PARIS WILL ALWAYS LIVE
ii i
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Sunday, November 1, 2015
Happy Black Cat Day * Happy Halloween * Happy Caturday!!! (It Has Been a Busy Week for the Kitties)
A BLESSED BLACK CAT DAY TO YOU!
HAPPY HALLOWEEN
HAPPY CATURDAY!
REMEMBER THE BIG CATS
Saturday, October 17, 2015
Saturday, September 26, 2015
Happy Caturday!!!!!!
I Wantz You To Have A
Happy Caturday!!!!
Thank you to the Huffington Post for this wonderful kitty!
Mantons At Dawn: I've Been Slandered, Insulted, Possibly Libeled, Ridiculed, Slapped Across The Cheek .... ......
Yes, yours truly has been put through the storm. As I have the right of choice of weapons, I choose Mantons (of course, I need to get a pristine 18th century set from England) as well as a refresher course (I was qualified on the 45 caliber revolver when I was in the Air Force). We have many Revolutionary re-enactors here who would probably be happy to teach me. One does not look at the North Korean border every day for a year as well as live with Def-Con 4/5 and not develop courage. One does NOT step on my honour and get away with it!
Now, what was this "slug-fest", you might say. I never thought it would devolve into that. First, I would like to say that there are indeed words describing different human groups which are degrading. I DO NOT approve of these at all. However, we are not speaking about that. What I am asking is when does wearing ashes and sack-cloth come to an end and a people can be honoured for their bravery and courage as the titular mascot of athletic teams.
The person who slandered me is not even wholly Amerindian. I knew the late Chief Tantaquidgeon of the Mohegan Tribe and his sister Gladys, who was an anthropologist. They were wonderful people. The Tribe was honoured when the town wished to honour them by calling their athletic teams The Indians. This was back in 1964. Why did she NOT want to hear this?
Then, I came to find out that another major part of her ancestry is Norse. She has lied to herself about the amount of stereotyping that particular branch has also gone through and its suffering at the hands of Christianizers. Did she want to hear it? No. She just called them raiders and pirates, forgetting that they were primarily farmers and fisherfolk. Most of the gold gotten from raids went to get land. Many also settled in the places where they raided. Somehow, she sees these ancestors as being less than her others. Her Amerindian ancestors fought against each other, sometimes to almost the point of genocide. Of course, she would really rather have myth. Of course, what the Europeans did was utterly inexcusable -- and I said so. However, she hurled insults at me after I told her my bona fides ( high honors in History first). She slung that I only probably had an AP course in high school. Immediately, I stated where the High Honors was from a college in the top 100 of small colleges and that I was also a member of Phi Alpha Theta. I also stated that I keep up with my field, the Christianization of Europe (and that it was not pretty but ugly and brutal) and the pre-existing religions. She thought the Norse rolled over like dogs. Then she hurls the worst insult ever -- she says that I must be a Republican!
If all of this does not deserve Mantons at dawn, I just do not know how many more insults a person must take.
Now, what was this "slug-fest", you might say. I never thought it would devolve into that. First, I would like to say that there are indeed words describing different human groups which are degrading. I DO NOT approve of these at all. However, we are not speaking about that. What I am asking is when does wearing ashes and sack-cloth come to an end and a people can be honoured for their bravery and courage as the titular mascot of athletic teams.
The person who slandered me is not even wholly Amerindian. I knew the late Chief Tantaquidgeon of the Mohegan Tribe and his sister Gladys, who was an anthropologist. They were wonderful people. The Tribe was honoured when the town wished to honour them by calling their athletic teams The Indians. This was back in 1964. Why did she NOT want to hear this?
Then, I came to find out that another major part of her ancestry is Norse. She has lied to herself about the amount of stereotyping that particular branch has also gone through and its suffering at the hands of Christianizers. Did she want to hear it? No. She just called them raiders and pirates, forgetting that they were primarily farmers and fisherfolk. Most of the gold gotten from raids went to get land. Many also settled in the places where they raided. Somehow, she sees these ancestors as being less than her others. Her Amerindian ancestors fought against each other, sometimes to almost the point of genocide. Of course, she would really rather have myth. Of course, what the Europeans did was utterly inexcusable -- and I said so. However, she hurled insults at me after I told her my bona fides ( high honors in History first). She slung that I only probably had an AP course in high school. Immediately, I stated where the High Honors was from a college in the top 100 of small colleges and that I was also a member of Phi Alpha Theta. I also stated that I keep up with my field, the Christianization of Europe (and that it was not pretty but ugly and brutal) and the pre-existing religions. She thought the Norse rolled over like dogs. Then she hurls the worst insult ever -- she says that I must be a Republican!
