I Hate Houseguests

Publication date:  July 2019

Review, short version:  Three skunks out of four (because it wasn’t a total stinker)

Review, long version:

A friend of my parents – who was also an avid reader – said, “I give a book 40 pages.  If it hasn’t grabbed me by then, I’m done with it.”

I took that to heart, and don’t waste my time on a book that doesn’t grab me.

While I can’t say Mary Ellen Taylor’s Spring House actually grabbed me, it was holding my interest – to page 40 and beyond.  It’s of a genre I like – Young-Woman-Uncovers-Secrets-From-Her-Past – and there are lots of these books out there.

The blurb on the back cover reads, “The lives of two women, generations apart, converge in this enthralling novel of love, mystery, memories, and secrets,” and that description pretty much covers it.

Except for the “enthralling” part.

A more accurate adjective would have been “confusing.”  Or “muddled.”  Or, “Who the hell?”  I did a lot of “Who the hell-ing?” with this book.

Taylor starts out with a family tree:

And when a book has numerous characters, I appreciate that and refer to it.

A family tree is a good road map for who’s who, except when there are a lot of whos (relatives) who aren’t on the tree, yet play roles – some of them significant – in the book.

For example (brace yourself – this will get exhausting), the lead character, Megan Buchanan, has a cousin, Hank Garrison, who is on the family tree.  Hank has a sister, Rebecca, but she’s not on the family tree.  (From now on I’ll abbreviate that to NOFT, so I don’t get even more exhausted typing it over and over.)

Megan’s great-grandmother, Claire Hedrick, has parents, Addie and Isaac (NOFT) and siblings Diane, Jemma, Michael, Sarah, Joseph and Stanley (NOFT).  Then there’s Samuel Jessup, a relative of Megan’s who is on the family tree.  Samuel has four brothers (NOFT) – Stanley, Joseph, Michael and Aaron, though Aaron marries Adele (NOFT) who’s the daughter of the above-mentioned Diane (NOFT), who married Gilbert (NOFT).

Confusing?  Muddled?  Who the hell?

That same Samuel Jessup was Helen’s (NOFT) late husband’s grand uncle.  Helen is the mother of Scott (NOFT).

Scott and Megan are somehow blood relatives, and they’re engaged.

And Megan is…not very bright.  She’s engaged to Scott, “But she had known from the beginning they were not really suited.”

So what does Megan do?  She gets pregnant.

See?  Not bright at all.

In addition to trying to connect and keep track of all the NOFTs, Spring House jumps around to many different time periods:  2018, 1903, 1939, 2017, 1914 and 1918, and then I lost track.

Then there’s Spring House itself, which was the caretaker’s home on the grounds of a mansion called Winter Cottage.  Both were built by Megan’s great-great grandfather, but not for his first wife, Megan’s great-great grandmother, but for his second wife, who is on the family tree but is not a blood relative, and by now…

A friend was reading my book reviews on this blog and said, “You read a lot of stinkers,” referring to my skunk rating system.

I start a lot of stinkers, but I don’t finish them.

Spring House is another one, which begs the question:

Why did I finish it?

Because the stinkers are such fun…

I see it on my TV, it’s everywhere online,
When I’m drinking morning coffee or sipping evening wine.
Infected numbers rising, the death toll’s rising, too.
I have to say
As of today
I’ve got the Too-Much-Coronavirus-News Blues.

It started in December, in China so they say,
No one here was worried, cause China’s far away.
But then it started spreading, and heading our way, too.
And came the day
We’re on our way
To the Too-Much-Coronavirus-News Blues.

Can’t find those precious facemasks, or ventilators?  No way.
Our doctors and our nurses are in danger every day.
The Dow is in the toilet, the economy’s headed there, too.
There is no doubt
We’re all about
The Too-Much-Coronavirus-News Blues.

Can’t go to school, can’t go to work, can’t even see our friends,
We’re all just staying home these days, who knows how this will end?
Social distancing’s become the norm, and washing our hands, too.
As the USA
Leads the way
In the Too-Much-Coronavirus-News Blues.

So, I’m turning off my TV, I’ll skip that stuff online,
I’ll drink a lot less coffee and drink a lot more wine.
I’m scared that I might have it, and give to others, too.
Can’t get a test
I need a rest
From the Too-Much-Coronavirus-News Blues.

It’s been a while since I featured Numbnuts in the News, but my newspaper had such a collection that I had to share them.

Let’s start with Ian Simmons and Joshua Reinhardt, both 34.  Last month they were pulled over on I-10 in Florida after a trooper clocked them going 95 mph:

The trooper determined that Reinhardt was the subject of an active felony warrant for violation of probation, so driving that fast and attracting attention to yourselves probably wasn’t their best idea.

No, this was their best idea:

They had a stash in two bags marked “Bag Full of Drugs.”

What a good idea!  If Simmons (above, bottom image) and Reinhardt had forgotten where they’d put approximately 75 grams of methamphetamine, 1.36 kilograms of the date-rape drug GHB, 1 gram of cocaine, 3.6 grams of fentanyl, 15 MDMA tablets and drug paraphernalia…

All they had to do was look around and say, “Oh, thank goodness!  There’s our stash, in those bags marked ‘Bag Full of Drugs!’”

A bit of research and I learned that Simmons and Reinhardt bought the bags here:

But as you can read in the small print, the point of the “Bag Full of Drugs” is to have fun fooling people into thinking you’re walking around with some “amazing swag.”

Not with controlled substances that can get you 30 in a Florida slammer.

Next up:

Last fall a guy walked into a bank in Dunfernline, Scotland.  He was carrying a pillowcase with something bulky in it.

The bulky item was a meat cleaver, and he was there to rob the bank.

Before he announced his intention, however, he removed the cleaver and put the pillowcase over his head – a clever disguise.

Except for one thing:

He’d forgotten to cut eye holes in the pillowcase.

This was Matthew Davies, 47, and unfortunately, no image of him appears to be available, so I’ve improvised (left).  Just pretend the eyeholes aren’t there, OK?

When Davies realized he couldn’t see anything, he removed the pillowcase from his head, made a lot of noise and threatening gestures with the meat cleaver, and got away with almost £2,000.

He then strolled out of the bank and headed home, and a brave bank customer followed, then alerted the police.  Davis was arrested at home, where police found cash, a pillowcase and a stun gun in Davies’ house.

In late February Davies was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison.

Some stories reported that as Davis was heading home, he stopped to pet a dog.

The dog had no comment.

And finally, this guy:

Also last month, Adrian Afriyie Ansah-Asante, 23, was driving around Waterford Twp., MI when he was pulled over by Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard.

“Oh, no,” you’re thinking.  “Not another guy going 95 mph with Bags Full of Drugs!”

Nope.

Asante was pulled over because Sheriff Bouchard noticed that Asante’s SUV was fitted out with “big police-style bumpers, an array of lights on the back and a decal that read ‘Emergency Response.’”

The car also featured a radar-type thing on the dashboard and a police-style computer.

The problem?   The police car was a fake, and Asante was a fake – not a cop or a member of any Emergency Response unit.

Clearly, Asante had gone shopping at Fake Police Stuff R Us.

His shopping included a loaded gun and a large knife.

Asante’s sentencing included a felony concealed weapons charge and misdemeanor possession of flashing lights, a $50,000 bond and GPS tether.

OK!

Now you get to decide which of these guys is…

Release date:  July 2018

Review, short version:  Thumbs up for the movie, thumbs down for the ending.

Review, long version:

I’m not sure why I wanted to see Puzzle.

I’d barely heard about it when it was released, and I’d never heard of the people in it:  Kelly MacDonald, Irrfan Khan and David Denman.

It must have been one of the trailers leading into a DVD I was about to watch, and when I saw that jigsaw puzzles were what the title was referring to…

And jigsaw puzzle contests were an important element of the film?

But…there was something about that woman that tugged at my heart, just in that brief trailer.

She continued to tug at my heart all the way through the movie.

“She” was Agnes, played by Kelly MacDonald.

Agnes, wife of Louie and mother of almost-grown sons Ziggy and Gabe, has no life outside taking care of Louie, Ziggy and Gabe.  Housework, laundry, making meals, followed by more housework, laundry and making meals.

In other words, she has no life.

Agnes doesn’t complain.  In fact, she doesn’t express much emotion at all.

We come to Agnes’ birthday, and one of the gifts is a jigsaw puzzle.  The gift is completely out of the context of Agnes’ life, and she puts away somewhere.

But one day, something prompts Agnes to open the jigsaw puzzle.  She spreads its 1,000 pieces onto a table, and starts fitting it together.

Agnes completes the puzzle.

She discovers she enjoyed completing the puzzle.

She discovers something she enjoys, for herself, that has nothing to do with anything except her.

And she discovers – she good at jigsaw puzzles.

Excellent, even.

Agnes is about to go on a journey that will change her life.

One scene that particularly touched me takes place as Easter approaches.  Agnes is at home, sitting at the table, dyeing Easter eggs, and crying.

And I thought, “She’s dying and crying.”

And she was – weary of her monotonous life in which she’s totally taken for granted.  She’s the meal maker and the housekeeper and the errand doer, a fixture like the fridge and the TV and the toilet.

Agnes allows the satisfaction she gets from mastering jigsaw puzzles to take her on that journey, and it will include deception, jubilation, and – horrors! – forgetting to make dinner because she’s engrossed in a puzzle.

Or rather – two puzzles…

One is the jigsaw in front of her.

And one is – where her journey will take her.

So – thumbs up for Puzzle, except…

Thumbs down for the ending, because it’s ambiguous.

And I like stories that are neatly resolved and wrapped up, all the i’s dotted and the t’s crossed.

But life isn’t like that, and neither is Puzzle.

Or, as the reviewer at rogerebert.com put it,

“Puzzle wisely doesn’t complete the whole picture in easy or obvious ways, but rather gives us the space to consider the solutions for ourselves.”

Unlike myself, my beloved husband, bless his heart, is not one for bad-mouthing people.

So this past Thursday, when I heard him exclaim, “He’s despicable!” I rushed to his side to see who he was talking about.

He was reading this story:

What? I thought.  But why?

I read more articles, trying to understand, like this one…

And this one…

And they all said basically the same thing – even though Trump has repeatedly insisted states get their own supplies of critical medical equipment necessary to aid patients and protect medical professionals from coronavirus, the federal government is outbidding states on orders.

But none of them explained why.

Why would Trump tell governors to buy their own critical medical equipment, then allow the government to outbid states trying to do that very thing?

Was it for the sake of that smug, self-satisfied look he gets when he’s thinking, “I won, and you lost”?

Was it Trump’s self-gratification from making this (he thinks witty) remark:

“The federal government’s not supposed to be out there buying vast amounts of items and then shipping.  You know, we’re not a shipping clerk.”

Or was this a harbinger of what’s to come:

My husband was right.

Trump is despicable:

Publication Date:  November 2019

Review, short version:  Four roses out of four for both.

Review, long version:

I recently had the good fortune of learning that books by two of my favorite authors were being released at around the same time.

That meant hours of great reading straight ahead!

But, to clarify:  “Books by two of my favorite authors” is a bit of a misnomer.  Those authors, Dick Francis and Robert B. Parker, are, sadly, deceased – Parker in January 2010 and Francis in February 2010.

But – happily – their quality books are still being written, Francis’ by his son Felix, and Parker’s by novelist Ace Atkins.

Prior to their deaths, Robert B. Parker and Dick Francis were prolific writers – Parker had several series with different lead characters, but I’m focusing on his Boston detective who goes by one name:  “Spenser.”  This list includes the recent additions by Ace Atkins:

Here are the books Francis wrote solo, wrote with his son Felix, and that Felix has written solo:

Both series are mysteries, Parker with his detective, Spenser, and Francis mostly with a different lead character in each book.  Parker’s Spenser series is sequential, and I recommend reading them starting with his earliest, The Godwulf Manuscript, published in 1973.  It’s the best way to see Spenser evolve, and keep track of other characters who appear, and then reappear in later books.

The Francis books don’t have to be read in sequence, though several of his lead characters do make later appearances so I’ll recommend reading those in order as well, starting with Dead Cert in 1962.

While both authors’ lead character is a first-person narrator, their approach is very different.  Spenser is a delightful wise ass; the Francis lead characters tend to have more gravitas.  Spenser lives in Boston and many books are set there, with some elsewhere.  The common thread in the Francis books is the connection to horse racing, though I’ll emphasize that these are not horse racing books.

For instance, in Francis’ most recent, Guilty Not Guilty, the lead character is a volunteer steward at a racetrack but with a full-time job in insurance.  What all of Francis’ lead characters do have in common is a common-man-gets-into-big-trouble theme – and how will he get himself out of it?

Parker’s detective Spenser usually gets hired by a client who may or may not have something to hide.  Spenser is sometimes the hardboiled private investigator, sometimes the compassionate hero, and always the smart mouth.  In Ace Atkins’ latest, Angel Eyes, Spenser has a mystery to solve and lives to save – including his own.

When Francis and Parker died barely a month apart in 2010, I was sincerely sad.

And when I learned that Ace Atkins would continue the Spenser series, and Felix Francis would continue in his father’s tradition – I was skeptical.  I felt there was no way their books would be anything but poor substitutes, would fade, and be forgotten.

But…

I’m delighted to say that both Ace Atkins and Felix Francis are doing a wonderful job, staying true to their predecessors’ “voices,” and delivering highly readable, entertaining and satisfying stories.

I’ve read all of Parker’s Spenser series, and all the Francis books, and enjoyed every one of them.  I’m hopeful that a new book from each will be out next year.

They’re…

In early February the San Diego Zoo celebrated the birth of a hippo, the ninth calf born at the zoo.

The baby, named Amahle – which means “beautiful one” is Zulu – is indeed a beauty:

She weighs about 100 pounds and as you can see, is dwarfed by her mother, Funani.  According to the Zoo’s website, adult female hippos have an average weight of 3,000 pounds, grow to 11 feet in length and are five feet tall at the shoulder.

Amahle is especially precious because the hippopotamus is currently listed as “vulnerable” on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species:

The primary threats the animals face are illegal and unregulated hunting for meat, and habitat loss.

And according to my research, a more recent threat is poaching hippos for their teeth.  As elephant ivory and rhino horns become increasingly more expensive and policed in Asia, poachers and wildlife sellers have started replacing them with hippo’s teeth, which are made from a material similar to ivory and which can also be used in traditional Chinese medicine, and carved into art objects…

Stories are emerging of pods of hippos being machine-gunned down and all their teeth removed and sent to Asia.

So Amahle – every hippo – is precious.

Except for these:

Perhaps it’s not fair to say these hippos aren’t precious, but they definitely aren’t welcome:

Instead of living in Africa, their native habitat, these hippos are in Columbia, in South America:

How did they get there?

According to a 2019 story from CBS News,

“The story of Colombia’s hippos starts in Villa Napoles, the former estate of Pablo Escobar, who in his heyday had four hippos smuggled there for his private zoo.

“By the 1980s, his cocaine empire made him the wealthiest and most feared drug lord in the world.  For Colombia, it was a reign of terror.  He’s said to be responsible for some 7,000 deaths.

“Around the time Escobar met his death [in a police shootout] in the early 90s, the government relocated most of the animals to zoos, but not the hippos which were basically allowed to roam free.”

“Roam free” – because hippos are extremely difficult to catch, and it was deemed too dangerous and impractical to move them from the ranch.

“Roam free” – in a place with no natural predators and plenty of food and water.

The article estimated the hippo population at higher than 50.

That number was updated in this more recent article:

“The four hippos living there remained and multiplied over the subsequent years.  The population has now expanded to around 80 individuals and spread beyond the confines of Escobar’s estate into the small lakes dotted around the surrounding areas.”

And that’s the problem.

More hippos mean more interactions with people.  In Africa, hippos cause more human deaths than any other large animal.  So far, there are no known attacks in Colombia.

So far.

As for the environment, scientists analyzed water quality and other environmental factors in the areas where the hippos roamed over a period of two years.  They found that the animals were altering the chemistry and biology of local lakes:

“At night they feed on land, where they become covered in nutrients and organic material.  Then in the daytime they move to the water, taking these materials with them.  This can have negative consequences for the aquatic ecosystem.”

“Negative consequences” like their waste impacting the area’s water system, causing excess algae production that can lead to harmful algal blooms similar to red tides.  This can harm both humans and animals, including the lakes’ native species.

“Negative consequences” like the concern that hippos are displacing native wildlife, like manatees and giant river turtles:

As the hippo population in Columbia continues to expand, scientists are at a loss for safe and humane solutions.

Killing the animals has proven highly unpopular with the Columbian people, so “We can’t just kill the hippos,” said biologist David Echeverri in the CBS News article.  He works with CORNARE, the environmental agency in charge of tracking and managing the hippos in the region.  “And the other solution is relocating hippos or sterilizing hippos,” acknowledging that would be an expensive and dangerous process.

And this more recently, from Gina Serna, also with CORNARE:

“It’s urgent.  We already have a report of a family of hippopotamuses in the Magdalena river.  The Magdalena connects almost all of Colombia, so they could move into any part of the country.”

And from the Newsweek article,

“On one hand, they’re a local tourist attraction and curiosity,” said Jonathan Shurin, an ecology professor at UCSD.  “On the other, they pose a real risk to the public and the environment.  There’s real public resistance, in Colombia and elsewhere, to removing them by lethal means, but no resources to capture or sterilize them.”

For now, signs warning “Danger, Hippos Present” are posted:

And the Columbian hippo population just keeps growing.

Africa:  The continent where hippos belong, and are vulnerable.

Columbia:  The country where they don’t belong, and are a threat to people and the environment.

And Amahle, our baby hippo at the San Diego Zoo?

I wish her a long and safe life, despite the havoc we’re wreaking on our planet.

The irony?

The acronym for that havoc is HIPPO:

 

In the very early hours of Saturday, March 14, CNN announced:

This bill, H.R. 6201, is the Families First CoronaVirus Response Act, a multibillion-dollar stimulus package aimed at assisting millions of Americans directly hurt by the coronavirus outbreak.

What only a select few know is that’s there’s a provision buried in the bill that reads, in part:

“To ensure that the President is receiving the most up-to-date information on the well-being of the American people, we require that he be the first of the American people to experience the hardships they, too, will be experiencing.”

As a result of this provision, my hope is that in the very near future, when Trump ducks out of an Oval Office meeting into his Executive Bathroom, he’ll experience this:

He’ll yell out and several of his toadies will rush to the door:

Toady #1:  Yes, sir?

Trump:  I’m out of toilet paper!  How the #!*$!%*#!! can my bathroom be out of #!*$!%*#!!ing toilet paper?

Toady #2:  Well, you see, sir, the store shelves are empty and –

Trump:  I don’t care about that!  Just get me some #!*$%!%*#!!ing toilet paper!

Toady #3:  Yes, sir!

(A few minutes pass)

Toady #1:  Sir?  Sir, are you there?

Trump:  OF COURSE I’M STILL HERE, YOU #!*$!%*#!!ing IDIOT!

Toady #1:  Sir, we have everyone out checking the other bathrooms and the supply cabinets, we haven’t found any toilet paper so far but we’re moving as expeditiously as we can, and…

(Long pause)

Trump:  Are you wearing a tie?

Toady #1:  A tie, sir?

Trump:  YES!  A #!*$!%*#!!ing TIE!  ARE YOU WEARING ONE?

Toady #1:  Well, yes sir, but…?

Trump:  Crack open the door and toss me your tie.

Toady #1:  Yes, sir!  Right away, sir!  (Pause, then door opens slightly) Here you go, sir.

Trump:  Close the #!*$!&*#!!ing door!  (Short pause) Why the #!*$!%*#!! do I have to solve all these big problems myself?

(Sound of flushing, and more swearing)

Of course, to fully ensure that Trump is experiencing what we’re experiencing, in addition to the toilet paper shortage, let’s include supermarket shelves empty of paper towels, baby wipes, hand sanitizers, bottled water, rubbing alcohol, hydrogen peroxide, soap, peanut butter, pasta, rice, beans, canned goods and many other food items…

And of course, Trump can’t be tested for coronavirus because we can’t, and we can’t be tested because…

Oh, wait.  It appears that most of us 331,000,000 U.S. residents can’t get tested, but somehow, Trump did:

But most of all, let us remember the people who are losing their jobs and incomes.

Trump claims he doesn’t take a presidential salary, so instead we’ll deprive him of the income from his businesses, which is substantial, according to this article:

No income for Trump till further notice.

