Fred speaks his mind again.... refreshing!

Fred Thompson has graced us with another
short essay. More like an opinion really..

This time he talks about eminent domain
abuse by local governments.

Imagine that... a politician who thinks
people have a right to own property
without fear the government will steal
it for profit......

How bleepin unusual is that?
Why am I shocked??

Even stranger... a politician who actually
tells us what he thinks without pulling
punches.

Ebay limits firearms related sales.....

Ebay just announced they will restrict the sale of just about anything firearms related through their auction site.

This, of course, is their corporate right. They could, if they wished, demand that only pink flamingo garden statuary be sold on their site. So be it.

What is REALLY cheap, downright loathsome, about their action is their stated reason. They say they feel it's the 'right thing to do' since something sold on E-bay was used in the Virginian Tech school murders.

E-bay has never in the past cared about right and wrong, and very little about legal and illegal for that matter. They care only about profits and business.
I have no problem with that attitude, but their two faced approach is pretty low.

Ebay's statement:

July 30, 2007 | 10:00AM PST/PT

Matt Halprin

Hello everyone…In mid-August, we will be updating our Firearms, Weapons and Knives Policy to place more restrictions around gun-related items. Once these changes take effect, we will prohibit listings of any firearm part that is required for the firing of a gun. This includes items like bullet tips, brass casings and shells, barrels, slides, cylinders, magazines, firing pins, trigger assemblies, etc. Please read the Firearms, Weapons and Knives Policy for more details on our current policy.

As you may know, eBay does not allow the listing of any items which are regulated by individual states or the federal government; however, there are still a large number of firearm-related parts that are legal and are widely available in retail stores. These items have also historically been allowed on eBay.

After learning that some items purchased on eBay may have been used in the tragedy at Virginia Tech in April 2007, we felt that revisiting our policies was not only necessary, but the right thing to do. After much consideration, the Trust & Safety policy team – along with our executive leaders at eBay Inc. – have made the decision to further restrict more of these items than federal and state regulations require.

This new update continues to encourage safety among our community members and brings our policies in the U.S. and Canada in closer alignment with our existing policies in other markets around the globe.

Sincerely,

Matt Halprin
Vice President, Trust & Safety

Why should we obey the rules? They don't!

As a teacher, one of the biggest hurdles is
class discipline. Getting students to behave
well enough that education can go on, that
can be a difficult task.

Working with high school seniors, the old
statement "Because I told you so!" just
does not cut it. That's a sure fire way to
encourage rebellion.

Why? Because the students don't trust
us, that's why. They don't trust us as adults
or instructors to be fair, honest, or even handed.
They don't trust us to have their best interests
at heart.

The simple fact is, they are not really stupid, just
unchallenged. At the core most of them are able
to think just fine. They can tell when they are being
lied to just as well as you or I can. Better, in fact,
as they are more experienced than we old farts,
at least with being lied to.

Teenagers live their lives with double standards.
One for them, and one for the adults. Adults live this
way too but usually choose not to notice. If noticed, most
adults let it pass.

Teenagers still think 'Life is supposed to be fair'. and
they get angry and confused when it's not. Most
mature adults realize that life is not fair, it just 'is'.

A case in point from an adult viewpoint: A senior judge
was just caught at the Detroit airport trying to smuggle
a loaded weapon in her luggage. Judge Sylvia James
was released and probably will never be charged with
the federal offense she committed. Had that
been I, or anyone I know, we would still be in jail.
Is that 'fair'? Is that 'right'? Not by any means.
Is it the reality? Do I realize there are
multiple standards and multiple levels of law
enforcement in this nation? Yes, I do.

My realization that I live not under double standards,
but multiple levels of standards, (many for sale), does not
prevent my functioning in society because I don't
expect life to be fair. I know for a fact that most of the
police cars that pass me well in excess of the speed limit
are not on emergency missions. They drive fast and
illegally because they can. That's not fair, it just 'is'
what it is. I know for a fact my state's governor
will never be charged with the two dozen times
he was clocked going over 100 mph on the PA
turnpike. He's earned his nick name of
'Fast Eddie' Rendell. Is it fair he'll never be charged
while 175,000 other folks in this state got cited
for driving over the speed limit last year?
No.... it's not. It is what it is.

