It always bothers me to see all of the examples of racism that pop up in 2007 America. A couple caught my attention recently.

The five year old son of a black (Is that the politically correct indentifier? Why do we have to be so careful?) good friend mentioned the accomplishments of George Washington Carver. I asked about George Washington but he had never heard of him. He knew of Martin Luther King but not Abraham Lincoln. There was not a chance to discuss it but it has been in my thoughts. They had obviously been going over famous black men. All well and good. I learned about famous Virginians (transplanted here) and Pennsylvanians (grew up there). But we did Washington, Lincoln, etc. first. Their accomplishments and place in our history are so very great. Carver and King are also famous and accomplished and all kids need to learn about them. But Washington is the Father of Our Country and did so many great things that affect our everyday existence and kids should learn about him first. Likewise, the greatest contributor to emancipation of African-Americans is Lincoln.

Now, is this racism? A little iffy.There is certainly nothing wrong with learning about your heritage or your selection of people who are admirable. Christians should admire good Christian heroes. And Virginians admirable Virginians (and there are so many of those.). Etc. But there should be some priorities, too. First things first. We are all in this together. And choosing one race to eliminate others is ...... well ..... racism. And selecting because of race rather than accomplishment is .....? The basic racist mindset that is taught to our next generation, blatant or hidden, can not bode us well.

One news event that was definitely blatant was the reaction of some black ministers to the Vick dog fighting story. Maybe it is because the local Hampton Roads news has had considerable detail about the story and that Vick's involvement is a baseball bat to the forehead. And the story is really horrible. To these ministers, it is not Vick's guilt or innocence, it is about his race. To make it even worse, those ministers are using racism to forward their own financial and political interests. From one side of their mouths comes accusations of others racism while from the other side comes statements like this.

We are all tribal creatures. See my previous entry. And there is that basic animal reaction that “my tribe is better than yours!”. And that is very much a good thing for us human beans. As is sex, accumulating wealth, etc. But we need to use our cerebral abilities to control these instincts. Our strength is our ability to use our God-given fantastic brains and our God-given honed-over-millions-of-years animal drives. And we need our tribe to be global. Times are rough and we need all of us to work together.

One of my favorite TV shows is George Stefanopolis on Sunday mornings. His interview with the Republican candidates (I do not usually watch the debates. They are more disgusting than educating and I end up not wanting to vote for any of them.) was interesting.

My problem with the episode this past Sunday is that it started out with what must be the most important issue, abortion. Why that, George? Coverage today (Monday) mentioned only that and Romney's Mormonism.

With so many problems that need to be dealt with in the United States and the world, why is abortion the pivotal issue? I agree that it is significant. But I also know that even if a candidate is pro-women's-right, he or she is not really advocating killing or death, like in attacking another sovreign nation. I consider myself against any form of abortion but I do not march in demonstrations. Should one of my daughters tell me that she wants one, I would express myself even if it meant that I, at 71, would have to take the child with all that it involves. But would I vote based on that? How about health care, education, corruption, international relations, war? Is this another case of righteousness (see #10 in my previous entry)? Are we having to get another idiot President because a group of U.S. Citizens is trying to be superior than everyone else because they are going to Heaven and the rest of us are not?

It certainly does not bother me to have a Mormon as a President of our melting pot nation, either. I might worry about an anarchist or a complete nonbeliever-in-any-beliefs. But a Catholic or a Mormon or even a Muslim as long as their religion is not going to be shoved down my throat or control policies and decisions. Romney seems to be relatively honest and wise for a politician (an oxymoron?). If that is because of his religious beliefs, well done to him.But for his Mormonism to be a deciding factor? Once again, a tribe amongst us Americans is trying to be better than the rest of us 'cause they are going to Heaven and we are not.

Found an interesting recent blog entry by the Peever (http://thepeever.blogstream.com/) . In it he listed twelve things that perked his pique. It got me thinking about things that get under my skin. Some of mine are blatently ripped off from Peever and from the comments on his entry.

1.TV ads that are obnoxious, are repeated over and over, and are obviously just after our hard earned cash. The ones for Head On and its derivatives are the most obvious but most ads fit into this category. Head On has no active ingredients. It is purely the placebo effect. And the numerous ads just snow ball the whole thing. Plus be so irritating that the button to go to another station gets pushed.