No toilet paper for Trump till further notice.

No employment for Trump as of November 3, 2020:

Broadcast date:  2005

Review, short version:  All thumbs up.

Review, long version:

I remember as a kid repeating something I’d heard somewhere:

“Catherine the Great of Russia died after she had sex with a horse!”

At the time I thought this sounded very adult, and daring, though I didn’t have the slightest understanding of sex, of women having sex, or of the mechanics involved in a woman having sex with a horse.

And I barely knew what Russia was; I certainly didn’t know who Catherine the Great was.

But I’d heard it, and it was fun to say it for shock value, and being the bearer of such an adult, probably dirty, and maybe true event made me – momentarily – feel like the Queen of the Playground.

This is why propaganda thrives.

Ignorant people – like me – hear it and repeat it.

The story about Catherine the Great having sex with a horse was propaganda, and it wasn’t the first time the spin masters who manufactured it had turned their attention to her.

And why the propaganda campaign against her?  According to PBS’ excellent documentary, Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia:

“France and England, fearful of Catherine’s success in southern Europe, began a propaganda war, concentrating on her sexuality with cartoons, portraying her as a nymphomaniac to subvert her reputation for success.”

And that success was extensive.  One of the commentators in the film spoke of Catherine’s “Massive status as a statesman and as a woman,” and called her the “greatest of Russia’s rulers, including all the great empire builders.”

But guys in power didn’t like her, as illustrated in this 1791 political cartoon.  A colossal figure of Catherine steps from “Russia,” a rocky mound on the extreme left, to “Constantinople,” her toe resting on the horn of a crescent which surmounts a spire on a group of buildings, with a dome and a minaret.  Her head is turned in profile to the right; in her left hand is an orb, in her right she holds out a scepter over Constantinople, at which she looks with a determined frown:

Beneath Catherine’s petticoats, and strung out between “Russia” and “Constantinople,” are the heads and shoulders of seven sovereigns, gazing up at her.  On the extreme left is a man wearing the cap of the Doge of Venice, saying, “To what a length Power may be carried.”  Next is the Pope wearing his triple crown, saying, “I shall never forget it.”

Next is the King of Spain saying, “By Saint Jago, I’ll strip her of her Fur!”  Louis XVI says, “Never saw anything like it.”  George III says “What!  What!  What!  What a prodigious expansion!”  The Emperor says, “Wonderful elevation.”  The Sultan says, “The whole Turkish Army wouldn’t satisfy her.”  Below the design is inscribed “European Powers.”

These guys really didn’t like her.

Jealous, perhaps?  Afraid, perhaps?

Catherine the Great lived from 1729 to 1796, and she reigned as Empress from 1762 until her death.  She’s been the subject of numerous books, both non-fiction and novels, as well as feature films and TV miniseries.

So this film’s two hours couldn’t begin to cover all the highlights of Catherine’s life, but it does a great job with her overall story, beginning with her arrival in Russia as an obscure, young German princess who transformed herself into an Empress, and reigned for 34 years.

You’ll see how Catherine strengthened Russia’s standing in Europe; how she sought to modernize Russia’s culture through progressive views on arts and education; that she had an astute intellect; and was able to survive dozens of uprisings and court intrigues to keep her crown.

Catherine also chose her lovers, and there were many.  And she decided the hows and wheres, and when it was time to move on.

I can assure you that none of those lovers was a horse.

But that didn’t stop the propagandists from perpetuating lies, even after her death.

I recently read, “When myths and stereotypes predominate, facts, logic and evidence lose out.”  That’s why the myth of Catherine and the horse survived all those years to reach my ears.  And just like the fools who believed and spread the lie back in the 1700s, I believed and spread it, too.

And that story is still out there.  A google search brought me 84,000,000 results.

I recommend skipping the lies and propaganda and watching Catherine the Great.  It’s informative and entertaining, and made me want to learn more about her.

And it’s a great film about the “greatest of Russia’s rulers.”

 

I’ve heard of the card game Texas Hold ‘em, but I’d never heard of Texas Super Flush.

I wondered if Texas Super Flush was another card game, with a Super Flush being even better than a Royal Flush?

But no!  The Texas Super Flush was this mid-February breaking news:

It appears that the Texas Rangers – the baseball team, not the law enforcement agency – have a brand-new stadium in Arlington:  Globe Life Field.

And before the first event there on March 14 – a country music concert, not a baseball game – the stadium builders proposed an even more important event:

They wanted the plumbing system – 860 toilet stalls and 260 urinals – stress tested.

So the builders brought in 300 local high school students who headed for their battle stations…

Waited for the countdown…

And let the games begin!

There was much sprinting from bathroom to bathroom – remember, only 300 students and more than 1100 toilets and urinals – and the competition was fierce:

“Dude!  That was, like, my fifth toilet!”

“Ashley, I own that urinal, get away from it!”

“It’s kinda weird flushing when I haven’t used the toilet – I don’t flush half the time at home!”

There was up-to-the-minute live coverage:

And more live coverage:

Of what one reporter called a “synchronized simulation of the seventh inning stretch”:

“Seventh inning stretch” being a baseball euphemism for “when everyone goes to the bathroom.”

Those students gave it their all, testing those toilets, flushing and moving on from one to the next, while others flushed the same toilets – they were keeping score, after all:

“Dude, I’m up to 26!”

And then, after much sprinting and flushing and flushing and flushing:

But they can’t fool me.

I know what was really going on there.

It was, after all, Texas, home to lots of Trump supporters.

And they wanted to let the world know that they love Trump, no matter what.

Remember when Trump said this:

These are the people Trump was talking about!

These proud Texans…

Flushed and flushed and proved Trump was right.

You might even say they were…

When I read the book section of the Sunday newspaper – yes, I’m a dinosaur, I still read and enjoy the daily newspaper – I always look at The New York Times hardcover fiction and non-fiction best seller lists.

This section is usually followed by a list of top sellers from a local bookstore, and on a recent Sunday that store was Warwick’s, which proudly states it’s “The oldest continuously family-owned and operated bookstore in the United States…since 1896.”

So I’d say Warwick’s has some credibility.

Or it did.

Until I saw this:

That’s right – coming in at #6 on Warwick’s top sellers:  The Beautiful Poetry of Donald Trump.

Now, Trump has been in the White House for a nightmarish what-seems-like forever, and while I have many words to associate with him, “beautiful” and “poetry” are not two of them.

Never once has it occurred to me to put “beautiful” and “Trump” in the same thought, nor “poetry” and “Trump.”  Never until this very repulsive moment.

Is this a joke?

Well, the book is on Amazon, hardcover, in stock, with 105 customer ratings, published by Canongate Books.  With this description:

Does a poet’s heart beat under Donald Trump’s brash exterior?
Experience his best quotes and tweets, rearranged into poems and haikus.
It’s a new word order.

This called for:

1. Anti-nausea pills, followed by
2. Research

Looking at the cover above, in very small print we see that Trump is not the author of the book – on the cover it says, “Created by Rob Sears.”

It’s also immediately apparent that the creator(s) put Trump’s head on someone else’s body.  Seriously – Trump, in a cravat?

And look at the hands on the cover – compare those graceful, slender fingers to Trump’s, which are stubby and thick:

So far we’ve established that Trump neither wrote the poetry, nor posed for its cover.

Next research:  “Creator” Rob Sears, who proved easy to find.

Sears has a page on the publisher’s website, where I learned that Canongate Books is in the United Kingdom, and Sears lives in Finsbury Park, a bit north of London.

In 2017 – the year the book was published – Sears was also featured in this September article in the UK’s Guardian:

From the article:

“‘He [Trump] does speak in very compact, distilled phrases that tell you a lot about who he is, in a small number of words.  So it’s not that far away from poetry,” says Sears.  “Lots of declarative sentences, a staccato rhythm.  There is no complexity to anything he says.  People have said he writes like a third grader with a limited vocabulary.  I’ve read so many of his words and there really are no exceptions.’

And of the book, the article says:

“More than 30 years of Trump’s misogyny, xenophobia and taste for vengeance are on display – all fastidiously footnoted.”

OK, I get it.

The book is a joke.  If I’d scrolled a bit further down the Amazon page, I would have seen the category “Satire.”

Apparently Sears was motivated to – and found a publisher for – a collection of Trump’s tweets and other statements which Sears cut up, reordered, and pasted together.

Without further ado, but with the anti-nausea pills, here’s an excerpt:

Here’s another about – of all things – Trump’s hands:

And here’s the one on the back of the book, in case you couldn’t read it in the top image:

I knew those anti-nausea pills would come in handy.

So of course, I get it – the Warwick top seller list is serious, but the book is a joke.

What I don’t get was how the book ended up on Warwick’s top seller list – who was buying it?  Were they people who thought Trump actually wrote poetry?

Based on some of the Amazon reviews, it appears so:

“I was expecting poetry from Donald Trump!”

“This book is not Trump’s poetry…written to put the President in a negative light, probably penned by a Democrat.  It should not have been allowed to be published.”

“This book is horrible and is an attempt to make President Trump look stupid?  The book is not what I thought it was going to be…”

“They are poking fun at the WONDERFUL INTELLIGENT president of the U.S.A. in this waste of paper.  He is a genius, and the reason this book only has two or three words per page to attempt to insult him is because the TRUTH is – they could fill volumes with his meaning and wit.”

“More liberal hate and attacks on the greatest president since Lincoln!”

Pathetic.

Or did they buy it thinking they’d have a good laugh?

Because…I’m not laughing.

I’m not laughing because what Trump says isn’t a joke.

Trump, and what he says, are a tragedy:

Update, March 9:  And now, from a different author, these more recent examples of Trump’s poetry:

In mid-December 2019 there was a lot going on in the news, like this:

And this:

And this:

And, oh yeah – the House voted to impeach what’s-his-name.

There was that, too.

So it’s no wonder that I – and perhaps you – missed this mid-December story:

It appears that Boeing – yes, the folks that brought us the 737 Max airplanes that have been grounded for…let’s see…coming up on a year now, isn’t it?

Even though last October, Boeing’s CEO said this:

Clearly, the Boeing higher-ups are rocket scientists, and I mean that literally, since they decided, “Hey, we built the 737 Max – let build rocket ships, too!”

So they built this thing called “Starliner,”

With the goal of taking astronauts to the International Space Station.

But…after lifting off on its first test flight December 18, Starliner ended up in the wrong orbit:

There were no astronauts on board this test flight, so instead I’ll imagine the conversation by whoever was in charge at Mission Control Center:

Rocket Scientist #1:  Wait a minute – isn’t the Space Station in the other direction?

Rocket Scientist #2:  Make it turn right!  No, your OTHER right, you dummy!

I don’t know what orbit Starliner ended up in, but somebody hit the brakes and Starliner made what one article called “a hastier-than-planned return to Earth.”

What brought this background information to my attention was this recent update:

According to the article,

“A software error left the Starliner capsule in the wrong orbit in December and precluded a docking with the International Space Station.  Another software flaw could have ended up destroying the capsule, if not fixed right before reentry.

“A Boeing vice president, John Mulholland, said both mistakes would have been caught if complete, end-to-end testing had been conducted in advance and actual flight equipment used instead of substitutes.”

So when testing a space capsule that was intended to carry humans to the Space Station, Boeing skipped thorough testing?

And used substitute instead of actual flight equipment?

Substitutes like…an old blender they had sitting around?  An out-of-date throwaway camera?  A computer from the 1981 space shuttle?

I wondered, was Boeing trying to cut corners?

Not so, according to the article,

“Mulholland stressed that the situation had nothing to do with saving money.”

Wow!  Finally, someone at Boeing is telling the truth!

After all, it’s not their money Boeing is spending.

It’s ours.

And take a guess how much the government – meaning we taxpayers – have thus far spent on the Starliner debacle:

That’s right.

Taxpayers have given $5 billion to Boeing to develop Starliner.

Clearly, “saving money” is not on Boeing’s priority list.

But the real bummer was that Starliner – this was back in December – carried taxpayer-paid-for “Christmas treats and presents for the six space station residents.”

Those treats and presents never arrived.

And neither did this:

Meet Rosie the Rocketeer.

In this photo provided by Boeing, the space test dummy that would be aboard the Starliner was “named after the iconic WWII character, Rosie the Riveter, and is headed to space decked out in her famous red bandana and a Boeing blue space suit.”

Boeing got the red bandana right, but not the Starliner.

I’d say Rose the Rocketeer isn’t the only dummy at Boeing.

Fifty-some years ago someone I suppose we’d call an “artist” wrote something I suppose we’d call a “song.”

It became fairly popular among rock ‘n’ rollers, and actually rose to the height of anthem among a certain segment of popular culture.

It was 1967, the song was “White Rabbit,” and it’s all about drugs – ingesting them and tripping out on them, with lyrics that made no sense until you were, indeed, ingesting and tripping.

Here are the lyrics:

One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you, don’t do anything at all.

Go ask Alice, when she’s 10 feet tall.

And if you go chasing rabbits, and you know you’re going to fall
Tell ‘em a hookah-smoking caterpillar has given you the call.

And call Alice, when she was just small.

When the men on the chessboard get up and tell you where to go
And you’ve just had some kind of mushroom, and your mind is moving low.

Go ask Alice, I think she’ll know.

When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead
And the white knight is talking backwards
And the red queen’s off with her head
Remember what the dormouse said:
Feed your head, feed your head.

See?

No sense at all.

Unless you’re stoned.

Fast forward to 2020.

A cruise ship line – for reasons that also make no sense at all – has incorporated these 50+-year-old lyrics and the music into their commercials.

Well, it makes no sense to me, so I took to the Internet and found plenty of explanations from back when the commercials came out, on websites including AdWeek, the bible of the advertising industry:

And Travel Weekly, which bills itself as “The Travel Industry’s Trusted Voice”:

And this:

From JeffersonAirplane.com, or “JA,” Jefferson Airplane being the band that recorded “White Rabbit” in 1967.

The articles state that the commercials are for Celebrity Cruises and their newest ship, Celebrity Edge:

Which, according to the Celebrity Cruises website is “A ship designed to leave the future behind.”

Which also makes no sense at all.

So, let’s hear from the experts, as quoted in Travel Weekly:

Celebrity Cruises said:

“The ad ‘follows a female protagonist on a voyage of discovery through a dream-like wonderland of world-class cuisine, cocktails, Eden-istic experiences and alluring accommodations, all on the brand’s newest ship, Celebrity Edge.

“Eden-istic experiences.”  Uh-huh.

‘…bringing the experience of cruising with Celebrity to life in a dramatic, beautiful way.  We wanted to show how unexpected moments, impeccable service and stunning design create a trip that is truly wonderful, and provides our guests with a break from reality, even just for an instant.’”

“Create a trip.”  Well, the “trip” part sounds right.

And this, from the ad agency that did the airplane-cruise ship mix:

“We want viewers to see Celebrity the way we see Celebrity, as a modern and progressive brand with an incredible and unique product.  We hope to convey the same feelings of wonder and intrigue you get from being on a Celebrity cruise, in a fresh way.”

“Wonder and intrigue.”  I see.

Only I don’t.

Perhaps only a hookah-smoking caterpillar could:

I am humbled.

Seriously humbled.

To think that Melania Trump – busy as she is, picking out clothes and shoes and accessories, getting her hair and makeup done, and following behind Trump like in this famous image, where Trump is bounding up the White House steps, Melania apparently forgotten…

That she would take the time to find MY name, MY address, write to me AND send me a check?

And not only that, but to write a two-page letter, personally addressed to me?

Just a cursory glance at the letter showed me it was filled with her own personal words of wisdom, like these…

And these…

And these…

WOW, again!  Melania is going to tell Trump – about me?

And she personally signed it with an authentic Trump-style Sharpie?

Seriously, all I can say is…

So there I was, basking in the glow of Melania’s personal attention, picking up the check again to admire her other authentic Trump-style Sharpie signature, when…

Wait.

The check isn’t made out to me.

It’s made out to “Republican National Committee.”

Did Melania mail me the wrong check?

I went back and this time I read the letter closely, and…

This wasn’t a personal-from-Melania-let’s-be-BFFs missive at all.

It was a pitch for money!

For the Republican National Committee!

And here I’d had visions dancing through my head of us shopping together, and finding these Jimmy Choo Metallic Avril 100 Crystal Pumps – a steal at $4,215…

Well.

If you see Melania (look for her following behind Trump – he’s the one with the umbrella) …

Well, if Melania wants to write to me again, please tell her my new address…

At…

Here’s an easy, guaranteed way to save $200 and the best part is, you don’t have to do anything.

It’s what you’re not going to do that will save you that $200:

Don’t do this:

No, this is not the first settlement of humans on the moon.

It’s Dinner with a View, or DWAV, and those in the know call it.

DWAV is San Diego’s latest pop-up dining experience – excuse me, experiential dining event – and was deemed “Instagram-worthy” by the San Diego Union-Tribune.

And not only “Instagram-worthy,” but “Instagram-worthy luxury event” and “Instagram story dream come true.”

The article sounded more like an ad for Instagram than a restaurant review.

As does the DWAV website:

“…opportunities to capture that perfect photograph…a wondrous environment perfect for sharing via social…

Here’s what happened.

DWAV sent a bunch of worker bees to a location in San Diego (above) to hand-assemble 36 domes – excuse me, dining pods – from dozens of Plexiglass-style hexagons.

This is outdoor dining in the dead of winter, and yes, while it is San Diego and temperatures at this time of year can reach the 70s during the day, they can drop to the 30s at night.

And in those chilly temps…

Want a pre-dinner cocktail?  It’s a GYO – Get Your Own – at the outdoor bar.

Indoor bathrooms, the reviewer assures us, “are happily close,” which could be anything from a few steps away to a trip over the river and through the woods.

Thus, the reviewer recommends “cold-weather clothing and shoes”:

And, the reviewer assures us, each dining pod has a space heater.

But before you start zipping up your down jacket, you must “book your dome.”

Cost:

That’s right – $200 just to sit in a Plexiglass-style dome, shivering with cold while you eat.  And speaking of eating…

Next:  You pay for your dinner in advance.

Cost:

Next:  You make your meal selection from something I’d never heard of:

A blind menu.

That means you can choose meat, fish or vegan, but you have no idea what you’re ordering, or paying for in advance.

So “meat” could mean a juicy, perfectly cooked ribeye steak, or beef tripe (a cow’s stomach lining) or whatever was left over from last night.

You won’t know until your server serves it.

Same for fish and vegan.

The DWAV website says that beverages are not included, and they mean NONE:

“There will be no complimentary water available.”

Other extras:  Gratuity, taxes, and ticketing/processing.

And, added the reviewer, “the food needs a boost” and “service…was slow.”

As for the “view” in Dining with a View, this “dazzling winter wonderland scene” happened in Toronto:

But in San Diego,

“It’s not quite as romantic at Liberty Station, with the domes set up on a concrete patio behind the Navy’s National Training Center building.”

Yeah, just to the left of the dumpsters.

Your reservation must be for a minimum of four guests, so throw in one round of GYO cocktails and a bottle of wine, and I figure $800+ for you and three others to dine in a dome.

And take a shivering selfie.

Dinner With a View will dissemble its domes on March 9, so you have till then to decide:

$200 shivering selfie…………………………………….or $200 in your pocket?

No one has ever accused Trump of being a student of history.

His numerous mistakes when speaking about historical events and the people involved are legendary.

Like this one on July 4^th in 2019:

Trump said,

“In June of 1775, the Continental Congress created a unified army out of the revolutionary forces encamped around Boston and New York.  Our army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rockets’ red glare, it had nothing but victory.”

This prompted a Twitter storm, including this:

I’ll also point out that the battle of Fort McHenry occurred during the war of 1812, and not the American revolutionary war which took place several decades earlier.

Then there was this gaffe:

During a Black History Month breakfast, after mentioning several African American historical figures Trump said, “Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I notice.”

Frederick Douglass, the famed abolitionist, died in 1895.

And another:

“Andrew Jackson been a little later you wouldn’t have had the Civil War.  He was a very tough person but he had a big heart.  He was really angry that he saw with regard to the Civil War, he said, ‘There’s no reason for this.’”

Jackson died in 1845, 16 years before the Civil War began.

During his recent visit to India, Trump and Melania visited the Taj Mahal, the mausoleum commissioned in 1632 by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan to house the tomb of his favorite wife.

