later, the justice would face a state yes or no retention vote, and if successful they would continue, but with an obligatory vote every six years.  Modifications have been made, but the goal has remained to avoid tricks and bad judgements in the court. 

Why has Kansas used this system, ignoring the way other election candidates are chosen?  My presumption, biased by having studied and practiced Law, with licenses in three states, is this.  When I need someone to fix my car, I take it to a trained auto repair man.  My law degree didn't teach me anything that would help me fix my car.  I respect trained professionals, whether they are needed to install my plumbing or do open-heart surgery.  I respect training and experience.  As important as common sense and good judgement can be, some things require education and experience, and I believe the law is one of those things.  The present way of selecting judges seems very wise.

As I understand the current voting, it decides whether the current way continues. using people trained in the law to evaluate the capability, experience, and reputations as practicing attorneys or voters will decide. Once elected the Justices would follow the same manner as in the past, serving 6-year terms and basically follow the practices as past judges have been doing.  The primary changes seem to be that    candidates can campaign as in other elections, and the people would have the responsibility to select the best person to serve in a highly complex position.  What it also appears to do is involve politics more significantly, with campaigning and money more involved.   

The questions that voters seem to need to ask is, are we being asked to fix something that is or is not broken?  Where is the call for change coming from?

Also of concern, why was the election placed on a typically low turnout August 4th primary ballot.  I do try to follow political issues, but I had overlooked this very important election.  Now, I am concerned whether others have overlooked an extremely important election.  

I am not aware of any abuse or failure of duty as a result of the current way judges have been chosen that warranted a call for a change.  The issue seems to be more about bringing politics back into the selection of judges.  It is true that many other states do include politics as part of their selection of judges, and that Kansas has been unusual.  The question is however whether change would be better.     

  , 

How Can I Decide?

 Just think about how difficult it might have been in the time of Washington to wisely select for whom to vote.  Washington himself warned against the power of political parties, and that power has only grown.  What can we do to make wise voting choiceness?  Here are some ideas.

    1.  Dismiss the cute children and smiling spouses in political ads.

    2.  Define your own definition of things you value in others that you would expect in someone capable of serving in the position for which they are running, such as good character, a good reputation, trust worthiness, intelligence, experience, maturity or other such things you personally would expect to find in a person running for particular offices.

An old dodge--Letting the Little Fellow Think He's Driving--When He Is not!

        (The political cartoon comes from the era of the People's Party, warning against being fooled.)

    3.  Identify your own important issues and do a little research on your own before listening to the candidates.  Are their statements accurate, their ideas possible, and where is the source of the money for their advertising and travel coming from.?

    4.  Who are the people speaking on his or her behalf?  

    5.   If he or she has served in office before, what is their reptation and did they keep promises?

    6.  Are they acquainted with the community they will serve if elected.  Where do they live and how often do they visit the communities they represent.  

    7.  Do their promises match reality in terms of costs and support from others needed to get it done. 

    8.  Do they seem more interested in talking than listening, do their promises have a logical plan, and do they seem capable of working with others to get things done.  

    9.  Inquire, if possible, of his or her reputation in his or her own community.

    10.  Does financial support for his or her campaign come from local citizens or primarily unfamiliar outside sources? 

    Our access to information today is helpful only if it is accurate, and it is reasonable to assume that candidates will present themselves as favorably as possible.  It is also likely that their opponent will likely represent them in unflattering ways.  We should not rely entirely on the pamphlets provided by the candidates themselves.  

    The complexity of figuring out how to divide states into voting districts in a way fair to all voters created that strange looking thing called the Gerrymander, who meanders around like a drunken sailor in an attempt to allow all voters a chance to get a fair vote.  Those contortions have always been difficult, but by taking on the challenge of trying to make it better, the Supreme Court may have made it worse.  It certainly has cast a shadow over voting.    

The responsibility as voters remains on us, and we must be reminded of that.  For example, I can make a sign supporting a candidate to put in my yard, but I cannot afford to make thousands of signs to flood the entire area in which the candidate is running.   I can visit with friends and neighbors, but I cannot buy time on television to share my opinion with countless viewers.    Without regulation, organized sources with money can overwhelm promoting their candidates.  What we can do is determine the source of the money spent for all of those advertisements.  

Remember even the richest man in the world has only one vote.  As small as our single vote may seem, it's power is equal to America's richest man.  The danger is how the rich are allowed to use their money for advertisements and other things, if not restricted by laws.  The power of "One man, One vote."  remains.   Decisions by the Supreme Court matter, but the people still hold the power.         

We should pay attention, but we must not be misled by nonsense about our votes not being counted or false votes being used.  Our successful watchfulness of elections is admired and envied around the world.  Sadly, the thing less controlled is the spreading of false doubt.  Watchfulness is essential, but so is ignoring those who use false fear to weaken our trust.       

Our votes do not belong to your political party, your minister, your employer, your best friend, or anyone else.  It belongs to you, and every one's vote matters.  

As a final comment, if during the preliminary campaigns there are no candidates that you believe are good choices, let your opinion be known and suggest that other candidates step forward.  We all have voices, and we must not delay using them until it is too late.  Take the advice of George Washington.  Don't let political parties take over without our voices being heard.

