One side effect of the approaching holiday season is that many of us decide to begin household projects. Whether families are expecting company during Christmas or entertaining for New Years, most people have at least a few undone chores.
The call is heard: get the projects done. Cool weather is always more conducive to indoor projects. In addition, the end of the calendar year gives us a deadline to finish tasks.
Since moving into my house a number of years ago, there was one, looming task remaining: redoing the kitchen. Why was this task delayed? Mostly because I could not decide what to do. Each time a new trend would emerge, I would cut pictures from magazines trying to analyze options. What style to try? What colors would look best?
The kitchen was finished a few weeks ago and the result is great. But the interruption to daily life far worse than anticipated. The work only took a couple of weeks, but workers were here daily and access to the kitchen nonexistent. Still, it looks great now and I didn't have to do much of the actual work.
A couple of recent events brought remodeling efforts to mind.
First, I was watching an HGTV program about people who purchased unusual buildings and remade them into fabulous homes. The buildings had all been abandoned and decrepit, including a classic old New York bank, a Spanish-style California school and a 19th century church. In each case, the buyers and subsequent homeowners had the vision to recognize the architectural beauty of the building and its potential. Each renovation was massive and no doubt frequently overwhelming. But the end results were spectacular.
What motivates someone mid-project to continue to the finish? There are probably countless untold stories of abandoned renovations where the task became too difficult or large to complete. Perhaps the buyer experienced some type of set back -- financial, personal, medical -- and was unable to complete the work. Perhaps the buyer had a spouse/partner who said, "Enough already."
Several years ago I worked with a woman whose husband was a contractor. He had begun remodeling their own kitchen many years earlier. "It's still not done," she would remark, shaking her head. "He works on other people's remodels all day long and by the time he gets home, the last thing he wants to do is more of the same."
I have to give kudos to those renovators who can stick with an overwhelming project until it is done.
The other event prompting thoughts of home repairs was the tragedy of Hurricane Sandy. Seeing the devastation suffered by folks on the East Coast is heartbreaking. I know what it is to encounter mold and water damage and cannot imagine how anyone can begin the process of clean up. Not only did they have to endure the storm, the frightening winds and rain, but they had to immediately turn their attention to rebuilding/repairing with no time for personal recovery.
Each time the news features stories of communities that have suffered flooding, tornado damage or wildfires, I cringe for the residents. They are dealing with loss on so many levels at once. They have lost everything, perhaps even loved ones. Many have become separated from their pets. They are without comforts, personal items, documents they might need. How can they begin to "fix" something forever gone?
Volunteer efforts appear to be strong, providing food, clothing and shelter within a short period. Volunteer agencies also step forward to help in the long run with clean up and rebuilding.
But as of today, some homeowners are still without power nearly two weeks after the storm hit. I cannot imagine what it takes to continue bravely under such conditions. People who keep their nose to the grindstone and forge on toward the future are truly to be admired.
Knowing that people have lost everything is a sobering thought. It makes the rest of our rather trivial concerns irrelevant by comparison.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Friday, November 9, 2012
Cats Rule
Thank goodness the election is over. Alas, one of my favorite candidates did not win his senate seat despite conducting a clean campaign and looking exceedingly handsome in each photo.
That would be Hank, a cat in Virginia who hoped to win a seat in the U.S. Senate. Hank won 6,000 write-in votes and supporters contributed $16,000 to animal rescue groups on his behalf. It's rare to see a candidate with that much class who works tirelessly for the benefit of the community. Gotta give Hank credit.
I have always had immense respect for cats. Dogs are nice in their place. Birds brighten their environment, singing and even talking clearly. There are many other species which make good household pets: hamsters, gerbils, fish and ferrets to name only a few. However, it's hard to top cats as the all-round kings of Petdom.
Just like identifying what constitutes a truly attractive man, the secret to the appeal of cats is their eyes. When observing a cat, most people immediately attempt eye contact. Looking in our eyes is a cat's way of scoping out visitors and confirming they are non-threatening. Many cat behavior experts advise against locking into a staring contest with cats, who may interpret this as a sign of aggression and will often attack if they sense a challenger.
There is "someone home" behind a cat's eyes. The cat demonstrates focus as he analyzes what is going on around him. He pays attention to activities, odors, moving objects, even light and shadow. His eyes may open widely as he deciphers the signs, looking for threats and escape routes if needed. Sadly, these same skills are not evident in many human beings.
Some people simply do not like cats. "They're sneaky." "They bring in mice/birds and that scares me." "They have too much attitude." Admittedly cats are masters of their own domain and people who share space with a cat are keenly aware that they must pay attention to the cat's requests.
Hank, the Virginia candidate, could not express himself to his audience. Many other cats do speak to us -- everyday and often -- but many people fail to read the signals. Perhaps one of the greatest failures of cat ownership is neglecting to heed the signs. It is up to the cat's handler to pay attention, read the signs and obey.
