OUCH!

I messed up my right knee in April.  It still bothers me.  But I know what caused it.

Last night. I did something that messed up my left knee.  It is as if I hit it on a door frame.  But I didn't.  Can't think of anything I did to cause it.  Damn...

I guess I'm going to have to see a doctor...  I used to just heal in a week from these sorts of problems.  But not any more.  Getting old is really annoying.

Angry Voters

I have been hard on Donald Trump (and rightly so).  But I haven't discussed his supporters much.

I sort of understand them.  They are angry.  They are desperate.  They aren't living the life their parents enjoyed.

In a general sense, we all know that some people succeed in life better than others. And the others don't.  The reasons are not my point here.  My point is that they know the world is somehow passing them by, they are not succeeding,  and they are angry.  There are few emotions stronger than anger.

Hate is usually directed, anger is diffuse.

Trump has activated the angry people.  He wouldn't have gotten the Republican nomination for President if anger and fear wasn't a real thing in significant part of the population.

I do not fear Trump.  He will go down into crushing defeat on Election Day.  It is the angry people who concern me.  Their anger is justified.  They used to have decent-paying jobs putting headlights on cars, collecting coins from parking meters, loading luggage on airplanes, etc.  There used to be jobs you could just learn to DO without having to work on a computer, make decisions, or attend meetings and argue with people.  Some people are just not good at those things.  And they have fewer places to do work now.

And I understand because in the 1st 10 years of my adult life, I had cruddy jobs too.  I pushed a lawn mower in the hot sun for 2 Summers on an Army Base.  I spent 2 Summers pumping gas at a full service station where the owner dipped his sticky fingers into the till and charged us workers for the "losses". 

I worked at minimum wage in several department stores while the rent went up faster than my wages.  I even got to where I was in charge of a 1/4 of the department store and my hourly pay was 25 cents above minimum wage.  And the store managers cheated us every chance they could get because every dime they took out of our pocket went into theirs!

But I took a competitive exam for Government work and scored 100% in 5 categories of jobs.  That was because *I* spent my time in high school studying while "other" kids were goofing off.  I learned "stuff".  I practiced general skills.  I did well.  I was promoted regularly.  I retired well.

But not much better than the middle class in the US did in the 50s and 60s.  The high point of the US economy was when unions were strong (but not overly strong), when the percentage of the total wealth held by the top 1% was low, and when a college education for children was withing reach of most middle class families. 

There was a chart in Scientific American magazine a month ago that showed the percentage of national wealth held by the top 1% of Americans. 

In the 1920s, it rose to 20%.  At the end of The Great Depression, it was down to 15%, and the end of WWII, it was down to 10%.

In 1970, it was down to 8%.  After the Republican Tax Reform act of 1986, it rose rather suddenly to 16%, and after the 2000 Bush Administration, it went back up to 18%.  That is wrong.  The trickle down theory of wealth only means every one below the top 1% gets peed on.

The Republicans are doing it very very wrong, in pay to their super-rich supporters.  But the Democrats are doing things a whole lot better.

What we need is a Centrist-Union party dedicated to recreating the middle class.  No industrialized nation can survive without a strong middle class.  That is what makes democracy work.

Democracy works best when the poor have a path up, the middle class has some basic stability in life, and the rich are accepting a lower level than "outrageously fabulous".

I'll give a sports example...

Say you are a farmkid in Kansas and you have a choice between driving a tractor around cornfields for $20K a year vs earning $100K a year catching balls in the outfield.  Of course you would take the $100K.  But is it worth $50M.  No, you would do it for $100K. It is idiodically super-rich people playing their own game, competing with each other.

If they weren't, the seats would cost $10 and they would all still make a fine profit.  THat's what a generally middle-class world would look like...

Annoying Commercials

I have a love/hate relationship with TV commercials.  I love humorous ones and hate annoying ones.  Dad used to mute commercials, but I always found the deafening silence more annoying than the commercial themselves.  So I grew pretty immune to them.

That doesn't mean I didn't hear what they said.  The mind just filters out the brand names  And sometimes there is a new product that will actually draw my interest in the general product.  Then I research similar products that do the same work better.  Then I sometimes find stuff that really works. 