Closer to home.... in our own school, an edict
went out that food was allowed only in the cafeteria,
never in the classrooms. This was supposed to
fight mold, of all things. In a school with over five
hundred students and dozens of instructors and
staff, enforcing this was difficult, especially as
the school sells food in the cafeteria never meant
to be eaten there.

In a letter to the administrator, I asked how I was
supposed to explain and enforce this rule when
my students only had to walk into the
administration offices to see food laid out
on the tables and snack bowls on every desk?

Some people would think it common sense, but
the reality is the admin staff simply never thought
the rules applied to them. They marched to a
different standard. Just like the judge, just like
the governor, just like the police, just like
Congress, just like.......

I'm sure the point is clear.

How do I explain to my students why rules
should be followed? With two simple
points.....

1) Sometimes rules are made for good reasons.
Look for the reason, and obey the rule because it's
a good rule with a purpose, not just because some
two faced bozo tells you to. Be smart enough to see
the reason for the rule.

Like speed limits in town.... 35mph makes sense
when people are walking around and cars are pulling
out without looking. I drive 35mph in town
because it's makes sense, not because it's "Da LAWwww".

2) One day, you might be making all the rules, and for
reasons that make a lot of sense to you. Do you want
your rules to be followed or ignored? Start a trend.

Many of my students will one day own or run business's.
They know they will be making rules, or are at least hoping
they will. This makes sense to them.

How would you explain to a teenager why rules and laws
should be followed, when all around us the privileged,
the important, the wealthy, and the deranged are
held to no, or different, standards?

To quote a student of mine:
"Why should I follow the rules? The principle doesn't!"

Too good not to swipe....

Yes, I stole this from another blog site.


It was just too good, and I got weak, and
enough of the rationalization....

The sentiment is valid and I share it.

History should be studied and learned from.
The good parts should be repeated,
and the bad should be avoided.

Different people have different definitions
of good and bad, and what should be repeated.
Perhaps that's why the Socialists and
Communists work to change the official
history at every opportunity.

Gun control in this nation was born of racism.
In other nations, it was born of a desire to
enslave and control. It's never safe to try enslaving
an armed populace. Better to disarm them first
in the name of 'safety'. Sure, that's true, but who's
safety are we talking about here?
Certainly not the soon-to-be slaves.

Invariably those in power who call for
disarming the populace first make sure
of their own protection.

Beware someone who wants you to be defenseless
while they are well protected. They don't have your
interest at heart.

I am REALLY starting to like Fred.... a LOT.

Fred Thompson writes his own stuff.
I like that, a lot.

After reading an essay like this.... well.....
There are a lot of thoughts welling up.

First, the media are going to really hate this guy....
I like that.
Second, Congress is going to hate this guy....
I like that.
Third, the ACLU is going to hate this guy....
I like that.
Fourth, the I.R.S. is going to hate this guy...
I like that.
Fifth, the A.T.F.E. is going to hate this guy...
I like that.
Sixth, the Islamo-Nazi terrorists are REALLY
going to hate this guy...
and I REALLY like that.

Can you imagine her majesties handlers letting her
write her own thoughts down where we could
actually read them? How about hair cut boy?
(Assuming he has thoughts and opinions).

I can't even fathom 'sound bite' Obama having a
coherent and reasoned point to make, much
less the ability to write an essay regarding it, or the
testicular fortitude to place it in public view.

On the other hand, can anyone imagine a Fred
Thompson staffer telling him he couldn't post
his thoughts out there for us to read?

Fred is running a campaign unlike any other ever
run. He seems to have a grasp on how the world has
changed and what our society is really like. The media
are going berserk trying to not cover his non campaign,
yet pressure is building like mad out there
in real-people-land.

The rest of the presidential crowd need 'people' to tell
them what to do and how to gain advantage. Fred just
sits down and writes an essay on his blog telling us
what he thinks.

Seriously laughing out loud.... I am really starting to like
this guy.

Compromise.... a good thing, right?

Compromise is always a good thing....... isn't it?

Momma always used to tell the kids: "You will have to
compromise and share", like it was just the right thing to do.
'Good relationships are all about compromise' (manly shudder).

Well.... maybe in some cases, and certainly not in others.
The cases where it's a good activity are manifest and well
noted by every feel good counselor in the world.

These words are not about when we should compromise, but
when we should not.

Some people look to a compromise as the way to settle everything.
Especially politicians, as in the sickening words:
'Bi-partisan compromise'.
Perhaps that's fine in some cases, but a slavish devotion
to the almighty idea of meeting in the middle is a poor
way to run a government. It's an especially poor way
to run a life.