      

A Reflection on Changes

 

After WW II America changed. Foremost may have been the population burst, the result of returning soldiers eager to start families, and marriages postponed during the war.  What came to be called the Baby Boom, represented nearly 40% of the nation's population, with nearly six million babies born.  

Another important change during that time was the result of the GI Bill, which allowed many of the returning soldiers to attend college.  As a consequence, some young men chose careers that did not include returning to the family farm or other careers as laborers. Expected or not, those changes reduced the labor force.  

The Vietnam War, and the fall of Saigon in 1975 resulted in an arrival of Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian refugees, estimated to be a million.  Many had aided the U.S. military, and even after the war ended, deaths and disabilities, such as those caused by Agent Orange, were impossible to calculate.

This blog is not long enough to address all of those who have slipped over our borders, nor the many from other nations who have become legal American citizens.  The objective is intended only to summarize the impact of changes in the ethnicity of the American population.  From the time it became possible to sail across the ocean to reach what became America, the indigenous people were displaced.   

During the early colonial era, the first typical arrivals were English, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Swedes.  At that time, not all of those arrivals may have been eagerly welcomed, but they and their children became what we called Americans.  When enslaved Blacks were brought to America, they were brought not to be welcomed but to be used as slaves, disrupted from their homes and families.  It was Orientals that were brought to do the risky and dangerous work of blasting through mountains to link America from East to West, using Americans for less dangerous work.    

For most of us, especially those whose ancestors came from European Nations, we do not have to go far on our ancestral chart to find immigrant ancestors.  My precious Grandmother came to America in her mother's arms.  She was British, and her parents came to America for the same reason most of those wishing to become Americans today come...to make a better life for their children. 

Our founding fathers had clearly left no question that Americans have been welcome without regard to their religions, nor because they had no religion at all.      

Sometimes we forget that we were not here first.  That history belongs to the indigenous people we displaced.  We were also the ones who brought people who did not look like the majority.  Today I sense a failure to recognize the unique value of our population.  Once we took pride in what we called our melting pot and celebrated it with parades and festivals.  Today I sense a loss of pride in our unique population, and an arrogance to ignore the carefully drafted constitution that has guided us for so long.  I sense not only a decline in the pride of our unique nation, but also an effort to separate us.               

 We can live in a changing world...in fact, we must.  But we should not throw away history that has served America well.  The past idea of each generation having the opportunity to have more than their parents if they worked hard is declining, while wealthy families can amass enough wealth to support their decedents for generations.  Something is out of balance, and I believe the source of change rests with those we have elected.      

I shared my thoughts because I think all of us sometimes need to pause and look around us.  If you had written this blog, you would probably have commented on different things, but that is the point.  We all should reflect on what is happening, and that includes paying attention to those we elect.  Too often they seem to vote as their party tells them, or whatever benefits them, rather than honoring their responsibility to act on behalf of those who elected them.  They seem to ignore the duty the Constitution gives them.  Unless we pay attention, we may not know that is happening.  The Founding Fathers expected more from us.     

When our Constitution was new, people treasured the privilege of voting.  Newspapers were filled with information, not always accurate but certain to have other newspapers to challenge their content.  People attended rallies and argued with friends, trying to persuade them with well-prepared advice.  Today most of us are reluctant to openly discuss politics, except with friends likely to agree on the same issues.    

The intention of this blog is simply to offer food for thought.          

.   

The Meaning of Charactor

 The meaning of character has evolved significantly over time, from a distinctive indelible stamp of a person's soul to a more flued customized personal development.  If character is flued, what are characteristics that shape and define character?  If time and experience are constantly shaping character, what are some of the guides?   I will share some of the things I believe to be good choices.  

My first choices combines two pairs to represent character -- Honesty and Integrity.

1.  Honesty is telling the truth & refusing to lie, cheat, or deceive.  Integrity is the quality of having strong moral principles and consistently aligning actions with those values, even when no one is watching.

2.  Honesty is saying what you know & believe even when doing so might lead to negative consequences.  Integrity is being honest and fair.

3.  Honesty is about truthfulness and transparency.  Integrity is doing the right thing in words, actions, and beliefs, even when no one is looking.  

Thank you to those who shared their ideas of Honesty and Integrity. 

I agree that good character involves those things.   However, I believe that developing good character includes learning from great men.  Mahatma Gandhi is considered perhaps one of the most truthful men, dedicating his entire life to truth.  Abraham Lincoln was known for his honesty and even acquiring the nickname of Honest Abe.  The story is told of a philosopher who night after night strolled the streets of Athens with a lantern, and when asked what he was doing he replied that he was looking for an honest man.  Mark Twain offered his own bit of wisdom by saying "If you always tell the truth you don't have to remember anything.  However, "one lie ruins a thousand truths."

Thomas Jefferson is an interesting example of the meaning of character.  He is famous for his quote, "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom."  However, he is also known for personal matters being less than admirable.  He seems to be well aware of his own disappointing weaknesses of character, as the following well-known quote reveals.  "In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock.  His reputation declined in the 19th and 20th centuries, with support for States Rights, political philosophies, and especially fathering children of his slaves.   