While posing for pictures like this in front of the Taj Mahal:

Trump called the world-famous landmark “truly beautiful” and added this historical fact:

“They named it after my hotel in Atlantic City, you know – the Trump Taj Mahal.”

He then pulled up these images on his phone to compare:

And said, “See?  India made their version white, just like mine, and those pointy things?  Exactly the same.  Their building looks almost as good as mine – almost.  They don’t have the neon, that would add a lot.”

Trump went on to say, “My Trump Taj Mahal is the greatest – not just casino, but greatest building ever built.  Yeah, you can talk about the pyramids and that stuff, but Trump Taj Mahal – hey, when we opened it, I called it ‘the eighth wonder of the world,’ and everybody agreed.

People would come in and say, ‘Donald, your hotel is the eighth wonder of the world.’  Michael Jackson came, and he said, ‘Donald, your hotel is the eighth wonder of the world.’

“So I don’t mind that the nice people of India – and they’re great, these Indians are great, not like those Indian troublemakers we have at home – if the Indians here want to copy my Trump Taj Mahal and steal the name, hey, I won’t even charge them for it.”

Trump added, “I might buy it from them, though.  They tell me they get millions of visitors every year, so they’ve already got the foot traffic, I’d add some neon, restaurants, McDonald’s, badda-boom, badda-bing, you got Trump Taj Mahal Casino India.

“And I promise you, Michael Jackson will come to the opening.”

As the coronavirus continues to spread, many in the world are wringing their hands in anxiety.

At least one group, however, is rubbing its hands in glee:

Airlines.

Says one article:

“United Airlines is facing the impact of suspending its 12 daily flights to China due to steep traffic declines from the coronavirus outbreak.”

I’m sure this is true – United’s flights to China were revenue generators, and that revenue stream has dried up for now.

But instead of taking the hit as a cost of doing business – a temporary cost of doing business – United came up with this solution:

That’s right.

United is raising its checked baggage fee by $5, to $35 for the first checked bag and $45 for the second.

I can just hear the conversation in United’s boardroom, as The Powers That Be were sitting around thinking about their next way to gouge us passengers:

Power #1:  I’m pissed off about the lost China revenue.  That virus thing – what a nuisance.  Suggestions?

Power #2:  How about a new fee?

Power #3:  Well, we’re already charging for carryon bags, checked bags, oversize bags, the bags under your eyes, snacks, drinks, priority seating, priority boarding, seat selection, ticket booking/ changes/cancellations, Wi-Fi, traveling with pets, traveling without pets, runway fees, take-off fees, landing fees, segment fees, and fee fees…

Power #2:  OK, instead of a new fee, how about we just raise a current fee?

Powers #1:  Here, here!  I like the way you think!  We’ll go with checked bags – that’s a guaranteed revenue stream.  Let’s see (shuffling papers) …Yeah, it says here in 2018, our checked baggage revenue was $888.7 million.  So how much do we raise it?

Power #3:  Um…I’m a tad concerned about raising any fees right now.  It will look like we’re sticking it to passengers because we’re losing money on the China flights.

Power #2:  And…your point is?

(Silence…)

Power #1:  OK, then – we’re agreed.  Let’s raise it $5 per bag.  I like nice, round numbers.

Power #3:  May I ask…once the coronavirus has run its course, will we lower the checked bag fee by $5?

(Silence…)

Online articles are predicting that Delta and American will also raise their checked baggage fees.

No coincidence – Delta and American were also flying to China.

But take note – United just announced a clever way to distract us from the flap about fees:

Apparently United has something they call a “rotating selection of complimentary snacks.”  Biscoff cookies were part of that rotation, but now Biscoffs are out and Oreo Thins are in:

“Our complimentary snack options continue to be a hit and we’re always looking for opportunities to introduce new selections,” a spokesperson for the airline said.  “We plan to add Oreo Thins into the mix soon and look forward to the response from our customers.”

United didn’t have to wait long for a response:

The United spokesperson hastened to assure the disgruntled that their beloved Biscoffs would eventually resume their place in the rotation selection.

But as for lowering those raised baggage fees after airlines resume flights to China?

And missing the opportunity to make money off others’ misery?

When I publish a post on this blog, and later find an error in it…

I hate that.

An error in spelling or grammar or punctuation, a typo, a “your” instead of a “you’re,” a “continuously” that should be “continually…”

(And I get that last one wrong continually, which means “something that is frequently occurring but intermittent” vs. continuously, “something that occurs without interruption.”)

I hate it even more when someone else spots an error.

I’m embarrassed and annoyed and even ashamed.

I really aim to make my posts perfect, but my aim is sometimes off.

But now I’ve decided to feel slightly less embarrassed and annoyed and ashamed.

Because I found a WHOPPER of an error in the book I’m reading.

An error so glaring, so obvious, so egregious that at first, I thought I’d misread it.

So I read it again.

And it still said the same thing.

I was flummoxed.

I won’t reveal the book’s author or title, but will say it was published in late 2019 and described as a “a compelling novel.”

The setting:  It’s 1949.  A 19-year-old woman is in a swimming pool.

The error:  She “swam to the metal ladder and with all the grace of Ethel Merman, climbed out of the pool.”

I wondered if this was a joke, or perhaps the author was being sarcastic?

But – no.

The author got it wrong.

And not just the author – the steps in book publishing from author’s hand to bookstore also involve an editor, one or more copy editors, and then the page proofs review by the author and editor and proofreader.

A whole host of people missed the whopper:

The author said, “Ethel Merman,” but meant “Esther Williams.”

Ethel Merman (1908-1984) was an American actress and singer.

Esther Williams (1921-2013) was an American actress and swimmer.

Ethel singing.	Esther swimming.

Williams was famous for her “swimming” movies including Bathing Beauty (1944), Neptune’s Daughter (1949) and Million Dollar Mermaid (1952).  She made non-swimming movies as well, but what she’s most remembered for are those swimming scenes:

Mermen was famous for her voice, described as “big” and “brash” and “powerful.”  She earned the recognition of “undisputed First Lady of the musical comedy stage” and her performances included Annie Get Your Gun (1946), Call Me Madam (1950) and Gypsy (1959).  Merman also made movies, television appearances, and record albums:

So:  They were both popular actresses with long careers.

But Ethel didn’t swim.

And Esther didn’t sing.

Maybe the author associated “swimming” with “Merman” because a merman is the male equivalent of a mermaid?

Or, maybe not.

Either way, that Ethel/Esther error is out there forever.  I suppose the eBook could be corrected, but all those hard copies?

Nope.

I, at least, can open my blog post, click “Edit,” and fix my mistake(s).

And I will do that continually.

I mean, continuously.

I think.

Publication date:  October 2019

Review, short version:  Four roses out of four.

Review, long version:

The last time I reviewed a John Grisham book – The Reckoning – I gave it three out of four skunks.

I also gave three out of four skunks to the Grisham book I reviewed before that:  Camino Island.

So you’d have good reason to wonder why I keep reading John Grisham books.

Here’s the reason:

Grisham’s latest, The Guardians.

Everything’s coming up roses for this one!

Grisham chose a subject I’m hugely interested in – the exoneration of people wrongly imprisoned.

You might have read or seen the stories, like this one:

The length of time wrongly convicted men and women spend in prisons is staggering, and it happens because somewhere, someone along the line from arrest to conviction made a mistake or lied.  Sometimes multiple people make mistakes or lie.  As Grisham puts it,

“This can be a dirty business.  We are forced to deal with witnesses who have lied, police who have fabricated evidence, experts who have misled juries, and prosecutors who have suborned perjury.”

From Grisham’s point of view, there are no mistakes, only lies.

Lies that put innocent people behind bars, many of them on death row.

In The Guardians, the “we” in the above quote is first-person narrator Cullen Post, a lawyer and one of three people that comprise the Guardians, a non-profit committed to freeing the wrongly convicted, or “innocence cases.”  The plot concerns Post investigating a murder and the man, Quincy Miller, convicted for it 22 years ago – 22 years spent in prison for a crime that the Guardians believe Miller didn’t commit.

Post spends his time driving endless miles to talk to cops, snitches, and past witnesses – or trying to talk to them – and dealing with a prosecutor who, according to Post:

“Instead of pursuing the lofty goal of finding the truth and unraveling an injustice, he attacks me because I’m trying to prove him wrong and exonerate and innocent man.”

Post also spends his time meeting with clients in various prisons, his descriptions of which are unfailingly grim:

“Prison is a nightmare for those who deserve it.  For those who don’t, it is a daily struggle to maintain some level of sanity.  For those who suddenly learn that there is proof of their innocence yet they remain locked up, the situation is literally maddening.”

And Post spends a lot of time waiting – for the justice system to work, for juries to vote, for judges to decide:

“Waiting is one of the hazards in this business.  I’ve seen a dozen courts sit on cases involving innocent men as if time doesn’t matter, and I’ve wished a hundred times that some pompous judge could be forced to spend a weekend in jail.  Just three nights, and it would do wonders for his work ethic.”

Grisham weaves a tangled web, but he wrote this book so well that the storyline and multiple characters are easy to follow.  You can’t help but cheer for Post and the Guardians team, and want them to win Quincy Miller’s freedom.

But will they?

And since I believe that Grisham did his homework on this one and knows what he’s talking about – you can’t help but curse our justice system when it allows the innocent to pay for the guilty.

And the guilty free to offend again.

I highly recommend The Guardians.

And I strongly encourage you to get acquainted with the nonprofit organizations that are committed to doing what the Guardians do:  correct the injustice of wrongful convictions that occur in the U.S. Judicial system.

A good place to start is A-JustCause.com, which lists a number of those organizations (click the Affiliates tab on the home page).  You can read some success stories, and maybe donate some money so they can keep doing this important work.

After all, you might need their help one day, just like this innocent man did:

And of course, Trump also tweeted about it:

That was then, and this is now:

And here’s the latest “draining”:

No one can doubt that hate is a growing trend in our country:

Now, even a zoo is getting in on the hate:

Yes, the San Antonio zoo is celebrating Valentine’s Day by inviting you to participate in its first-ever “Cry Me a Cockroach” event.

I’ll let the zoo tell you in its own words:

The live-streaming they’re referring to is just a quick scroll down the page, where for now you see their cockroach cam:

But today – Valentine’s Day – just stay tuned, and you can watch this new and sickening outlet for hate…

As your live cockroach or dead rodent, named after your ex, is devoured by San Antonio Zoo animals:

“OK, kids!  It’s time to watch that horrible, nasty cockroach we named after your daddy get killed and eaten!”

A full-page ad in a newspaper catches the eye.

But this full-page ad in the February 9 San Diego Union-Tribune?

Both eyes:

OK – I should have said my less-than-perfect ad replication, since my scanner couldn’t take it all in, in one pass.

And who could take in all this news?

The Rolling Stones are coming to San Diego!

In fact, their “No Filter Tour” kicks off in San Diego on May 8!

Presale tickets go on sale TODAY, February 12, at 10am, and the take-what’s-left tickets on February 14.

As I marveled at the full-page ad, something else caught my eye:

The Stones’ proudly sole sponsor:

Alliance for Lifetime Income.

There’s just something so ironic about that sponsor:

That the Rolling Stones, now all in their mid-70s, are sponsored by a company whose website states:

Could there be any people less likely to “outlive their retirement income” than the Rolling Stones?

• Mick Jagger 2020 estimated net worth: $300 million
• Keith Richards 2020 estimated net worth: $400 million
• Ronnie Wood 2020 estimated net worth: $100 million
• Charlie Watts 2020 estimated net worth: $170 million

The sponsor, of course, is a nod to the Stones’ concert attendees, many of whose ages may be similar to the Stones’ but whose retirement incomes certainly aren’t.

On the Alliance website, the executive director states,

“With their outstanding success in the 21^st century and creative forward thinking, the Stones have set an example for all of us by reimagining and redefining the exciting future they can create for themselves.”

Back in 1963, when the Stones cut their first single, I’m pretty sure they were not focused on “outstanding success in the 21^st century,” “creative forward thinking” and setting “an example.”

I checked out TicketScalpers.com and No Filter Tour tickets come in lots of prices, but the VIP Front Row Seats tickets are selling for $5,031 each.

And where else would you want to see the Stones except from the front row?

So I say:

Hit that ticket presale at 10am THIS MORNING!

Dust off your tight leather pants and get down with some major Stones attitude!

Spend the money!

And as for outliving your retirement income, well…

I’m a writer, and I find it mostly easy to imagine conversations – for others, and for myself.

Sometimes I imagine having a conversation with a Trump supporter.

And since it’s my imagined conversation, I’ll chose to have it with a male adult Trump supporter.

I’ll call him “Bob.”  Bob has a wife, and they have two teenage daughters.

Here goes:

Me:  Bob, you’re a Trump supporter, correct?

Bob:  Yes, I voted for Trump in 2016 and I’ll vote for him in November.

Me:  OK.  Now, do you recall, over the past several years, the negative things Trump has said about women?

Bob:  Not particularly.

Me:  Then how about if I recall an example?

Bob:  OK, I guess.

Me:  In 2018, referring to a woman who used to work for him, Trump said she was  “a crazed, crying lowlife” and a “dog.”

Bob:  And…so?

Me:  I was wondering if you’d like it if Trump called your wife a “a crazed, crying lowlife” and a “dog”?  Or your daughters?  Would it be OK if Trump called your daughters “crazed, crying lowlifes” and “dogs”?

Bob:  Oh.  OK, no.

Me:  How about if Trump said this about your wife or daughters:  “Does she have a good body?  No.  Does she have a fat ass?  Absolutely.”  Would that be alright?

Bob:  No.

Me:  OK, Bob, last example.  Suppose Trump said this about your wife or daughters:  “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”

Bob (long pause):  Is there a point to this?

Me:  Yes.  I’m wondering why it wouldn’t be OK for Trump to make these statements about your wife and daughters, but you’re fine with him saying these things – and worse – about other women?

Bob:  I didn’t say I was fine with it.

Me:  But you’re going to vote for him, right?

Bob:  Yes.

End of my imaginary – though I think real enough – conversation.

I culled the above Trump insults from this article:

Articles about Trump’s verbal abuse of women are easy to find, like this one:

And this one:

And back in 2017 the Brits got in on the act with this article:

But the Brits are behind the times; just think of all the demeaning things he’s said about women since then – this one, for example:

It’s so obvious to me that Trump is a misogynist:

He hates women.

He likes to fuck women, but he hates women.

What I can’t find are articles that tell me why.

I thought I might find articles written by or quoting experts, but no – it’s widely that accepted no ethical psychiatrist or psychologist would speak publicly about Trump’s mental state, having never had Trump as a patient.

And of course, if they did have Trump as a patient, those conversations would be kept private due to patient/doctor privilege.

So I’ll jump in and offer my opinion on why Trump hates women.

Here she is:

Mary MacLeod Trump, his mother.

Mary grew up poor, crammed into a two-bedroom rented cottage with her parents and 10 siblings.

Homes in the community were considered “indescribably filthy” and characterized by “human wretchedness.”

She had less than a high school education.

But worst of all…

She was an immigrant.

And Trump has made his feelings clear about immigrants:

Mary was poor, Scottish immigrant who spoke English with an accent.  She came to this country in 1929 when she was 17, and worked as a maid before marrying Trump’s father.

A maid.  Sometimes called a “domestic.”  Or, a “servant.”

Trump is ashamed of his mother’s – and therefor his – “lowly” roots.

When you feel ashamed of someone, and because of someone, it can be easy to hate them.

Trump hates his mother.

And he extends that hate to all women.

Oh, I know – he’s been married three times, and considers himself the greatest cocksman of all time…

But he hates women.

I did find one article with a headline that matched my theory – it’s the first image at the top.

The article is thoughtful and well-written, but nowhere is there any mention of Trump’s mother.

So, the author had his theory, and I have mine.

And I’ll stand by my theory.

But…why have a theory?

Why write about “Trump hates women” at all?

Because, come November, I want his female supporters to remember, while he’s courting them for their vote…

He hates them.

And I want Trump’s male supporters to remember that every time Trump demeans a woman…

He’s also talking about their wives…

And their daughters.

When we hear the term “price fixing” it’s usually associated with high-profile items:  prescription drugs, computers, air travel.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) issues a news release like this one:

And this one:

And this one:

Names are named, fines are fined, and sometimes heads – metaphorically – will roll.

So, pharma, airlines, computers – all high profile.

But these guys?

The canned tuna people?  As in, the canned tuna I, and millions of others, have in our cupboards?

The canned tuna that, combined with mayo and celery, is the foundation for my beloved tuna fish sandwiches?

Yes, the very same.

And it turns out, this canned tuna price fixing is very high profile, too.

But, briefly – what is price fixing?  The Federal Trade Commission explains it far better than I could:

Price fixing:  Hurts consumers, and profits the companies doing the price fixing.

Unless they get caught.

And the above-pictured canned tuna companies – Bumble Bee, StarKist and Chicken of the Sea – all got caught.

This hit close to home – my home – both because I’m a canned tuna consumer, and the tuna industry is an integral part of San Diego’s history.  Back in the 1920s, San Diego was known as the “tuna capital of the Pacific.”

By 1940, 95% of packed tuna was canned right here.

In the 1970s, tuna was San Diego’s third-largest industry, employing some 40,000 San Diegans in catching, canning and marketing the product.  Two of the three big tuna canning companies were based here, and the waterfront was home to four canneries and scores of fishing boats.

The industry has mostly vanished, but Bumble Bee is still headquartered in San Diego.  It’s the nation’s largest branded canned seafood company, and a major player in the industry – a 41% U.S. market share for canned albacore and 13% percent of the canned “light meat” tuna market.

Bumble Bee’s U.S. and Canada sales totaled $933 million last year, according to bankruptcy records.

Yes, Bumble Bee filed for bankruptcy in November:

This was part of the fallout from price-fixing charges first brought in 2016:

All three companies were charged with price fixing – “collusion in the seafood packing industry” in government-ese – from at least 2011 to 2013.

Which was followed by this:

And this:

The price-fixing scheme came to light when Chicken of the Sea’s attempt to buy Bumble Bee failed in 2015, according to court records.

Chicken of the Sea executives then alerted federal investigators, and the company received conditional leniency from the Justice Department for its cooperation with the price fixing investigation and didn’t have to pay fines.

At StarKist, Stephen Hodge, a former senior vice president for sales, pleaded guilty in 2017 to price fixing.

In September 2018 a federal judge ordered StarKist to pay a $100 million fine for its role in the collusion.

And Bumble Bee Foods?

Bumble Bee agreed to pay a $25 million fine after pleading guilty to price fixing in 2017.

Two executives at Bumble Bee, Kenneth Worsham and Walter Cameron, pleaded guilty in the price fixing scheme.

The three companies face lawsuits from wholesalers, food service companies and retailers.

And, finally:

Bumble Bee had pleaded guilty; Worsham and Cameron at Bumble Bee had pleaded guilty.

But Bumble Bee former CEO Chris Lischewski apparently decided to take his chances in court – he pleaded not guilty.  (Lischewski had “stepped down from his leadership position” in May 2018.)

According to a 12/1/19 article in the Los Angeles Times, Lischewski was

“a major prosecution target because he was one of the most respected and influential executives in the tuna canning industry.

“And also because, by the government’s reckoning, he was a mastermind of the scheme.”

In early December, Lischewski was convicted in the price-fixing conspiracy by a federal jury in San Francisco:

Lischewski faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $1 million, according to the indictment.  His sentencing is set for April 2020.

Experts say this is likely the final piece of the DOJ probe.

I remember thinking over the years, “These cans of tuna are getting smaller.”

The Los Angeles Times article confirmed this:

“Bumble Bee, StarKist and Chicken of the Sea took several steps to shore up profits.  They shrank the size of their cans without a commensurate price reduction.  The seven-ounce cans that were the standard as recently as the 1980s gave way to six-ounce cans, and a couple of years ago to five-ounce cans.”

But apparently less tuna for the same (or more) cost to consumers wasn’t enough “shoring up” for these guys.

So they added price fixing to their recipe.

I’ll keep using those five-ounce cans to make my sandwich, which takes three ingredients:  tuna, mayo and celery.

This price-fixing conspiracy involved three companies, but required only one ingredient:

Looks like former-CEO-now-felon Lischewski will have plenty of company:

Update:  January 31, 2020:

A “rough few years” for Bumble Bee, indeed.

According to the article,

“Bumble Bee Foods has been sold for $928 million to Taiwan-based FCF Co., after years of legal troubles and bankruptcy for the San Diego-based company.