An example to illustrate the point is in order.
Find a compromise in this case: Your goal is to
live your life in peace without injury. The goal
of the deranged drug addict who just broke into your
home is to kill you. Ok? Got the terms?
Ready..... set...... Compromise!

What.... you think living your life in peace is a
perfectly valid goal and you aren't willing to be maimed,
let alone murdered, in the name of compromise?
How about just beaten senseless and left for dead?
Kicked in head a few times? No?

My, how counter social an attitude!

This extreme case does illustrate the idea that not every
situation can be solved by splitting the pot. Sometimes
compromise is wrong. It's generally in these cases
where you'll find 'principles' coming into play.

Principles are tricky things. One key point about
principles is they usually won't survive a compromise.
Once even a bit of a principle is given away in the bargain,
it's all gone. All that's left is a a convenient attitude, but never
a principle.

Give this idea some thought.....

What are you willing to compromise on?
What is beyond compromise for you?

Understanding that bargaining with principles means losing them,
apply that concept to some basic questions in life, such as:

• Who is entitled to your possessions?
• Who is entitled to the fruits of your labor?
• Who is responsible for your safety?
• Who is responsible for your happiness?
• What are you willing to give up for the above?

Don't let this keep you up at night................

The importance of a moral compass.... right and wrong

There are few things of more value to a person
than a healthy and well calibrated moral compass.

I am not speaking of religion, although that can help
some people understand and act.

I am speaking of a certainty of right and wrong.
Is an action right, or wrong? A belief, a law, a statement,
a thought..... you name it. The ability to judge right from
wrong with enough certainty to act is key to a
healthy personality and character.

Do not look to the law for help. Hear me now.....
Legal vs illegal does not have anything to
do with right vs wrong. It never has and
never will.

Doubt the validity of this statement? Can
you hear Judge Dredd (Sly Stalone) in your
head saying "It's Da LAWWwwww"?

Remember these points when you
hear "Because it's the law":

It was legal to own slaves in the united states, and beat
them to death when you wished.

It was illegal for woman to vote in the united states
for most of our national history.

It was illegal for blacks to own firearms in most southern
states up until the 1950's.
(the genesis of most of our national gun control laws).

While it is illegal for a citizen to tell an untruth
to any federal agent, AG Janet Reno stated it is
common and legal for federal agents to lie to citizens.

The point is this.... don't look for the law to be a
moral record of right and wrong. By the same token
religion in almost all it's forms has neatly removed itself
from the arena as well. History is replete with wars and
atrocities performed by humans acting under
orders from other humans reporting to act under
orders from various gods.

No buck to be passed here....
"Ve Vere only following Orders" will never
be an acceptable defense.

Every person needs a sense of right vs wrong, a moral
compass if you will.

Where do you get it from?
Still working on that point..... back later.

The lost art of just..... sitting and thinking

I lament here a lost art. As I sit in front of this
one eyed mind sucking device, considering all
that needs to be accomplished today, there is
something missing on the list.

There isn't likely to be any time left in the
schedule for just.... thinking. Sitting, no interruptions,
no plans, no 'must do' goals, just thinking.

Some of the best things I have ever done in my life
happened after a nice sit down with a cup of
coffee and a blank stare.

Guess I better put 'Go buy a book on meditation'
into the days schedule too....

Sigh.



This is a particularly nice place to just sit and think.
The airport vortex in Sedona, Arizona. People there
will actually leave a person alone to think. Rare.

Next time you tune in to Congress in action... Remember this.

Have you ever watched a congressional hearing in action?
Even once? (go ahead, we won't tell anyone.... our little secret).

How about just flipped channels and lingered on C-span for longer than a Nanosecond?

Next time you do, remember a few simple tid bits.....

The person testifying before the hearing? You know, poor sweaty sap they are drilling and grilling? That person had to swear an oath to tell the truth, punishable by jail or fines. Understand that part, right? Now the kicker..., and the part that must be remembered.....

The CongressCritters up on the big bench
swore no such oath. They can say anything they darn
well please without almost without retribution.
True, false, valid, or pure drug driven lunacy,
they are *almost* immune. Almost I say, but not quite......
and that's the second thing to remember when
you listen to them critters from the district of confibulation.....

Congress had to come up with special rules just
for congress on what they can say,
but only about each other!