My two cats Max and Tesla keep me on my toes. They co-exist despite being completely different and seriously independent. Max is five years old, 15 pounds and a gentle giant. He looks threatening but the ring of the doorbell or a stray clap of thunder will send him under the nearest bed. Tesla is nearly a year old, persuasion personified. She can get anyone to pick her up and make over her. Tesla knows she is irresistible and wants everyone to remember that fact.
But I am not the only feline fan around. Countless celebrities through time have indicated their partiality for cats. There is something about cats which unites us and which folks more famous than me have recorded. Here are some samples:
"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
"If animals could speak, the dog would be a blundering outspoken fellow; but the cat would have the rare grace of never saying a word too much." -- Mark Twain
"I would like to see anyone, prophet, king or God, convince a thousand cats to do the same thing at the same time." -- Neil Gaiman
"The only escape from the miseries of life are music and cats…" -- Albert Schweitzer
"What greater gift than the love of a cat." -- Charles Dickens
"A cat has absolute emotional honesty; human beings, for one reason or another, may hide their feelings, but a cat does not." -- Ernest Hemingway
"The smallest feline is a masterpiece." -- Leonardo da Vinci
If you are also a fan of the feline, take pride in your position. If you are among those who never found the appeal of cats, perhaps you should rethink your position. After all, there are many great minds who have found something to love in a fur ball who can't wait to climb into your lap.
That would be Hank, a cat in Virginia who hoped to win a seat in the U.S. Senate. Hank won 6,000 write-in votes and supporters contributed $16,000 to animal rescue groups on his behalf. It's rare to see a candidate with that much class who works tirelessly for the benefit of the community. Gotta give Hank credit.
I have always had immense respect for cats. Dogs are nice in their place. Birds brighten their environment, singing and even talking clearly. There are many other species which make good household pets: hamsters, gerbils, fish and ferrets to name only a few. However, it's hard to top cats as the all-round kings of Petdom.
Just like identifying what constitutes a truly attractive man, the secret to the appeal of cats is their eyes. When observing a cat, most people immediately attempt eye contact. Looking in our eyes is a cat's way of scoping out visitors and confirming they are non-threatening. Many cat behavior experts advise against locking into a staring contest with cats, who may interpret this as a sign of aggression and will often attack if they sense a challenger.
There is "someone home" behind a cat's eyes. The cat demonstrates focus as he analyzes what is going on around him. He pays attention to activities, odors, moving objects, even light and shadow. His eyes may open widely as he deciphers the signs, looking for threats and escape routes if needed. Sadly, these same skills are not evident in many human beings.
Some people simply do not like cats. "They're sneaky." "They bring in mice/birds and that scares me." "They have too much attitude." Admittedly cats are masters of their own domain and people who share space with a cat are keenly aware that they must pay attention to the cat's requests.
Hank, the Virginia candidate, could not express himself to his audience. Many other cats do speak to us -- everyday and often -- but many people fail to read the signals. Perhaps one of the greatest failures of cat ownership is neglecting to heed the signs. It is up to the cat's handler to pay attention, read the signs and obey.
My two cats Max and Tesla keep me on my toes. They co-exist despite being completely different and seriously independent. Max is five years old, 15 pounds and a gentle giant. He looks threatening but the ring of the doorbell or a stray clap of thunder will send him under the nearest bed. Tesla is nearly a year old, persuasion personified. She can get anyone to pick her up and make over her. Tesla knows she is irresistible and wants everyone to remember that fact.
But I am not the only feline fan around. Countless celebrities through time have indicated their partiality for cats. There is something about cats which unites us and which folks more famous than me have recorded. Here are some samples:
"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
"If animals could speak, the dog would be a blundering outspoken fellow; but the cat would have the rare grace of never saying a word too much." -- Mark Twain
"I would like to see anyone, prophet, king or God, convince a thousand cats to do the same thing at the same time." -- Neil Gaiman
"The only escape from the miseries of life are music and cats…" -- Albert Schweitzer
"What greater gift than the love of a cat." -- Charles Dickens
"A cat has absolute emotional honesty; human beings, for one reason or another, may hide their feelings, but a cat does not." -- Ernest Hemingway
"The smallest feline is a masterpiece." -- Leonardo da Vinci
If you are also a fan of the feline, take pride in your position. If you are among those who never found the appeal of cats, perhaps you should rethink your position. After all, there are many great minds who have found something to love in a fur ball who can't wait to climb into your lap.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Running for Office
Today's the big day and hopefully people are flocking to cast their votes.
That's the American way, the process that repeats every four years. Admittedly, this past year has seemed long and tedious as the field of various candidates narrowed and those remaining took to the air waves.
