Opinion

 Death. Death. Death. Death. Not again…

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

It’s typed four times in clearly readable Calibri* because typing it three times didn’t make the word sound as ridiculous as it should. Say it four times really, really fast…you’ll get an idea of how strange it is to worry about The Word. We accept a lot of things in life out of our control, why is “that one” any different? If I was 6 feet 8 inches I’d be a retired, rich former NBA basketball star, in the Hall of Fame. Being normal height hasn’t made me fall on the floor lamenting and grieving.

In “Slaughterhouse 5”, Kurt Vonnegut introduces the Tralfamadorians who view death as simple transport, a journey to another place, a minor station in life. Their view is life is never-ending since they exist in 26 dimensions representing all stages of their lives, and they can transport into any stage at any time. Want to revisit your gestation? No problem. Death? Only take a second, unless you want to stay longer. Any time in any individual life is always being played out in some dimension, somewhere, sometime. Death is merely another pearl in a necklace to be enjoyed, admired, and revisited. Neat, right?

Philosophy, science, and science fiction are not as far apart as the rational among us might think.  Learned and tamed Quantum Entanglement could explain the mechanics of the Tralfamadorian dimension travel, for example. But it might be wise to not expose young minds to any of these thoughts, as they leave a lasting impression with sometimes controversial side effects. Billy Pilgrim’s story of travels to his other dimensions was learned when I was 16, when death was not only unnecessary to consider, but touching life anyway, with car accidents, drugs, and the Viet Nam war…in the 1960’s dimension.

It isn’t any pedantic puzzle to solve, then, how an attitude towards death can be skewed, and become slightly comic. Sure, death is inevitable, and could come suddenly, but so what? If we simply move to another dimension, what’s the problem? In religious arguments with all sects, it was the same question: if the dead are actually going to the heaven you describe, why are we sad for them?

From then on, at funerals, I was a reasonably handsome, silent man in a nice suit with tissues in every pocket. The paper product’s sole purpose was to allow grief to transfer from the breaking hearts of grieving widows, mothers, daughters, sisters, and anyone else, to those flimsy papers, then the pockets, and finally, disposal. Rarely were more words than these exchanged: “It’s so nice of you to be here for______.” Accidents, the unlucky military draft, and suicides caused the scene to be repeated often and ended with a final straw**, the death of mom. I didn’t need to be the strong silent Man With Tissues. Where she was going would be a lot better than where she’d been. I was happy for her.

It’s easy to understand grief and loss surrounding death. They have been companions often, but when Death suddenly appears, the theory or assumed reality of where the dead are going should outweigh any selfish sense of loss, shouldn’t it? If given a choice, especially for eternity, we’d all choose heaven instead of sticking around to keep relatives and loved ones from crying. Wouldn’t we? Wait, if everyone went to heaven…

It’s hard to see how the medical world fits into a discussion of death. When doctors cure cancer, it is only a temporary victory, a battle won even though the war will be lost. Is our happiness for the cure and few extra years really that big a deal? It helps to wonder about what would have happened if the world never became “developed”, and we lived the laws of nature, not medicine and man. Is living with someone else’s heart, for example, worth it? Is donating your organs to someone else your goal in life?

Only until we know for sure, only until we have made that journey, it’s open season on end-of-life issues and we will discuss them forever, by ourselves or our progeny.

Conclusion: The journey matters. Not The End. Say it four times really, really fast.

Final note: The Calamities of the past three years stress-tested the opinions expressed in this post. Winning the battle rang the bell that saved them for another round. Can’t wait to see what’s next.***

And apologies for bringing this subject up for the umpteenth time. It’s not my fault if people keep dying.

PS Looked it up and the last time you were lectured about Death was January 11, 2026, when Bob Weir died, a Grateful Dead. See? It’s not my fault.

*Which the wordpress gods will change to New Times Roman.

**There is never a “Final Straw”. And loss never ends.

***Sarcasm?

Yes, Everybody Has An Opinion…Why? Is It A Law?

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

It is a struggle to get through the day without hearing not just opinions, but so many people defending having an opinion. Is there a course taught in how to form an opinion? How to plant the seed, nurture, it, and watch it grow to its rightful form? No, there isn’t. People acquire opinions like appetizers and a lot of opinions are dying on the vines due to lack of enriching truth. Most opinions are worthless, is my opinion. Follow these samples of real (paraphrased) conversations and  substitute “liberal” for conservative” and “Democrat” for Republican” in almost all these encounters. Worthless opinions are equal opportunity and DEI friendly. IMO.

“Legacy Media doesn’t tell the truth.” Question: “When was the last time you watched Lagacy Media?” The answer: “I don’t.”  See the reverse for Fox?

“There were no wars in Trump’s first term. He ended them all.”  Question: “Which ones?” Answer: “I don’t know.” You may not realize it but this question works for the Obama and Biden Years. Remember, Obama was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. Bonus question: Why?