Congresscritters may not, specifically, no matter
the evidence, publicly call each other "Liar' or
"thief", amongst other terms.

Think about it... they made it against the law to call
each other liar in public, no matter how true it
might be. HMMmmmmm..... Now what does
that say about Congress in general?

Me, I tend to believe they are right. Without
such rules they would probably spend all day and
every day just calling each other names. More
to the point, I am prepared to also believe
everything they say, but only about each other.

Just once I'd like to see a witness get up and say:
"*I* swore to tell the truth, would you silly buggers
up there take the same oath right now in front of
those cameras??"

I bet Ted Kennedy would turn that special shade of
purple he reserves for people who bring up
drowned dead drunken girl friends.......

Thought for the day.....

What is a 'citizen' of this nation?

(as compared to..........)

What is a 'resident' of this nation?

I'm not talking about a hunk-o-paper that
say "Dis guy is a real American type".
My thought is more on the lines of
defining a Citizen vs a Resident based
on their actions and loyalties.

The CITIZEN does not avoid jury duty, but
looks on it as a duty and an honor. The Citizen
knows that it might be their turn in the
defendant chair one day and only a jury of
honest intelligent people could stand in the gap.....

A RESIDENT considers jury duty something to
be avoided, a waste of time, a chore for the schmucks
and losers who couldn't get out of it.

The CITIZEN votes in elections. Not only votes, but
pays attention to politics and politicians, and government
in general. The Citizen knows that politics
and government really do matter, both in the short and
long run.

A RESIDENT doesn't bother to vote, unless it gets
them some time off from work. If the Resident votes,
it's a straight party ticket without a care as to the real
goals and agenda of the politicians they vote for.

Your thoughts?

A Citizen......
A Resident......

Playing with politicians.....

Here is a fun game, the next time you find yourself asking a politician a question in a public forum. Try asking this:

"One simple question; What form of government do we live under?"

Ever watch the Honey Mooners? Ralph Cramdon: Haminahaminahamina...

The answer, of course, is a Constitutional Republic. Most people will say we live in a democracy, which is totally false.

Adventures in Dallas driving.....

A few comments on driving in Dallas.

Friends, I learned a few things while at a convention in Texas,
but here are a couple choice comments on
DRIVING in DALLAS, perhaps the scariest action I have ever seen.

Getting close to Dallas on Thursday afternoon, I turned on
the 2 meter ham radio and found a local repeater that was
active. Introducing myself, A friendly local ham gave us
directions around the worst of the traffic and up to the
hotel.

It's not his fault the highway number he gave us was wrong,
as was the exit.

Really, it wasn't.

We ended up going into Dallas on 35 and joining up with 75
'someplace'. 75 is....ah....... fun. Yeh, that’s it. Fun.

I learned a few things about driving in Dallas. Learned
them real quick. I fear nothing anymore for I have driven
through Dallas during rush hour and survived.

First, there is no speed limit other than 'fast'. There are
three or four lanes most places, even in the alleys. The
right lane is somewhat slower, maybe 70mph. The left lane
goes FAST. I have no idea how fast, my truck only gets up
to about 90. I wasn't qualified to enter the left lane. I
was qualified to duck and suck my teeth back in as cars
blasted past in a blur. I was going 75, THEY were still a
blur.

Next, there are no lane markings in Dallas. They don't
bother with putting lines on the road because nobody cares.
They have little metal bumpy things that merely serve to
give some auditory warning as you drift through the lanes.
It seems that Texas-ites just AIM their cars, not steer
them. Lanes? What lanes? It's just different width roads.

And then there is the funny way them Dallas'ers use turn
signals. Look, I'm from Lancaster County in Pennsylvania.
Up here abouts when we put on a turn signal it means
"Pardon me, but I'm thinking of coming over there. Please
be careful, excuse me for butting in, thank you for the
room". In Dallas, if you put on your turn signal BEFORE you
go it means "You better rush up here and block me or I
might use up twelve feet of your road". I know that because I
learned it 30 seconds or two miles into Dallas, (whichever
came first). They DO use turn signals in Dallas, but it's
for something we would never dream of in Lancaster. In
Dallas you put your turn signal on AFTER you change lanes.
It means "Nya Nya, I got your spot!" You just blink it once
or twice and the guy behind you gets the message.