It's all over, as they say, but the shouting. Whoever wins will have obtained a job I could never envy. Just why would someone run for public office? The entire process has become nearly prohibitively expensive and anyone with a cell phone can record every misstep by each candidate. Why would anyone want to run?
I "ran" for Student Council in the 7th grade. It seemed like a big deal. When it came time to vote, someone asked our teacher whether we could vote for ourselves. She said, "Anyone who doesn't vote for himself/herself does not deserve to win." I voted for myself and won, too. While it was fun to serve on Student Council, that was the end of any desire to be a candidate for anything else.
Who ran for class offices in junior and senior high school? Guys who wanted girls to recognize their maturity. Some candidates merely wanted to see if they could win. Many girls who ran were pretty or popular and basked in the attention. Winning also meant having more photos in the yearbook, more than enough reward.
That makes as much sense as anything, I suppose.
A friend recently suggested that candidates run because they have enormous egos. Call it ego, sense of entitlement, poise or naiveté. Something nags away at certain folks who believe they can actually make a difference. That might have been noble in high school but any candidate who believes they will make a teensy bit of difference in the politics of any adult government -- local, state or national -- is living in a bubble.
I'm not experienced in the ways of politics, other than listening to candidates over the decades and voting regularly. I was employed in local government for several years, enough to know that very little is accomplished unless the person making the request is important or well-known in the community. That's a fact stated from first-hand observation and confirmed within a few days. Perhaps that policy is the result of government employees who fear losing their jobs. Perhaps they feel overly-important because they have a job that encourages favoritism. But most workers are merely hanging on until retirement, day-dreaming about life on Easy Street and doing little in the meantime to make waves.
I also lived and worked in the Washington, D.C. metro area for eight years. That's the equivalent of two 4-year terms and, believe me, that was enough for anyone. No wonder that was the length of time chosen for term limits. I did not work in government but witnessed the wriggling and gyrations caused by the influence of government's omnipotence. That period was astonishing and opened my eyes. The national government -- including the myriad of peripheral jobs and hopeful wannabes -- is a mind-boggling creature. Government workers at the highest level are usually exactly where they want to be. Life is good, very good. And they don't want anyone bringing change.
Recent local campaign advertising has depicted sweet-faced, well-groomed family folks who vow to fight the good fight for love of their fellow citizens. That is hard to believe. But if there are those candidates who really believe they can rock the boat of long-time pirates, they are in for a surprise. New arrivals won't be able to find their offices for months. It's a jungle that likes to scare off newcomers who want to see the wild animals. Intimidating. Exclusive. Filled with pork and pretension.
No place for the faint of heart.
So a message to any candidates out there: I hope you won your election if that's what you really wanted. But just remember: be careful what you wish for.
To quote Robert Redford at the end of "The Candidate" when, as Bill McKay, he won election, "What do we do now?"
That's the American way, the process that repeats every four years. Admittedly, this past year has seemed long and tedious as the field of various candidates narrowed and those remaining took to the air waves.
It's all over, as they say, but the shouting. Whoever wins will have obtained a job I could never envy. Just why would someone run for public office? The entire process has become nearly prohibitively expensive and anyone with a cell phone can record every misstep by each candidate. Why would anyone want to run?
I "ran" for Student Council in the 7th grade. It seemed like a big deal. When it came time to vote, someone asked our teacher whether we could vote for ourselves. She said, "Anyone who doesn't vote for himself/herself does not deserve to win." I voted for myself and won, too. While it was fun to serve on Student Council, that was the end of any desire to be a candidate for anything else.
Who ran for class offices in junior and senior high school? Guys who wanted girls to recognize their maturity. Some candidates merely wanted to see if they could win. Many girls who ran were pretty or popular and basked in the attention. Winning also meant having more photos in the yearbook, more than enough reward.
That makes as much sense as anything, I suppose.
A friend recently suggested that candidates run because they have enormous egos. Call it ego, sense of entitlement, poise or naiveté. Something nags away at certain folks who believe they can actually make a difference. That might have been noble in high school but any candidate who believes they will make a teensy bit of difference in the politics of any adult government -- local, state or national -- is living in a bubble.
I'm not experienced in the ways of politics, other than listening to candidates over the decades and voting regularly. I was employed in local government for several years, enough to know that very little is accomplished unless the person making the request is important or well-known in the community. That's a fact stated from first-hand observation and confirmed within a few days. Perhaps that policy is the result of government employees who fear losing their jobs. Perhaps they feel overly-important because they have a job that encourages favoritism. But most workers are merely hanging on until retirement, day-dreaming about life on Easy Street and doing little in the meantime to make waves.
I also lived and worked in the Washington, D.C. metro area for eight years. That's the equivalent of two 4-year terms and, believe me, that was enough for anyone. No wonder that was the length of time chosen for term limits. I did not work in government but witnessed the wriggling and gyrations caused by the influence of government's omnipotence. That period was astonishing and opened my eyes. The national government -- including the myriad of peripheral jobs and hopeful wannabes -- is a mind-boggling creature. Government workers at the highest level are usually exactly where they want to be. Life is good, very good. And they don't want anyone bringing change.