Religions also share words of wisdom.  Proverbs 12:22 says that lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who act faithfully are his delight."  Other faiths also address this issue.  Judaism:  The Talmud teaches "The seal of God is Truth."  Islam: Lying is a major sin, but exceptions for goodness are accepted.   Buddhism:  Lying is one of the fundamental ethical principles.  Hinduism:  Lying is permissible if the intent is to pervert great harm.  

I chose to use Jefferson as an example of the complexity of character, but what about other men of power?  No president has been perfect, but George Washington recognized the importance of his character as the first president of our nation, and the many decisions he had to make as the first president of the United States of America.  His leadership certainly seems to me to represent character.  However, he had slaves.  It may be nearly impossible to find a man or woman who exemplifies perfect character.  

My old dictionary defines character as moral excellence and firmness.  I cannot think of a better definition for character.  If today's definition of character has changed, perhaps that explains a lot about the world today.        

          .

     

Reckless or Careless

Recently a young woman was thrown to her death when the attachment of the bungee cord was carelessly overlooked.  This blog is not about the carelessness of those she must have trusted to do everything right.  It is a reflection on why she chose to bungee jump in the first place.  Assuming that her bungee jump had gone perfectly, why would anyone want to do that? 

In making the decision to Bungee jump, was she reckless or was she careless, after all, she had depended on the capability of others to do everything right.  Was there any reason to believe she was at least partially at fault. The distinction between being Reckless or being Careless is defined as if you know that what you are about to do is dangerous and you do it anyway, that is reckless. In contrast, if you cause danger or negligence, without actually intending to be dangerous, you are simply Careless.  While that definition may make sense in some situations, it seems that in many cases it is inadequate.  Each of us has a brain, and if it is scary enough to activate your awareness that what you are about to do is scary, ignoring what your brain is telling you is more than negligence!  In the case of the woman thrown to her death, she had to have known the risk of danger but put her faith in others.  Was that simply careless? 

Returning to the real issue, why are people willing to put themselves in dangerous situations?  The answer apparently is that such situations trigger a fight or flight response, which triggers an adrenaline rush, which then creates a profound sense of euphoria.

 As examples, people at an auction who keep bidding well past their budget might be called Careless.  People on a motorcycle weaving through highway traffic at a high speed cannot claim carelessness, in my opinion.  Yet, both of those were given as examples of carelessness as I did my research.   

Getting carried away at an auction and, bidding past your intention may fit the definition of carelessness.  Even that may cause harm to others, especially if the bidder is a family breadwinner for others.  In the case of the biker, he is threatening not only his own injury or death, but he is risking the same possibility of others.  That is more than simply carelessness.  

While I was busy patting myself on my back, thinking that I had never done any such things, an old memory crowded its way into my blog.  I was a new kid in that High School, eager to make friends.  One evening, I piled into a car 'dragging main', That was fun, until someone had the bright idea of raiding a farmer's watermelon patch.  I am a farmer's daughter, and I knew better, but I said nothing, foolishly thinking the farmer wouldn't be upset about kids swiping a watermelon.  We found the melon patch, and we all tumbled out of the car, but the boys were not looking for a ripe melon to take back to town to eat.  Instead, the boys began taking more melons than we could eat.  

The farmer's porch light went on, and we ran for the car, the farmer's language shouted at us nearly as frightening as the shots from his rifle.  Whether he intended to be shooting over our heads or not, we plunged into the car and took off, the boys bringing melons into the car.  I was ashamed of myself.  What made it worse was that when we reached town, the boys rolled the windows down and began launching melons out the windows to splatter in the streets.  They had never intended to eat the melons.  Had I been Reckless or Careless, and did it make any difference whether the farmer was shooting at us or over our heads?  I learned many lessons that night that I never forgot.  

That poor young woman who chose to bungee jump for whatever reason never had the chance to learn a lesson.  Those young men who never intended to cause her death that night were Reckless, despite the fact that they never intended to cause her death. 

I shared two stories, both about young people making poor choices.  When someone said, 'let's go steal a watermelon,' I should have said 'please let me out.'  My foolish choice taught me a lesson I never forgot.  Unfortunately, the young woman who fell to her death never had a chance to learn her lesson.  Maybe this blog will be read by someone who can avoid a bad choice without having to learn it for themselves.

 

       

To comment on a reader's post

 I believe it is important that people of all perspectives post comments to my blogs.  The only ones I delete are the ones who try to sneak in advertisements.  By including those of differing opinions, my readers can get perspectives of other readers of my blog.  I am unable to identify the senders of the comments unless they identify themselves.  Readers come from all over, including outside the USA.  I try to provide information, and I spend a great deal of time to avoid directly stating my opinion.  My objective is to provide information, and I understand that my readers may not always like the information I provide.  I do not always agree with readers' opinions, nor sometimes do I find their "facts" accurate.  However, if we read only those with whom we agree, we cannot broaden our prospectives.  Even knowing how adamantly someone with whom you disagree can help you understand why things are happening as they are.  The author of today's post is someone I would not have expected to be reading my blog, but I think he or she provides a perspective other Americans my feel.       