2.TV ads for prescription medicine and for legal services. I fail to understand why someone would ask a doctor to prescribe something when the doctor has not diagnosed the problem and determined what is needed. Also fail to understand why the millions for these numerous ads are not used for research and for cost reduction. And isn't there already too much suing? Why provoke more and run up medical cost even more? And why provoke the get-something-for-nothing attitude that seems so prevalent? Lawyers and pharmaceutical companies ought to be above this.

3.Political candidates that blatently are using the win-at-any-cost campaign. I remember the quote “The end justifies the means”. I think it came from Adoph Hitler. Spin doctors and political hit squads. Hillary seems the most obvious. A real nasty campaigner and a political killer. And then there is Dick! What is wrong with candidates expressing what they do that is good? And being straightforward and honest?

4.Dogs that bark incessantly. Not that they bother me so much as make me feel sorry for an animal that is basically unhappy all day and night. The dog is trying to tell their owners something.

5.Competitive drivers. I always drive 5 mph over the speed limit. Mostly because I am cheap and know that wind resistance increases exponentially using up lots of gas. All the beamers and benz's come zooming up behind me and swirl around like I was holding them up or something. And all they really want to do is get ahead of me and everyone else. All to get to the finish line a couple of minutes sooner. I am glad I am confident in my masculinity.

6.Wiregrass. I know it is smarter and meaner than I am. On purpose and because it hates me, it grows under the hardware cloth, under the geraniums, the pinks, the phlox, everywhere I can not get at it and where the weed killer can not be used.

7.Politicians, wantabes, etc., who use racism for their own benefit. Like in the Vick dog fighting stuff. And like in the OJ case. Anything that comes up that can be manipulated for personal gain.

8.Chili, pizza, anything that is not spicy and hot.

9.People who cut in line.

10.Anyone who thinks they are righteous. Especially those associated with those businesses (churches) which dispense righteousness.

11.All of those who can come up with more than ten good ones when I can only think of that many.

A couple of my blog entries have been about some of my favorite things. Like our Grand Marquis and my family. Another of my favorite things is my Neuton lawn mower. A Neuton is a battery powered mower (http://www.drpower.com/TwoStepCategory.aspx?Name=NeutonMower2Step). It is quiet, starts right up, easy to push, environmetally friendly, needs no gasoline or oil, etc.

They say it is for smaller yards. My yard is about a half acre. I just mow it in three sessions. The front one day, the side the next, then the back. It takes me between a half hour and forty-five minutes each session. Not because of the battery but because I run out of steam. Even on the hottest days, I can do that much. And one of the joys of retirement is that I can mow any day I want, any time I want. Early in the morning if I want 'cause it is so quiet. And the Neuton is never hard to start or get going. Just unplug the charger and push the button. I like to collect the clippings and use them for ground cover. It comes with a catcher so another plus.

Of course, there are things that could be better. Wet and tall, course grass needs some special attention. The blade and mower bed is not very wide. And, after about four summers, the battery needs replacing to the tune of about eighty bucks. I thought my latest one was going bad after just one year but found an electrode that needs cleaning. I can do that and I am a clutz. Fixing gasoline engines is a much different matter. I fixed the Neuton without any bad words and with just a fifteen dollar voltmeter from Ace Hardware and a bit of sand paper found lying on the floor of my shed. Tells you something about my cleanliness and storage system. But it works just fine.

Check out the Neuton. It certainly works for me.

A couple of movies we saw while visiting The Big City. The story of Edith Piaf, “La Vie En Rose”, at the Shirlington. “Perfume, the Story of a Murderer” on Netflix. Neither of them really worth the time and expense. The common thought that came to me was how utterly miserable life was for ordinary folks in the not too distant past. Both in Paris, Perfume in 18th Century Paris and Edith Piaf in the beginning of the 20th Century.

In pre-revolution France, of course, it was the monarchial system that kept ordinary people in subjection. In turn of the century, it was the barons of industry who profitted from the misery of the working class. In the time between the two situations, the situation for a vast majority of humanity had not changed a whole lot. Filth and abject misery.

And here we are in 2007. We most surely do not have the conditions that those two movies displayed. Us ordinary folks have it pretty good in comparison. When folks in the future look back on us, what will they say about our situation? Will it come out that big business still has us under subjection? Has governmental corruption and misdirection done to us what royalty used to? Will the genocides and the religious fanaticism be the topics that they make movies about then?