Recent local campaign advertising has depicted sweet-faced, well-groomed family folks who vow to fight the good fight for love of their fellow citizens. That is hard to believe. But if there are those candidates who really believe they can rock the boat of long-time pirates, they are in for a surprise. New arrivals won't be able to find their offices for months. It's a jungle that likes to scare off newcomers who want to see the wild animals. Intimidating. Exclusive. Filled with pork and pretension.
No place for the faint of heart.
So a message to any candidates out there: I hope you won your election if that's what you really wanted. But just remember: be careful what you wish for.
To quote Robert Redford at the end of "The Candidate" when, as Bill McKay, he won election, "What do we do now?"
Friday, November 2, 2012
Falling Out of Favor
A friend and I were recently discussing certain things which seem to have fallen out of favor.
We can all acknowledge that today's world is defined by the here and now. There is little room for yesterday's news in our whirlwind existence. That's too bad. Ignoring the past narrows our frame of reference and deletes ideas and people which are extremely worthwhile and deserving of remembrance.
The late philosopher-poet George Santayana expressed an often-quoted opinion about this subject. He is noted for his statement that "Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them." His concept has been often misquoted but the basic concept is simple: we should pay attention to the past and learn from it. A wise man indeed.
This morning's news about the recovery from Hurricane Sandy sparked a perfect example, not of historical importance but of common sense. The story was about the disruption in cell phone service following the recent storm and how pay telephones had been brought in to enable residents to contact family members and others who can assist. Apparently some people living on the East Coast had never before seen pay phones and had no idea how to use them.
I don't think this observation warrants comment. I merely wanted to pass this along. People who don't pay attention to what happened day before yesterday are missing a great deal.
In order to absorb information from the past, we need to be open to learning about things which existed outside of the past 24 hours. Two personal examples come to mind and are worth repeating.
While working in an office a few years back, I had a co-worker in her twenties who was responsible for several tasks which kept things moving smoothly for the staff. One day I was showing her a simple way to do two of the tasks at once so that she could achieve the same result more easily. "Sorry," she smiled. "I don't care to learn anything more. I've already learned all I want to learn."
The other example involved a comment I made one day regarding something about President Franklin Roosevelt. I don't even recall the context but it most likely had something to do with Social Security. The girl I was talking to rolled her eyes and sighed. "Well, that was WAY before my time. So I don't know anything about that." I calmly responded, "Franklin Roosevelt was WAY before my time, too. In fact, John Quincy Adams was WAY before my time, but I've heard of him."
I used to think that the casual dismissal of the past was something practiced by the so-called younger generation. Now I don't think that is entirely true. The under-20 group does live in its own world with its sense of infallibility and omnipotence. But that has been true since Elvis Presley first came on the scene and rock 'n' roll music separated us from our parents. (In truth, the separation probably goes back to the Pilgrims and even before.)
Perhaps it is natural that we forget a great deal about our past. I've heard a theory that the dominant role of computers has allowed us the luxury of forgetting a great deal of information. Instead of asking, "What was the name of the original Beatle that Ringo Starr replaced?" and perhaps trying to recall it, we now merely Google the question and immediately are provided with the answer (Pete Best). That requires a lot fewer mental gymnastics than a few years ago and we learn that we aren't compelled to recall relative minutia.
But in ignoring the past we seem to have lost a lot of practical knowledge (like how to sew a seam or prepare substitute cooking ingredients) as well of interesting things about numerous topics in the process.
We need to pay more attention to the past. This does not need to be as momentous as the name of the leader of the Nazi party during World War II or which scientist developed Polio vaccine. That data is available from several sources. Life involves a myriad of informational tidbits (how to make our own mayonnaise, the date of Aunt Susie's birthday, which color you get from blending yellow and blue) that we might want to recall.
Exercise those neurons one way or another. Assemble a puzzle or complete a word game. Occasionally pick up a book or magazine. Try something completely outside of your comfort zone.
You might be glad you did.
We can all acknowledge that today's world is defined by the here and now. There is little room for yesterday's news in our whirlwind existence. That's too bad. Ignoring the past narrows our frame of reference and deletes ideas and people which are extremely worthwhile and deserving of remembrance.
The late philosopher-poet George Santayana expressed an often-quoted opinion about this subject. He is noted for his statement that "Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them." His concept has been often misquoted but the basic concept is simple: we should pay attention to the past and learn from it. A wise man indeed.
This morning's news about the recovery from Hurricane Sandy sparked a perfect example, not of historical importance but of common sense. The story was about the disruption in cell phone service following the recent storm and how pay telephones had been brought in to enable residents to contact family members and others who can assist. Apparently some people living on the East Coast had never before seen pay phones and had no idea how to use them.
