It struck me while Cheryl and I spent a few hours cutting up and stacking a very large pile of wood on Saturday:
Funny how the older a man gets, the faster some body parts stiffen up compared to other things that take longer than they used to.
I'm sure there's another apropos observation relative to the size of one's wood...pile, but I'll think about that another time.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Thursday, October 18, 2012
All I want is this one thing, and nothing else! Well, and this paddle game! I need that!
When I was around 12 years old, give or take a bunch of years, but since Trev is 12, I'll go with that, my Mom told me she only had one request for me that she wanted me to keep to, the rest of my life.
And that request was that I never ride a motorcycle. And so far, with the exception of one time when my neighbor friend Stuart Quillman took me out for a spin through the fields along Black Horse Road, which may have happened before, or possibly to inspire, Mom's request, I've kept to her request.
Over careful consideration and much discerning over the past weeks or maybe even even longer, I think I have one request for both my kids, and Trev in particular, given the predilections of other teens I've seen, and that is to not get high any more than once a week at the very, very most.
From what I've seen in other teenage (and older) males I very much care about, it has hurt them in so many ways, almost to the point of keeping them from being productive members of society, and I don't just mean in the capitalist sense. I also mean in terms of relationships with family and starting a family. And it just rips me up inside. They are such amazing kids, on so many levels, but there is one thing I can see (though conceivably there are others) that has held them back, and that is their love of getting high, in any of a number of ways.
As for Emma, my main request is that she not marry, or get in a long term relationship with, a dolt. Set your standards high, Emma, as you already do for all of us lucky enough to be in your life!
I read recently a great quote: "Kids don't always listen, but they do always see." I just hope they're looking at the right people.
I love you, Trev and Emma!
And that request was that I never ride a motorcycle. And so far, with the exception of one time when my neighbor friend Stuart Quillman took me out for a spin through the fields along Black Horse Road, which may have happened before, or possibly to inspire, Mom's request, I've kept to her request.
Over careful consideration and much discerning over the past weeks or maybe even even longer, I think I have one request for both my kids, and Trev in particular, given the predilections of other teens I've seen, and that is to not get high any more than once a week at the very, very most.
From what I've seen in other teenage (and older) males I very much care about, it has hurt them in so many ways, almost to the point of keeping them from being productive members of society, and I don't just mean in the capitalist sense. I also mean in terms of relationships with family and starting a family. And it just rips me up inside. They are such amazing kids, on so many levels, but there is one thing I can see (though conceivably there are others) that has held them back, and that is their love of getting high, in any of a number of ways.
As for Emma, my main request is that she not marry, or get in a long term relationship with, a dolt. Set your standards high, Emma, as you already do for all of us lucky enough to be in your life!
I read recently a great quote: "Kids don't always listen, but they do always see." I just hope they're looking at the right people.
I love you, Trev and Emma!
Would you like a list?!
The criticism that hurts the most is the criticism that has some truth to it, especially if we hadn't previously observed it about ourselves on our own.
And, in my experience, it hurts even more when it is said in anger by friends or someone we love.
Wonder why I'm such an expert on this? Probably because my friends seem to have no qualms about telling me about my shortcomings!
And I wouldn't have it any other way.
And, in my experience, it hurts even more when it is said in anger by friends or someone we love.
Wonder why I'm such an expert on this? Probably because my friends seem to have no qualms about telling me about my shortcomings!
And I wouldn't have it any other way.
Why is this a big deal again? Because a Dem had it passed, that's why
OK, so imagine this scenario:
Imagine our current system of health care in this country was Obamacare and had been for many decades, where the government requires everyone to have health care, although 90% of the population is covered through their employer's plan, and if not, the government either picks up the tab, if you are a low wage-earner, or, if you make over a certain amount, you can instead pay a fine and then would have to be responsible for any costs you incur at a hospital or doctor in full. In other words, a plan whereby every is accountable for their own coverage, unless they are among the bottom rung of wage earners. And all preventative care is covered 100% and kids can be covered on their parents plan up to age 26, along with all the other benefits of Obamacare.
Now, a Democrat running for President suggests that we should abandon that entirely and says if you have insurance through your work fine, but otherwise, it's going to cost you ten thousand or so a year to get coverage, but if you don't want to do that, you can just go get free care at any hospital and the rest of us will pick up the tab for you. Oh, and kids are off their parents place after college or high school and you have to pay a deductible for preventative care.
Think that would go over well? I call that socialized health care, where the rest of us pay for people who don't think they need to have to pay or can't afford it.
On the other hand, when you look at it that way, it seems like the only difference between Obamacare and the current system in the big picture, not including the coverage up to age 26, and free preventative care, all of which is great, is that in one scenario, hospitals pick up the tab and in the other, the government does. And in the end, we all pay more as a result.
Imagine our current system of health care in this country was Obamacare and had been for many decades, where the government requires everyone to have health care, although 90% of the population is covered through their employer's plan, and if not, the government either picks up the tab, if you are a low wage-earner, or, if you make over a certain amount, you can instead pay a fine and then would have to be responsible for any costs you incur at a hospital or doctor in full. In other words, a plan whereby every is accountable for their own coverage, unless they are among the bottom rung of wage earners. And all preventative care is covered 100% and kids can be covered on their parents plan up to age 26, along with all the other benefits of Obamacare.