“Fines and litigation cost Bumble Bee millions of dollars, according to bankruptcy documents, eventually leading it to explore a sale.”

I expect FCF Co. president Max Chou is doing the Happy Dance.

I expect FCF Co. president Max Chou has written a thank-you note to Bumble Bee former-CEO-now-felon Chris Lischewski, “mastermind” of the price-fixing scheme:

If you’ve flown on commercial carriers over the past 10 years and wondered, “Gosh, is this seat smaller and do I have less leg room?”

It is, and you do.

It’s called “high-density seating” and the airlines aren’t bashful about it:

High-density seating means airlines utilize smaller seats in rows that are closer together to allow for more seats.

Bottom line:  More seats = more passengers = more profits.

Here’s just one example.  The Airbus A380 – a very popular commercial aircraft – “has a typical seating capacity of 525, though it is certified for up to 853 passengers.”

If you put 853 people in the same space you’d put 525 people, something’s got to go.

What goes is seat room and leg room.

And we tend to just grin and bear it – well, not grin, but bear it – because we’ve got to get to New York for a meeting or we want to go on vacation to California or seeing the sun rise over Uluru has been on our bucket list for years.

I mention high-density seating for a reason:

This is a miniature horse.  They generally stand between two and three feet tall and weigh between 150 and 250 pounds.

On an airplane, they don’t curl up in a pet carrier like a cat does.  They don’t contort themselves into a small space at their owner’s feet, like a dog does.

But they do produce manure, like any horse does.

In August the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) confirmed that it was okey-dokey for miniature horses to be in all cabins of commercial planes.

I’m guessing no one at DOT involved in this decision ever experienced this:

These are high-density seats 20E and 20F.

You’re in 20F, the window seat, and so glad you paid extra to be adjacent to the bulkhead in front of you.

You have more leg room, and no fool sitting in front of you, about to drop his seatback into your lap for the duration of the 10-hour flight.

Yup, you done good, buying your ticket early.

You hear a bit of a commotion, and see passengers standing up to get a better look at something moving down the aisle.  A few people are taking pictures with their phones.

Then you hear, “Ah.  Here’s our seat – 20E.”

A passenger is talking to a small horse.

A horse.  On your airplane.

The passenger smiles at you and says, “Hi!  This is Parsley.”

The passenger then backs Parsley the horse into the space between the seats and the bulkhead, all the way in, until the horse’s ass is right under the windows.

And right in front of your knees.

Say hello to your seatmates for the next 10 hours.

OK:  I want to be kind, and I want to be fair.

And in my research I learned that miniature horses actually can become effective trained service animals.  According to an article in the 8/17/19 New York Times,

“…guide horses serve as a compelling alternative to guide dogs.  The animals are mild-mannered and fast learners, with nearly 360-degree vision.  They may also offer balance support to individuals with physical disabilities.”

As for ESAs – emotional support animals – I’ve never felt the need for one, so I can’t put myself in the shoes of someone who does.

And we know that there is an abundance of owners who are claiming their animals as “necessary” to their emotional well-being during a flight.  Animals including pigs, lizards, ferrets, squirrels, hamsters, hedgehogs, mice, spiders, turkeys, monkeys, Dexter the peacock, kangaroos, and this…

And we’ve all heard the horror stories, like the ESA dog that injured a child on a Southwest Airlines flight, and the ESA dog that lunged at a seated passenger, attacking his face that leaving him with 28 stitches and a set of scars that may require plastic surgery.

And this story:

And it’s hard to be kind and fair when the flight attendant is walking down the aisle with this, instead of my martini:

Going back to the The New York Times article, it talked about a lady and her trained service animal:

“Mona Ramouni, 39, who is blind, has been traveling with her miniature guide horse, Cali, for the past 10 years.  She has flown from Michigan, where she lives, to New York City and Georgia, among other locations.

“Ms. Ramouni has created a tidy defecation setup for long flights:  When she senses that Cali needs to go, she signals the horse, who then goes into a deodorized bag.”

And if Cali’s butt is parked in front of my knees…

Better make that two martinis.

So the next time I’m on a commercial aircraft and my seatmates include a miniature horse, I’ll stay calm and take a deep breath.  I’ll remind myself about “kind” and “fair.”

And that the horse could be a trained service animal.  If it’s an emotional support animal, I’ll hope that it, too, has been trained.

And when the owner pulls out that deodorized bag, I’ll take another deep breath and…

Update:  January 22, 2020

In mid-January the U.S. Department of Transportation announced that the organization was seeking public comment on proposed amendments to its Air Carrier Access Act regulation on the transportation of service animals by air.

Or, as one flight attendant succinctly put it, “The days of Noah’s Ark in the air are hopefully coming to an end.”

“Noah’s ark,” meaning…

Yes, these are just some of the “emotional support animals” people have brought (or tried to bring) on airplanes.

It’s clear that airline passengers have been abusing the emotional-support-animals-on-planes situation.

According to the ABC News article,

“Southwest Airlines handles more than 190,000 emotional support animals per year.  American Airlines carried 155,790 emotional support animals in 2017, up 48% from 2016, and United Airlines carried 76,000 comfort animals in 2017.

“The public will have 60 days to comment on the proposed changes.  Officials highlighted a few areas where they are most eager to get comments, including whether miniature horses should continue to qualify as service animals.”

So whether or not the above-mentioned Mona Ramouni and others will be able to continue bringing their miniature guide horses on commercial flights is subject to public comment, and then a Department of Transportation decision sometime in March.

I sure don’t know the right answer.

My sympathy is with Ramouni…unless she parks her horse in front of me.

Another article spelled out the proposed changes, if you’re interested in reading them:

• Define a service animal as a dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability.
• No longer consider an emotional support animal to be a service animal.
• Consider a psychiatric service animal to be a service animal and require the same training and treatment of psychiatric service animals as other service animals.
• Allow airlines to require forms developed by the Department of Transportation, attesting to a service animal’s good behavior, certifying the service animal’s good health, and if taking a long flight attesting that the service animal has the ability to either not relieve itself, or can relieve itself in a sanitary manner.
• Allow airlines to require passengers with a disability who are traveling with a service animal to check-in at the airport one hour prior to the travel time required for the general public to ensure sufficient time to process the service animal documentation and observe the animal.
• Require airlines to promptly check-in passengers with service animals who are subject to an advanced check-in process.
• Allow airlines to limit the number of service animals traveling with a single passenger with a disability to two service animals.
• Allow airlines to require a service animal to fit within its handler’s foot space on the aircraft.
• Continue to allow airlines to require that service animals be harnessed, leashed, tethered, or otherwise under the control of its handler.
• Continue to allow airlines to refuse transportation to service animals that exhibit aggressive behavior and that pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others.
• Continue to prohibit airlines from refusing to transport a service animal solely on the basis of breed.

Release date:  September 2019

Review, short version:  Thumbs up for the film, thumbs down for repulsive Roy Cohn.

Review, long version:

I once referred to Roy Cohn as “pond scum,” and the person I was speaking to said, “But you’re insulting pond scum.”

She was right.

Who was Roy Cohn?

That story is told in the documentary Where’s My Roy Cohn? which I’ll recount, briefly:

Roy Cohn (1927-1986) was New York born, became an attorney, and became famous for his roles in the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg espionage trial (1951), and later as Senator Joseph McCarthy’s supportive sidekick in the McCarthy hearings (late 1940s to mid-1950s).

He spent the remainder of his life as an attorney, cozying up with politicians, celebrities, mobsters, shysters and sleazeballs until he was disbarred by the State of New York in 1986.  A few weeks later, he died of complications from AIDS.

When I said, “pond scum,” I was trying to come up with an original description of Cohn that wasn’t included in the film, or in the many reviews that appeared when it debuted.

Here are excerpts from some of the film’s reviewers, and comments from people who knew Cohn, about his psyche, personality, and modus operandi:

“…certain slippery charm, a relish for verbal combat, and what can only be called a passionate disdain for the truth…blatant amorality…”
The New York Times, September 19, 2019

“…tactics that included smearing the enemy, scapegoating the dispossessed, alternately courting and demonizing the press and brazening out any accusations of wrongdoing or mendacity, no matter how well-founded…wherein truth is malleable, relationships are transactional and ethics are strictly for losers.”
Washington Post, September 24, 2019

“a snake, a scoundrel, a new strain of son of a bitch…savage, abrasive and amoral behavior…truculent, unrepentant…sneering, sinister sheen of invulnerability…a braggart of a tax cheat…incorrigibly unethical…

“…couldn’t have given less of a shit about rules…preening and combative, look-at-me lavish and loud…a quintessential hypocrite…an intimidator and a bluffer…he’ll bend the rules to the limit…he will stop at nothing…

“He was roundly, practically fetishistically unapologetic, remorseless, shameless…totally impervious to being insulted…deflect and distract, never give in, never admit fault, lie and attack, lie and attack, publicity no matter what, win no matter what, all underpinned by a deep, prove-me-wrong belief in the power of chaos and fear.”
Politico, September 9, 2019

“…a real-life supervillain…using the cloak of patriotism to disguise his hypocrisy…he was most expert at burnishing his own ego.  Caught in a lie, he’d quickly deny it in his loudest voice…toxic, insidious amorality…”
Rolling Stone, September 19, 2019

“…a person who was in denial about a great many things, including his own capacity for delusion and the harm that he caused to friends, business partners, and the political institutions of the United States…the gutter tactics, including scapegoating and media manipulation…celebrating himself as a ruthless individual who seemed proud of his reputation for manipulation and viciousness…”
RogerEbert.com, September 20, 2019

Why did I take the time to read all these reviews, and excerpt quotes about repulsive Roy Cohn?

Because Cohn left us a legacy:

Cohn was Trump’s Mentor

From the early 70s into the mid-80s, while Cohn was one of Trump’s attorneys, he was the man whom the much-younger Trump chose to admire and emulate.

Let’s go back and read the review excerpts again, especially the words in bold:

“…certain slippery charm, a relish for verbal combat, and what can only be called a passionate disdain for the truth…blatant amorality…”
The New York Times, September 19, 2019

“…tactics that included smearing the enemy, scapegoating the dispossessed, alternately courting and demonizing the press and brazening out any accusations of wrongdoing or mendacity, no matter how well-founded…wherein truth is malleable, relationships are transactional and ethics are strictly for losers.”
Washington Post, September 24, 2019

“a snake, a scoundrel, a new strain of son of a bitch…savage, abrasive and amoral behavior…truculent, unrepentant…sneering, sinister sheen of invulnerability…a braggart of a tax cheat…incorrigibly unethical…

“…couldn’t have given less of a shit about rules…preening and combative, look-at-me lavish and loud…a quintessential hypocrite…an intimidator and a bluffer…he’ll bend the rules to the limit…he will stop at nothing…

“He was roundly, practically fetishistically unapologetic, remorseless, shameless…totally impervious to being insulted…deflect and distract, never give in, never admit fault, lie and attack, lie and attack, publicity no matter what, win no matter what, all underpinned by a deep, prove-me-wrong belief in the power of chaos and fear.”
Politico, September 9, 2019

“…a real-life supervillain…using the cloak of patriotism to disguise his hypocrisy…he was most expert at burnishing his own ego.  Caught in a lie, he’d quickly deny it in his loudest voice…toxic, insidious amorality…”
Rolling Stone, September 19, 2019

“…a person who was in denial about a great many things, including his own capacity for delusion and the harm that he caused to friends, business partners, and the political institutions of the United States…the gutter tactics, including scapegoating and media manipulation…celebrating himself as a ruthless individual who seemed proud of his reputation for manipulation and viciousness…”
RogerEbert.com, September 20, 2019

It’s easy to connect the dots between Cohn and Trump.

It’s so appallingly easy to do.

“Donald calls me 15 to 20 times a day…Donald is my best friend…”
Roy Cohn quoted in Vanity Fair, June 2017

Many of San Diego’s 1.5 million residents refer to their home as “America’s Finest City,” and with good reasons:

But there are some people – residents and visitors alike – who disagree.

Some of those are people who – unfortunately – make headlines like this:

Because they injured themselves when they fell on a San Diego sidewalk that looked like this:

It appears that San Diego has a lot of sidewalks – around 5,000 miles – and many of those sidewalks are extremely funky

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, an assessment in 2015 found 108,706 sidewalk repairs were needed.  As of mid-January 2019, just over 27,000 of those repairs had been completed, leaving 81,000 more.

Plus any new problems that have arisen, and we can assume they have arisen:

Sidewalks aren’t something most of us think about.  We stroll on them, jog on them, walk our dogs on them, go to work or out to dinner or to the grocery store on them.

All without thinking about them.

Sidewalks are just there, and we rarely look down at them.

Perhaps that’s what happened to bicyclist Clifford Brown in central San Diego in 2017 – he was watching where he was going instead of looking down at the sidewalk.

Specifically, this sidewalk:

Brown was launched 28 feet on his bike which tore some of his spinal cord ligaments, knocked out several teeth and caused brain damage that left him incapable of functioning independently.

Not all injuries are as serious as Brown’s, and few, if any, settlements are as big as Brown’s – $4.85 million.

But even with smaller settlements, San Diego has been forced to cover more than $11 million in injury payouts for sidewalk lawsuits over the last five years.

To be accurate, “San Diego” didn’t pay more than $11 million – taxpayers did.

But who is responsible for sidewalks that look like this?

The answer:  “It depends,” said one helpful lawyer.

Again, according to the Union-Tribune:

“While the city is responsible for sidewalk damage caused by vehicle crashes, water main breaks and trees within the right-of-way, state law makes property owners responsible for the normal wear and tear of sidewalks adjacent to their property.”

OK, so property owners are responsible, and…

“Upon notification of a broken sidewalk, the city will mail the abutting property owner a notice of liability.”

And you, as a good citizen, start looking into fixing that #*%!#*! sidewalk.

Then, from San Diego comes this surprise:

More than $2,000 in city permit fees before you fix your sidewalk:

“While permit fees vary by location, city officials said they typically amount to more than $2,000 per repair.  That includes a traffic control permit, a right-of-way permit, a mapping fee, a maintenance fee, a records fees and an inspection.”

That’s right.

In San Diego you can’t just be a good citizen and hire a contractor to remove the broken sidewalk and replace it.

You must secure city permits as listed above.

Let’s delve a bit into just what all that bureaucratic bullshit is for:

“Traffic control permit”:  This is the San Diego city employee in a hard hat and orange safety vest who, during your sidewalk repairs, stands at the curb next to the sidewalk, waving traffic by while he plays AdventureQuest 3D on his phone.

“Right-of-way permit”:  These are two city employees in hard hats and orange safety vests who will drive to the broken sidewalk location, look at it and say, “Yup, that sucker needs fixing.”

“Mapping fee”:  This is the city employee back at City Hall who uses Google Maps to pinpoint the exact location of the broken sidewalk, needed by the two “right-of-way permit” guys (above) before they go look at the sidewalk, even though they have GPS in their city vehicles.

“Maintenance fee”:  These are 16 city employees in hard hats and orange safety vests who stand around watching your contractor and crew repair the sidewalk, all the while debating if the San Diego Padres will still suck this season.

“Records fees”:  These are the five city employees in the Records Department playing AdventureQuest 3D on their phones with the “traffic control permit” guy, and will get around to recording your sidewalk repair…eventually.

“Inspection”:  These are the eight city employees in hard hats and orange safety vests who stop by after the sidewalk work is completed and say, “Yup, that sucker is fixed.”

So the property owner is hit with permit fees plus the cost of the sidewalk repair, and what often happens is…

“…the average repair cost to the homeowner is over $3,000, which is simply too costly for many homeowners.  As a result, very few residents pay to fix city sidewalks, and the backlog continues to grow, especially in low-income communities.”

And when you see all those fees San Diego tacks on to get your sidewalk fixed, you may very well think, “Nah.  If somebody gets hurt, let ‘em sue the city.”

Here’s the interesting twist.  Even though you, the property owner, are responsible for sidewalk repairs…

“According to the current policy and state law, the city remains liable for injuries that result from broken sidewalks.”

As mentioned above, San Diego taxpayers have been forced to cover more than $11 million in injury payouts for sidewalk lawsuits over the last five years.

But somehow, somewhere, a light bulb came on and someone said, “I’ll bet more people would fix their sidewalks if we got rid of those #*%!#*! permit fees!”

And – hallelujah – that’s exactly what San Diego recently announced:

There are some catches, of course:

“The city will temporarily waive more than $2,000 in permit fees that property owners have been paying to fix sidewalks.  The fee waiver will take effect within 90 days and extend through the end of 2020, city officials said.”

But even with the time limit, I’m hopeful.

Perhaps in the upcoming months we’ll see a lot more of this:

And a lot less of this:

And this:

Update January 28, 2020:

Like cities across the country – like the entire country, in fact – San Diego has infrastructure problems.

And likewise, not enough money to fix the problems – as in, a $2 billion gap, according to this article:

The article says,

“To get a better handle on how dire the situation is, city officials for the first time divided the backlog of projects into two categories:  priority needs and discretionary needs.

“Priority needs are projects required by state mandates or that affect community health and safety.”

I thought that seemed like a reasonable first step and, of course – the sidewalks situation is something that affects “community health and safety.”

But the article continues:

“Discretionary projects are still deemed necessary for the city to achieve appropriate service levels in its neighborhoods.  But they are somewhat less urgent projects, such as sidewalks repairs, bike lanes and new library branches.”

San Diego, seriously?

As mentioned earlier, taxpayers have spent more than $11 million settling sidewalk injury lawsuits over the past five years.

But San Diego is putting sidewalk repairs in the same group as bike lanes – optional – and library branches, also optional?

No wonder this guy is smiling…

To say that there’s been a lot going on in the news would be the grossest of understatements.

So, amidst all the sound and fury, it’s understandable if we miss a story here or there.

Even a story that was carried in many media outlets including The New York Times, Associated Press, Time, Smithsonian, CBS, NBC, and internationally by the BBC.

First there was the Big Reveal:  A new product had been invented!

Then there was the Big Build-up:  Coming soon!

Then the Big Debut:  It’s here!

Never mind that the world already had about 7,500 varieties of this item.

Apparently, what the world needed now was one…more…

At least, that’s what the researchers at Washington State University (WSU) decided, and then spent 20 years studying and developing.

It’s not the cure for a life-threatening disease.

It’s not peace in the Middle East.

It’s not even a better mouse trap.

It’s an apple.

Specifically, the Cosmic Crisp® brand apple.

Not only does it have its own registered trademark, the Cosmic Crisp® has a $10 million marketing budget, a website, Instagram account, line of promotional items, and its own transportation:

I wasn’t kidding about the media coverage:

Yes, Smithsonian called the Cosmic Crisp “the Beyoncé of apples” which I’m sure was intended as a mutual compliment, though it’s uncertain how Beyoncé feels about that.

Why “Cosmic Crisp”?

According to the Smithsonian article,

“Consumer focus groups helped give Cosmic Crisp its name, which alludes to white specks on its skin that create ‘the image of stars against red sky,’ writes WSU.  The reality is perhaps a little less romantic; as Ellen Gutoskey of Mental Floss points out, the dots are lenticels, or ‘porous openings that allow the apple to exchange gases with its environment.’”

I think we can guess how Beyoncé would feel about that.

Those same creative folks at WSU also said this on the Cosmic Crisp website:

“…a new variety that will change the face of the industry and win enthusiasm among consumers with a combination of taste, texture, and usability.  The Cosmic Crisp® apple demonstrates how the science of breeding and the art of imagination can work together to create an utterly new and delightful apple.”

“Utterly new”?

“Utterly new”?

Not.

I’d said earlier that there were already around 7,500 varieties of apples, and it occurs to me that the brainiacs at Washington State University might have better spent their time, energy and money developing something we didn’t already have 7,500 varieties of.

But despite all the much-adoing about not much, and the $10 million and the hype and website and Instagram account and spaceship…

I decided to give Cosmic Crisp a try.

And I can tell you this with absolute certainty:

The Cosmic Crisp bears absolutely no resemblance to Beyoncé:

 

I gotta hand it to Trump.

Well, I don’t.

But for purpose of mocking him, I will.

Why?

Because his recent activities bring this old quote to mind:

Trump is that busy person, but he just keeps doing more!

For example, forget “POTUS” – his industrious efforts have earned Trump the new title of:

TTPTBI:
“The-Third-President-To-Be-Impeached”:

And as Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson can affirm, getting impeached keeps you busy!