I don't think this observation warrants comment. I merely wanted to pass this along. People who don't pay attention to what happened day before yesterday are missing a great deal.
In order to absorb information from the past, we need to be open to learning about things which existed outside of the past 24 hours. Two personal examples come to mind and are worth repeating.
While working in an office a few years back, I had a co-worker in her twenties who was responsible for several tasks which kept things moving smoothly for the staff. One day I was showing her a simple way to do two of the tasks at once so that she could achieve the same result more easily. "Sorry," she smiled. "I don't care to learn anything more. I've already learned all I want to learn."
The other example involved a comment I made one day regarding something about President Franklin Roosevelt. I don't even recall the context but it most likely had something to do with Social Security. The girl I was talking to rolled her eyes and sighed. "Well, that was WAY before my time. So I don't know anything about that." I calmly responded, "Franklin Roosevelt was WAY before my time, too. In fact, John Quincy Adams was WAY before my time, but I've heard of him."
I used to think that the casual dismissal of the past was something practiced by the so-called younger generation. Now I don't think that is entirely true. The under-20 group does live in its own world with its sense of infallibility and omnipotence. But that has been true since Elvis Presley first came on the scene and rock 'n' roll music separated us from our parents. (In truth, the separation probably goes back to the Pilgrims and even before.)
Perhaps it is natural that we forget a great deal about our past. I've heard a theory that the dominant role of computers has allowed us the luxury of forgetting a great deal of information. Instead of asking, "What was the name of the original Beatle that Ringo Starr replaced?" and perhaps trying to recall it, we now merely Google the question and immediately are provided with the answer (Pete Best). That requires a lot fewer mental gymnastics than a few years ago and we learn that we aren't compelled to recall relative minutia.
But in ignoring the past we seem to have lost a lot of practical knowledge (like how to sew a seam or prepare substitute cooking ingredients) as well of interesting things about numerous topics in the process.
We need to pay more attention to the past. This does not need to be as momentous as the name of the leader of the Nazi party during World War II or which scientist developed Polio vaccine. That data is available from several sources. Life involves a myriad of informational tidbits (how to make our own mayonnaise, the date of Aunt Susie's birthday, which color you get from blending yellow and blue) that we might want to recall.
Exercise those neurons one way or another. Assemble a puzzle or complete a word game. Occasionally pick up a book or magazine. Try something completely outside of your comfort zone.
You might be glad you did.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
What's The Date Again?
Today is October 30, the day before Halloween. As I've whined about before, Halloween has nearly completed its journey from trick-or-treating to becoming an adult play day. Kids still go out looking for candy, but the spirit of the day has been drastically altered.
If one thing hasn't changed, it's the affection adults have for the bite-size candy bars and goodies intended for the little guys. Today I found my stash of such treats somewhat depleted. Some time ago I bought two large bags of candy and, as is my usual practice, bought the good stuff just in case there was an abundance of leftovers. OK, so I had a few myself in recent days and decided this morning to return to my favorite store to pick up a couple of additional bags before the door bell starts ringing.
Guess what? The store was out of Halloween candy. Clerks were unpacking Christmas candy today. The checker said that this close to Halloween it would be silly to expect the store to have -- Halloween candy.
Let me get this straight. Christmas candy? Christmas is almost two months away.
Sure, we've all seen television commercials dropping hints about the Big Event that rolls around in December. One TV commercial is for scented candles and, although it doesn't refer to Christmas outright, the candles being hawked are red and green. There are ads for major department and discount stores explaining the benefits of lay away and casually depecting elves. Plus there is that one often-shown ad for a large retailer which includes a white dog with a red bulls-eye painted around his eye (get it?) which has actually received a significant amount of negative feedback. People have said, "Hey, it's really too early for that." But the ad continues to run. So be it.
Christmas hype has been with us for many years and does not appear to be waning either.
When I was a kid, even a very young kid, the Santa hysterics were quite evident. There were church events, a school band event, singing carols and making a gift at school. All of those activities involved either making something or rehearsing to perform, all of which required getting into the swing of the holiday weeks earlier than everyone else. That was OK because we realized the planned performance/gift required oodles of practice and time.
But Christmas was not hyped on television or in the press, at least to the same degree. We eagerly awaited the Wards and Sears catalogues and looked through the pages to see what we might want to put on our Wish List. The process was done discretely, quietly, carefully. We marked the pages and made a list.
Excitement didn't build seriously until after Thanksgiving. When we watched the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade and saw Santa riding a float at the end, it was official. Christmas was on its way! Thanksgiving was savored for its warmth and family gathering. Turkey sandwiches followed and then… it was time to begin looking ahead to the next holiday. Enthusiasm was there when we really needed it.