Now, a Democrat running for President suggests that we should abandon that entirely and says if you have insurance through your work fine, but otherwise, it's going to cost you ten thousand or so a year to get coverage, but if you don't want to do that, you can just go get free care at any hospital and the rest of us will pick up the tab for you. Oh, and kids are off their parents place after college or high school and you have to pay a deductible for preventative care.
Think that would go over well? I call that socialized health care, where the rest of us pay for people who don't think they need to have to pay or can't afford it.
On the other hand, when you look at it that way, it seems like the only difference between Obamacare and the current system in the big picture, not including the coverage up to age 26, and free preventative care, all of which is great, is that in one scenario, hospitals pick up the tab and in the other, the government does. And in the end, we all pay more as a result.
Friday, September 14, 2012
ID-ing a different angle on the new voter ID law
I think I've noticed something about the new Voter ID law that went through in PA this year, that no one else has noticed. I'm hesitant to post it on facebook or tell any official for purely partisan reasons and that is this:
It could turn out to have a bigger effect on Rs than Ds.
My reasoning is based on the power it will give the Judges of Election at any given precinct, where the JoEs will hear the voter's name called when they arrive, with either a D or R after their name. Then when they hear that there is a discrepancy with their ID, the JoE can then apparently decide whether to let the person vote or not, after hearing, or in most cases just knowing by sight, what party the voter belongs to.
At the risk of being labeled a racial profiler, even though this has nothing to do with that, I'm thinking of the two biggest cities in PA. With one million or so more Ds in the state than Rs, particularly in Philly and Pittsburgh, there may be more of a chance of abuse of this power. With the preponderance of Ds in Philly especially, where union passions among others seem most partisan and frankly, contested votes might be more subject to question and the Rs might be more likely to feel the brunt than in the suburbs.
But then one most look at the bigger picture. With Obama's lead growing in PA, and accepting that this whole issue may not affect that outcome, one then must look down ballot where it will only serve to accentuate the one-sided nature of the current incumbents. Where there are more Rs likely to be serving as JoEs, their candidates will be given an increased ability to win. From that perspective, it will make it all the more difficult for the Ds to win in Pennsyltucky/Alabama between and around Philly and Pittsburgh.
Just a thought. Regardless, it's a dumb freaking law as it is written in the short window of time it has to be put into practice, no matter who might be moreaffected...effected...impacted.
It could turn out to have a bigger effect on Rs than Ds.
My reasoning is based on the power it will give the Judges of Election at any given precinct, where the JoEs will hear the voter's name called when they arrive, with either a D or R after their name. Then when they hear that there is a discrepancy with their ID, the JoE can then apparently decide whether to let the person vote or not, after hearing, or in most cases just knowing by sight, what party the voter belongs to.
At the risk of being labeled a racial profiler, even though this has nothing to do with that, I'm thinking of the two biggest cities in PA. With one million or so more Ds in the state than Rs, particularly in Philly and Pittsburgh, there may be more of a chance of abuse of this power. With the preponderance of Ds in Philly especially, where union passions among others seem most partisan and frankly, contested votes might be more subject to question and the Rs might be more likely to feel the brunt than in the suburbs.
But then one most look at the bigger picture. With Obama's lead growing in PA, and accepting that this whole issue may not affect that outcome, one then must look down ballot where it will only serve to accentuate the one-sided nature of the current incumbents. Where there are more Rs likely to be serving as JoEs, their candidates will be given an increased ability to win. From that perspective, it will make it all the more difficult for the Ds to win in Pennsyltucky/Alabama between and around Philly and Pittsburgh.
Just a thought. Regardless, it's a dumb freaking law as it is written in the short window of time it has to be put into practice, no matter who might be more
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Wait, wait...there's a National Center for Fathering?!
One of my goals as a dad is to never hear any of these negatives from Emma:
5 Things Your Daughter Wants from You
The National Center for Fathering has done research and found the top five things daughters want from their fathers:
1. Daughters longed to hear their fathers communicate love and encouragement. "The best thing my dad has ever done for me is let me know he loves me." "I wish my father would say, 'I love you.'" "When my dad encourages me, I feel like I can do anything."
2. Daughters wanted their fathers to take time to strengthen their relationship. "I wish my daddy wouldn't work so much and spend more time with me." "If I could add one thing to our relationship, I would add time."
3. Daughters asked their dads to communicate with them more and give them guidance. "If we talked more truthfully, we would have a better relationship." "I wish my dad would talk to me more and give me advice." "I need more input from my dad."
4. Daughters wanted their fathers to seek to understand them. "Sometimes I feel like my father has no idea what I'm going through." "I wish my father would try and understand me."
5. Daughters wanted their fathers to trust them more. "If I could add one thing to our relationship, I would add trust." "I wish my dad would trust me more."