But last week, Trump still found the time to travel to Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum (WEF), “an opportunity for the world’s most influential people to meld minds over the world’s economic and political challenges, and, more importantly, to network.”

“Meld minds”?

How would Trump do that?

Well, no matter, because Trump was still busy at the WEF, bullying Greta Thunberg:

The article noted,

“In a prepared speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump took the opportunity to take a swipe at Thunberg – who was in the audience – deriding ‘perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse’ about the environment.  ‘They are the errors of yesterday’s fortune-tellers,’ Trump claimed, ‘and we have them and I have them and they want to see us do badly, but we don’t let that happen,’ adding that in order to ‘embrace the possibilities of tomorrow,’ we must reject the warnings of such individuals.”

Whew!  A 73-year-old man bullying a 16-year-old.

Now that’s busy!

And coming up with all that great alliteration – “perennial prophets…predictions.”

I am in awe of Trump’s always-admirable alliteration.

Yet while busy at the WEF, Trump also found time for this:

And Politico even did the math for us:

“President Donald Trump posted more than 140 times on Twitter on Wednesday, surpassing his mid-December record for the most daily tweets and retweets during his presidency.

“The president flooded his Twitter account during the second day of the Senate’s impeachment trial, with 41 posts hitting the internet between 12 and 1a.m., or one every 88 seconds, according to the site Factba.se, which tracks and indexes Trump’s tweets and speeches.  He broke his all-time record for retweets, with more than 120 by late Wednesday afternoon.”

A tweet “every 88 seconds”?  Just think how tired his tiny thumbs must be!

So Trump was at the conference, busy being TTPTBI and bullying a teenager and typing those tweets, yet he somehow – clearly, he’s a time management meister – was working long distance as well:

As one media outlet put it,

“His new rule, which will be implemented in about 60 days, is the latest step in the Trump administration’s push to repeal or weaken nearly 100 environmental rules and laws, loosening or eliminating rules on climate change, clean air, chemical pollution, coal mining, oil drilling and endangered species protections.

“The new water rule for the first time in decades allow landowners and property developers to dump pollutants such as pesticides and fertilizers directly into hundreds of thousands of waterways, and to destroy or fill in wetlands for construction projects.”

He’s a time management meister, indeed – finding the time to roll back yet another of those pesky environmental rules and laws.

More long-distance multi-tasking:

I guess Trump was too busy to remember that, back when he was running for president, he promised to shield entitlements from cuts?

And speaking of long distance, before he left for the World Economic Forum – while he was busy packing and stuff – he made sure this happened:

Yup, thanks to Trump’s vigilance, the brand-new U.S. Space Force – not to be confused with the not-new U.S. Space Command – has a brand-new patch on an old Army camouflage uniform:

Not to be confused with the U.S. Space Command uniform:

Well, I presume this is the U.S. Space Command uniform, since this guy is Air Force Space Command Commander General John “Jay” Raymond.

And then – Trump returned to the U.S. and was busy unpacking and stuff, but still found the time to attend an anti-abortion rally at the National Mall:

Talk about transparency personified!

Vote whore that he is, Trump was obviously pandering to evangelists, parroting their language with phrases including,

“Unborn children have never had a stronger defender in the White House”

“The far left is actively working to erase our God-given rights [and] silence Americans who believe in the sanctity of life.”

“Make it your life’s mission to help spread God’s grace.”

“Sanctity of life”?  “God’s grace”?

Whew!  All that pandering and parroting kept Trump very busy!

So, Trump:  WEF attender, teenager bullier, Twitter leader, environment destroyer, uniform creator, parroter, panderer, women’s choice denier…

Trump is the ultimate time management meister multi-tasking TTPTBI.

And he’s has also mastered this skill set:

One night this past October at around 3am, a man entered a San Diego nursing home and went into a room where several female residents were sleeping.

He sexually assaulted one of the women, age 88.

When staff members heard the victim and her roommates screaming, they entered the room and the attacker fled.

Just six days later a suspect was arrested:  Lusean Arline, age 48.  Arline was identified as the alleged perpetrator through “evidence left at the scene” that was submitted to the FBI Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).  Police then tracked down Arline with help from the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Arline had prior convictions, including one from 2017 for following two elderly women home to their apartment and exposing himself to the victims.

After his release from prison on October 10, Arline was arrested for a misdemeanor drug offense and jailed until October 24.  He allegedly committed the nursing home sexual assault three days later.

One local TV station noted that Arline has “a long rap sheet”:

Arline was no stranger to getting caught, and his DNA was no stranger to databases.

DNA – an amazing tool that was unknown in police procedures until the late 1980s, and is now such a common part of our lexicon.  When we hear about a trial that includes DNA evidence, we know that evidence can be a huge part of a conviction.

This time around, Arline is facing felony charges including rape, elder abuse and residential burglary.  If convicted, he faces life in prison.

None of the news stories was specific about that “evidence left at the scene,” but when investigating a suspected sexual assault, police procedure is – if the victim agrees – to collect evidence and preserve it in a sexual assault evidence kit, commonly called a “rape kit”:

When tested, DNA evidence contained in rape kits can be a powerful tool to solve and prevent crime.

“When tested” are the magic words.

“When tested” are also the problem words.

Because, according to a July 2019 article in The Atlantic,

“Across the country, as many as 200,000 rape kits sit unopened in police storage while assailants – the people whose genetic fingerprints are decisively coded within such kits – are able to dodge prosecution and, in some cases, strike again.”

That means that in the U.S., thousands of people told law enforcement they were victims of sexual assault, and then subjected themselves to the evidence collecting police procedure.  This includes a doctor or nurse photographing, swabbing and conducting an invasive and exhaustive examination of the victim’s entire body for DNA evidence, a process that takes four to six hours.

How invasive and exhaustive?

Here are the contents of a typical rape kit:

And a list of items commonly included in a rape kit:

• Instructions
• Bags and sheets for evidence collection
• Swabs for collecting fluids from the lips, cheeks, thighs, vagina, anus, and buttocks
• Sterile urine collection containers
• Sterile sample containers
• Blood collection devices
• Comb used to collect hair and fiber from the victim’s body
• Clear glass slides
• Self-sealing envelopes for preserving the victim’s clothes, head hair, pubic hair, and blood samples
• Nail pick for scraping debris from beneath the nails
• White sheets to catch physical evidence stripped from the body
• Documentation forms
• Labels
• Sterile water and saline

Clearly it is an “invasive and exhaustive examination,” and clearly, these victims wanted the perpetrators brought to justice.  They wanted the perpetrators prevented from assaulting someone else.

They wanted their day in court, to face the perpetrator.

They’re still waiting.

Those 200,000 rape kits went to police evidence rooms.

Those untested kits have a name:  Backlog.

Backlog, because the rape kits have been in the evidence rooms, untested, for months, years, even decades.

Why?

Why would any rape kit go untested?

There are lots of answers online; when I googled “untested rape kits” I got 362,000 hits.

First up was endthebacklog.org, and they’re clear about their position on untested rape kits:

“The backlog of untested rape kits represents the failure of the criminal justice system to take sexual assault seriously, prioritize the testing of rape kits, protect survivors, and hold offenders accountable.”

Endthebacklog.org is also clear about the why – why any rape kit would go untested – and the reasons are disheartening:

A lack of clear, written policies among law enforcement for the testing of rape kits.  Decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, and sometimes those in law enforcement making those decisions are biased; police disbelieve victims of sexual assault more than victims of any other type of crime.

A lack of training and understanding about sexual assault and its impact on survivors and sex offenders, as well as a lack of training and understanding about the importance of forensic DNA, can impact whether a kit is submitted for testing.

A lack of resources – money and people; rape kit testing costs on average between $1,000 and $1,500, and public crime labs are underfunded, understaffed, and overwhelmed.

A lack of clear, up-to-date public crime lab policies to reflect innovations in the fields of forensic science and criminal justice.

That’s a lot of “lacks.”

Another website, RAINN.org, offered valuable insights.  RAINN stands for Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, and they reference CODIS, the above-mentioned Combined

DNA Index System:

“Each time a DNA profile is added to CODIS, it bolsters the strength of the database and increases the chance of catching and prosecuting perpetrators of sexual violence and other crimes.  CODIS has continued to grow to include DNA from millions of offenders and arrestees; it now includes more than 10 million DNA profiles.

“The result has been a dramatic increase in the hit rate, or the percentage of cases in which DNA found at the crime scene or in a rape kit is matched to someone in the database.”

A visit to the CODIS website is an eye-opener – it tells us that:

“CODIS’s primary metric, the ‘Investigation Aided,’ tracks the number of criminal investigations where CODIS has added value to the investigative process.  As of November 2019, CODIS has produced over 491,537 hits, assisting in more than  481,098 investigations.”

As of November 2019, in California, CODIS had 82,949 “Investigations Aided.”

Lusean Arline was in CODIS, and that aided his investigation.

Which brings us back to the 88-year-old victim in the San Diego nursing home.  I don’t know if the evidence was from a rape kit, but if it was, then it was one rape kit that did not go untested.

But what about those other 200,000 untested rape kits?

There is some encouraging news from endthebacklog.org:

“Jurisdictions that are deeply invested in bringing justice to survivors and preventing future crimes have dedicated the necessary resources toward addressing their backlogs and moving cases forward.

“New York City served as a model for the rest of the country when it committed to testing every rape kit in its backlog and aggressively following up on leads and prosecuting cases:

“Detroit is now working to pull together the resources needed to test every kit in its backlog of more than 11,000 untested kits and to investigate the resulting leads:

“In Cleveland, prosecutors have initiated cases against hundreds of perpetrators thanks to the testing of their nearly 4,000 kits:

“And in Memphis, nearly 6,000 kits have already been tested as the Memphis Police Department addresses its backlog of 12,164 kits”:

And these stories are encouraging.

But based on the image below from an ABC News story in January 2019, there is so much more to be done:

Yes, there is a smattering of good news like this…

And this…

But that good news is so far outweighed by the bad news:

Update:

There was good news on December 30 – though few major media outlets chose to tell it:

But still…

We’re still seeing headlines like this:

To call the British monarchy “staid” would not, in most cases, be an overstatement:

In fact, any number of British royal family members would take it as a compliment.

And I say “staid” not as a criticism – the British royal family is obviously doing something right.  Queen Elizabeth II is the world’s longest-reigning monarch – 67 years – and the English monarchy has been around since 827 AD or so.

I’m also not criticizing because I’ve been fascinated by English royalty for years.  There are so many English monarchs – 61 over a period of about 1200 years – among them your Aethelbald and Aethelred up through multiple Henrys, Edwards and Georges, a couple of Marys and Elizabeths (one being Elizabeth, or QEII, the present-day monarch), and of course, the one and only Victoria.

If we neglected to mention Victoria, she would not be amused.

And I daresay she would not be amused by the big announcement in January that shunted aside all other world news:

“Stepping back”? Queen Victoria would look down her royal nose and sneer.  “One does not step back!  One does one’s duty and smiles throughout, for God, Saint George and England!  ‘Stepping back’?  Balderdash!”

The phrase “not amused” was recently echoed, this time in reference to Queen Elizabeth’s response to the decision of Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markel:

It’s not as though “stepping away” from royal responsibilities is something new; QEII’s own uncle, Edward VIII, abdicated the throne in 1936.  At the time Elizabeth was 10, so she certainly remembers that.

So I think the whole thing is – as Brits are wont to say – a…

If the Queen were to ask me – of which I’m doubtful – I’d say, “Lighten up, Liz!”

And just for laughs – of which I’m also doubtful – I’d tell QEII to check out this subsequent Harry/Meghan story:

Yes!  When Burger King learned that Harry and Meghan wanted to become more “financially independent,” Burger King stepped up and offered them part-time jobs.

And the episode has provided us with some great laughs, like the above “Whopper Of A Job Offer” – funny!

And there are more:

“Goodbye House of Windsor, hello Home of the Whopper.”

“If you’re looking for a job, we have a new crown for you.”

“You always have a job in our kingdom.”

“After so many years of living as dukes, it is time for you to start eating like kings.”

Some wit came up with a spin-off of Brexit:

And an enterprising media outlet even tracked down a 2013 Men’s Health magazine video starring Markel and entitled, Grilling Never Looked So Hot:

There were lots of photo spreads from the video, like this one:

Which I think really missed the point of the video:

If Burger King hires Meghan,
she already knows her way around a burger grill:

The burgers are at the lower-right under the Men’s Health logo.

Not that anyone was looking at the burgers.

Though it appears that Meghan and Harry don’t need to accept Burger King’s offer.

Seriously, how much more “financially independent” can you get?

Allow me to introduce Representative Chris Collins, R-New York and Representative Duncan Hunter, R-CA .

Collins and Hunter were the first two members of Congress to endorse Trump’s presidential bid in 2016.

Here’s the trio in 2017 – Trump, Collins (center) and Hunter.

Fast forward to 2019; Collins and Hunter are now convicted felons:

Collins pleaded guilty to insider trading and is a convicted felon.

On Friday, January 17 Collins was sentenced to 26 months in prison and fined $200,000.  He’s had his last headline.

He begins serving his sentence March 17.

Hunter pleaded guilty to campaign finance abuse and is a convicted felon.

Hunter resigned his House seat on January 13.  The only mention in the San Diego Union-Tribune was at the bottom of page A-9.  He’s old news.

His sentencing is March 17.

Here’s my prayer for 2020:

The database at Bishop-Accountability.org, which documents the clergy abuse crisis in the Catholic church, shows that abuse by priests has been reported in all 50 states.

In the state of New York there are eight Catholic Dioceses.  According to The New York Times, the Buffalo Diocese had been relatively insulated from the abuse scandals until 2018.

What happened in Buffalo in 2018?  Keep reading…

The Buffalo Diocese is one of the Northeast’s largest, with 600,000 Catholics.  Six hundred thousand faithful, many or most of them attending church in more than 150 parishes.

And in some of those churches were and are priests who have and probably still are sexually abusing people.

Why were those abusers in the Buffalo diocese still performing as priests?  Why are those abusers still performing as priests?

This is baffling to me because…

Hasn’t the church abuse scandal been front-page news since the Boston Globe broke the story in 2002?

Didn’t the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops – in that same year – establish this charter of procedures to deal with accused child sex abusers in the clergy, including a “zero tolerance” policy for accused abusers:

Didn’t Pope Francis – in 2013, shortly after becoming pope – announce the creation of a Vatican committee to fight sex abuse in the church?  And publicly apologize for the Vatican’s actions, expressing regret that “personal, moral damage” had been “carried out by men of the Church”?  And also urge any priest who had enabled abuse by moving an abuser to another parish to resign?

Didn’t this same pope host a conference of bishops in Rome this past February to talk about sexual abuse, where he vowed “to combat this evil that strikes at the very heart of our mission”?

Didn’t the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops meet this past June with a focus on the church sex abuse scandal?  Where they committed to bishops holding each other accountable for committing sexual abuse and covering up the crimes committed by their fellow bishops?

And didn’t this same group come up with a toll-free number to call to report abuse?

Though, after reading that paragraph – never mind that one.

Didn’t yet another group of U.S. bishops – this time from New York including Malone – meet with the pope as recently as this past November:

What the hell did Malone and the pope talk about?

Pope:  So, Malone, how’s it going?  Hidden any more documents lately?
Malone:  Oh, you know – all is calm, all is right.  Bright.  Whatever.

Isn’t this the church on track to spend another $4 billion settling clergy abuse lawsuits?

Isn’t this the church that’s been promising “transparency” so often, ad nauseam comes to mind?

Yet in the Buffalo diocese, Bishop John Malone had files about abusive priests that he was hiding from the public.

What happened in Buffalo in 2018?

In 2018, abuse survivors in the Buffalo diocese began speaking publicly, and the local news media began to investigate.

The media found that at least some of the accused priests were still in the pulpit.

Responding to pressure, in March 2018 Bishop Malone released a list of 42 priests accused of abuse over decades.

Enter the whistleblower:

Siobhan O’Connor had worked closely with Richard Malone as his executive assistant for three years.

She’d seen 117 names on a draft list in the diocese’s secret files.

She began photocopying documents.  Just before she quit her job in August 2018, she anonymously leaked the church documents to a reporter at Buffalo television station WKBW.

The hundreds of pages O’Connor uncovered included personnel files and memos.  They revealed that for years Bishop Malone allowed priests accused of sexual assault such as statutory rape and groping to stay on the job.

According to The New York Times,

“The leaks revealed Malone, who had led the diocese since 2012, as clinical and protective in his dealings with church lawyers about abuse, seeking to limit disclosure of church secrets to minimize their damage.”

Then in October 2018, O’Connor appeared on 60 Minutes:

The 60 Minutes story noted,

“In Bishop Malone’s first six years in Buffalo just one priest was put on leave.  It was only after this scandal broke in March [2018] that he suspended 16 more for abuse.  None have been kicked out of the priesthood.”

In addition to O’Connor, other people were included in the 60 Minutes segment but, the program also noted, “Bishop Malone declined our requests for an interview.”

Probably because Malone was too busy running around, telling everyone he was not going to resign – he did that a lot, and loudly:

But then he did this:

But don’t feel sorry for Malone.

According to a 12/10/19 article in the Buffalo News, Malone, is now referred to as “Bishop Emeritus.”

“Emeritus” meaning “the former holder of an office, having retired but allowed to retain their title as an honor,” and a misnomer if I ever heard one.

The Buffalo News provided this checklist of the cushy benefits of Malone’s retirement:

1. At least $1,900 per month in stipend and pension benefits, according to guidelines set in 2010 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).
2. Appropriate housing and board within the diocese where he last served.  The housing should include the use of a private chapel and housekeeping assistance.  If the bishop emeritus chooses to live outside of the diocese where he last served, that diocese is still obligated to pay for appropriate housing and board.
3. Health and welfare benefits, including major medical and the full cost of medical and hospital care.
4. Home healthcare, assisted living and long-term care facilities.
5. An office and secretarial assistance.
6. Paid funeral and burial expenses.
7. An insured car.
8. Paid travel expenses for provincial and regional meetings, USCCB meetings, visits to the Vatican, installations of other bishops, and other functions that involve meeting with colleague bishops.

In the same Buffalo News article, when the writer was asked if Malone would be charged, he said in part,

“Revelations of clergy sexual abuse cover-ups similar to those now surfacing in the Buffalo Diocese have been uncovered in dozens of other dioceses around the country and rarely resulted in criminal prosecutions.

“In 2012, Bishop Robert W. Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph became the first Catholic prelate in the country to be convicted of protecting from prosecution a priest who had child pornography.  A judge found Finn guilty of a misdemeanor for failing to tell police that one of his priests collected lewd images of young girls on his computer.  Finn was sentenced to two years of probation.

“A Philadelphia jury in 2012 convicted Monsignor William Lynn, a supervisor in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, of covering up clergy sex abuse, but the conviction was voided on appeal in 2016.”

In other words, instead of Malone being here:

He’ll be here…………………….or perhaps here………………………..or maybe here:

Monaco?	California?	Costa Rica?

Or (see #2, above) Malone will be wherever he “chooses to live outside of the diocese,” since “that diocese is still obligated to pay for appropriate housing and board.”

Memo to Malone:

Wherever you decide to park your bony ass…

Update 12/17/19:

The pope recently made a “big announcement” about abolishing a secrecy policy in clergy sexual abuse cases:

Here are some of the highlights from The New York Times article:

1. “It’s now (see above) acceptable – but not required – to turn information about abuse claims over to the police, prosecutors and judges.”

But – why not required?  No explanation forthcoming.

2. “In recent years, church officials in the United States and some other countries have shared with civil authorities information about some sexual abuse allegations.  But that cooperation, in theory, defied a decree adopted in 2001 that made the information a ‘pontifical secret’ – the church’s most classified knowledge.”

Not only was the church hiding information about the sexual abuse, there was actually a decree against sharing information with civil authorities from the “pontifical,” or highest, level.

3. “The rule announced on Tuesday was also a product of the February meeting, the Vatican said.”

This is referencing the bishops conference the pope held in Rome in February, which I talked about earlier.  It took the pope 11 months to make this watered-down decision?

4. “This is a sign of openness, transparency and the willingness to collaborate with the civil authorities,” Andrea Tornielli, the editorial director of the Vatican’s communications office, wrote in a commentary.

There’s that word “transparency” again.

5. “The Rev. Hans Zollner, a member of the Vatican’s child protection commission, said, ‘This is pretty much revolutionary.’”