If all of this does not deserve Mantons at dawn, I just do not know how many more insults a person must take.
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Robert E. Lee ~~ TRAITOR
As some of my readers are aware, I am a former History major; and, though my speciality was pre-Classical through early Modern (pre-1825) European history, I still do have a decent background in American history and government.
This country was founded during the 18th Century and its immediate starting was NOT sanguine. The Articles of Confederation was a document that only provided a very loose sort of alliance to the former British colonies that would later form the United States of America. Yes, we were NOT the USA at the end of the Revolution. It seems as though the South in particular never forgot that older part of our history. This was probably because of the fact that the "alliance" was just that, an alliance, something that could be abandoned at a whim. The Articles lasted about 4-5 years, failing horribly. The Constitutional Convention was called in Philadelphia in order to draw up a better document. This document which starts with the ringing words WE THE PEOPLE... created the country which we know as the United States of America, a country entire of itself.
Of course, there were problems with this original document. Human beings make mistakes, even mistakes of grievous moral turpitude (slavery). To call a human being who happens to have a different colour skin a mere percentage of human is disgusting and evil. Personally, I do not believe in the biological concept of race. Everyone on this planet is within 3% of each other genetically. This is why documents can and should be revised. The Bill of Rights is one such way that such revisions can occur in the Constitution. The Supreme Court is another. Of course, we sometimes have to wait for the stupidity level to go down enough in order to make these most needed changes because of the cupidity of many of our politicians.
Now, to go back to Robert E. Lee. We can say that he was an educated man. Yet, he had a streak of Southern stupidity which can be traced to The Articles of Confederation. The State of Virginia is NOT above the country to which it holds its allegiance. The state proclaimed rebellion against that allegiance. The fact that they named themselves the "CONFEDERATE States of America" specifically hearkens back to that old document which did not work the first time. They KNEW what they were doing. Some may claim it was for economic reasons. However, every state that went into rebellion SPECIFICALLY stated that it was to keep their institution of slavery alive and thriving. So, in the long run, it was not only treasonous of Lee; it was also for the most immoral and evil reasons possible that he took up arms against the United States of America. He was lucky that General Grant did not have him summarily executed at Appomattox.
In my opinion, there should be no hero worship of these Southern fighters and their commanders. Their flags, like the Nazi flags, belong in museums, because they are banners in a call to hate.
This country was founded during the 18th Century and its immediate starting was NOT sanguine. The Articles of Confederation was a document that only provided a very loose sort of alliance to the former British colonies that would later form the United States of America. Yes, we were NOT the USA at the end of the Revolution. It seems as though the South in particular never forgot that older part of our history. This was probably because of the fact that the "alliance" was just that, an alliance, something that could be abandoned at a whim. The Articles lasted about 4-5 years, failing horribly. The Constitutional Convention was called in Philadelphia in order to draw up a better document. This document which starts with the ringing words WE THE PEOPLE... created the country which we know as the United States of America, a country entire of itself.
Of course, there were problems with this original document. Human beings make mistakes, even mistakes of grievous moral turpitude (slavery). To call a human being who happens to have a different colour skin a mere percentage of human is disgusting and evil. Personally, I do not believe in the biological concept of race. Everyone on this planet is within 3% of each other genetically. This is why documents can and should be revised. The Bill of Rights is one such way that such revisions can occur in the Constitution. The Supreme Court is another. Of course, we sometimes have to wait for the stupidity level to go down enough in order to make these most needed changes because of the cupidity of many of our politicians.
Now, to go back to Robert E. Lee. We can say that he was an educated man. Yet, he had a streak of Southern stupidity which can be traced to The Articles of Confederation. The State of Virginia is NOT above the country to which it holds its allegiance. The state proclaimed rebellion against that allegiance. The fact that they named themselves the "CONFEDERATE States of America" specifically hearkens back to that old document which did not work the first time. They KNEW what they were doing. Some may claim it was for economic reasons. However, every state that went into rebellion SPECIFICALLY stated that it was to keep their institution of slavery alive and thriving. So, in the long run, it was not only treasonous of Lee; it was also for the most immoral and evil reasons possible that he took up arms against the United States of America. He was lucky that General Grant did not have him summarily executed at Appomattox.
