Sunday

Hey...I like hey, when it's used as a social convention I mean. It's particularly handy at work. First pass: Howyadooin? Get that over with as best you can. Howyadooin requires a thousand words, no, a short book, but I'm in a hurry.

Next, and subsequent passes: Hey. Verbally punctuate and shape it any way you please. Hey. Hey! Heeey.... A very handy word. One syllable social lubrication. But I am in a hurry, as I said. I just began with hey, for no particular reason... and well..., well anyway, I'm back now.

The reason I'm in a hurry is that I've just decided that the post that I had prepared will not be available until Sunday. There's a whole bunch of mostly boring reasons for this, as well as what follows.

Starting this Sunday, Sunday is my official day to post. In addition to the boring reasons referenced above, it's been suggested to me by someone I trust, that the sort of stuff I write about and the way I write it goes well with Sunday morning, coffee and bagels, the Sunday paper... I know you can feel it., smell it.

Well, I do anyway and that's why I'm cranking this out (relatively speaking) and I'm going to post it in just a second (I'm a relatively slow writer) to meet a self-imposed deadline that's important to me.

And...

I'll write something every day between now and Sunday just to see what happens and as a peace offering if you get into this before I have a chance to beef it up, and you're disappointed.



Wednesday afternoon: Define (some of) Your Terms, Sir

Bonkercockie -- I stumbled on this word while wandering around the web and it was love at first sight. I didn't care what the definition might turn out to be. As it turns out the creator was easily located via googling, and the definition is a flexible one. I like to use it in place of B.S. because that feels obvious and natural to me, but the inventor uses it in other ways as well.

Hooplehead -- Often credited to the creator of the best TV show ever made, Deadwood, it looks as though the word was abroad in the world long before David Milch (sort of) popularized it. While my research indicates the definition is noncontroversial (fool, dope, hick etc. -- as seems obvious) the etymology is somewhat vague.

Gentlereader --  A somewhat archaic term that is actually two words I like to combine into one. It dates to Victorian times and is a device an author uses to directly address a reader. I combine the words just because I like the look and feel of the result.

I think we should all strive to be gentlepersons, and this will the subject of an eventual post. I always write with an imaginary gentlereader looking over one shoulder and my muse over the other. From my perspective, it's a way of saying thanks for taking a few minutes from your life to bother reading what I have to say.


Thursday Morning -- Nuns

When I was a kid my worldview was shaped by nuns. I'm an old dude so this means that I'm talking about an era when nuns still had hair on their chests and were proud of it.

I didn't care much for nuns at the time, and even though my feelings have changed somewhat, I have no doubt that one or two of the good sisters I spent nine months out of the year with, for eight years running, were at least mildly psychotic.

Fortunately, one or two were probably saints. Most would probably be less than pleased that I grew up to be agnostic. I say most because I'll betcha a bottle-a-pop that at least one of those bizarrely dressed women was secretly agnostic.

The reason my feelings have changed is that from my current perspective, that of an adult (more or less), I can now appreciate that as a group, they were an invaluable part of my life, even the nuttier ones.

They were part of a culture that believed (as I still believe) that kids were adorable little infidels in need of civilizing. Some handed out corporal punishment, as did some parents, too frequently. Some, like some parents, not enough. But you knew where you stood and you knew what the rules were.

They had the temerity to believe that a few thousand years of Western Civilization, warts and all, had come up with a system of morality, ethics, politics -- even common courtesy -- that worked and was one of the many reasons we callowutes were damn lucky to be able to take the USA for granted.

Finally, though they were members in good standing of an often hidebound institution, they, the ones that taught me at least (from '59 to '67), had no fear of discussing the "real" world and how it worked -- I believe they called it Social Studies. They also were strong supporters of the civil rights struggle and made it clear that I better be as well.

But for the record, by the time I reached ninth grade and switched to the public school system because my parents couldn't afford to send me to a Catholic high school, I no longer believed there was a place called Limbo.