How to Teach Constitution History

Not long ago we attended a lecture on teaching the Constitution by one of the book's authors.  The Forward of the book was written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  Essays were written by essayists, pertinent to the subject of 8 chapters.  The book's authors encourage readers that they need not be a lawyer or a constitutional scholar to teach constitutional history in the classroom.  

However, teachers are already struggling to educate today's children to read, write, and do math. They    may feel overwhelmed to be expected to pick up a 436-page book to learn how to teach kids about the Constitution, as important as they know it is.  High School Students in Kansas are expected to pass a test on the constitution in order to graduate, and they may take the test as many times as it takes to pass.  I fear that memorizing test questions is not really teaching students about the American Constitution.  

With many young Americans claiming to prefer Russian laws verses our American Constitution, Kansas lawmakers were understandably concerned.  They required that in addition to testing students about the Constitution, they also be prepared for knowledge of Russian Laws.  Unfortunately, a few questions on a test are not going to fix those problems.  

A new possibility?

I understand that it is important that American students learn to read. write, and understand math.  However, I believe it is equally important that American students learn in depth about our American Constitution.  Passing questions on a test is not going to make much difference in students' appreciation of our Constitution.  Understanding and seeing the importance of our Constitution takes more.  

I believe that if this nation is to survive, teaching students about our constitution is just as important as reading, writing and arithmetic.  Many people see AI as a means of making our lives easier.  I see it as a reason for us to get smarter.

Teachers have made it clear that they are already struggling to teach all of their students enough to succeed with a basic education.  Many teachers cannot see any room for an additional task.  I understand their feelings, but it seems to me that it is more important than ever that we find a way to teach children the importance of our constitution.  I have an idea to ponder.       

 Many years ago, when I was teaching in New England, on Wednesday afternoon, students who wanted to attend religious class in their church were excused from school an hour early.  Students whose parents did not wish their children to be dismissed for religious training used the hour for study hall or other activities.  Why couldn't teaching the constitution for one hour at the close of the day, one day a week, be part of the school day.  If that was done from the time kids started school, a smaller burden could be placed on teachers.  The Constitution weekly programs could be prepared by constitutional scholars, freeing teacher from intensive research.  The scholars would not insert political bias, and if the teaching plan was consistent throughout the nation, children whose parents moved would be receiving the same education when they moved to a new school.  If it was a program for public and private schools, without exception, America could have an educated population without bias and misinformation. President Washington's concern about the problem of political parties would be considerably reduced.  One hour a week, or perhaps a shorter time for younger students, for sixteen years of education, uniform across the nation, whether in Private or Public schools, with unbiased learning about the Constitution, would be good for the kids, teachers, and ultimately for the nation.  It's just a thought, but it might work, free from the bias of politics and without burdening teachers with preparing lessons.  

It's just a thought, but if the politics were removed, and teachers were relieved from having to prepare the lessons, perhaps the nation could benefit from an educated population with a reduction of political bias. It's just a thought!

 

To answer a readers Question

 The drilling is taking place in the Great Plains Industrial Park in Parsons, Kansas.  

Going Underground in Kansas

I saved a clipping about Kansas getting the world's first mile-deep nuclear reactor and have continued to watch for recent news about the dig.  I did find that they had begun, and that some of the neighbors close to the dig were concerned about safety.  I plan to continue checking on progress.  

As I was researching the current issue, I remembered an old clipping about the tragic death of two men, one from Ulysses, Kansas, who decided to go into an abandoned mine shaft near Georgetown Colorado, in hopes of finding something worth the effort.  My mother-in-law had saved a clipping, beginning with a headline "Hope Dims for Missing Pair." The rescuers had followed their tracks left in the dust, and they knew that the two men carried tanks with enough oxygen to last 4 hours.  One of the men had 3 children, the other had two, and hope for the men's survival was strong.       

That general area in Colorado had been a mining region almost 100 years before, but no strike of precious metal was ever found in that particular mine.  Sadly, their decision to enter the mine was a mistake.  The searchers said that it appeared that the men stopped for a rest, pulled off their oxygen masks, and died so quickly they had no awareness of their mistake.    According to the newspaper, the mine was opened only a year.  

A happier story in Grant County, Kansas goes back to the late 1910s, when a farmer discovered a badger hole of nearly pure white ash.  The ash originated in the Pleistocene-era, and it was found in other Western Kansas locations.  By 1922 production reached four tons every hour and a half. The ash was used in toothpaste, grit, soaps, and cleaning powders, although superior abrasives eventually replaced it's use.  In the 1916s it was once again marketable for such things as plaster, concrete, potassium fertilizer and oil absorbents.  However, by that time, it was no longer being marketed in the area of Grant County, Kansas. 

Deep Space

As I mentioned earlier, mining in Kansas has once again made the news.  Deep Isolation is testing in Kansas, Texas, and Utah as part of President Trump's nuclear pilot program.  A newspaper article described an "expedited testing of new designs" to ultimately design a pressurized water reactor--"the world's most common kind of clear technology--small enough to fit into the borehole and powerful enough to generate about as much power as 10,000 homes consume.  That article focused on the generation of power; however, I also found articles about the concern.  