Really?  “Revolutionary”?

Let’s see if the hundreds of thousands of victims of clergy sexual abuse agree.

Victims:  Everyone who agrees, give a big cheer!

What’s that we’re hearing?

Finally – not that there will ever be an end to this story – in contrast to the Times story that said the top-secret decree had been around since 2002, NPR noted that it had been around since 1974.

If so, that means it was in place during the time of, and clearly with the approval of, five popes:

Paul VI 1963-1978
John Paul I 1978
John Paul II 1978-2005
Benedict XVI 2005-2013
Francis 2013-Present

Here’s the headline from the NPR story, and here’s that word again:

This story will never be over until there truly is…

When we hear about men behaving badly, we’re rarely surprised.

Politicians, entertainment industry people, military, athletes – it seems like it’s become the story du jour.

From sexual abuse to financial fraud to breaking and entering, the bad behavior, large and small, has been – in my smug opinion – the boys’ bailiwick.

“Women are better than that,” I smugly think.  “Women are so honest, we have so much integrity.”

I am so wrong.

Recently there’s been a spate of women behaving badly stories, in San Diego and elsewhere.  I’ll classify their behavior as “Minor League,” “Major League” and “Out of the Ballpark.”

Minor League:  Breaking Into Zoo Enclosures

A North Dakota woman, 18-year-old Ashlee Brown, was visiting the Bismarck Dakota Zoo when she noticed something sad in the primate enclosure.

Specifically, a sad siamang.  And there is nothing sadder than a sad siamang:

“I know!” thought Ashlee.  “I’ll, like, hop the guard rail and touch that sad siamang and, like, take a selfie with him.  That will, like, cheer him right up!”

So Ashlee hopped the guard rail, touched the primate, took her selfie, and got busted.

She pleaded guilty to trespassing, was fined $300, and will be on unsupervised probation for nearly a year.  She can keep the incident off her record if she stays out of trouble during that time.

And if she, like, stays out of zoo enclosures.

Unlike Ashlee, Gloria Lancaster’s foray into an animal enclosure was on a rescue mission – specifically, to rescue her dog.

A worthy endeavor, except that her dog had gotten into the camel enclosure at Tiger Truck Stop in Iberville Parish, LA.

Gloria, 68, crawled under the barbed wire fence.  The camel, Caspar, had invited neither Gloria nor her dog into the enclosure, and was understandably miffed.

So Caspar sat on Gloria.

Caspar weighs 600 pounds.

Trapped, Gloria did what anyone would do – she bit Caspar.

As one TV station delicately put it, “allegedly on the camel’s private parts.”

Gloria is claiming injuries but she’s not getting much sympathy.  She did, however, get citations for criminal trespassing and leash law violation

Caspar, on the other hand, is getting lots of sympathy and media attention:

And antibiotics from his veterinarian.

Did I mention this happened on a Wednesday?

Hump Day.

Major League:  Rob From The Rich And Give To…Yourself

I don’t know much about investing, and I’m OK with that.

But even I know that if someone promises “returns of 15 to 25 percent in one year…”

They’re lying.

And I know that if the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) comes after you…

You’re in big trouble:

That’s what happened to Gina Champion-Cain, 57, of San Diego.

Gina – to know her was to love her.

The city even declared June 28, 2006 “Gina Champion-Cain Day.”

She was a successful, high-profile, and had many business interests – coffee shops, lifestyle brands, San Diego restaurants, and rental properties.

Unfortunately, it appears Champion-Cain was less than honest about the money she received from 50 investors.

To the tune of $300 million.

The SEC filed the complaint in which it alleged that Champion-Cain’s ANI Development had fraudulently raised hundreds of millions of dollars since 2012 by claiming to investors that they could profit by issuing short-term, high-interest loans to people applying for alcohol licenses in California.

In some cases, she promised investors those returns “of 15 to 25 percent in one year,” according to the SEC.

Instead of using the investors’ money to make those loans, Champion-Cain is alleged to have directed “significant amounts of investor funds” to a company that she controlled.

Soon, nearly a dozen of Champion-Cain’s restaurants were closing or had already been shuttered.

A court-appointed receiver is now involved.

I reckon no one is calling her a “Kickass Entrepreneur” anymore:

But as bad she is, here’s the lowest of the low:

Out Of The Ballpark:  Ripping Off Our Military Members, Veterans And Their Families

The Armed Forces Foundation was a legitimate charity, established in 2001 to protect and promote the physical, mental and emotional wellness of military service members, veterans, and their families

I say “was” because it closed in October 2016.

That was shortly after the organization’s president, Patricia Driscoll, 41, was indicted on eight felony counts in September 2016.

For misspending more than $900,000 of Armed Forces Foundation money for personal purposes starting in 2006.

On personal shopping trips, legal fees, and paying bills for Driscoll’s private defense-contracting business, prosecutors said.

Driscoll was convicted in September 2018 of two federal counts each of wire fraud and of tax evasion, and one count of first-degree fraud.

She faced a maximum 20 years in prison on the wire fraud charge and a maximum 10 years for first-degree fraud.  Tax evasion carries a statutory maximum of five years.

Instead – and baffling to me – Driscoll was sentenced only to 12 months and one day in prison, 36 months supervised release, a period of home confinement, 360 hours of community service, and must pay $154,289 in restitution and $81,779 in a money judgment forfeiture.

I can’t quite figure how you “misspend more than $900,000” and pay only $154,289 in restitution.

Driscoll isn’t going to prison anytime soon.  In late 2019, the sentence was stayed pending appeal.

There’s an online article at sportingnews.com that talks about a Driscoll video that went viral before it was removed from YouTube:

The article quotes the video of Driscoll saying this of herself:

“I am a mom, a businesswoman, a patriot, a socialite, and a whole lot of attitude.  I have the reputation for not being the nicest person in the world, and I’ve earned it…I don’t care if people hate me for who I am or what I do because I’m not going to change.”

The article also says one of her employees at the Armed Forces Foundation called her “one scary b—-” and, “You don’t want to mess with Patricia…If you cross her, she’ll grab you by the nuts and twist them and tear them right off.”

Whew.

All that, and stealing from our military, veterans, and their families, too?

Women behaving badly.

Step aside, boys.

Update:  January 9, 2020

 Oh, No!  Yet Another Woman Behaving Badly?

I described Patricia Driscoll’s bad behavior as “out of the ballpark,” meaning lowest of the low, for stealing money from military members and their families.

I may have to re-think who is “lowest of the low,” due to this recent story:

The former Mrs. Florida, aka Karyn Turk, pleaded guilty in September to a misdemeanor charge of Social Security fraud after stealing her elderly mother’s Social Security checks instead of using the money to pay for nursing home care.

Now a federal judge has sentenced Turk to a month in prison, followed by five months of house arrest.

The judge also ordered Turk to perform 100 hours of community service at a nursing home – a reminder of the time she never spent with her own mother who lived for three years in a Lake Worth facility, ravaged by Alzheimer’s disease, according to the Palm Beach Post article.

Instead of using her mother’s Social Security, Veterans Administration and pension checks to cover $219,000 in nursing home bills, Turk used the money to pay for shopping sprees, dinners out, and for a nanny to watch her children, said Palm Beach County sheriff’s Detective Vaughn Mitchell.

Stealing from your mother?

Recently I read a review of a book, Barnum:  An American Life by Robert Wilson, and this paragraph resonated with me:

“…there appeared a self-promoting blowhard of a man with an easily branded name and a poof of noticeably weird hair.  He conjured fortunes and then lost them in spectacular catastrophes.  He would eventually catapult himself into political office as a Bible-hugging Christian, committed to reclaiming American virtue.  His proper name would become a common noun, a contemptible exclamation and novel profanity.  Through it all, he found one way or another to seize the gaze of the media, often by slipping to the press short bits of provocative writing, then known as squibs.  His name was Phineas T. Barnum.”

Phineas, or P.T. Barnum (1810-1891), was the mastermind behind the world-famous circus spectacle that came to be known as “The Greatest Show on Earth.”

I couldn’t help but think that the reviewer was drawing a parallel between P.T. Barnum and Trump.

Here’s the same paragraph, with slight alterations in bold:

…there appeared a self-promoting blowhard of a man with an easily branded name and a poof of noticeably weird hair.  He conjured fortunes and then lost them in spectacular catastrophes.  He would eventually catapult himself into political office as a Bible-hugging Christian, committed to reclaiming American virtue.  His proper name would become a common noun, a contemptible exclamation and novel profanity.  Through it all, he found one way or another to seize the gaze of the media, often by slipping to the press short bits of provocative writing, known as tweets.  His name is Donald J. Trump.

This got me wondering if there were other parallels between Barnum and Trump.

Further research lead to an astonishing number of them.

Here are some of the parallels I found:

When the TV is on, I’m usually – at most – paying half-attention to it.

I might be reading, or doing something in the kitchen.  (No, not cooking.  You’re confusing me with someone else.)

I’ll glance up at the TV from time to time, which – if it’s commercial television – generally reinforces my belief that most programs on commercial television are lousy, and all commercials are awful.

It was one of those happen-to-glance-up times that I saw this guy licking Tina Fey’s face:

Who is this guy?

And why was he licking Fey’s face, and then picking up her purse with his teeth and shaking out the contents?

What I was seeing was so awful that the advertiser, and the product being advertised, completely missed my radar.

What was that a commercial for?

And why was Fey – one of my heroes – allowing that guy to lick her face?

Since I like Fey, this warranted some investigation.

My perception of Fey is that she’s smart, funny, and something of a trailblazer.  She joined the writing team of Saturday Night Live in 1997, when writing for TV was still very much a male bastion, and eventually became the show’s first female head writer.

She began appearing in SNL sketches, including the coveted spot as co-host of Weekend Update, while she continued as head writer.  She left the show in 2006 – more about that below.

But it was during the 2008 presidential election, when she returned to SNL to create and own the impersonation of Vice-Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin that, for me, Fey transitioned from admired writer/actress to hero:

Then back to SNL in 2016 for this:

SNL, 2016:  Palin (left) endorses Trump; Fey as Palin endorsing Trump.  Fey:  “I don’t think this guy should be president.  I’m just here cuz he promised me a spot in his Cabinet!”

If you haven’t seen these, find them on YouTube.

In the meantime, Fey was busy – in 2006, creating and starring in the TV show 30 Rock which ran for seven seasons, writing screenplays, starring in and/or producing movies, appearing on TV shows, winning numerous awards, getting married, giving birth to two daughters, writing a book.

So, Tiny Fey:  Not only smart and funny, but also rich – here’s Fey’s bank account in 2019 according to the website Celebrity Net Worth:

So why did she make that awful commercial?  She sure doesn’t need the money.

More investigating.

I’d said earlier that the commercial was so awful that the advertiser, and the product being advertised, were not even on my radar.

It turns out that the face-licking ad is one of two Fey has done for Allstate Insurance.  The face licker is an actor named Dean Winters, personifying the idea of mayhem, i.e., “disorder, confusion, chaos.”

I found this article in AdAge:

The article says,

“In the new TV spots, Fey plays a driver using Drivewise, a nine-year-old product that tracks how carefully someone drives and offers perks accordingly:

“In one commercial, Winters plays a rambunctious Saint Bernard pup eager to distract the driver; in another, he plays a critical mother-in-law whose cutting remarks provide the same level of distraction as the dog.”

The AdAge article goes on, as do other articles about the Fey/Allstate ads, but none of them answered my burning question:

Why did Fey do this?

I even googled “why is tina fey doing allstate commercials” and got 124,000 results – but no answer.

I suppose I’ll never know.

And I suppose one of these days I’ll be half-watching TV and Fey’s other Allstate ad – the mother-in-law – will come on.

Does the mother-in-law lick Fey’s face, too?

There are so many current telephone scams, and the goal of each is to separate us from our money.

The scammers are creative and relentless – and it’s only getting worse.  Here are just a few examples from this Washington Post article:

Scammers target immigrant communities with urgent calls claiming ambiguous legal trouble.

Scammers pose as representatives of the Chinese embassy and contact U.S. metropolitan areas with large Chinese populations, trying to trick Chinese immigrants and students into revealing their credit card numbers.

Scammers pretend to be a representative from a bank, a debt collector or cable company who needs to discuss “an important business matter” such as debt collection and billing information.

Scammers mimic actual Internal Revenue Service (IRS) telephone numbers at assistance centers, tell victims they owe money to the government, and urge them to pay through a gift card or wire transfer.

Scammers pose as charitable organizations, preying on the generosity of Americans who want to help those affected by the natural disasters like hurricanes and earthquakes.

Scammers trick people into answering their calls with a scheme known as neighborhood spoofing, in which they manipulate caller ID information so that their actual phone number is masked.  Instead, the calls appear to have been placed locally, and when we see a number that matches our own area code, we’re more likely to answer the call.

Scammers steal your money with Medicare scams, Social Security scams, concert and sports tickets scams.

But of all the telephone scams – and there are many more – I think the most heartbreaking is “romance scams.”

And I mean heartbreaking, literally.

Romance scams start through online dating websites, social media, email and telephone to make contact.

The victims are male and female, straight and gay, and of all ages:

They all have this in common:

Broken hearts and lost money:

The Internet abounds with their stories, so I’ll share a personal story instead.

My brother is someone who – like most of us – would have laughed if anyone had suggested he’d fall for a romance scam.  “Not me,” he would have said.  “Never!”

He’s a college graduate, has a great job, and he’d been around long enough to know that grocery shopping, housework, cooking, laundry and even ironing (yes!) don’t just happen.  He’s a nice-looking man, he works out, and has a great sense of humor.

But – like many singles – he’d been through a long, dateless dry spell and decided to check out some dating sites.  He met a woman a half-world away, and they seemed to click.  Their conversations transitioned from chats to extended skype exchanges.

They both seemed smitten.

About two months in, she told him her mother was ill, then didn’t mention her again until a few conversations later.  This time she said her mother was getting worse, and they couldn’t afford her mother’s medicine.

My brother has a big, compassionate heart, and he sent her a few hundred dollars.

Then she claimed she was also sick, and she didn’t get paid if she didn’t work, and…

Her requests escalated from there.

When we siblings suggested that he was being scammed, he didn’t believe it for a minute.  This lady was different.  She wouldn’t do that.  She genuinely cared for him and he wanted to help her.

Especially since she’d told him she loved him, not once, but several times.

And she’d promised to pay the money back, all of it.

When my brother finally accepted that she was not going to pay him back, he ended the relationship.  She continued posting on Facebook how much she loved him until he cut that off, as well.

He was sadder and poorer, but wiser.

Like my brother – like most of us – I, too, believed I could never be scammed.  Not by that phony IRS thing, or the bank scammers, or that neighborhood spoofing stuff, none of it.

Now, here’s what I believe:

Update:  While I was writing this post…

My phone rang.

When I don’t recognize the caller’s name or number, I don’t answer, so he left this message:

“Laura, my name is Tim Presley.  I’m contacting you in regards to a case that is in the process of being filed through San Diego County.  The case is not being filed against you, it is being filed against a Christina (unintelligible).  I’ve been instructed to make you aware that your name and address is listed as the most likely location for her.  At this point (name? unintelligible) still has the legal right to contact the Proceedings Office filing the case to update her information.  However, once this case is filed, that will no longer be an option.  The phone number to that legal department is gonna be 855-337-4536.  When she calls, she’ll provide her case number 605233.  This is considered legal notification by telephone and Christina will be located at your residence unless I am (unintelligible) otherwise.”

I don’t know anyone named “Christina.”

I didn’t call the number.

But the words “case,” “being filed,” “San Diego County” and “legal” got my attention.  So did the information that “Christina” was listing my home as “the most likely location for her.”

This sounded like it might – might – be on the level.

So I went on the website for the San Diego County Superior Court and searched for “case number 605233.”

And there it was – a legitimate court case number.

The name on the case wasn’t Christina, and it was filed back in 1988, but I thought it was worth checking, so I called Superior Court.

I spoke with a very nice woman and explained why I was calling – that I suspected a scammer.  She looked up the case with the number and told me that “The entire case was dismissed.”  She checked for my name and said it wasn’t associated with the case.

I asked how the scammer could have gotten an actual Super Court case number, and she suggested that they might have “made up the case number and got lucky.”

I doubt it.

Let’s recap:

1. The scammer had my first name, telephone number, and knew I live in San Diego County.
2. The area code of the number he called from matched mine.
3. He identified himself, making himself sound legitimate.
4. This was a person, not a recording, well-spoken, and he had no accent.
5. He used attention-getting words.
6. His tone was urgent and somewhat threatening – “will no longer be an option.”
7. He was obviously reading from a script – no stumbling over words, no hesitations.

How did the scammers get an actual Superior Court case number?

I was still pondering that the next day, when I heard from “Tim Presley” again.  This time there was more urgency in his voice, and his message was definitely more threatening:

“Laura, this is Tim Presley contacting you once again in regards to a case being filed in the San Diego County.  I reached out to you several times yesterday and all correspondence have been ignored.  At this point they are intending on proceeding with the order of location for Christina (unintelligible) at your residence.  Understand that she still has the legal right to contact the office filing the case.  I’ll provide that information to that office once again, just so there’s no way for you, or her, to say you had no prior knowledge of this matter.  That phone number’s gonna be 855-337-4536.  Her case number is 605233.  This is considered a final legal notification by telephone, and Christina (unintelligible) will be located at your residence unless I am (unintelligible) otherwise.”

He lied when he said he’d “reached out” to me “several times yesterday.”

Gosh, a lying scammer.

Update 11/27/19:

I can promise you that this recent scammer victim also believed it could never happen to her.

We all know better — until we don’t:

Has a family member, friend or acquaintance ever shown up at your door, uninvited?

I hate that.

How about a group – adults and children, at your door, uninvited?

Expecting an invitation to enter your home, expecting that you’ll gladly drop whatever you were doing because nothing you were doing could be more important than their uninvited appearance?

Uninvited…and possibly – unwelcome?

It happened to my husband and me over the holidays.

Only it wasn’t at the front door – it was in our family room.

And it was a group – adults and children, 17 of them.

In one second my husband’s and my peaceful afternoon was interrupted by a buzz on his smartphone, followed by an explosion of people and music and noise.

It was members of my family, on the other side of the country, raucously celebrating the holidays, and deciding to include us in the fun.

It felt like our home had been invaded, and indeed – it had.

By Facebook Messenger.

A brand-new experience for me.

I’d never heard of Facebook Messenger, much less been in it.  On it.

Whatever.

But suddenly I saw a room full of relatives on the phone’s screen, and up in the screen’s corner, my own stunned face staring back at me.

Now, before you say anything, even with my lack of experience I know I didn’t have to allow the party into my home.

I could have said, “Oooo – bad time, can we do this in a half-hour?”  Then at least I would have been prepared, and I could have spiffed myself up a bit instead of appearing to one and all in my bathrobe.

Instead I stammered, “Wh – what the heck is this?”

And just like that, one family member – evidently the iPad Commando – started walking around the room, pointing the camera at each person and shouting, “Say hi to so-and-so!  Say Merry Christmas to so-and-so!”

And one by one, every family member and I said “Hi!” or “Merry Christmas!” and then they promptly walked off camera to get back to the festivities.

As the iPad Commando turned the camera on herself and her face filled the screen, the background noise continued unabated.  “How did you connect us?” I shouted.

“Face (unintelligible) enger!”  she said, which I later learned meant “Facebook Messenger.”  Then she walked into the kitchen to show me the deserts spread out on the counter, waiting for the horde to descend en masse.

Damn!  Is that apple pie?  And I missed it!

I missed my family.

Later, I did some research about Messenger, and started thinking it might be cool technology.  I could maybe see how it might be a good thing.

I imagined a parent connecting face-to-face with a child away at college, or a service member on deployment seeing the smiles of a spouse and children, or my showing Aunt Myrtle the gorgeous sweater I’d bought with her gift card.

If the weather was lousy I could “visit” with someone in a hospital if they felt like it, or do my book club on Messenger, or offer a friend a digital “shoulder” to cry on.

And I could Messenger my hubby when he’s upstairs, just to tell him I love him, and see his smile.

Maybe I’ll look into this Messenger thing.

Yup, I’m being dragged, kicking and screaming…

Recently I was reading an article, then stopped and thought, “Didn’t I just read this the other day?  Are they running the same story again?”