In my opinion, there should be no hero worship of these Southern fighters and their commanders. Their flags, like the Nazi flags, belong in museums, because they are banners in a call to hate.
Monday, May 25, 2015
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
Anti-Vaxxers Are Child Abusers of Their Own Children and Ours
This article comes from HuffPost and is by Dr. Sanjeev K. Sriram, thank you for putting into words my feelings on the matter.
It angers me when people make bad
decisions that threaten the health and
safety of other people. Whether you're
driving drunk, parading loaded firearms
in public, or choosing to not vaccinate
your child (exceptions for children with
health conditions that contraindicate
vaccinations), you are a danger to your
own health and to the health of others
-- and I am fed up with the ignorance
and arrogance behind these decisions.
To be fair, I have to briefly clarify my
frustration with drunk driving. Knowing
what we now know about the
interactions between genetics,
neurobiology and the social variables of
alcoholism and substance abuse, I can
wrap a little compassion around those
drunk drivers who are struggling with
addiction. By no means will I condone
or pardon drunk driving, but there is
some tiny fragment of that
phenomenon that eventually warrants
patience and understanding.
Anti-vaxxers, on the other hand, are no
longer deserving of my patience and
compassion. People who purposely
choose not to vaccinate themselves or
their children against diseases like
measles, whooping cough, rubella, and
so on are endangering the lives of
others. In the current measles
outbreak
that started in Disneyland,
All
of these babies are younger than 1 year
old, which is the age at which the first
MMR (measles-mumps-rubella)
vaccine
is done. These infants were counting on
us, their herd, to provide them with
community immunity until they were
old enough to get vaccinated. It is not
science's fault that these children, our
fellow Americans, caught the measles.
It is not their parents' fault. It is the
fault of the anti-vaxxers, the vaccine
cynics.
Let's all stop calling anti-vaxxers
"vaccine skeptics" because it is unfair
to genuine skepticism. As a
pediatrician, I have seen the difference
between skeptical parents and cynical
parents. Skeptics are driven by
curiosity, and they make it clear that
health care providers have to earn
their trust -- but it can be earned. As a
health care provider, I do not assume
anyone's trust and appreciate the
opportunity to earn and maintain the
trust of my patients and their families.
Whether we are talking about
vaccinations, medications, imaging
studies, or surgical procedures, the
skeptical parents of my patients want to
have their concerns acknowledged and
their questions answered. I am happy
to oblige. My conversations with them
are informative and even enjoyable
because these are transparent
exchanges about what priorities shape
our perspectives, where we get our
information, and how to contend with
risk. Genuine skepticism can transform
the doctor-patient relationship from
patriarchy to partnership, and we ne
ed this now more than ever in modern
medicine.
Anti-vaxxers are mostly cynics, and
they are a whole other phenomenon. I
am fortunate to have only experienced
cynical parents outside of my direct
clinical work. Cynics are not driven by curiosity but by an ugly mix of
ignorance and arrogance. After
dumpster diving on the Internet for
pseudo-science, anti-vaxxers have
decided that their contempt for public
health guidelines and their distrust of
modern medicine somehow makes them
more "informed."
As a pediatrician and public health
policy wonk, the cynical anti-vaxxers
frustrate me on several levels. First,
there is no amount of expensive
scientific research that will assure anti-
vaxxers about the safety, efficacy and
necessity of vaccines. Where genuine
skeptics ask questions in order to
learn, cynics ask questions in order to
scorn. Presenting legitimate peer-
reviewed scientific data to anti-vaxxers
does not persuade them because they
already reached a verdict based on their
fears and contempt. The scientific
community has diverted so much
funding and resources towards
disproving any causal relationship
between vaccines and autism, but to
what end? Those who get vaccinated
don't really need the additional proof,
and anti-vaxxers don't really care
about the real work of the scientific
method. As a result, millions of dollars
that could have been used to research
the real causes of autism or to study
the real toxins in our environment are
wasted proving what has already been
proven repeatedly: Vaccines are safe,
effective, and necessary for public
health.