Also of concern is the disposal of spent nuclear fuel.  The current process, as I understand it, uses existing drilling techniques used in the oil and gas industry.  Currently, the concerns about the deep boreholes are primarily the impact on the ground water and aquifer contamination, and while the companies assure the mile deep placement is secure, local people remain particularly concerned.  

Borehole drilling is common in the oil and gas industry, however, apparently using it for nuclear energy and waste disposal is something new. I have only dipped my toe into the issues that appear to be already underway. What concerns me is whether the safeguards I once trusted are still as competent as they once were.  I do not know.  However, I do know that we are living in a far different world that moves faster and seems less dependent on the wisdom of those well educated in their particular sciences.  AI is amazing but as I understand, isn't it only as intelligent as what the information of humans put into it.  It thinks faster and can assimilate the wisdom of a great many people all at once, but for difficult new issues, I still hope that human beings have a place.  We are already giving too little attention to Mother Nature's warning about global warming.  If we become careless about our planet, we do not yet have a backup, although apparently, we are also working on that!       

      

Baking with the Best--and a little humor.

     Every Christmas, and often Thanksgiving, I bake a pumpkin bread that is wonderful!  I do not remember the first time I made it, but it has been our holiday cake ever since.  I know that my favorite flour is Hudson Cream, and I blogged once about being on a trip in Canada, going into a specialty cooking store, and finding a special promotion selling Hudson Cream Flour.  Sometimes we do take for granted special things in our own communities.   

Doing my research for this blog I learned that Kansas Wheat is regarded as superior.  We are the top producer of hard winter wheat in the U.S., known for high protein and strong gluten content, making it ideal for yeast breads and commercial baking.  Because of our reputation, we export to over 100 countries for making premium flour.   

Our nearby Stafford County Flour Mill is generally ranked at the top.  There are also other respected mills in Kansas, and part of that reason for respect is the specific food safety standards and labeling requirements set by the Kansas Department of Agriculture.  First are the safety standards Equipment, Labeling, and Packaging Process steps.  I shared only the headings, but the details are strict. The next time you select your baking flour, feel proud of the respect we should feel for Kansas farmers.  

That being true, I hope the story I am about to share has nothing to do with our Kansas flour!  I prefer to assume that the flour in this case did not come from Kansas, or the culprit wasn't in the flour. There are many ingredients in that cake.  I'm sure it had nothing to do with Kansas!  Perhaps the problem was not in the flour at all!  Maybe it was in the canned pumpkin...or all those spices.  Who knows.  That recipe has many ingredients.

I certainly do not want you to think I am the kind of hostess who would serve cake that had anything bad to our guests.  Oh dear!  Maybe this blog wasn't a very good idea, but I suppose it is too late now not to finish!.  

The bottom line of the story is that all of the ingredients were mixed, and I was pouring the batter into the baking pans when the pieces pictured above were noticed. For those of you who might have reason to eat my cooking...bear in mind how much we love that pumpkin bread, how hard I worked making it, and the important fact that we were not inviting guests.  Now that all of that is understood, I confess that I poured all of the cake mixture back into the bowl where I could search for even the smallest pieces to be certain I had found all of them.  Only then did I bake the cakes. Despite the uninvited addition to the recipe, we ate every bit of that cake! 

I hope this story gave you a chuckle, even if you have never faced the choice between throwing everything out and starting over or carefully searching for unwelcome things in your cake!      

 

Celebrating 250 Years

The responsibilities of the America Constitution.

 

Sadly, for many of us, the American Constitution is taken for granted.  However, it is actually remarkable.  When it was written, only a tiny ancient republic had a codified written constitution.  Ours was the first of its kind.  Today that has changed but we Americans remain unique.  

Not only is it the oldest, but it is also unique for such a long success. It has only been amended 27 times, and those amendments protected individual freedoms.  

Many nations used our Constitution as a model in drafting their own, although that is less so today.  

History records how seriously people in the past took their responsibilities about their vote.  Having lived in times when there were no rights for citizens to vote, people of that era cherished their privilege.  America finally recognized the right for black men to vote, although they went through challenges for their rights to be recognized.  And although it took women a longer time to be granted that right, they did not give up.

As we celebrate our Bicentennial the nation is unsettled, and although it is undeniable that there have been disruptions in the past, the present turmoil is significant.  The Constitution has endured in the past because of its flexibility, because the documents can be read by ordinary citizens, and most importantly, Americans have understood the importance of their responsibility to care about all issues, not just those relevant to themselves.  Getting out the vote is important but being informed voters is also important.  Various researchers have found that between 5 to 37 percent of Americans have read the entire constitution.  As for candidates and elected officials, they certainly should be well informed about the Constitution, as well as the issues that will come before them if they are elected.  Being informed is important from the bottom to the top, and being responsible once elected is obviously important.  Certainly, all of that is demanding, and not every issue can be fully studied.  It is easy to think your one vote doesn't make much difference, but without the voters, elected officials get nowhere, or worse they get somewhere the founding fathers never intended.  