The answer is, different articles, same story:

States Purging Voter Rolls

First, in Wisconsin:

Then in Georgia:

Two states, with a common thread,

From the Slate article about Wisconsin:

“…in a massive purge that would disproportionately affect minorities and Democrats.  The decision rests on a dubious interpretation of Wisconsin law pushed by a conservative group that seeks to weaponize state records against left-leaning voters.  If upheld, the ruling could increase Donald Trump’s chances of winning the closely divided state in 2020.”

From the article about the Georgia purge by the nonprofit Common Dreams, a quote from the advocacy group All Voting is Local:

“Voter purges pose a distinct threat to our democracy, causing disproportionate harm to the very voters who have long been disenfranchised:  people of color, low-income voters, and those who move frequently.”

The common thread:  The words “disproportionately” and “disproportionate.”

Wisconsin and Georgia purging so many voters in such a short time frame is new, but purging voter rolls is not.

In August, the Brennan Center, a non-partisan law and public policy institute, published this:

And said,

“The Brennan Center analysis found that between 2016 and 2018, counties with a history of voter discrimination have continued purging people from the rolls at much higher rates than other counties.”

The article goes on to say,

“This phenomenon began after the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, a decision that severely weakened the protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.”

What is Shelby County v. Holder?

I found this article in The Atlantic very enlightening:

Regarding Shelby County v. Holder, the article says,

“In that 2013 decision, the Supreme Court invalidated a decades-old ‘coverage formula’ naming jurisdictions that had to pass federal scrutiny under the Voting Rights Act, referred to as ‘preclearance,’ in order to pass any new elections or voting laws.  Those jurisdictions were selected based on their having a history of discrimination in voting.”

So, jurisdictions that had a history of discrimination in voting had to pass federal scrutiny before they passed new voting laws.

But the Supreme Court did away with that, and that unleashed a firestorm of voter purging that began in 2013 and has steadily increased.  According to the Brennan Center article:

“The median purge rate over the 2016-2018 period in jurisdictions previously subject to preclearance was 40 percent higher than the purge rate in jurisdictions that were not covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”

Trump was elected on November 8, 2016.

And the purging has been surging ever since – this from the Brennan Center article:

“The latest data from the Election Assistance Commission shows that between the presidential election in 2016 and the 2018 midterms, more than 17 million voters were purged.”

And when your name is purged, you may or may not know about it.  You’ll go to your polling place, and be denied your right to vote.

A big, ugly surprise.

Now, purging voters for the right reasons is not only legal, it’s mandated by law.  If someone moves out of state or dies, of course their names should be removed.

But there’s another reason voters are being purged, one I find especially pernicious.  Take, for example, in Georgia.

Where voters are being denied their right to vote simply because they haven’t voted for awhile.

According to a December 17 CNN story,

“The removal comes as part of a new state provision signed into law earlier this year.  Under the provision, the state must remove registration records from the voter rolls that have been deemed ‘inactive’ for more than three years.  A voter is categorized as ‘inactive’ if they don’t vote in two general elections and have had no contact with board of elections in that time.”

“Signed into law earlier this year.”

This year.

Imagine that.

Now imagine that you live in Georgia and you haven’t voted for awhile.  You haven’t moved, you haven’t died, and you’re on your way to vote in the next election.

You arrive at your polling place only to be told, “You’re not on our list of registered voters.”

Georgia’s CTA (Cover Thy Ass) move was sending a pre-addressed, postage-paid confirmation card that asked voters to confirm or update their information.  The “inactive” voters were marked for removal after failing to respond to a within 30 days.

But suppose the card didn’t make it to its destination?  The Postal Service has been known to misplace, misdirect, or inadvertently shred our mail a time or two.  More like a zillion.

Or suppose you dutifully completed the card and dropped it in the corner mailbox, and the Post Office misplaced, misdirected or inadvertently shredded it.

Or supposed that confirmation looked like junk mail – which it probably did – and who has time to wade through the pile of junk that shows up in our mailboxes every day?

Whatever occurred, in Georgia you can be denied your right to vote only because you haven’t voted for several years.

According to that CNN article, Fair Fight Action spokesman Seth Bringman said,

“In our view, it is a First Amendment right not to vote, and it is unconstitutional to take away a Georgian’s right to vote simply because they have not expressed that right in recent elections.”

So here’s where we are.

Between the presidential election in 2016 and the 2018 midterms, more than 17 million voters were purged.

And according to this article:

December 13:  A state judge in Wisconsin ruled that the state could begin canceling the registrations of 234,000 voters – seven percent of the electorate – who did not respond to a mailing from election officials.

December 16:  The Georgia Secretary of State removed 309,000 from the rolls – four percent of the electorate – whose registrations were labeled inactive, including more than a hundred thousand who were purged because they had not voted in a certain number of previous elections.

Mother Jones did the math:

“These numbers are large enough to swing close elections.  Donald Trump carried Wisconsin by 22,000 votes; the number of soon-to-be purged voters is more than 10 times his margin of victory.

“Democrat Stacey Abrams failed to qualify for a runoff against Brian Kemp in the 2018 governor’s race by 21,000 votes; the number of purged voters in Georgia is 14 times that.”

And – no surprise – here’s that word “disproportionately” again:

“These purges appear to disproportionately affect Democratic-leaning constituencies, including voters of color, students, and low-income people who tend to move more often.”

Blatantly obvious?

Oh, yeah.

Now let’s you and I do the Election Day math.

Your state:

My state:

Every state:

Update:

Here’s an earlier story from October, one that didn’t get the attention that the Wisconsin and Georgia voter purges got, but is sickeningly similar:

According to the article, this past summer a group of elected officials in Ohio, mostly all moderate Republicans, decided that rather than purge the voter rolls behind closed doors as had been done in the past, the government would release the full list of 235,000 voters to be purged, and give the list to advocacy groups.  And…

“The groups said they found the list was riddled with errors.

“The result:  Around 40,000 people, nearly one in five names on the list, shouldn’t have been on it, the state determined.”

One ironic example:

Jen Miller, the executive director of the League of Women Voters.

Miller got the list of 235,000 names and found her name on the list, flagged as an inactive voter.

“I voted three times last year,” said Ms. Miller.  “I don’t think we have any idea how many other individuals this has happened to.”

And there’s this more recent story:

It says, in part,

“Democrats and liberal advocacy groups…are worried that their voters are hurt the most by these cleanup efforts.  That’s because low income, minority and young voters do tend to move around a lot.  So they are disproportionately affected.”

There’s that word again.

Update 12/18/19:

How many more?  I think this opinion piece in the December 18 Washington Post put it well:

The article says in part:

“Many states operate on a use-it-or lose-it principle:  If you haven’t voted in a couple of elections, the state sends you a notice, and if you don’t respond, they strike you from the rolls.  Then the next time you show up to vote, you find that you’re no longer registered.

“Republicans deny that they have any partisan motives; they claim that voter purges are just a way of cleaning up the rolls.  But we all know the truth:

“If purges didn’t work to suppress Democratic votes,
Republicans wouldn’t be so eager to do them.”

Let’s start with some context:

You go to the doctor and hand him or her $1,000, cash or credit card.  You’re going to have an elective medical procedure, and no insurance companies cover this.

You say, “Doctor, I want you to stick a needle in my face 50 times, around my eyes and in my forehead.

“And in that needle, one of the ingredients will be botulinum-toxin protein, one of the most powerful nerve poisons known.  This toxin is produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum.

“This will cause flaccid paralysis of the muscles where you did the injections, so the muscles can’t contract.  That makes skin relax and soften.

“So these bad wrinkles in my forehead, bad lines between my eyebrows, and bad crow’s feet around my eyes will be all gone.  I’ll look younger, be infinitely more successful, and live happily ever after!

“Or until the toxin wears off in a few months, at which time I’ll return for a refill.”

Context:  Botox Cosmetic treatments.

“Botox” is a brand name – there are several others – and it’s been around for years.  Their website says BOTOX^® Cosmetic is “the #1 selling treatment of its kind,” and claims to be:

“The first and only treatment FDA approved to temporarily make moderate to severe frown lines, crow’s feet and forehead lines look better in adults.”

“Temporarily…look better.”

Now let’s review a recent Botox TV commercial.

The commercial starts out as do so many others, aimed at females age 12 and over.

The message:  For any female to allow her face, skin, hair, body, etc. to look anything but eternally youthful is:

The commercial starts with brief clips of young, lovely, taut-skinned women – with one young, handsome (token) man thrown in – and a female voice-over urging us to “own your look…with fewer lines”:

“How?” we wonder, “Please, tell us how!”

The voice-over lady is happy to tell us:

“Botox Cosmetic.  It’s the only one FDA approved to temporarily make

And…

And…

“Look better.”

There’s that “temporarily…look better” again.

We’re now 20 seconds into the commercial, and the disclaimers begin.

Disclaimers we’re not really hearing as more images of young, lovely, taut-skinned women – with a few more young, handsome (token) men thrown in – fill our TV screens.

Here’s what we’re not hearing:

The effects of Botox Cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms.  Alert your doctor right away as difficult swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition.

(“Life threatening”?  Wait.  What?)

Do not receive Botox Cosmetic if you have a skin infection.  Side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain and headache, eyebrow/eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling.

(“Drooping?  Swelling?”  Geez!)

Tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxin as these may increase the risk of serious side effects.

(“Serious side effects”?  Holy shit!)

Disclaimers complete, we’re now 50 seconds in and winding up for the big pitch:

LOOK LIKE YOU

WITH FEWER LINES

LIKE THESE RESULTS?

And you can, indeed, go to the Botox website and see before-and-after pictures, like this one:

Of course, the fact that “Nancy” is frowning in her “Before” shot, and not frowning in her “After” shot has nothing to do with anything.

I looked at all the images and was not surprised to not see these before-and-after pictures…

Or these…

Or these…

Images of people with botched Botox treatments who don’t “look better…

But do look tragic…

Addendum

I recently watched the documentary Jane Fonda in Five Acts, in which the actress/activist freely admitted to having had cosmetic surgeries.

Fonda, now 82, has been performing in front of the camera for 60+ years.

“Looking good for the camera” is very much in her job description.

Whether that camera is shooting Grace & Frankie – the Netflix series Fonda stars in with Lily Tomlin, now renewed for its seventh season – or catching Jane being arrested at a protest:

Looking good is necessary to Fonda’s career.

Fonda comes to mind because I recently heard about an acquaintance who also had cosmetic surgery.

The acquaintance, whom I’ll call “Ann,” is 43.

She does not make her career in front of a camera, but rather, in front of a classroom.

Ann is the divorced mother of two pre-teens, and happily remarried to a divorced man, also with two children – a blended family.  Their income is adequate for their family of six, and they tend to spend every penny they earn.

I would describe Ann as attractive, of average height and weight.  She tries every new diet that comes along, and between the kids and her classroom, she gets plenty of exercise.

But apparently, Ann felt her body was “bad,” and needed fixing.

So she had breast augmentation, a tummy tuck and thigh liposuction, all three procedures in one day.

Cost:  Approximately $20,000.

None of it covered by health insurance.

I’ll never ask where they got the money.

And I’ll never ask why she voluntarily went under the knife – plus anesthesia, pain, recovery, risking infection and worse.

Though I know the most common answer to that question is, “I wanted to feel better about myself.”

If I did ask, and did hear that reason, I’d have had further questions:

Did it ever cross your mind that putting that $20,000 into a college fund for your kids would make you “feel better” about yourself?

Did it ever cross your mind that using that $20,000 to help pay down your monster mortgage would make you “feel better” about yourself?

Did it ever cross your mind that putting that $20,000 in an easily accessible account for emergencies would make you “feel better” about yourself?

Apparently not.

Instead, Ann spent that money to change her body.

Because her body was…

You want “bad”?

How’s this for bad:

Update from Ann, 12/29/19:

“My belly is flat, the drain plugs are out, my breasts are round.”

Yes – even I will allow that issuing pardons is the one thing Trump does adequately.

Take turkeys, for example.

In 2017:

In 2018:

In 2019:

But…

Here’s my New Year’s prediction:

Publication Date:  August 2019

Review, short version:  Four roses out of four – two red and two white.

Review, long version:

If you enjoy English royalty historical fiction – the Plantagenets, the Yorks, the Lancasters, their predecessors, their successors – I highly recommend author Anne O’Brien.

What’s different about O’Brien is that her many books don’t just focus on history…

But also, on herstory.

Here are the 10 O’Brien books I’d read, and the women whose story the books tell.  I’ve enjoyed them, learned from them, and recommend all of them:

Queen of the North Elizabeth Mortimer	The Shadow Queen Joan of Kent
The King’s Sister Elizabeth of Lancaster	The Forbidden Queen Katherine of Valois
The King’s Concubine Alice Perrers	Virgin Widow Anne Neville
Devil’s Consort Eleanor of Aquitaine	The Uncrowned Queen Philippa of Hainault
The Scandalous Duchess Katherine Swynford	The Queen’s Choice Joanna of Navarre

Now we have #11, O’Brien’s latest:  A Tapestry of Treason, that tapestry woven by the York family.  On her website, O’Brien describes the family as “magnificently dysfunctional,” and they were.

O’Brien’s focus is Constance of York – daughter of Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, and granddaughter of Edward III.

Born circa 1375, Constance had an older brother, Edward, and a younger brother, Richard.  When the book begins in 1399, she is married to Thomas, Earl of Gloucester.  Constance was very aware of – and proud of – her family’s royal blood, and her place in that family, their power and their connections.

And because the current king, Richard II, has no heir, her father, the Duke of York, is Richard’s heir to the throne of England.  If the Duke of York should outlive Richard II, then the Duke would become king, and his oldest son, Edward, heir to the throne.

Power and connections?

Oh, yes.

There’s a tangle of many cousins – both legitimate and illegitimate grandchildren of Edward III – that can be challenging to keep track of, but O’Brien handles it deftly.  Equally deft was her giving Constance the first-person narrator role, so we get some insight into Constance’s thoughts, and motivations for what she did.

And, oh – what Constance did.  I found myself thinking, “No!  Constance!  Don’t do this!” but that’s because I had the benefit of having read about Constance before, and knew it would go badly.

Constance was an intelligent adult, and could be as arrogant, ambitious and grasping as the men around her.  She could also be tactless, cruel and self-centered.

I found her fascinating.

Because of her rank, Constance was able to make some of her own choices in an age when most women had none.

But choosing treason?  Not once, but twice?

She was fortunate to keep her adult head on her shoulders.

Two of the power-hungry men in Constance’s life were her cousin Henry, son of John of Gaunt; Gaunt was Duke of Lancaster and third son of Edward III.  Henry usurps the throne of Richard II and becomes King Henry IV, and when this happens, the York family – which had been loyal to Richard II – must suddenly switch their loyalties to Henry IV.

But – will they?

The other man is Constance’s older brother Edward, who was charming, brilliant, and a traitor, schemer, liar, and ambitious self-seeker.  But Edward took it to another level, betraying both his king, and his sister.

Toward the end of A Tapestry of Treason, here’s Constance, looking back on her life:

I closed my eyes, seeing the tapestry of connections that I was stitching.  Had I not, for much of my adult life, been at the centre of a tapestry of treason, drenched in blood and death?  I had stitched with my own hands and intellect to undermine and destroy.  In my mind’s eye I could see each interlocking stitch, the interplay of colour and vibrancy.  There would be no redemption, no forgiveness for me in its creation, even though it had never come to pass.

In was during Constance’s era that the seeds were sown for what is often referred to as “The Wars of the Roses.”  Awhile back I learned that that phrase is attributed to a man who lived 300+ years later, Scottish novelist Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832).

I think that phrase is such a misnomer.  It romanticizes what was a series of bloody civil wars in mid-15th-century  England that lasted almost 30 years, fought between people who were blood relatives – descendants of that tangle of cousins of York (white rose) and Lancaster (red rose).  The phrase “The Cousins’ Wars” is also used, less frequently, but more accurately.

If you’re interested in the Yorks’ role in the opening act of The Cousins’ War – and in Constance’s herstory – I highly recommend The Tapestry of Treason.

This story sounds like the synopsis of a Robert De Niro/Martin Scorsese movie.

A lousy De Niro/Scorsese movie.

First, take a bunch of guys with names like Marco Garmo, Fred Magana, Leo “The Ham” Hamel, Giovanni Tilotta and Waiel “Will” Anton.

Then add in a 23-count indictment, federal prosecutors, the FBI, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

And then, like many movies, start with some flashbacks:

February 13, 2019:

The home of San Diego “jewelry giant” Leo Hamel:

The FBI and ATF searched Hamel’s home as part of an investigation into a suspected firearms trafficking case.

It’s around 7:30am.

Cut to:

Three hours later, at Hamel’s San Diego flagship jewelry store:

The FBI and ATF raided the store as part of the investigation.

Officials were seen going in and out of the business.  An FBI spokesperson confirmed that agents were serving “multiple federal search warrants” for evidence on the gun trafficking case, but declined to release details about the home or potential suspects.

And there hasn’t been much in the news since then.

So let’s do another flashback.  Who is Leo “The Ham” Hamel?

I should be honest and say that as far as I know, I’m the only one who calls him “The Ham.”

And the reason I call him “The Ham” is because he LOVES seeing himself on local TV.  Hamel had been in business since 1979, and once he’d discovered the pleasure of seeing himself, on TV, in his own commercials, he – and we – saw a lot of him.

Most of the commercials featured Leo and his family, like this one from 2010:

There’s Hamel, his wife Penelope, and their kids who, while remaining nameless, always chimed in at the end with a hearty, “Come See Us!”

Over the years we saw the kids grow, as in this commercial from 2017:

The kids were changing, but their “Come See Us!” didn’t.

Hamel branched out in 2018, running this ad for his new “Leo Hamel Boutique & Consignment Shop” that October:

The shop, Hamel noted, was “conveniently located next to our jewelry store.”

The same jewelry store that the FBI and ATF would raid four months later.

The same kids at the end of Hamel’s Boutique & consignment Shop commercial:

And their same, “Come See Us!”

But wait – Hamel’s wife, Penelope, isn’t anywhere to be seen.  Did she perhaps stop stumping for Hamel’s business because he filed for divorce in 2017?

Little did Hamel know back then that his troubles were just beginning.

Now our movie dissolves to the present – late November – and we catch up with the rest of the cast of characters, which now includes the U.S. Attorney.

And if you can keep track of this mess, you’re a better director than Scorsese:

Hamel is one of the “four others.”

In addition to Hamel, the indicted were Marco Garmo, 52, who served as a sheriff’s deputy for 27 years; sheriff’s department Lt. Fred Magana, 42; firearms dealer Giovanni Tilotta, 38; and local resident Waiel Anton, 35.

According to a news release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Garmo was charged with engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license, making false statements in acquisition of a firearm, obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting the possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and other offenses.

Besides making a profit, Garmo sold guns to cultivate future donors for his anticipated campaign for sheriff of San Diego County.

(Insert:  Marco Garmo TV commercial #1)

The “other four” were charged with aiding Garmo in operating an illegal gun trafficking business.

Cleary, Garmo was the ringleader here.

Hamel and Magana entered guilty pleas to aiding and abetting Garmo’s business and will be sentenced in February 2020.

Garmo and Anton pleaded not guilty and are expected back in court on January 10.

Tilotta remains at large, which means nobody knows where the hell he is.

Now I enter in, as the nameless voice-over narrator.

I’ve long been an admirer of – and grateful for – police officers.  They put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe from the bad guys.

When two of the police are the bad guys – Garmo and Magana – it’s sickening.

It’s especially sickening when, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune, in 2017 San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore – Garmo’s boss – formally reprimanded Garmo after an investigation found that he had bought and sold dozens of guns without securing a federal firearms license:

“Garmo said at the time that he was simply a gun hobbyist who was unaware that he needed a federal license to buy and sell so many weapons.”

At the time, Garmo had been a law enforcement officer for 25 years.  Yet he was “unaware” of the law?

I’ll bet during those 25 years, Garmo busted other people who broke the very same law he said he was “unaware of.”

The Union-Tribune continues,

“Sheriff Gore defended his decision from 2017, saying the punishment fit the misconduct because Garmo did not appear to be selling the guns for profit and apparently had simply overlooked the law that requires people who buy or sell more than five guns a year to have a federal license.”

“Simply overlooked”?

And “did not appear to be selling the guns for profit”?

What was Sheriff Gore suggesting?  That Garmo was running a gun non-profit 501(c)(3)?

(Insert:  Marco Garmo TV commercial #2)

Sickening.