And they have learned a couple of new tricks this year.  In the first, they repeat the same commercial the 1st and 3rd time in a single station break.  In the second, they have the same commercial played on related channels at the same time.  So if you are watching the Science channel and an annoying commercial comes and you switch to the History channel, you are likely to see the same commercial.

But, my favorite disliked commercials...

1.  Some allergy medication that says their competitor treats 1 problem and they treat 6 AND 6 IS GREATER THAN 1.  Was 6 being greater than 1 supposed to be a revelation to me?

2.  A car insurance company that criticizes a competitor for telling a customer they should have bought "full replacement insurance" and says the customer should have researched that company better.  And then offers to sell you "full replacement insurance".  Just like they criticized the competitor for doing.

3.  I'll name names for this one.  For several years, Comcast has been comparing its cable service speed to Verizons DSL service saying "we are 5x faster".  I don't know if you remember what DSL is, but it stands for "Digital Subscriber Service".  DSL is about 40 years old technology.  It worked over old twisted copper wire telephone lines that were basically cleaned of static so that 9600 kbs could be transmitted over old-fashioned telephone lines. 

Its like comparing a 1940s Oldsmobile car to a 2016 Mercedes Benz in terms of spped, safety, and features.  And you only know Comcast is comparing their current service to DSL if you listen the the fast-talk and the very end on the commercial.

4.  All the car insurance companies who claim to have better rates than the others...  Every insurance company has slightly different rates for coverage and cost.  Everyone has SOME combination where they are cheaper than the others.  They can all prove they are better than the others at SOME specific coverage even if that coverage combination is so limited and bizarre that almost no one would choose it.

5.  Another one I dislike is a medication that says ours can start working in 30 minutes while out competitor's can take up to 24 hours.  I get such a kick out of that.  From what little I can discover, they are the same chemical.   Medication tests show a range of response times to the medications.  For the same medication, some people respond very quickly and some respond very slowly. 

So a particular medication may work very quickly on some people and very slowly on others.  There are many causes for that, but don't worry about that.  What Company "A is saying is that SOME test subjects self-reported an effect in 30 minutes.  And that SOME of Company X's test subjects reported irt took 24 hours.  What they are NOT telling you (because they don't have to" as that some of THEIR test subjects took 24 hours to respond and some of the Competitor test subjects took only 30 minutes. 

In other words, they were identical.  One company took the absolute lowest response time and compared it to the other company's longest response time.

  -----------------------

It can be hard to stay ahead of the advertizing.

Rule 1 is to look for hidden insults.  Advertisers assume everyone is stupid and gullible.  "6 is greater than 1" is the best example I have seen of that in many years.

Rule 2 is to think about the assumptions.  Is a car showing it being driven at 120 mph better than a car being driven at 60?  How often do you drive at 120?

Rule 3 is to read the fine print at the bottom of the screen at the end of the commercial.  Puse it or record it.  That's were ALL the truth is.

Rule 4 is to turn off the sound and look at the commercial without the expensive talented narrator.

Rule 5 is to do the opposite. Close your eyes and listen to the narrator.  Sometimes what he or she says doesn't actually make much sense. 

Rule 6 is to apply some basic knowledge.   All through history, people have claimed benefits from and sold common or bizarre substances.   Most people are basically honest.  They have to be to keep the respect of family and friends and neighbors.  Salesmen don't! 

If anyone says "Scientists (or Doctors) Don't Want You To Know This", that's because the claim IS NOT TRUE.  Wearing copper bracelets or moving "special" magnets over your joints does not work.  Otherwise, doctors would be doing that!  Any doctor who could show by patient recovery that some odd idea worked would become FAMOUS.

Rule 7 is that "If it seems to be too good to be true, then it isn't true".  Ideas that are good generally don't need much advertising.  There isn't a lot of business advertising telling you to eat more fruits and vegetables.  There ARE a lot telling you to eat more Toaster Sugar Blasts and Chocolate-Frosted Sugar-Bomb cereal.  Because YOU KNOW that fresh fruits and vegetables and "some" meat is good for you and eating a pound of sugar a day isn't and they have to work hard to convince you to buy their sugar/fat products.