Without the responsibilities of everyone, the system weakens.  We Americans must understand the system, take the time to understand issues, and avoid assuming that political parties are always concerned about the citizens.  The supreme court's decision regarding the capacity of money pouring into elections has made it harder for individual voters to feel like they can make a difference, but we do still matter.  The better informed we are as citizens, the more officials take notice.  The more informed we are, the more attention we receive.  Our responsibility is not just voting.    

What we can do is talk to our representatives.  We can follow the news and not just sources that have a political bias.  Remember misdeeds or neglect of officials.  If their primary home is far from the state they represent, and they rarely visit their home state, take that into consideration.  Do not rely entirely on the party you favor.  Your vote is yours, not theirs.  When George Washington declined running for a third term, he warned against presidents serving too long.  Today presidents can serve only two terms, but Washington also warned against political parties, giving organized political parties more power than the people.  That warning has not been adequately respected, and it is up to us to pay attention to the issues that will serve you and protect the constitution.    

As we celebrate the Bicentennial, we can wave the flag and cheer the parades if we choose, but it is also a good time for us to read the Constitution.  Perhaps it is an opportunity to talk with your children and grandchildren.  It might be a good time for all of us to give ourselves a peptalk on the power citizens actually have, and with the power, the responsibility.  We can honor the Constitution by remembering that we do make a difference, if we take our role seriously.               

          

 Remember Memorial Day When families came to place flowers on graves and veterans marched in carrying the flag, the High School band marched, and two trumpeters hid to play taps.  The cemetery was crowded with people, and everyone took time to visit friends.  As a child, I remember visiting all the infant's graves.  Then people finally disbursed for family dinners.  

When we came back to the farm, we replicated that tradition, with family members from both of our families.  The farmhouse had been empty for many years, but that day seemed like old times.  We tried to continue that tradition later, but it never was the same.  This year, at last, we had guests at the farm on Memorial Day.  Although there were only 4 of us, it seemed a lot like the old times, reminiscing about those who are no longer with us, catching up on children and grandchildren, and sharing news of what we had been doing since last together.   

It made me wonder about how other families gathered on Memorial Day.  I assumed that gradually most families had separated, moving far apart.  I was surprised that approximately 68% of city families remained in or near the city where they were raised.  In general, 6 in 10 young adults live within 10 miles of their childhood home, and 8 in 10 live within 100 miles, representing a strong tendency to stay relatively close.   Do young people live at home longer?  Do adults move back into their childhood homes to take care of aging parents?  Are purchasing homes or living in apartments too expensive to afford?  Do different ethnicities commonly share family homes?  I do not know.

However, back to the question of the continuation of visiting family graves on Memorial Day, it varies.  Where once visiting graves on memorial was expected, with few exceptions, today it is a personal choice.  People in the South and those in rural areas are more like to continue the tradition of visiting family graves.  In my rural community it seems that fewer visit memorial services; however, I remind myself that farms are large operations, with single farm families and hired workers covering far larger farms than in the days of many farmers able to make a living on less farmland.  Populations have changed.  Another change is that some people visit graves with flowers early and enjoy the long weekend to take a holiday opportunity at the lake or to the mountains or other holiday opportunities.  

Traditions vary.  On a New England group trip, I learned a new tradition.  People who visit a grave place a penny on the gravestone to leave a message they had visited and honored the deceased.  We were with a Willa Cather group, with people from many places, and when we noticed others in the group leaving pennies, we inquired why they were doing that.  Once everyone understood the tradition, we all began searching for pennies in our purses and pockets.  What will people leave now that no more pennies are being minted?  

Respect for our Presidents and the Arts

 When I was a senior in High School, I saw an ad in a magazine for learning how to draw.  I sent the request for information.  To my surprise, a salesman showed up at our rural Kansas front door to encourage me to sign up for their learn by mail course.  My father was quite displeased with me for sending off that request.  I share that story to explain how important art has always been to me, as it is to many people.  That is why I consider respect for The Kennedy Center is so important.  It is not just a building to accommodate the taste of everyone.  It is the memorial to our fallen president who gave his life in office, a president who loved art and had an educated taste for it.  

Previous blogs have expressed my concern about President Trump appointing himself, naming the members of the board, and removing most of the trained staff.  Putting his name over President Kennedy's name on the front of the building is offensive.  None of this is news.  What is news is that art has been removed from the building, reportedly some going into storage of some sort, but also some sold, returned to donors, and unknown unknown decisions made.  If that report is accurate, it is deeply concerning.

John F. Kennedy

   

 "The life of the arts, far from being an interruption, a distraction, in the life of a nation, is very close to the center of a nation's purpose."  John F. Kennedy.  Those words were spoken by John F. Kennedy himself.  The Kennedy Center is more than just an art museum.  It represents the man who spoke those words.    

       

 In death, John F. Kennedy left behind a gift to generations who could visit art and music and dance and theater.  Tampering with the content of the museum is a direct attack on John F. Kennedy's memory.  For those reasons, the current news that much of the art, particularly art given from other countries, is being removed to offsite storage, is particularly disturbing.  If accurate, it is a disgrace to our traditional memorials to past presidents. 