Today many people shop well in advance of Christmas. Some shoppers are hoping to find the best bargains. Some have to buy early because they are shipping gifts to a distant location and have to leave enough time. Some want to purchase an item before the store "runs out." Others simply want the shopping to be finished, somewhat like going to the dentist.
Rushing and enjoying seem contradictory. If you are going to enjoy a holiday (or vacation or dinner at a nice restaurant), isn't it better to relax during the event? Why run around like a chicken with its head cut off?
Now through the end of the calendar year is a period filled with a myriad of events. There is family time. Cooking and eating time. Decorating the tree time. Plenty of memories to recall and cherish.
But we need to keep in mind that we are supposed to enjoy the time we are given. Especially during the rush to do everything, we need to slow down and enjoy each minute.
If one thing hasn't changed, it's the affection adults have for the bite-size candy bars and goodies intended for the little guys. Today I found my stash of such treats somewhat depleted. Some time ago I bought two large bags of candy and, as is my usual practice, bought the good stuff just in case there was an abundance of leftovers. OK, so I had a few myself in recent days and decided this morning to return to my favorite store to pick up a couple of additional bags before the door bell starts ringing.
Guess what? The store was out of Halloween candy. Clerks were unpacking Christmas candy today. The checker said that this close to Halloween it would be silly to expect the store to have -- Halloween candy.
Let me get this straight. Christmas candy? Christmas is almost two months away.
Sure, we've all seen television commercials dropping hints about the Big Event that rolls around in December. One TV commercial is for scented candles and, although it doesn't refer to Christmas outright, the candles being hawked are red and green. There are ads for major department and discount stores explaining the benefits of lay away and casually depecting elves. Plus there is that one often-shown ad for a large retailer which includes a white dog with a red bulls-eye painted around his eye (get it?) which has actually received a significant amount of negative feedback. People have said, "Hey, it's really too early for that." But the ad continues to run. So be it.
Christmas hype has been with us for many years and does not appear to be waning either.
When I was a kid, even a very young kid, the Santa hysterics were quite evident. There were church events, a school band event, singing carols and making a gift at school. All of those activities involved either making something or rehearsing to perform, all of which required getting into the swing of the holiday weeks earlier than everyone else. That was OK because we realized the planned performance/gift required oodles of practice and time.
But Christmas was not hyped on television or in the press, at least to the same degree. We eagerly awaited the Wards and Sears catalogues and looked through the pages to see what we might want to put on our Wish List. The process was done discretely, quietly, carefully. We marked the pages and made a list.
Excitement didn't build seriously until after Thanksgiving. When we watched the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade and saw Santa riding a float at the end, it was official. Christmas was on its way! Thanksgiving was savored for its warmth and family gathering. Turkey sandwiches followed and then… it was time to begin looking ahead to the next holiday. Enthusiasm was there when we really needed it.
Today many people shop well in advance of Christmas. Some shoppers are hoping to find the best bargains. Some have to buy early because they are shipping gifts to a distant location and have to leave enough time. Some want to purchase an item before the store "runs out." Others simply want the shopping to be finished, somewhat like going to the dentist.
Rushing and enjoying seem contradictory. If you are going to enjoy a holiday (or vacation or dinner at a nice restaurant), isn't it better to relax during the event? Why run around like a chicken with its head cut off?
Now through the end of the calendar year is a period filled with a myriad of events. There is family time. Cooking and eating time. Decorating the tree time. Plenty of memories to recall and cherish.
But we need to keep in mind that we are supposed to enjoy the time we are given. Especially during the rush to do everything, we need to slow down and enjoy each minute.
Friday, October 26, 2012
I Don't Get It
In this world of sound bites, instant messages and late breaking headlines, a most extraordinary development has occurred. There seems to be a wide-spread breakdown in information that we all need.
The public is told the minute that certain celebrities get plastic surgery, check into rehab or file for divorce. It doesn't escape our attention when a politician misrepresents a fact or ignites controversy. There is instant coverage for any number of media trollops who bask in the spotlight promising some juicy tidbit.
No, that "information" is immediately provided to the public.
What seems to be missing is good, old-fashioned details about matters which are confusing.
Recently I have been sifting through materials provided by insurance companies hoping to lure Medicare recipients during the so-called open enrollment period. Having turned 65 this year, I quietly entered the bracket and selected supplemental coverage. Open enrollment is my first indication of just how many friends I have in the insurance industry. It's rather nice to be wanted.
But gotta say that navigating the materials is daunting. In fact, I'm only reviewing materials following a rather disappointing performance by my original choice. On more than one occasion, I had contacted my original provider to ask coverage questions. In each instance, I was given the assurance that yes, the matter would be 100% covered. At no time was this information correct, resulting in additional expenses to me. One matter was "appealed" and I was assured in writing that a reimbursement payment would be forthcoming. When 60 days had passed without receiving a check, a follow-up inquiry uncovered that the letter was wrong and in fact there would be no payment. Why had I received a letter saying that a check would be issued? "Sorry, I don't know" is hardly reassuring.