And since the sugar/fat foods, copper bracelets, magnets, etc, etc, etc are their only way to make a fortune, they try it.  And when it works, they are gleeful.  They think it is sure better than having a REAL job...

Trump's Commennts About Women

I am posting this Saturday evening, before any new news about the Presidential debate or further news discussion about Trump's comments about how he views or has treated women comes out.

So this is general.  You know I don't like Trump.  He lies.  He lies about what he said years ago and he lies about what he said yesterday.  There is nearly no position that Trump has ever claimed that he has not denied afterwards.

My point here is not to list them.  Professional journalists and fact-checkers have done that before and found/proved him to be a pathological liar about almost everything.  That is what he is.  You can accept him for that or deny it, but he is that so frequently proven.

My concern today is the video of his comments about women.  Trump was politically-fatally damaged by the video.  Trump will never be a President of the US.

What I want to discuss is his justification for the comments.  His claim was they were locker room comments.  I've been in locker rooms.  I played soccer in high school and that was a rough bunch.  And we often shared locker room time with the football players and they tend toward crudeness.  Comments about cheerleaders, comments about fans in the stands.  Never in any locker room did I hear statements like Trump made.

In college, I tried rugby for a few months, and never did I hear such comments there.

And let me try to explain it.  In the locker room, some guys talked about expectations of having sex with their girlfriends.  Some talked about about going out to a local bar and trying to hook up with "fangirls".

Those were mostly established monogomous relationships or just plain fantasies.  There is a difference!

That isn't what Trump was talking about.  He was talking about outright predatory sexual assault, he was talking about using a position of power and influence to get unwilling sex, he was talking about taking advantage of fear of retribution and career destruction to have sex with women.  He wasn't talking about vague "desires".  He was talking about actual factual experiences in his life and the expectation that they would continue.  That is a VERY different thing.

The terms "creep, "vile", and "predator", come to mind.

His apologies are insipid, deceitful, and vapid! His first response was "I apologize if anyone was offended".  Now THAT is a standard political trick.  He isn't apologizing for what he SAID or DID, he is expressing some vague regret that OTHERS were upset by what he said or did which he considers perfectly OK.  In other words " You are an overly-sensitive, politically-correct annoying twit who doesn't understand reality".  That isn't an apology; that's an insult.

An apology is a clear unambiguous statement that you were wrong by all social standards, that you wish you had never said or done the thing, and that it was a strange inexplicable action that was totally out of character.  Allowable reasons are things like utterly mis-speaking, medication effects, typos on your notes, etc.

When you say you can get away with things like that when you are famous, you can't even apologize at all.  It is just "who you are"!  And that IS who he IS!

So, Trump is no longer viable as President of the US in any consideration.  That is simply an "absolute".  I don't care what any supporter thinks of his general political views, I don't care what his supporters think of his list of Supreme Court nominees, I don't even care if he COULD improve the economy (which he wouldn't).  That no longer matters.

Donald Trump must NOT ever be President of the US...

Recent Posts and Comments

First, thank you to everyone who commented about my recent house searches. The comments all made good sense (and they were easy to agree with since I was coming to that understanding myself).  I have MUCH to like about my current house and LESS than I imagined to dislike.  After enough years, you have everything where you want it.  Minor problems seem larger than they really are.  Sometimes it seems easier to escape them than just fix them.

I argue with myself about many things.  I see both sides of issues and that can really make decision-making difficult.  I've had friends for whom any question gave them an immediate answer which they acted upon with no further concerns.  Personally, I thought they tended to make bad decisions sometimes, but at least they were never tortured by doubt. 

But thinking too much about everything can lead to "analysis-paralysis" and that can be just as big a problem.  You get to a close decision and you are STUCK in between.  I recently saw a TV ad that used the term "FOBO" (Fear Of Better Options).  I get that.

2 years ago, I looked at houses with County water and sewage and cable and large open yards with sunlight for gardening.  Last year, I looked at rural lots of converted farmland that I could build a new home on.  Starting from scratch in the yard and a new house that would outlast me seemed good.  But all the lots I could find were surrounded by working farmland with overpowering fertilizer smells and I never found the open house structure I could afford (like 100'x50' for one-level living and a workshop attached and a garage.   This year, I looked at large Ramblers about the size of my current size  over a large open basement large enough for my woodworking equipment, and had a 2 car garage (one car, one boat).