It frustrates me that anti-vaxxers
benefit from herd immunity but refuse
to contribute to it. Those of us who get
vaccines are improving our own
individual lives as well as those around
us because vaccinated bodies do not
give dangerous viruses and bacteria
opportunities to start an infection,
reproduce, and pass on to others. This
is exactly how the United States
declared itself free of measles 15 years
ago. Regardless of whether the anti-
vaxxers admit it or not, they benefit
from herd immunity. But anti-vaxxers
are not the ones for whom herd
immunity is intended. As a pediatrician, I see infants who are too young to
receive certain vaccines. I see patients
whose immune systems are impaired
because they have organ transplants
or
they are undergoing treatments for
cancer. All of these children are part of
our herd, our community, and they are
depending on the rest of us who are
healthy enough to get vaccines to do
our part in maintaining our collective
immunity.
Getting vaccinated involves an element
of social responsibility. The strength of
our public health is reliant on a web of
mutuality. When we drive sober and at
the speed limit, or when we ban
smoking in public places, we are doing
the basic but important work of keeping
each other safe and healthy.
Vaccinations are an integral part of that
process, and no one should have to
suffer from preventable diseases. As
much as anti-vaxxers may think they
are exercising their right to choose,
they do not have the right to put others
at risk. It took tough laws against drunk
driving to keep people safe, and there
has been a slow but welcome cultural
shift against driving under the
influence. Similarly, we must urge anti-
vaxxers to look beyond their egos and
show some responsibility toward public
health.
AND A BIG HEAR, HEAR FROM THIS
BLOGGER!!!!
Monday, February 2, 2015
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
What I Do Not Want To See in a Novel for Entertainment
No where but here will you get the honest word on the newest in Austenalia. I am also not ashamed to give you my real opinions, when I feel an author has "borrowed" too much from another author, and I will name the names.
I am now (virtually) getting ready to read a new book by an author who is unfamiliar to me. Through the grape-vine I had heard fairly good things about the books which she has authored.
This particular author (Sharon Lathan) must have two personalities. I would not call myself a prude; but, her books are just shy of a X-rating. Even though it is married sex, the fact that the story is set in the early 19th century should have given her the hint to tone it down just a bit. Then, in addition to being slapped in the face with soft porn, she starts to proselytize to her readers about her religion. NO, NO, NO!!! I do not want to have anybody's religion shoved in my face while I am trying to be entertained. In addition, I have caught her in random acts of racism as well. Needless to say she is no longer on my Author List. (She writes Austenalia)
Now I know a certain ilk of writers will use the popular Austenalia genre and stoop very low in their varied attempts at apologetics (LDS, for instance) and even an out-right smarmy-type of "Convert or you'll burn forever" message, I wanted my readers to be aware of it. The second-type is particularly vicious (Robin Helm). Many people seem to feel a need to excuse a person who belongs to a cult of personality which preaches some of the worst ethos I have ever seen. Again, this is the "entertainment" of the arena.
Some people will say that these authors are writing for LDS readers. Why? Is it a part of their mind-control programme in order to keep women in their proper place. One really has to wonder.
Ms. Helm's first trilogy was so ridiculous (I believe it tied Angelology) that I did not attempt it. However, I DID read the first volume of her second trilogy. To say I was shocked would be an understatement. Her major male character (21st century) has multiple psychiatric disorders, which are unacknowledged. I read this book with an open mind; however, I could not believe that no one else could see the pathology in his behaviour. This "Gospel of Greed" on which she expounds is vile. Again, this is not a book for entertainment.
I much preferred the flawed 18th century character. He was real.
Well, this is all for today. I will be bringing you positive reviews soon; but, I just had to get these two off my back.
I am now (virtually) getting ready to read a new book by an author who is unfamiliar to me. Through the grape-vine I had heard fairly good things about the books which she has authored.
This particular author (Sharon Lathan) must have two personalities. I would not call myself a prude; but, her books are just shy of a X-rating. Even though it is married sex, the fact that the story is set in the early 19th century should have given her the hint to tone it down just a bit. Then, in addition to being slapped in the face with soft porn, she starts to proselytize to her readers about her religion. NO, NO, NO!!! I do not want to have anybody's religion shoved in my face while I am trying to be entertained. In addition, I have caught her in random acts of racism as well. Needless to say she is no longer on my Author List. (She writes Austenalia)
Now I know a certain ilk of writers will use the popular Austenalia genre and stoop very low in their varied attempts at apologetics (LDS, for instance) and even an out-right smarmy-type of "Convert or you'll burn forever" message, I wanted my readers to be aware of it. The second-type is particularly vicious (Robin Helm). Many people seem to feel a need to excuse a person who belongs to a cult of personality which preaches some of the worst ethos I have ever seen. Again, this is the "entertainment" of the arena.