More sickening:

“The sheriff’s case was referred to the District Attorney’s Office for possible criminal charges, but then-District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis declined to file charges and instead sent Garmo a letter warning him not to continue violating the law.”

If this had been you or me, buying and selling “dozens of guns without securing a federal firearms license,” do you think Bonnie Dumanis or any District Attorney would have contented herself with just sending us a letter?

I’m doubtful.

End voice-over narrator.

Our movie winds down with this from Hamel’s attorney, after Hamel pleaded guilty:

“Mr. Hamel is pleased to have this matter behind him, and he is satisfied with the agreement he has made with the government.  This will allow him to get back to his family and continue to the businesses he enjoys along with his numerous community service activities.”

Well, it will allow Hamel to “continue” until his sentencing in February.

And perhaps during that time Leo “The Ham” Hamel will treat us to a few more commercials, starring, of course, him.

And of course, his kids saying, “Come See Us!”

Only now they can say…

(Fade to black)

(Music up)

(Roll credits)

My friend and I have bucket lists, and we enjoy crossing items off our lists and recounting our experiences.

Recently she said, “I have the chance to do an item on my bucket list – and this time you’re going to join me!”

Intrigued, I said, “Tell me more!”

“Remember on my list I wrote, ‘Have a unique flying experience’?  Like a ride in a Blue Angels jet.  Or the Goodyear blimp, or a hot air balloon.  Something that most people never get to do?”

Now I’m more intrigued.  To actually get a ride with the Blue Angels?  Wow!

My friend continues, “I heard about this guy with a one-of-a-kind, very cool airplane, so I checked him out.  He takes people for rides over San Diego and the wine country up north and out along the coast.  It’s a 90-minute flight and I booked it for Saturday morning and won’t that be great?”

Well, it’s not the Blue Angels but – why not?

“He calls his plane Mélange, which is French for ‘mixture.’  Look, I downloaded these pictures from his website:

“He got the engine from this golf cart…
salvaged one wing from a DC-10…
and the other wing from this F-35 fighter jet – he didn’t say where he found that…
and the airplane body is this Cessna.”

Uh-oh.  I’m starting to feel less enthused.

“It has tires that he found in a guy’s private collection…
And get this – the tail came from one of those kiddie airplanes rides you see at the mall.  I love that the whole plane is recycled parts!
And the fuel is cooking oil from a restaurant, so really environmentally friendly.”

Now I’m far from enthused.

I’m pretty sure this is not a good idea.

I’m pretty sure the FAA would not give a high-five to this aircraft.

I’m pretty sure there’s only one mélange on my bucket list:

The platypus.

Because if ever there was an entity made of a mixture of parts – a mélange – it’s this guy:

A bill like a duck. A sleek, furry body like an otter. A tail like a beaver. Big webbed feet like a pelican, but with pronounced claws. No teeth. No stomach.
It’s a mammal that lays eggs – rare.
It’s a mammal that has poison– also rare; the males have a venomous stinger on their back legs.
Females have no nipples – but they can nurse their young.

It’s no wonder that when the first platypus was sent from Australia to England in the late 18^th century, people thought it was a fake – that a prankster had taken parts from different animals and sewn them together.

Even its name is a mélange – the scientific name Ornithorhynchus anatinus is derived from ορνιθόρυγχος (ornithorhynkhos), which literally means “bird snout” in Greek; and anatinus, which means “duck-like” in Latin.

Platypus, the name we non-scientifics use, comes from the Greek platypous or flat-footed – platys meaning flat + pous meaning foot.

Speaking of Australia, that’s the only place you can find platypuses (and yes, “platypuses” is preferred over “platypi”).

The only place…until now:

There is much excitement in San Diego now that Eve, a 15-year-old female, and Birrarung, an 8-year-old male, have moved into their new residence at the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, the only place platypuses are on display outside of Australia.

Former residents of the Taronga Zoo in Sydney, Birrarung and Eve are considered a donation to the park with no requirement that they be returned, unlike the Zoo’s fickle giant pandas, which have all gone back to China.

Eve and Biarrarung’s residence is part of Safari Park’s Walkabout Australia, a 3.6-acre exhibition that opened in 2018 and was designed to represent Australia’s rural animals, plants and landscapes encountered along backcountry roads.

Keeping company with the platypuses are kangaroos, wallabies, cassowaries, kookaburras, ducks and geese, all living in habitats that simulate back home.  The one exception being the platypus enclosure – they’re nocturnal animals, but we’re daytime visitors, so keepers are tricking Birrarung and Eve through lighting controls, to think night is day, and vice versa.

Birrarung and Eve have known each other for several years but never mated.  The keepers are hopeful, though I don’t know if that day-is-night and night-is-day thing is going to work out.

I do know that my friend can take that bucket list airplane ride without me.

And I’ll get my mélange fix from those duck-billed, web-footed, egg-laying, no-teeth-or-stomach-or-nipples, furry, venomous but cute little mammals.

They are pretty cute, aren’t they?

A conversation between two members of the Trump campaign was caught on an open mike on December 11, shortly after Time magazine announced Greta Thunberg as the magazine’s Person of the Year.

We have that conversation, and unlike so many things these days, this is the full conversation, that is, unredacted, and in its entirety.  Let’s listen to it now:

Trumper 1:   He is so pissed.  I’ve never seen him so pissed.

Trumper 2:  Yeah.  Not even that picture of him going up the steps to Air Force One, with the toilet paper stuck on his shoe?  Remember that?  Not even that pissed him off this much.

Trumper 1:  Bad enough that he was one of the Person of the Year finalists and lost.  But he lost – to a girl!

Trumper 2:  Yeah!  A 16-year-old girl who’s running around all doomy and gloomy because it’s getting a little warmer.  What’s the big deal?  I like warm weather!

Trumper 1:  Did you see the tweet he sent out about it?  “Greta must work on her anger management problem” – brilliant!

Trumper 2:  Of course it was brilliant.  And now WE have to do something brilliant or heads are going to roll.

Trumper 1:  Yeah, but what?

Trumper 2:  What we always do – another tweet!

Trumper 1:  OK, but what about?

Trumper 2:  Well, we…we…uh…

Trumper 1:  Wait.  Wait.  It’s coming to me.

(Long pause)

Trumper 1:  OK.  We take that cover of Time magazine…

Trumper 2:  And…

(Long pause)

Trumper 1:  And we use his head to cover up her head!  Look (tapping on keyboard), I’ll just bring up the Time magazine cover…add his head…and…

(Long pause)

Trumper 2:  Ah, OK…um…  We put the head of a 73-year-old guy on a 16-year-old girl?

Trumper 1 (lowers voice):  Shhh!  You know he hates anyone talking about how he’s old and all that shit.

Trumper 2 (whispering):  Put the head of a 73-year-old guy on a 16-year-old girl?

Trumper 1 (shouting):  Yeah!  He’ll love it!

Trumper 2:  You don’t, um, think that’s a little creepy?

Trumper 1:  Creepy?  Sure, but so what?  What matters is that he’ll love it!  He’ll see it as a, you know – “Trump Triumphs Over Teen With Anger Management Issues!”

(Long pause)

Trumper 2:  Is that the tweet’s headline?

Trumper 1:  No.  The headline will be something about keeping promises – you know he’s big on that – and how all that makes him the real Person of the Year.

Trumper 2:  OK, so you mean, like, when he promised that Mexico would pay for the wall…

Trumper 1:  NO!

Trumper 2:  Or how he’ll be too busy to play golf when he’s president…

Trumper 1:  NO, NO, NO!

Trumper 2:  Or when he promised American families that he’d work for them rather than wealthy donors and corporate interests?

Trumper 1 (sighs):  No.

Trumper 2:  I know!  He was just in  Pennsylvania, right?  Remember back during the campaign, when he said, “We will be opening brand new factories across this state”?

(Long pause)

Trumper 2 (sounding desperate):  OK, then you mean – like reducing the national debt?  And getting rid of Obamacare and replacing it with…um…  And fixing our infrastructure?  And denuclearizing North Korea?  Wait!  What about when he said, “I will take care of women, and I have great respect for women.  I do cherish women, and I will take care of women.”

(Long pause)

Trumper 1:  No, you moron.  I mean like the economy, and that stuff.  We do a list, put that above the picture and…and…

Trumper 2:  And check marks?  For the promises he says he’s kept?

Trumper 1 (surprised):  Yeah!  That’s a great idea!  I guess you’re not a total moron.

Trumper 2:  Gosh, thanks!

Trumper 1:  OK.  Let’s do a list of the promises he’s kept.

(Extremely long silence)

Trumper 1:  OK.  Instead, let’s do a list of the promises he’s made.

Trumper 2:  Sure, that should be easy.

December 12, 2019:

Here’s what Trump is talking about:

That’s right.

Recently, Trump was at a meeting with entrepreneurs, or as the White House website called it:

During what must have been a torturous-to-hear, almost-2,500-word rambling bunch of disparate opening remarks, Trump had this to say about toilets:

“People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once.”

Oh, really?

I live in California, a state that has droughts on a regular basis, and we know a thing or two about water, water conservation, and low-flow bathroom fixtures.  If anyone had to flush the toilet “10 times, 15 times,” it would be headline news.

That’s the kind of state we are.

So here’s the question:

Who are the “people” Trump is referring to?  Who is this faceless, amorphous group known as “people” who are “flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times”?

And telling him about it?

When Trump has no facts, his fallback word is “people.”  “People” do this, say this, are or aren’t this.  Here are some examples of Trump using his fallback word during that meeting:

“Some people said…”
“people were rooting for a recession…”
“we’re paying interest to people…”
“there are a lot of people very unhappy about it…”
“that people can’t even believe it…”
“people are getting very excited about it…”

“people will be going to the new cars…”
“a lot of the people…”
“that people got used to…”
“Many people were complaining…”
“those people in…”
“these people were coming in…”
“our people are very happy…”
“we have a lot of great people looking at it and interviewing people…”

Well, at least, in the midst of his monologue and “people-ing,” Trump was good enough to give us a meteorology lesson:

“they have so much water that it comes down – it’s called rain…”

And Trump knows rain – as demonstrated in these 2018 photos of Trump leaving his Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, and heading back to the White House.

First, the headline:

We see Trump walking up the stairs to Air Force One, umbrella in hand:

Followed by Melania and Barron, left exposed to the elements:

“What a gent!” indeed.

The article says this trip to Mar-a-Lago was also noteworthy because a crowd had gathered near the resort to protest against Trump, the most recent reason being his disparaging comments about Haiti and African nations.

“The Trump administration both denied his comments and has claimed that they were misrepresented.  Multiple politicians present at the meeting have said he made the comments.

“In a closed-door meeting about immigration, Trump allegedly said, ‘Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?’”

Also note Trump’s use – again – of “people.”

Imagine that.

Memo to Trump:

From now on, you’ve inspired me to think of you every time I…

On December 9 the Washington Post broke this story:

I’ll leave it to others to interpret, analyze, yea or nay the Afghanistan Papers.

My takeaway can be summed up in one sentence, a 2003 quote in the article from then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld:

“We are woefully deficient in human intelligence.”

Rumsfeld was referring to information from the U.S. Intelligence Community, but I think his statement describes the entire war in Afghanistan:

We are woefully deficient in human intelligence in our leaders, who led us into, and have kept us in, an 18-year unwinnable war.

We are woefully deficient in human intelligence in those same leaders who, according to the article, were advised – repeatedly – by experts that “the war had become unwinnable,” and instead continued making “rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.”

We are woefully deficient in human intelligence when we don’t challenge a war that since 2001:

• Has deployed more than 775,000 U.S. troops.
• Has caused 2,300 U.S. deaths, and 20,589 U.S. wounded in action.
• Has cost $1 trillion of our tax dollars, and counting.

Why have we allowed this tragedy to continue for so long?

Because I/you/we are woefully deficient in human intelligence for believing:

George W. Bush, October 11, 2001:

“We learned some very important lessons in Vietnam.  People often ask me, ‘How long will this last?’  This particular battlefront will last as long as it takes to bring al-Qaeda to justice.  It may happen tomorrow, it may happen a month from now, it may take a year or two.  But we will prevail.”

Barack Obama, December 1, 2009:

“The days of providing a blank check are over…It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security and that America has no interest in fighting an endless was in Afghanistan.”

Donald Trump, November 28, 2019:

“The Taliban wants to make a deal and we’re meeting with them and we’re saying it has to be a cease-fire and they didn’t want to do a cease-fire, and now they do want to do a cease-fire.  I believe it’ll probably work out that way… We are winning like we haven’t won in a long time…We’ve made tremendous progress and at the same time we’ve been drawing down our troops.”

Here, instead, is the truth:

This is not a movie review, though it is mostly about a movie.

And it’s a “movie” in the sense that it’s six one-hour segments.

Each segment focuses on one dictator.

It’s called The Dictator’s Playbook.

The documentary began airing on PBS in January 2019.  I saw it only recently, but long before I saw it, I was struck by the timing.

I have to believe this was not a coincidence – producing a series about dictators when we have, in the White House, the closest thing to a dictator our country has even seen.

Trump:  A would-be dictator who openly expresses his preference – love, even – for other dictators including:

Trump’s pals, above left to right:  Kim Jong-Un, Vladimir Putin, Mohammad bin Salman; below left to right:  Rodrigo Duterte, Xi Jinping, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi.

As I watched all six hours, I saw many similarities.  Though it doesn’t state this on the PBS website or in the program, it was clear to me that The Dictator’s Playbook was intended to educate us about the common strategies that past dictators share – their “playbook” – and as a warning to alert us to similarities in Trump.

Here’s the list of playbook strategies I made note of as I watched, and the dictators featured.  None of the dictators practiced all these, but all the dictators used many of them:

Dictator’s Playbook	Dictators
1.    Learning from other dictators 2.    Creating a common enemy 3.    Creating a need for scapegoats 4.    Creating terror; a culture of fear and intimidation 5.    The carrot and the stick 6.    Unifying elites 7.    Using violence to seize power and take control 8.    Crushing the enemy 9.    Using propaganda 10. Controlling the secret police 11. Spinning defeat into triumph 12. Using indoctrination 13. Using war as a distraction 14. Creating a desire for a “strongman” 15. Manipulating votes/elections 16. Controlling the press to support the dictator 17. Appealing to underprivileged and forgotten people 18. Controlling information 19. Making an example 20. Gaining consent 21. Purging enemies 22. Creating a gulag 23. Diverting public attention from his failures 24. Cult of personality 25. Theatricality of personality 26. Populist charm 27. Increased exaggeration of dictator’s own glory and abilities 28. Rising racism 29. Disaffection for traditional forms of government 30. Military path to power	Kim Il Sung (1912-1994) Country:  North Korea, in power 1948-1994
	Saddam Hussein (1937-2006) Country:  Iraq, in power 1979-2003
	Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) Country:  Italy, in power 1922-1945
	Manuel Noriega (1934-2017) Country:  Panama, in power 1983-1989
	Francisco Franco (1892-1975) Country:  Spain, in power 1939-1975
	Idi Amin (1925-2003) Country:  Uganda, in power 1971-1979

Something else that several of the six dictators had in common (though certainly not listed in the playbook) was how often the crowds cheered him when he was in power – and jeered him when he fell from power.  Like Mussolini:

Left, 1937:  Mussolini greets a cheering crowd.  Right, 1945:  Mussolini, his mistress and three senior Fascists were executed, then put on display for a jeering crowd.

So, the parallels to Trump are unmistakable – how the six dictators in the film were fervent believers in nationalism, even as Trump declared himself a “nationalist” at a rally in Houston in October 2018.

That Franco was convinced he was the only man who could save his country from all the “challenges from the left.”  Trump is “saving” the country by telling politicians on the left to “go back to where they came from.”

And Amin, who launched a “nationwide charm offensive, promising better jobs, housing, a better future.”  The people “love me,” he declared, just as Trump continues to promise the same, and frequently identifies himself as “your favorite president” on Twitter.

I highly recommend The Dictator’s Playbook for both the information about the past – and the warning about the future.

As CNN put in it this article:

“The prevailing message serves as a reminder that the methods on display carry a not-so-subtle warning that while America has been shielded from dictatorships, it is not necessarily immune from forces that have shaped and defined them.”

But – I know six hours is a huge time commitment.

So I’ve provided a checklist of those same 30 items as above and invite you to see how many you would identify as Trump behaviors.  I did, and my count was 19:

□          1.  Learning from other dictators □          2.  Creating a common enemy □          3.  Creating a need for scapegoats □          4.  Creating terror; a culture of fear and intimidation □          5.  The carrot and the stick □          6.  Unifying elites □          7.  Using violence to seize power and take control □          8.  Crushing the enemy □          9.  Using propaganda □          10.  Controlling the secret police □          11. Spinning defeat into triumph □          12. Using indoctrination □          13. Using war as a distraction □          14. Creating a desire for a “strongman” □          15. Manipulating votes/elections □          16. Controlling the press to support the dictator □          17. Appealing to underprivileged and forgotten people □          18. Controlling information □          19. Making an example □          20. Gaining consent □          21. Purging enemies □          22. Creating a gulag □          23. Diverting public attention from his failures □          24. Cult of personality □          25. Theatricality of personality □          26. Populist charm □          27. Increased exaggeration of dictator’s own glory and abilities □          28. Rising racism □          29 Disaffection for traditional forms of government □          30. Military path to power

I’ll mention one last behavior all six dictators had in common:  Making promises they didn’t keep.  This was especially true during their rise to power.

In January 2016 the Washington Post compiled this list:

Here are a few of them:

11/29/19 Update:

Trump has added another strategy to the Dictator’s Playbook list:

Create chaos within the military:

Our federal and state governments are doing a piss-poor job – no surprise there – of educating us about REAL ID.

REAL ID – that thing you need to get on a commercial flight starting October 1, 2020.

Our governments are also doing a piss-poor job – again, no surprise – of educating us that you don’t need a REAL ID to get on a commercial flight starting October 1, 2020.

Well, which is it?

Don’t bother asking our governments.

Oh, you can slog through the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) website, where they’ve got a timer counting down the days, hours, minutes and seconds to the Date of Doom, October 1, 2020:

But I promise it will strike terror into your heart when you read this:

You see where it says, “If you’re not sure”?

The TSA should update that to,

“If you’re not sure because we’ve done a piss-poor job of giving you the simple, straightforward facts about REAL ID even though we’ve had plenty of time since this became a law back in 2005…”

So you read “contact your state driver’s license agency,” which is a multi-word government way of saying…

“Contact your DMV.”

And you want to get this resolved, so you call your DMV, and they put you on hold and you wait so long that…

But it’s not enough to just contact your DMV – you can’t just call them and say, “Those REAL ID things?  Could you pop one into the mail to me?”

If you want a REAL ID, you must go to your DMV:

Think the lines at your DMV are bad now?

Lines at your DMV as we get closer to the October 1, 2020 deadline:

And since, according to this New York Times article from early October:

Which says,

“99 million Americans do not have the REAL ID-compliant identification”

And half of them don’t even know about the REAL ID deadline.

That line to the DMV in September 2020 will turn in to this:

And these folks still won’t have gotten their REAL ID.

Earlier I said you don’t need a REAL ID to get on a commercial flight starting October 1, 2020.

And that’s a fact.

To get on a commercial flight starting October 1, 2020 you need:

A REAL ID-compliant driver’s license*

A state-issued enhanced driver license.*

Another acceptable form of ID* such as a passport.

*This language is verbatim from the TSA website.

Otherwise, as of October 1, 2020 – the Day of Doom – when you arrive at airport security, which will look like this:

Because of conversations like this:

If you don’t have the proper documentation you will not be allowed through security and onto your flight.

And come October 1, 2020 that’s going to affect a lot of us:

Though I think “affect” is an understatement:

Quoting the U.S. Travel Association, the New York Times article also said:

“If Real ID went into effect tomorrow, almost 80,000 people trying to board a plane would be denied on Day 1.”

My recommendation?

Don’t be one of them:

And speaking of doing a piss-poor job…

Update, 11/13/19 Los Angeles Times:

The airlines also aren’t doing squat about educating people about REAL ID and October 1, 2020, the Day of Doom.

Amidst all the bad news in this article was a problem that hadn’t occurred to me:

“Make sure you don’t leave on a September 28 flight and can’t come home after October 1 because you don’t have the proper documents.

The article leaves us with a very sad image, indeed:

“Imagine the novice traveler, a grandma who only travels once or twice a year.  She can’t come home to her family.”