It's thoughtful to offer an annual period when seniors can shop around to identify a different provider. From what I've gathered, it sounds like many people actually do change coverage to find better customer service or access to information.
But after looking at alternatives, I'm not so sure that such an option exists.
Recently I met with a local insurance consultant who helped explain coverage. His answer? "They're all pretty much the same. They will avoid paying you if at all possible." This statement is probably the most revealing information received to date on the subject.
Medicare supplemental insurance is not the only area to deal in smoke and mirrors. It only happens to be a current example which impacts a large audience. Someone remarked to me that I happen to be inquisitive enough to ask some pertinent questions. He added that most people don't even ask questions and merely accept what is offered.
While the Medicare coverage issue seems rather insignificant in the "big picture" of life, this example provides a chance to revisit some points we should all keep in mind.
You owe it to yourself to take control of your decisions. You'll be glad that you did.
The public is told the minute that certain celebrities get plastic surgery, check into rehab or file for divorce. It doesn't escape our attention when a politician misrepresents a fact or ignites controversy. There is instant coverage for any number of media trollops who bask in the spotlight promising some juicy tidbit.
No, that "information" is immediately provided to the public.
What seems to be missing is good, old-fashioned details about matters which are confusing.
Recently I have been sifting through materials provided by insurance companies hoping to lure Medicare recipients during the so-called open enrollment period. Having turned 65 this year, I quietly entered the bracket and selected supplemental coverage. Open enrollment is my first indication of just how many friends I have in the insurance industry. It's rather nice to be wanted.
But gotta say that navigating the materials is daunting. In fact, I'm only reviewing materials following a rather disappointing performance by my original choice. On more than one occasion, I had contacted my original provider to ask coverage questions. In each instance, I was given the assurance that yes, the matter would be 100% covered. At no time was this information correct, resulting in additional expenses to me. One matter was "appealed" and I was assured in writing that a reimbursement payment would be forthcoming. When 60 days had passed without receiving a check, a follow-up inquiry uncovered that the letter was wrong and in fact there would be no payment. Why had I received a letter saying that a check would be issued? "Sorry, I don't know" is hardly reassuring.
It's thoughtful to offer an annual period when seniors can shop around to identify a different provider. From what I've gathered, it sounds like many people actually do change coverage to find better customer service or access to information.
But after looking at alternatives, I'm not so sure that such an option exists.
Recently I met with a local insurance consultant who helped explain coverage. His answer? "They're all pretty much the same. They will avoid paying you if at all possible." This statement is probably the most revealing information received to date on the subject.
Medicare supplemental insurance is not the only area to deal in smoke and mirrors. It only happens to be a current example which impacts a large audience. Someone remarked to me that I happen to be inquisitive enough to ask some pertinent questions. He added that most people don't even ask questions and merely accept what is offered.
While the Medicare coverage issue seems rather insignificant in the "big picture" of life, this example provides a chance to revisit some points we should all keep in mind.
- Pay attention. If you are about to do something big (or even small, for that matter), pay attention. Whether that action involves buying a house/car, signing a contract/agreement, or getting married/divorced, slow down a bit and think the matter through. Putting your name on anything should not to be done carelessly. If the matter is particularly momentous or intimidating, get a second opinion.
- Ask questions. It's surprising how many times I ask a question about some matter when the response is "You're the first person to ask that." People should ask questions about anything that is unclear. Expressions like "what if" or "why" should be part of your dialogue. Take these phrases out of storage, dust them off and use them.
- Do your homework. Whether it's changing insurance providers or trying a new medication, gather some information. It's out there. Try searching the internet. Don't have internet access? Most local libraries are wired. If not, the library can help you find information one way or another. There is likely a senior center or agency which can provide guidance.
- Get assistance. Being a pest is not necessarily a bad thing. Customer service is provided by most organizations. They may not welcome questions, but that's the reason they exist. Make sure you feel comfortable with your conclusion.
You owe it to yourself to take control of your decisions. You'll be glad that you did.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
The Cuban Missile Crisis
It hard to believe that 50 years have passed since the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Last night NBC Nightly News ran a story about the event and showed video of President Kennedy speaking to the nation about the matter. A very young president said: It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.
President Kennedy certainly got our attention.
I was in high school at the time and remember that period vividly. Of course, there had been talk about the so-called nuclear threat all during the Cold War. Ever since the end of World War II -- even before I was born -- the majority of people were aware of the dangers of atomic warfare.
At first, the nuclear threat was explored in films starring gigantic insects and organisms resulting from nuclear tests. We giggled as we silently pondered whether such things might actually exist.