Now, let’s talk about access roads. What is it with those
people down there? The damn access road next to the
highway, you know the ones you actually use to go in
places? They go 65 on the access roads until they find
where they want to pull in, then they slam on the brakes
and skid into the parking lot. It's almost kinda fun,
sorta. A lot like roller derby with cars. That's how you
get off the highway and stop someplace.

Now, getting on the highway, THAT'S WILD!
The best I could figure is, you line up on the
on ramp (at 65), aim your vehicle towards the highway, turn
up the radio, close your eyes, and put your foot on the
floor. YEHAAAA!!!! (It IS Texas after all). This was
actually a lot of fun but I thought I damaged my truck at
first. There was this funny high pitched whining noise
every time I entered the highway but I finally realized it
was just my wife screaming in terror. No big deal.

Ok, in Dallas itself. Some new rules became apparent pretty
quick on Saturday afternoon when we went shopping. First,
you can't get there from here. Nope, just forget it. Here
is here and there is there, and NONE of the roads in
between go there or here. If you want to go THERE then you
have to start from someplace else than where you are at. In
fact, it's best if you just go everywhere by accident. You
get there quicker. Also, some of the strangest roads are
one way and the map mentions nothing about it. Making a
wrong turn onto a one way street, I realized that the folks
in Dallas are totally without fear. Faced with my big red
truck going the wrong way on a one way street, two lanes of
cars coming the other way never even slowed down (at
65mph). I quickly decided the sidewalk looked particularly
smooth and slid to a stop (in standard Dallas fashion). It
seems that a truck parked on the sidewalk facing the wrong
way on a one way street is not unusual, as the pedestrians
never even glanced at us. They just got back up and kept
going.

On the way back to the hotel we passed a western wear shop
Kim had wanted to stop at. Now, I didn't know this at the
time, but if you miss a turn in Dallas you can't go back
for the rest of your life (unless of course you get there
by accident). I figured we would go around the block. HA!
HA HA!! RIGHT! There AINT no around the block in Dallas.
Remember rule #1, 'you caint get thar from here'. We went
up a few miles and found a road that went off to the right.
We figured we would double around and end up back below the
store. Riiiigghhhtttt. Someplace near Texarcana we realized
there AINT no road going back off to the right. Maybe half
an hour later we ended up back on the service road, only to
find that damned store off our LEFT shoulder. In other
words, all together now, say it with me: "YOU CAN'T GET
THERE FROM HERE".

Kim and I drove from home to Plano. 1300+ miles each way.
It was a nice drive, very pleasant all the way. I'm not
going to count the Dallas driving as part of the trip. That
wasn't driving, that was a pinball game played with cars
and no rules. I know why people live big in Dallas. It’s
because they know life is short on the streets of Dallas.

One more thing....

It was FUN!

YE HAAA!!!!

Pacifism follow up....

I would certainly never call myself a pacifist, but I have made a commitment to avoidance, deescalation, and alternatives when it comes to violence. I am also at peace with the idea that violence may, and probably will, be required one day to solve a failed social situation. To say differently is to ignore all of human history. That would be foolish.

I guess everyone has to define words for themselves, and that's what was on my mind when I wrote the first post. The thing is, words have meaning and power. When different people work with different definitions of the same word, ugly things can happen. Therefor, discussing and working out the meaning of a powerful word should be a good thing.

A lot of people call themselves pacifist, with no idea the meaning of the word.
No idea, or no real care.....

There is such a thing as human nature. It's made up of good things, such as courage, hope, love, joy, morality, thoughtfulness, wisdom, etc. It's also made up of bad traits, like racism, hate, greed, depravity, sadism, cowardice, etc.
It's in how we recognize and deal with these traits in ourselves that makes us what we are.

I think war can happen for many reasons, and can have mixtures of nobility and evil on every level from the politicians who cause it to the grunts who die for it. It's all a reflection of human nature, magnified to historical proportions.

What is a pacifist?

So... what does it mean?

Ever thought about it?

I'm willing to bet most people know someone who SAY'S they are a pacifist, but I'd bet more none of them really are.

Here's my test.... applied many times..... and never failed yet:

"Pacifist? I'm not sure what that means. Mind if I ask a question so I better understand?"

"Lets say You walk into your own home one afternoon to find a burglar has broken in. You hear noises from the other room, that are probably
from whom ever broke in (and who is still there). You have with you a baseball bat, because you were playing with the kids down the road, and a cell phone. What does a Pacifist do?"