Friday Morning -- Billary

This is the last installment of this transitional post, the transition from publishing on Wednesdays to publishing on Sundays. I can write publishing with a straight face because the button that you click on to post your post via Blogger is labeled Publish.

And no, I didn't stay home from work and life yesterday to watch Billary testifying, nor did I stay up all night to watch a recording of it of some sort. I checked in yesterday from time to time.

I began my day today in the usual fashion -- with a large cup of coffee and the perusal of multiple websites, a carefully crafted collection of key (Aw geez, there he goes again) websites designed to provide me with a snapshot of what's going on. I do this every morning, seven days a week, and it takes about an hour and a half.

Some folks might find this appalling, perhaps even mildly disturbing. I could easily justify the practice by claiming that I do it because I'm a columnist and it's part of the job considering the nature of my writing, and that would be partially true.

However, I would be doing this even if I were incapable of generating a single intelligible sentence. In my defense, the process includes comic strips. Also, an hour and a half is the absolute limit because my brain starts melting at that point so it's time to push away from the desk and return the coffee I've been renting back to mother nature. But that's not what I want to talk about.

Billary's Benghazi bonkercockie is what I want to talk about, but barely briefly. Turns out that Billary sent an email to Chelsea (estimated net worth, $15,000,000. I wonder how she's managed that?) -- 45 minutes after issuing a statement blaming mobs that went nuts over the famous YouTube video for the murder of some of her fellow Americans -- clearly stating that an "Al Qaeda-like group" was responsible for the murders. There are other emails and records that name the specific group, Ansar al-Sharia, and state that the attack was a carefully planned terrorist operation.

Billary and the Obama administration, the folks that assured us they had taken care of this Al Qaeda thing, spent the next couple of weeks sticking to the video story, and then when they couldn't anymore, blamed, and continue to blame, the attempted coverup mistake on the chaos and confusion surrounding the incident.

Mr. O. was re-elected a few months later. Billary, confronted with the facts stated above, stuck with the chaos and confusion defense. The New York Times website's story about the hearing this morning was headlined Four People Died, Clinton lied Benghazi Engages Clinton in Tense Session.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."
"Yup, yup, yup, it was a vast right-wing conspiracy!"

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2015 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll 

Just the Facts -or- Ohio and Weed

"Just the facts, Ma'am." The Information Age is clearly upon us. Never have so many had such easy access to so much information. Now that so many of us have ready access to the cold, hard facts of a given matter we are much more likely to form our opinions and policies, in the public as well as well as private spheres, from documented reality and not our personal prejudices and sticky, convoluted emotions.

The paragraph above is 99.9% unadulterated bonkercockie.

The Information Age is wonderful for weirdos like me. I'm thinking of starting a narrowly focused support group for dilettantes and current events junkies that have no interest in celebrity journalism. Keep an eye out for our micro-niche website.

Also, the internet can be a Godsend to anyone in need of the cold, hard facts necessary to deal with cold, hard objects or processes. For example, recalcitrant lawnmowers, or, how to make sunny side up eggs without breaking the yolks long before the dipping toast is ready, and the yolks turn into cold, hard objects.

However...

The inexhaustible high-pressure firehose of information available in real time often as not leaves us on our butts, gasping for air. If highly respected, highly educated economists, after 20 years or more of formal education can draw radically different conclusions as to what works best for the most, how are we mere mortals to decide?

If I want to purchase a particular product through Amazon and the reviews of previous purchasers are wildly contradictory, what should I do? My second example is even more complicated than it seems because I've strolled around the block often enough to know that something even most folks seem to agree on may lead me to conclude most folks are nuts.


This brings us to Weed and the Buckeye State. The good citizens of Ohio will shortly be voting on whether or not to end the prohibition of Cannabis. Sort of.

When the USA passed a constitutional amendment prohibiting the use of alcohol for consciousness altering purposes that occasionally lead to unconsciousness, it caused such a chaotic kerfuffle (somebody stop me) that it led to a capitalization. It wasn't an era of prohibition, it was the Prohibition Era. Ken Burns thought it worth a documentary.

