Follow by Email

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

DJT--naaaa, DAT

Guess I should start off with an “Oh, No!  Not again,” but then I would not feel comfortable using this in this particular Blog, now would I?  If there’s a question there, the answer is, “Yes, I guess that’s right.” 

Seems like my dog and my wife conspired to get this “Morningbrain” entry written.  At least that’s the way it seems, sitting here at 3:15 in the AM.  Wife has a problem with her dreams.  Which is to say, when she is having a bad one, she feels the need to “share.”  And when she “shares,” sometimes, just sometimes, Dog feels the need to put in his two cents too. 

Now, wife’s sharing is bad enough—often it is on the order of a “STEVE, WHAT THE?”  And this brings on the arf, arf…arf, Arf, ARF!  Which continues, in an escalating manner, until “ARF, ARF,…ARF, ARF, ARF! Etc, Etc, results in me, me, me getting up and trying to calm things down.  Well, I’m happy to say, I have been successful.  At least for a while.  Wife and Dog are both sawing logs.  But me?  OH, NOOOO.  

So “Morningbrain” takes over.  And what subject does it choose?  DJT.  (Not again, you say!)  (Yes, again, I say.)

Now, Dee, Jay, Tee is not exactly what I want to discuss, it is just what the brain picked out while I was trying to sleep through the occasional wife-dog middle-of-the-night shout-bark-around.  It is not a subject I care much for, it is just one that seems more than ubiquitous in today’s American society, for one reason or another.  Kee-Rap is my thought, though.  Still, considering the why behind the now, it is what I’m stuck with.

DJT (pronounce all the letters separately,) it’s what we are hearing today.  I guess “the Donald” just got tired of people simply referring to him as just plain ole “DT,” and when he realized this, he put out the word to his altogether-too-many surrogates to always add that middle-of-the-initial “J.”  At least that’s how it seems.  OK, “D, J, T,” if that’s what you want, that’s what you get, but, as Fred G. Sanford might have pointed out, “and the 'J' stands for 'Just ain’t right!' ” 

Now, if the “J” just ain’t right, what might we suggest as a replacement?  Well, why not go with a vowel?  If you try to pronounce “D-J-T,” you gotta admit, you’re going to have to slip in just a little bit of vowel somewhere, right?  So, instead of slipping in one of the little buggers, why not just go with an out-and-out substitution?  OK.  Problem solved, at least in part.   Let’s start with a “u,” and back up from there. 

“D-U-T?”  Why not?  Dut, Dut, widdle Trump, dut-dut, dut-dut you said?  No, not a “u”—definitely not—try something else, instead.

“D-O-T?” Dot, dot?  No, no, not that, not that at all, you say.  A morse code “S” is not the sound we want, for our President today.

“D-I-T?” Dit, dit?  The problem here is how it might rhyme, and we’re not thinking ‘bout spit.  The rhyme won’t do, so neither will “Dit” one more down, highly unfit.

“D-E-T?” Well, Det’s not too bad—it’s just (shall we say) too easy.  Let’s go with an “a,” and see what we’ve got—detraction’s defin-it-ly sleazy.

“D-A-T?” Yes! Dat’s it! Just what we need today.  You tell him, say, ‘tis the American way, Dat’s fine, dat’s good, dat’s OK.

Well, now that we’ve solved that minor problem, guess we might just see what we can do with the post.  No real problem there (tomorrow morning will be just fine.)  Wife’s fine, she’s back in bed asleep.  Dog’s fine, he’s the same down by my feet.  All that’s needed now is for this old man, somehow, to get back to bed to sleep (while our other two, too, do the same.)

On the couch, maybe?  Fine.  4:40 now.  Let’s see how long this might last.  And, as for that “A,” as Fred G. might say,  “and the “A’s” for Atrocious (much better than “J.”)  Just the thing for our Billionaire with the "common touch."  (It's Great, just Great! that way.)  

Saturday, January 7, 2017

Painkillers and other ‘problems’

I have a problem (and,) my problem is pain.  What do you suppose I should do about it?  Well, the obvious answer, to me at least, is I should take my problem to my doctor and see what he might be able to do about it:  And therein lies the rub:  My doctor does not want to prescribe pain killers.  So--why is this?

It seems pain killers are now a popular issue of choice for our lawmakers.  All of them (the lawmakers, not the pain killers) are jumping on this bandwagon lest they be seen as promoting the use of these addictive substances, mostly the oxycodons, or hydrocodons (each has various commercial names) and the problems (addiction, overdose, death) that may accompany their misuse.  And, while our legislators’ injecting their (questionable) opinions, bills, and votes into this issue may make them seem responsive and give them an issue that may increase their popularity in some quarters, it does nothing for the person who may benefit from using the medications in question—the person in pain.

Our legislators need to examine problems and issues that relate to the public.  Our doctors need to deal with problems and issues that relate to the needs of each individual patient.  While some time the twain will meet, when the legislators interject themselves between the doctors and their patients, they are making public decisions on issues that should be kept between two individuals—the doctor and his patient.  Public solutions are not solutions that may be tailored to the needs of individuals, as the decisions of doctors for and with their patients must of necessity be tailored to each individual situation. 

If our legislators insist on inserting themselves between us and our doctors, I think we need to insert ourselves between our legislators and their jobs. 

Correcting my pain is not a public matter.  My legislator needs to remove himself from interfering with my relationship with my doctor.

My pain is not a public problem.  

Monday, January 2, 2017

What, or where, is Ninety Six?

Watching CBS this morning, January 2, 2017, I found Conor Knighton’s clip on “Visiting all of the National Parks” interesting.  (  If you choose to call up this address, sorry about the leading commercial—guess CBS has to pay their bills some way.)  In any case, Ric Nipper, a friend of mine from Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, and I have been taking annual trips to various Georgia and South Carolina sites for several years.  This year, we ended up in Ninety Six.

I had a dear French teacher in High School, who told her students she had grown up in Ninety Six.  Now, I have had occasion, over the past quite a few years, to drive down one or more of our state roads near Ninety Six, and I had noticed highway signs pointing “To Ninety Six,” but, until Ric and I set out on our annual pilgrimage to wherever, I had never even given consideration to visiting Mme. Butler’s home town.  Nor did Ric, or I, give any consideration to going there when we left Aiken this year just before Thanksgiving.   Guess we just gravitated in that direction.  So, you say, why bring this up now?  Well, it seems this year, we inadvertently went to a South Carolina National Park Service site—the one in Ninety Six.

And, should you need a reason to try this site, maybe the fact that it is one National Park site you might be able to visit and see in just one day might provide that reason:  Now, before I go any further, let me quibble just a bit.  The National Park Service calls the Ninety Six site a “National Historic Site,” making it one of nine sites in the state on its list of places you might like to visit:  ( .   In any case, if you are anywhere near it (it is close to Greenwood, SC,) I recommend it to you, whether or not it qualifies as a “National Park,” proper.

I would also recommend the other eight sites on the NPS’s above list (most of which I have had the pleasure to visit in the past) as being worth your time.  Maybe, next Thanksgiving, I might be able to convince my friend Ric to come a day or so early so we can show our wives this little bit of history, just down the road from Aiken, in Ninety Six, South Carolina.  As road trips go, this is a “good 'un.”