Some people will say that these authors are writing for LDS readers. Why? Is it a part of their mind-control programme in order to keep women in their proper place. One really has to wonder.
Ms. Helm's first trilogy was so ridiculous (I believe it tied Angelology) that I did not attempt it. However, I DID read the first volume of her second trilogy. To say I was shocked would be an understatement. Her major male character (21st century) has multiple psychiatric disorders, which are unacknowledged. I read this book with an open mind; however, I could not believe that no one else could see the pathology in his behaviour. This "Gospel of Greed" on which she expounds is vile. Again, this is not a book for entertainment.
I much preferred the flawed 18th century character. He was real.
Well, this is all for today. I will be bringing you positive reviews soon; but, I just had to get these two off my back.
Monday, January 19, 2015
I Have My Standards -- Smile, You Are on Camera
When it comes to reading for entertainment purposes only, literary standards tend to slacken a bit. However, with the trend to self-publishing being offered by mega-corporation Amazon and other companies, many writers are not treating their readers with the respect that they deserve. Editing has almost disappeared. Writing levels that are barely out of elementary school have also been noted. In addition, the so-called "reviews" on many book and e-book buying sites are very questionable. Many are almost word for word and appear to be written by a claque of followers. The reviews I have given have ALWAYS been true reviews in that I have read the book, no one has paid me for the review, and I will honestly tell what I think.
So, in that regard, I will now re-publish my Amazon reviews here as well since I have read that authors do NOT read their Amazon reviews. This is especially true in the Austenalia genre, which I must admit that I do on occasion enjoy. The authors as a whole hold tight to their bulwark and do not criticize fellow authors. I am not sure that is a good thing. Historical novelists certainly criticize each other, especially when important facts are gotten wrong. Today, for example, I found a series of novels about ancient Alexandria. However, the author made Heron of Alexandria female which would have surprised HIM greatly. Heron was also the major character. These novels also got glowing reviews from the hoi polloi or a claque. They were not useful at all. I would have liked to post something to the effect that I had not read the novels but that Heron was male, so I would not waste my time since this was a primary fact.
I will be posting further on this subject as it is important to me.
So, in that regard, I will now re-publish my Amazon reviews here as well since I have read that authors do NOT read their Amazon reviews. This is especially true in the Austenalia genre, which I must admit that I do on occasion enjoy. The authors as a whole hold tight to their bulwark and do not criticize fellow authors. I am not sure that is a good thing. Historical novelists certainly criticize each other, especially when important facts are gotten wrong. Today, for example, I found a series of novels about ancient Alexandria. However, the author made Heron of Alexandria female which would have surprised HIM greatly. Heron was also the major character. These novels also got glowing reviews from the hoi polloi or a claque. They were not useful at all. I would have liked to post something to the effect that I had not read the novels but that Heron was male, so I would not waste my time since this was a primary fact.
I will be posting further on this subject as it is important to me.
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Where Did My Blog Go?
Some of my visitors may wonder where the lovely blog I used to have has gone. I do not know. The only thing of which I am aware is that Lyndzy, a designer at The Cutest Blog in the World, took my money for a custom blog. I have not been able to get in touch with her. When attempting to get in touch with the other owners, they have found the work order; however, they have done nothing as yet to restore my blog. I am not an expert in this and Lyndzy messed around with the CSS, so I cannot even borrow a temporary design until I can get another done.
This also happened on my knitting blog when the designer decided to sell her business and did not inform me of it. It is even worse there because I have no way of even posting to it. I spent good money for both these blogs and feel that I have been robbed. People do not RENT a custom designed blog, for goodness sakes.
This also happened on my knitting blog when the designer decided to sell her business and did not inform me of it. It is even worse there because I have no way of even posting to it. I spent good money for both these blogs and feel that I have been robbed. People do not RENT a custom designed blog, for goodness sakes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