“The Covid virus came from a Chinese lab and Fauci is to blame.” Question: Why? Answer: “Fauci’s NIH paid for the research.” This one is tricky and you need to do your own digging, but in a nutshell: The US and China (and others) have collaborated on virus research for many years and the NIH sent a grant to a Non-Profit US research group to participate/monitor work in the Wuhan, China lab. Trump cut that funding in April 2020, as well as The PREDICT Program funding in September 2019. Google the purpose of PREDICT and draw your own conclusions, and opinions.

“Democrats only want immigrants to win elections” and “ICE is only arresting and deporting the worst of the worst.” Why would anyone believe either? The immigration problem is over 100 years old and been lied about by both parties for all those years. So when you search for an opinion about immigration, don’t select either of these. Think of it a complex issue needing much research.

“The Russian Issue in 2016 to 2020 was a hoax” and it’s partner: “Russia helped elect Trump.” Both these get the Jeopardy buzzer. 2016 was NOT the first time Russia attempted to influence American Elections. The cumulative effect of their interference, and if it helped Trump, will never be truly known, but it was real. America does the same thing, when we can. For years. So it was a trusty but ineffective device for impeachment in 2016-2020, but it was not a hoax. And will never be a hoax. Russia, China, North Korea, Hungary would love to see Americans question and abandon our free elections. It would be a victory for those countries. It’s not an opinion, but a question: Why are we helping them with that effort? Opinion: Donald Trump started the Period of National Doubt (PND) with his 2015-2026 claims the election would be rigged. He did it as a smart politician who knew he was going to lose the election and needed a good reason to save his political prospects. Smart move, but selfish. He did lose the popular vote so he carried PND over to 2020 and 2024. A decided win for him was not enough to disprove a lie he’d told for years, so…

The last opinions about opinions took too long. Election denying is a strange sport we should all be leery of. Some election deniers have since been elected by the very systems they said were rigged. None of them refused to accept the win. In my opinion, that says it all about election deniers.

The befuddled and buried point is don’t accept other’s words when you form your opinions. It is OK not to have one until you’re ready. Really. One of the favorite questions we should ask our opinion disseminaters/influencers is “Why?’ and “What’s in it for you?”

And then take the time to listen.

This may seem to be a political posting, but it is more about common sense. Think about it. Please.

Truther(sic) Words Were Never Spoken

ness23456 Tags: , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Mark Twain is a personal idol and national treasure. He was born November 30, 1835, raised in the 19th Century and died in the early 20th, on April 21, 1910, but his observations are timeless. They defy the centuries. He recognized enduring human traits which were humorous on the surface, often dangerous to society, and funny. If you have the long view of life and believe living a good life will get you to a Good Place, Mark Twain is your prophet/guide. His life is one of triumph and tragedy as he lost 3 children to the illnesses of the times, and suffered some, himself, but his reported last words as he lay dying of a heart attack (which happened to people in those days) were “Give me my glasses.” He had more to write in the afterlife.

Most of us know Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, even though forcing a student to read something is not the best way to introduce authors and their works. Ai says the books are still being taught in “some Schools” but the subject matter can be “controversial”. Since talking about race is always controversial, Twain would be happy we are just discussing it, these days. Of course, he would point out we shouldn’t need to, anymore.

Unfortunately, our modern societal and political conversations are not about facts and truth. Pick any issue in America and you’ll find arguments, facts, and opinions to support either side, with both sides thinking the other is—at best—uninformed. My personal opinion is one side of the national debate is intent on obscuring facts and making opinion the determining factor for truth or fiction. But the opposing side doesn’t seem interested in sticking to the facts, either. Having truth be so “fluid” brings to mind this Twain Quote: “Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

I’ve written about the rhetorical skirmishes from my local paper’s opinion section, how writers pronounce themselves as know-it-alls, and lack humility. (Knowing and talking about humility, by the way, does not sound humble, does it. If there was any other way…) In speaking (figuratively) with these writers, this Twain quote often comes to mind: “The truth is no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie.” Please note in repartees with local writers I never profess 2 plus 2 equals anything, just that 2 plus 2 does not equal 5. So many political party supporters are intent on believing anything the party says. See my post about “Tribe over Truth”. An additional point is to reveal, slyly, not everybody you disagree with is wrong all the time. You agree?

But, alas, it is the fate of a semi-professional Devil’s Advocate and self-appointed Fact Watcher to learn there will always be a part of society unfazed by brilliant and cohesive skewering of a particular viewpoint. ((I honor myself un-humbly(sic), with the previous statement and arbitrarily assign myself the role of Twain in 2025. Just for this day, I promise.)) These “skewerings” are not meant to denigrate anyone or any viewpoint, but professional political statements from professional politicians are getting comical, as each one tries to satisfy what they think their tribe/party needs to hear the professional politicians say. (Hope you get the sublte, sophisticated, elitist sarcasm in the repetition of a phrase.)

This “adherence” to party dogma and debate (alliteration) leads to this post’s final Twain quote:

“It’s easier to fool people than convince them they are being fooled.”

Final declaration: Professional Politicians (Again?) have always tried to fool the voting public. Most of them do it on the fly, reacting to polling, upcoming elections, or current events. But some do it on purpose with carefully designed and artfully thought-out schemes, often involving years of planning and manipulation.

Which type did YOU vote for?