John F. Kennedy has been described as a blend of youthful, relaxed refinement with a high-culture sophistication.  His taste emphasized understated elegance, modernism in architecture.  These tastes were shown during his time in the White House, bridging traditional polish with forward--thinking, American imagery, or so called, informal elegance.  His sophistication included inviting poets, classical musicians, and artists to the White House, as well as appreciating popular music.  It is not about whether all of us agree with his taste in less traditional art.  Memorials often reflect the changing taste in American culture over the years.  

 President Trump has also shared his taste while in office, including his interest in architecture, his apparent love for applying gold to things, his appreciation for mixed martial arts and boxing, and receiving an honorary 9t -degree black belt in Taekwondo from World Headquarters.  Memorials to him might include those things.  However, the Kennedy Center is intended to honor Kennedy.  

Perhaps some would say there are more important things happening in the world today than a living president making over the memorial of a president killed while in office.  I disagree.  We must respect the memorials intended to honor the men for whom the Memorials were created. 

When President Trump completes his time in office, he would expect his memorial to represent his achievements and tastes.  Surely, he would be angry if his memorial was disrespected.               

            

Are Norms Important?

 I have blogged about norms before, common examples of customs, courtesies, etiquette, and traditions, all of which play an important role in our culture.  However, the norms I am exploring in this blog are different.  They involve the traditional norms in our government.  

Whether we approve or disapprove the changing attitudes of norms in our government, they are happening.  Some are so common that over the years we have come to think of them as laws.  However, just because we regard then as laws does not make them laws.  

Am obvious example is Presidents declining to make money off of being President.   Surprisingly, presidents have respected that norm so often that many of us assumed that it was a law.  It isn't.  

 

Presidents have sometimes been embarrassed by relatives using their family connection for financial gain.  I remember the embarrassment of President Carter when his brother created a soda pop using the Carter name on the lable. People also questioned whether President Biden's son got an important job because of his father's position.  There are other examples of family members benefitting through the position of the President, although the President himself did not benefit.    

 Most presidents have resisted using their name and position while in office simply from a sense of ethics, respect, and dignity for the office they hold, although they are not prohibited by a law.  

Remember, norms are not laws.  The fact that most presidents have declined using their political office for personal gain does not require other presidents to do the same.  In other cases, some presidents have avoided taking personal advantage of financial gain, but they have given family and friends offices of advantage.  

The impact of norms depends on whether American voters disapprove of presidents using their office for their own economic benefit, or they just overlook that greed if they are satisfied with how the president handles the presidency itself.

It is apparent that most presidents benefit in numerous ways after they leave office, selling books about their time in office, giving speeches, and sitting on corporate boards as examples.  We expect that.  

However, if Americans think their presidents and those in other offices have gone too far in using their positions for personal gain, it is up to us to voice our disapproval.  If we think that matters, we should ask candidates running for office about their intentions.  We cannot draft laws about every ethical issue, but we can make our respect for traditional norms known.  It is up to us to let candidates know what we expect from their service to the nation. 

I have used the quote by Ulysses S. Grant some time ago, but I had forgotten that he had included Ambition between superstition and Ignorance. 

The Book Stores I Miss.

My weakness has long been books.  I think the explanation goes back to my childhood.  My parents were wonderful about taking me to the library to check out books.  However, they saw little reason to buy books when you could get them at the library. That logic followed me for a long time.  As a high school English Teacher, libraries were available.  In law school I did not have time to read for pleasure, nor did my legal practice offer much free time.  

Some of my antique books

However, I gradually began to create a library.  Once it started, I soon filled the house.  I tried to be strict with myself about buying books, but I failed.  We added bookcases, but books hid under the furniture.    

However, this blog is not about my tidy hiding places for so many books.  It is about those wonderful bookstores that are now nearly extinct.  Remember those bookstores that had all kinds of books, new and old.  The joy in those stores were the odd old books, or the wonderful discovery of a book you loved as a child, or books once unaffordable, or discovering that an old movie was first a book.  

Of course, now you can look online.  New and old, they are neatly organized and inventoried to locate in a moment, with price and the book's condition. It is not the same as discovering something you didn't know you wanted until the moment you saw it on the shelf.  Those bookstores are disappearing.

Today I found an old clipping I had saved for some reason. A newspaper man was interviewing the proprietor of the oldest bookstore in Fort Worth, Texas.  The proprietor was Brian Perkins, and the name of the store was Barber's Bounty, although haircuts were rare.  At the time I first clipped this article, the Fort Worth Star- Telegram said it was Fort Worth's oldest bookstore.  The reporter, Tim Madigan,  described it as "a paradigm of literary clutter, with books of all genres spilling from the jam-packed shelves onto floors, chairs, tables and stairways."  Most of his books, between 80,000 and 100,000,(the number being a guess Perkins he admitted, since he had never counted them. Although the Barber Chair was rarely used, Perkins claimed he could give a customer a haircut if they asked. 