Cannabis prohibition does and will continue to merit the attention of scholars, the media, The Gubmint etc, but it's not been Prohibition II.

 Mainstream Americans were not suddenly deprived of a socially acceptable (within limits) practice. White collar types have never been (in)famous for three joint lunches, (most) blue collar types for a quick joint and a beer after work before heading home for dinner with Marge and the kids. Dad must've worked hard today, look at him eat!

Though cannabis prohibition has needlessly trashed no shortage of our fellow citizens lives the worst damage has occurred south of the border, courtesy of those zany drug cartels that get so much press.

That's why cannabis prohibition has remained the law of the land for roughly a century in spite of the inherent difficulties involved in trying to stop folks from growing, selling and/or smoking a weed. But this is the Information Age, and having easy access to all that information enables us to repeal or amend goofy laws and get on with our lives -- after jacking everything up.

Several of the states have either effectively legalized weed or are working on it. The federal law that prohibits this remains in place. When it comes to laws The Gubmint (the Feds) trumps the gubmint (state and local). The folks currently in charge of The Gubmint are too busy screwing  up foreign policy and working hard to make sure we have a slow growth, politically correct economy to care about weed. But what if the next administration has different priorities?

In Ohio, ten groups of crony capitalists put up money to pay for a petition drive and bought themselves a motion that will appear on the ballot next month. The motion proposes that the state legalizes weed and helpfully supplies a slate of Rules&Regs for legal weed -- to be added to the state's constitution.

These Rules&Regs give the ten groups the exclusive right to grow the weed that will eventually be purchased by Ohio consumers. They're now paying for commercials to promote its passage. The commercials reassure the folks that a monopoly will not be created, that the ten authorized growers will compete with each other -- honest, we swear -- so that consumers will get the best possible prices.

They're technically correct. What they're proposing is a cartel, not a monopoly. Well, why not? We've certainly been well served by the world's most well-known cartel, OPEC.

The motion, if passed, will enshrine the right of these guys to be the only ones in Ohio to legally grow weed to sell, in the Ohio constitution. Citizens will be permitted to cultivate their own plants and maintain a stash as long as they don't exceed explicitly specified quantities -- and if they buy a $50 permit so the gubmint can keep an eye on them. The cronies will permit you to grow your own as long as you're not trying to compete with their non-monopoly.

The Ohio legislature, no doubt miffed that a group of would-be oligopolists is trying to have their oligopoly embedded the state's constitution, could've just passed a law that said weed is legal for everyone over 21, if you sell it you have to pay sales tax, and we're going to let the free market figure out the details. We can always step in later if the market messes it up.

Instead, they've placed their own measure on the ballot. This one forbids building a business monopoly into Ohio's constitution. Sounds good. Also, it gets them out of having to vote yes or no on weed. Unfortunately, it allows for placing motions on the ballot that would let voters decide that a given monopoly can become part of the constitution. Huh?

It gets worse. Both motions could pass. One that sets up a monopoly, and one that says you can't do that in Ohio -- except for when you can. Let the litigation begin!

But thanks to the fact we're living in the Information Age you now know what's up and it all makes perfect sense, right?

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2015 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll 









         

The 6.5 Commandments

I know that officially there are ten commandants, but I'm only going to discuss 6.5 of them. See, three and a half commandments all presume a firm belief in a Judeo-Christian concept of God. I'm an agnostic so I'm can ignore them, at least for the purposes of this article.

I bear no ill-will to believers and hope they feel the same about me. I hope we both are thankful to be living in a country designed to accommodate us both, in theory, if not always in fact. While I'm spreading the sunshine let me also go on record and state that I also don't care if you're an atheist or a believer in a spiritual tradition that falls outside of the Judeo-Christian one assuming you're prepared to peacefully share the playground with all the other kids and not bully, or behead, anyone that disagrees with you.

Why does an agnostic want to discuss 6.5 commandments? In a polarized nation egged on by a hyperventilating media, why wouldn't I want to discuss behaviors most of us more or less agree on?