Oddly, I would be thrilled if Liss or Ev wanted more: love, encouragement, time, advice, understanding. I really do try to give them as much of those things as they'll tolerate, though I doubt they would think that to be true, especially in Liss' scary teenage years. I think they are content more to just tolerate me in their lives, where it feels like I can only do more bad than good for them. Doesn't stop me from trying though. To do good, that is. And do better and better, knowing there is SO much room for improvement.
5 Things Your Daughter Wants from You
The National Center for Fathering has done research and found the top five things daughters want from their fathers:
1. Daughters longed to hear their fathers communicate love and encouragement. "The best thing my dad has ever done for me is let me know he loves me." "I wish my father would say, 'I love you.'" "When my dad encourages me, I feel like I can do anything."
2. Daughters wanted their fathers to take time to strengthen their relationship. "I wish my daddy wouldn't work so much and spend more time with me." "If I could add one thing to our relationship, I would add time."
3. Daughters asked their dads to communicate with them more and give them guidance. "If we talked more truthfully, we would have a better relationship." "I wish my dad would talk to me more and give me advice." "I need more input from my dad."
4. Daughters wanted their fathers to seek to understand them. "Sometimes I feel like my father has no idea what I'm going through." "I wish my father would try and understand me."
5. Daughters wanted their fathers to trust them more. "If I could add one thing to our relationship, I would add trust." "I wish my dad would trust me more."
Oddly, I would be thrilled if Liss or Ev wanted more: love, encouragement, time, advice, understanding. I really do try to give them as much of those things as they'll tolerate, though I doubt they would think that to be true, especially in Liss' scary teenage years. I think they are content more to just tolerate me in their lives, where it feels like I can only do more bad than good for them. Doesn't stop me from trying though. To do good, that is. And do better and better, knowing there is SO much room for improvement.
If you like to watch, this site's for you
As often seems to happen in journalism, this article waits until the final line to get to the bigger point, so I'll show it here before you go and read the story, which is about an older woman who started a web page where you can pay $5 to watch people having "normal" sex, which frankly, I have surprisingly little interest in doing, watching sex, that is, not doing it (and for the record, even less interest in watching people having abnormal sex!):
“The issue I’m tackling is not porn,” she said. “It’s the complete lack of open, healthy dialogue around porn and sex.”
Now here's the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/fashion/cindy-gallops-online-effort-to-promote-real-not-porn-fed-sex.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120909
I like to say that the answer to the huge majority of the letters to Dear Abby is one of two pieces of advice, only one of which Abby ever gives. The one she frequently correctly gives is to recommend counseling, usually marital counseling.
The answer she rarely gives but should in so many examples, almost daily, is to people who describe a bad interaction they had or are having or are frequently having with someone. My advice: Try just sitting down with the person and talking about it. It isn't easy, but it is usually for the best.
Same here with sex. She explains how so few of the younger men she "meets" (read: as sex with) know how to have sex in any way except from what they've learned watching porn, and I'm sure there's some truth to that. I'd submit (so to speak) however that even more of what they are doing is just from what comes naturally (pun unintentionally intended), which is to mount, pound, explode and then return to watching the game.
It is no reflection on the poor young, inexperienced male that they don't know any better. (It may, however, be a reflection of bad, or a complete lack of, advice from the boy's dad, but that's a somewhat separate issue.) What is needed is just raw, somewhat uncomfortable, but extremely fulfilling conversation with one's partner(s) about what feels good, what works, what doesn't and what to try next time.
But of course, like every single example I've ever challenged myself with, sex is definitely easier said than done. On the contrary, in a similar comparison of saying vs doing, doing it is oh-so-much-easier than talking about it.
“The issue I’m tackling is not porn,” she said. “It’s the complete lack of open, healthy dialogue around porn and sex.”
Now here's the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/fashion/cindy-gallops-online-effort-to-promote-real-not-porn-fed-sex.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120909
I like to say that the answer to the huge majority of the letters to Dear Abby is one of two pieces of advice, only one of which Abby ever gives. The one she frequently correctly gives is to recommend counseling, usually marital counseling.
The answer she rarely gives but should in so many examples, almost daily, is to people who describe a bad interaction they had or are having or are frequently having with someone. My advice: Try just sitting down with the person and talking about it. It isn't easy, but it is usually for the best.
Same here with sex. She explains how so few of the younger men she "meets" (read: as sex with) know how to have sex in any way except from what they've learned watching porn, and I'm sure there's some truth to that. I'd submit (so to speak) however that even more of what they are doing is just from what comes naturally (pun unintentionally intended), which is to mount, pound, explode and then return to watching the game.
It is no reflection on the poor young, inexperienced male that they don't know any better. (It may, however, be a reflection of bad, or a complete lack of, advice from the boy's dad, but that's a somewhat separate issue.) What is needed is just raw, somewhat uncomfortable, but extremely fulfilling conversation with one's partner(s) about what feels good, what works, what doesn't and what to try next time.
But of course, like every single example I've ever challenged myself with, sex is definitely easier said than done. On the contrary, in a similar comparison of saying vs doing, doing it is oh-so-much-easier than talking about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)