 He explained how the bookstore evolved:  "I've paid for my building.  I've paid for my house.  I don't have that motivation to be up on my toes anymore.  I've enjoyed coming to work every morning.  I'm down here six days a week almost always.  That's a lot of days.  I feel at home.  I kind of look around and see wonderful stuff.  

His "stuff" included Sherlock Holmes original editions (1894), a signed Amelia Earhart, a signed Stephen King, and a Latin script printed in 1561, the back cover crumbling.  He admitted, "I like people to see my books.  I don't like them to buy too many.  But I hate to just buy them and stick them away where nobody will see them."

There aren't many bookstores like the one that Brian Perkins once had, but what fun it must have been to wander through his unique collection.

   

Is the Current Health of our Presidents Adequately known?

 This blog is not intended to answer the title question, although I do think it is an important question to consider.  My research uncovered historic information of which I was unaware, and I think it deserves thought as medical treatment changes, as well as public awareness of our presidents' health becomes so important.  With hindsight, the issue of our presidents' health has been important for many years, but the publics access to information was less available.  In more recent years we have had both younger and elderly presidents.  For example, Kennedy, Clinton, and Obama were younger presidents, and Eisenhower, Johnson, and Reagan were older.  Our two most recent presidents are both in the older category.  Regardless of age, should voters know the status of the health of presidential candidates. 

Drown during covid by Lyn Fenwick

Certainly, being President of the United States and a leader of the free world inevitably puts stress on the president. Age in itself is not always what determines the physical and mental stress on the president.  President Jimmy Carter served only one term, but his post president life was extremely active years past his presidency.   

Woodrow Wilson suffered a number of strokes during his presidency, which his wife and personal physician concealed.  Grover Cleveland concealed a cancerous lesion on his upper pallet, pretending to be on a fishing trip when in fact a tumor and five teeth and part of his jaw were being removed, necessitated by his cigar chewing.  Dwight D. Eisenhower had heart disease during his presidency.  When Donald Trump had covid, he misrepresented the severity of his illness, and now in his second term he is private about his medical reports.

In 2000, Duke University did a study that indicated the first 37 presidents showed symptoms of health issues while in office, to the extent that it could have affected their leadership.

 We live in a different world today, in which things can happen far more rapidly than in the early days of the presidency.  Are we acting properly about the health of our current presidents?  Should voters have the right to know the health of presidential candidates when they vote.  If our president is unconscious or incapable of managing the office of the presidency, are our current procedures during such situations adequately covered?
  

Have you given this enough thought?

 

Do we know enough to do what we are doing?

Do you remember as a child hearing one of your parents saying to you "Do you think you have really
given this enough thought?"  Whether it was something simple, like spending your Birthday money on something questionable or declining a summer job offer to loaf by the pool, most of us remember parents or a good friend gently keeping us from a poor judgement by suggesting that it might deserve a second thought.

The generation in which I grew up moved more slowly, with more time to reflect and consider.  Younger people have grown up in a faster world, where answers are closer at hand.  Why look something up in the dictionary when the answer is right on your phone.  Why use a Thesaurus to find the best word for what you want to say when being precise isn't all that important.

Why reflect on future consequences when the things AI can do are amazing.  As Bill Gates states it, AI is like a "copilot, that handles administrative tasks, freeing humans from chores and giving more time for creative, human-centric parts of more important jobs."

Gates's reasoning may be significant to an executive, but what are the impacts on most people?  Should we have slowed down for a while before rushing headfirst, with little or no consideration of consequences like job displacement, bias and discrimination, privacy concerns, the ability to collect vast amounts of personal data, and taken time to establish ethical guidelines and legal frameworks.

In addition, what about the theft of information fed into the education of AI which not only used that information without compensation, but also subsequently displaced many of the people from whom they took the information.  For example, copy right laws forbid the theft of authors' work, but unknown numbers of books, ancient and modern, were fed into educating AI without compensation. Authors, Artists, and who knows what else, trained AI without compensation, and displaced the people from whom they stole. 

So, here we are, and one might ask, "Have you given this enough thought?'  In 2026 young college graduates found it to be the worst college hiring in two decades.  On the other side, the demand for large scale data centers is creating a boom for construction workers of all types.  As one man commented, "This is something that we've never seen before.  It's akin to the industrial revolution."

Trade workers are busy as electricians, pipe fitters, and other workers build the structures housing AI requirements, working 5 days a week to keep up, college graduates can't find jobs.  Some would say that is just the way the world has always advanced, it is the first time humans have competed with AI.  Construction works are benefiting now, but how long will they be needed, and will those workers with pensions and health insurance experience changes similar to the displaced office workers once the AI workers boom ends.  Will there be enough need for a permanent workforce to maintain the buildings once they have all been built.  

It is true that history tells us that as one generation creates a different world, new jobs evolve. However, humans have never competed with AI before.  History also tells us that there may be suffering in the interim.   I have seen many changes in my life, some mistakes, some imperfect, and some wonderful.  I believe this is different.  I understand that America was not the only nation exploring AI, and humans have always rushed forward, with inadequate concern for the consequences.  It seems to me that perhaps now more than ever, America, and the rest of the world, need wise leadership.  Perhaps now more than ever we need to ask that old question:  Have you really given this enough thought?