This question is a trap. It's a double faceted trap. Most people won't think past the first trap they notice, and never see the real threat to their argument. The 'baseball bat' is a red herring. In this scenario most people assume it's there to represent a weapon, and that defines the test. What will the contestant do with the weapon?

Follow along.......

"Of course, I guess that follows then. You say that as a pacifist you would not use the baseball bat as a weapon. Would you use the phone then, to call the Police? You would? Why? What do you expect the Police to do?"

Invariably people respond thus: They expect the police to come arrest the criminal. The majority of the sheeple never think what that means.........

They expect the police to come, with weapons, ready to do violence on the victims behalf. People expect the police to handle the dirty work for them. All law comes from the barrel of a gun..... and people forget that till it's rubbed in their faces.

A 'pacifist' who responds to the question by saying they would call the police is certainly no pacifist. They have no issues with using violence to achieve their goal. They just have a problem with doing it for themselves. They have no problem paying someone else to take the risk, stand in the breach, and take the hit.

There is no problem with this.... as long as we are honest about what is going on. The police are professionals paid to deal with the dark side of human culture. It's an excellent system overall, and our officers really should be honored for their work.

On the other hand, a person who claims to morally object to violence when they are called to act, but will happily pay someone else to do the same violence on their behalf.... that person is a coward, not a pacifist.

There is no easy way to say that, nor should there be. Not when this attitude costs good people their very lives, acting as sheepdogs in a world of sheep and wolves.

I can understand a sheep not standing up to the wolf, and the sheepdog fulfilling his calling in defending the sheep. That said, only a human coward could claim that mindless sheepdom is the right path while deriding the action the guardian sheepdog must take on the flocks behalf.

How would a true pacifist answer the question? I don't know.... I've never met a true pacifist.

An essay on racism

Words

Words have meaning. The way we use words can change the world. Sometimes just thinking about what the words mean can change everything we know.

What does the word ‘racism’ mean? To some it means hate. To others it’s an excuse to be cruel and unfair. To some it signifies a crutch to be leaned on while still others see it as a challenge. Like most words, ‘racism’ can have meanings Webster never considered.

The Miriam Webster dictionary defines racism as 1: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial difference produces an inherent superiority of a particular race. 2: Racial prejudice or discrimination.

Like many people I define racism in my own way. To me racism means making serious judgments about others based on their skin color or race. I consider it to be a subset of ‘prejudice’ which I define as making advance judgments about people without having evidence at hand. Amongst all the stupidities that mankind has invented over the millennia prejudice has to top the list.

If our society would agree on a definition of racism we could move a long way towards peace in this world. Years ago I arrived at my own meaning for the word and applied it to my life. I have since learned that many people are so invested in their own view of racism that any change is viewed as a threat, especially when it attacks the industry of racism which is spawned by hate and fueled by profit.

My own epiphany came during a discussion regarding a senatorial candidate.

The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) had invited all candidates to speak to their convention and one had refused. The other party in our discussion held the viewpoint this showed the candidate had little regard for the interests of black people. My return, without deep thought, was that perhaps the candidate simply didn’t wish to associate with racists. I was immediately challenged to explain my point, which forced me to give it more consideration. Often what’s arrived at through instinct needs a grind through the mental mill before it can be intelligently shared with other people.

The point I explained was this: The NAACP is at face value a racist organization. Their very name proclaims they work to give advantage to people based solely on skin color. Is this not the very definition of racism? If the organization was named

The National Association for the Advancement of White People would it not immediately be lambasted by one and all as a racist organization?

There is an argument that ‘people of color’ need help to right past wrongs done to their race. True or not, I simply will not believe that allowing one case of racism to counteract another can be right. Ignoring the inherent racism in an organization formed and dedicated to act based on the color of a persons skin does not make it right. Two wrongs do not make a right. Perhaps the candidate agreed with that idea.

In her essay ‘Why does my race matter?’ Yasmine Bahrani relates her experience of being pigeon holed by race. “Now a whole national dialogue on race is underway. What I have come to want from such an exchange is what I used to think every American wanted: to be taken for who I am” says Bahrani . She states she wants to be judged for herself and not her race. She does not wish to be an object of racism any longer. Her words echo those of Martin Luther King who once said he dreamed of a time when his children would be judged based on the content of their character, not on the color of their skin.