Waves of paranoia ebbed and flowed throughout the 1950s, accompanied by other hysteria, like the "Red" witch hunt conducted by the late Senator Joseph McCarthy. It was a period of post-war apprehension and uncertainty.
Then began more open discussions about nuclear war. Some folks constructed bomb shelters in their back yards. Others created survival kits for their homes -- flashlights, food and water -- just in case. At school, we practiced "duck and cover" drills in which we got on the classroom floor beneath our desks, face down and rolled up like a ball so we would be able to withstand a nuclear attack.
But suddenly an actual situation had developed. The missile crisis involved a challenge by the Soviet Union which had established missiles in Cuba, a stone's throw away from the United States. It was a tense thirteen days until the matter was resolved and the missiles were removed.
In hindsight and based on all accounts of those involved in 1962, the United States was very close to entering nuclear war.
Graham Allison, professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard has said: Fifty years ago, the Cuban missile crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster. During the standoff, U.S. President John F. Kennedy thought the chance of escalation to war was ''between 1 in 3 and even,'' and what we have learned in later decades has done nothing to lengthen those odds. We now know, for example, that in addition to nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, the Soviet Union had deployed 100 tactical nuclear weapons to Cuba, and the local Soviet commander there could have launched these weapons without additional codes or commands from Moscow. The U.S. air strike and invasion that were scheduled for the third week of the confrontation would likely have triggered a nuclear response against American ships and troops, and perhaps even Miami. The resulting war might have led to the deaths of 100 million Americans and over 100 million Russians.
What if the American people had been fully aware of the situation in 1962? It seems likely that panic might have ensued, causing riots and worse. Perhaps that would not have been the case in view of the American mindset of 50 years ago. We were not yet ruled by sound bites and instant information.
So, what's the point of exploring this event?
The point is that sometimes instant information should be reined in a bit. Today pundits are so anxious to get a scoop that they leap to conclusions which are both ill-advised and incorrect. As the present political campaign nears to an end, perhaps we should try to exercise a certain amount of restraint before reporting any rumor to be a verified fact.
This country has come a long way. It would be shame to see us regress into a nation of Chicken Littles who run through the streets screaming, "The sky is falling."
Last night NBC Nightly News ran a story about the event and showed video of President Kennedy speaking to the nation about the matter. A very young president said: It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.
President Kennedy certainly got our attention.
I was in high school at the time and remember that period vividly. Of course, there had been talk about the so-called nuclear threat all during the Cold War. Ever since the end of World War II -- even before I was born -- the majority of people were aware of the dangers of atomic warfare.
At first, the nuclear threat was explored in films starring gigantic insects and organisms resulting from nuclear tests. We giggled as we silently pondered whether such things might actually exist.
Waves of paranoia ebbed and flowed throughout the 1950s, accompanied by other hysteria, like the "Red" witch hunt conducted by the late Senator Joseph McCarthy. It was a period of post-war apprehension and uncertainty.
Then began more open discussions about nuclear war. Some folks constructed bomb shelters in their back yards. Others created survival kits for their homes -- flashlights, food and water -- just in case. At school, we practiced "duck and cover" drills in which we got on the classroom floor beneath our desks, face down and rolled up like a ball so we would be able to withstand a nuclear attack.
But suddenly an actual situation had developed. The missile crisis involved a challenge by the Soviet Union which had established missiles in Cuba, a stone's throw away from the United States. It was a tense thirteen days until the matter was resolved and the missiles were removed.
In hindsight and based on all accounts of those involved in 1962, the United States was very close to entering nuclear war.
Graham Allison, professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard has said: Fifty years ago, the Cuban missile crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster. During the standoff, U.S. President John F. Kennedy thought the chance of escalation to war was ''between 1 in 3 and even,'' and what we have learned in later decades has done nothing to lengthen those odds. We now know, for example, that in addition to nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, the Soviet Union had deployed 100 tactical nuclear weapons to Cuba, and the local Soviet commander there could have launched these weapons without additional codes or commands from Moscow. The U.S. air strike and invasion that were scheduled for the third week of the confrontation would likely have triggered a nuclear response against American ships and troops, and perhaps even Miami. The resulting war might have led to the deaths of 100 million Americans and over 100 million Russians.
What if the American people had been fully aware of the situation in 1962? It seems likely that panic might have ensued, causing riots and worse. Perhaps that would not have been the case in view of the American mindset of 50 years ago. We were not yet ruled by sound bites and instant information.
So, what's the point of exploring this event?
The point is that sometimes instant information should be reined in a bit. Today pundits are so anxious to get a scoop that they leap to conclusions which are both ill-advised and incorrect. As the present political campaign nears to an end, perhaps we should try to exercise a certain amount of restraint before reporting any rumor to be a verified fact.
This country has come a long way. It would be shame to see us regress into a nation of Chicken Littles who run through the streets screaming, "The sky is falling."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)