To answer the obvious question, the half of a commandment is the one that tells us to observe the Sabbath. I don't believe in blue laws. Nor do I expect a world that is evolving a 24/7 culture to be able to agree with everyone taking the same day off.

However, I highly recommend observing a personal sabbath, even a half sabbath (halfasab?). I know that hard-charging 24/7 types will find this a ridiculous notion. Keep moving, rust never sleeps. OK, but trust me on this dude, take a break once in awhile. If you don't, sooner or later some part of you is going to turn on the rest of you, and I don't mean that in a good way.

Or one of these days when you show up at the playground, you may find a bunch of other kids are hiding in the bushes with a stockpile of sticks and stones.

Next, we're told to honor our mom's and dads. It takes an unusually long time for us to mature in comparison to most species and to be able to function on our own. Common sense, if not love, suggests we at least humor our parental units.

Not all parents are worth honoring, but most are, in spite of the fact they're not perfect like us. However, parents also need to honor their kids. This is accomplished simply by choosing to do your job. It's not an opinion it's a scientifically proven fact -- a kid that has an involved mom and dad is more likely to succeed, on every level. And by the way, kids need parents, not grown up friends.

Don't kill anybody. For most of us, this is an easy one. Even when killing is sanctioned by the traditional justifications  -- self-defense, war, and capital punishment -- most of us are reluctant to kill another human being, even when it's morally or logically justifiable. Good. If this notion puzzles you, seek help.

Don't commit adultery. To me, and I suspect I'm not alone in this, adultery is having some form of sex (all forms of sex are sex, even the one Bill Clinton pretends isn't) with someone other than your spouse. Unless you both genuinely agree to an open relationship, and I suspect this is rare (and often sad), it's wrong. You can justify it any way you want, you're betraying the most intimate relationship possible between two human beings.

Considering the kerfuffle concerning gay marriage (I love alliteration, sorry if you find it annoying) I guess I should mention it. I don't think the Supremes had any business ruling on this issue, or on abortion for that matter.

I think abortion should be legal, but only during the first trimester. I could care less what consenting adults are doing behind (hopefully) closed doors. However, I'm a firm believer that individual states should decide on playground rules not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, as the Constitution specifically mentions.

Don't steal. I didn't realize, until I did a bit of research, that many Jewish scholars interpret this to mean don't kidnap. Most of us view it as a proscription against taking someone's stuff. This one's about as easy to agree with as don't kill anybody.

Interesting that radical, bloodthirsty revolutionary types with wildly divergent goals regard murder and kidnapping as essential components of a terrorist's toolbox.

Don't lie. Well, that's how it was taught to me, deliberately over-simplified by various nuns belonging to the order of the Sisters of Charity because I was just a kid. I'm now familiar with the meaning of don't bear false witness. It's wrong to lie if you do so out of a desire to deliberately alter or hide facts that need to be revealed if justice is to be served.

Lies of social lubrication are not only not wrong, it's easy to make a case for their vital role in society and relationships. No, as a matter of fact, those pants make your butt look awesome. We must draw fine lines. Navigating through shades of gray is often difficult, but Reality is usually presented to us in shades of gray -- rarely in crisp, clean black and white.

Finally, don't covet ________. Coveting ain't the problem, it's what you do next. You may not agree with my interpretation of do not covet but to me, since it's impossible to not have desires and since trying to suppress them only makes them stronger, what you do next is what's important.

What I try to do is note how quickly I respond in a primitive, me-wanta, chest-thumping sort of way and then remind myself that civilized behavior is indeed a very thin veneer. I don't try to suppress my desires, but I do try to take the high road and not act on the inappropriate ones.

The gentlereader scratches his/her/hir(?) head. How do know what the high road is, as pertaining to this or any other commandment? I maintain that 99.9% of the time you'll know, assuming you can be honest with yourself. As for that .1% of the time, all you can do is the best you can do.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2015 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll down.