I find myself in agreement with Bahrani and what she says in her essay. I think her point is simple and striking. It resonates in my own thoughts. How healthy will our society ever be when racism itself has become a business? She states “Even so, I prefer to take my chances as an American among other Americans and not to construct an alternate identity out of my ethnic origins as a shield against this hurt”. I regard this as an extraordinarily healthy outlook, both for her and our society as a whole.

Racism is pervasive in our society and I believe one of the reasons is a lack of definition. Situational ethics abounds in the industry of racism and the malleability of the words can be partially blamed. Anytime our society aids and abets ingrained racism by turning a blind eye to one flavor of it while chastising another, the inherent dual standard involved will destabilize our society. Fair is fair, and justice should be color blind. Even a child can recognize that dual standards are wrong.

When I was forced to define what my instincts told me about racism I was also forced to make a decision. Many people have a vested interest in maintaining our society in its delineated racial strata and these people don’t take kindly to having their profitable authority challenged. There is an entire industry formed around the idea that the guilt of racism can be bought off with mere money, when the real answer lies in intellectual honestly. The herd has been schooled to regard as evil incarnate anyone challenging the high priests of racial strife. It’s never easy or comfortable to go against the herd, yet sometimes the words really do matter more than life in the herd.

An essay on philosophy.............

Life can be confusing. Things happen that don’t make sense. People do things that don’t make sense. Some days more than others, life can be very confusing.

People have the amazing capacity to adapt themselves to their surroundings. We can become used to a room or even a whole building and walk around in complete darkness without difficulty. Life can be like that too. Once we are in our ‘room of life’ we can exist without light, or direction, quite nicely.

Once we leave our zone of comfort the darkness becomes a hindrance. We need a light to see what is around us. We need some way to define the edges of our world
and understand what we see. We need a way for it to make sense. In our comfort zone the world can just be, but in a strange place we need a way to make everything work in our own minds before we can understand our place in the world.

In a strange and dark place, our whole world can revolve around a flashlight. Within its beam the world takes shape and edges appear. Things fit. We fit. Confusion ends. When life itself becomes a strange and dark place a flashlight won’t do the trick. We need something more. We need a philosophy.

I define philosophy as a light by which we view the world. Without philosophies to filter what we see and help us understand we can only choose to accept or ignore what we see around us without truly understanding it. Without a philosophy to guide the pieces the puzzle remains just that, a puzzle.

This concept is what I came to understand when I read a book titled Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand wrote the story as a way to display her philosophy called objectivism.

When I finished the book I was stunned. Is this what a blind man would feel if vision suddenly appeared? Darkness can be peeled away by light to reveal the truth of what’s before you, and an idea can peel away the darkness of life to reveal the truth as well. After finishing Atlas Shrugged I was forced to review my own life in a whole new light. It was not a pretty affair. It was not enjoyable.
It was not fun. It was honest. I’m not sure I liked me for a while after that.

I was reminded of this while reading a short biographical essay called Georgia O’Keefe by Joan Didion. Didion quotes O’Keefe in several instances and describes her life in terms that make me think O’Keefe and Rand must have crossed paths at some point. They have the same brashness and honestly. They appeared to view life through the same filter, to see what is really there.

Didion describes Georgia O’Keefe with the word ‘Hardness’, then goes on to explain that O’Keefe was thought such because she was honest and straight spoken. She saw what was really there and was not afraid to tell the truth. I admire both traits more than I can say. Didion says “A woman clean of received wisdom and open to what she sees”.

What a wonderful turn of a phrase!

In reading Atlas Shrugged I was exposed to such a viewpoint in a way that struck home. Honesty can be warming or cold. It can be harsh or expected. What it can’t be is good or bad. Those are moral judgments we apply in our own minds when we filter what we see. Clearly seeing what goes on in our own world can never be good or bad, unless we view lying to ourselves as a good thing. Then honesty might be thought bad. Seeing the world clearly and honestly can be frightening and lonely and perhaps most people shy away from it. Choosing a philosophy that demands honesty is not an easy path through life.

Since the meteoric impact on my life of Atlas Shrugged the world has changed for me. To be more accurate, the world as I see it has changed. Most things have taken on new meaning. Some things mean more, some less, some different. My wife and children have taken new places in my life’s priority. My work became a career rather than a job.

My life fits better now. I fit better now. Peace is a possibility now.

It’s not the world that changed, but I. I switched filters on my camera from polarized to crystal clear. I applied philosophy to my viewpoint with a purpose.

I like the world outside my little comfortable room and I want to explore it.

I think I will.