The good house was on a lawn dome that fell off into ravines in back and the large side, the house with the good yard had crumbling foundations and obvious water problems in the basement, and the last one had a good yard but was smaller than my current house and, even filtered and softened, the water tasted bad.  And was $150,000 more than my house is estimated

So I have decided to remain here for a while.  Perhaps in a few years County water and sewage will be installed in more rural areas, the cable companies will expand, solar panels will become cheaper and more efficient, etc.  But that time is not now.

There isn't a whole lot I can do about my lack of gardening sunlight, though some ideas occur to me.  Putting up silver-painted sheet metal on the shady side would reflect a fair amount of sunlight back into the garden, for example. 

There isn't much I can do about the trees.  They are tall and narrow.  It's not the overhanging branches; it is their sheer height.  And it has been years since I asked about removing them.  Perhaps paying to have them professionally removed and replacing them with flowering trees like dogwoods would work.  I'll at least ask again.

And if that doesn't work, I do have the right to cut out all roots invading my soil.  Since they are so close to the property line, that might kill them.  And THEN I can offer them lower growing flowering trees that won't cause me problems.  From the shade angles, all I need is that trees be not more than 20' high.  The current ones are 50 to 75'.

As far as the house itself goes, most of the things that bother me are fixable through my own or contractor efforts.  The basement bathroom I installed myself 20 years ago was a mistake, but it can also be removed.  I've never used it except for storage.  It goes back to when I paneled 3/4 of the basement and carpeted the area thinking I would have parties.  I didn't throw parties and tore out the carpet in favor of a wood-working area, but the bathroom remains as dead space.  The ancient refrigerator can go, in favor of a medium chest freezer in the cat room upstairs.

I have 3 rooms with original 30 year old carpeting.  The master bedroom carpet is still oddly good (it gets so little use), but the other 2 are trashable and I'm thinking linoleum for the computer room (getting rid of the annoying chair mats) and tight pile carpet for the cat room).

I have new shingles on the roof, a new deck, new siding, and I have raised the front lawn to solve  drainage problems.  The asphalt driveway is deteriorating gradually; that can be removed and replaced with concrete. 

My 25 year old perennial beds have less in them than my pictures show these days (which is why you have been seeing more pictures of potted deck plants this year).  I can dig up the good plants, rototill the areas, replant the good ones and add more.  But that is what I would be doing in a new place anyway, and with greater effort. 

I could go on, but you get the idea.  I was desiring to escape redoing and fixing things and just starting over.  Starting over is neat and clean.  Summer's Mom mentioned that HER passion was big beautiful houses  and those are what she wants to spend her time and effort on.    I when I lie in bed at night, thinking about what's not perfect about my house, my thoughts are on doing work to make it better.

I have reasons to want to move, but less than I thought a month ago.  I'm staying.  And if you are the kind of person who remembers things like this and I mention moving again next year, remind me about the past 3 years of searches.  LOL!

Houses Again

I visited another house today.  This one was listed a shade over $400k, but I could tell they would accept a lower offer.  The elderly lady and her son seemed to want to leave ASAP. 

The house is nice.  3 decent bedrooms, 3 baths,  large kitchen, combined dining/living room, 2 car garage, decent basement (divided into several rooms but they didn't seem to be structural so they could be removed).  Large front lawn, backyard sunny enough for gardening, and the place comes with a separate deed for 20 surrounding wooded acres.  I could probably sell a few acres and even make a profit on the cost of the house.

I discussed the purchase procedure with the agent and suggested starting the paperwork.  I could afford the new place, and what is the point of dying wealthy when you have no descendants?

There were some negatives.  The place is on  well water and a septic tank.  The direct water is OK for washing and showering etc, but not for drinking.  Even filtered and softened, the water tasted terrible (the agent looked at the system and said better ones are available).  I would need to build a 300' fence around the backyard to protect the cats from neighborhood dogs and the garden from deer.  I would have to have a large toolshed added.  I would have to remove interior basement walls.  The deck was tiny and I would want a much larger one. 

But those are problems that can be overcome.  The problem is ME!  I sat down after I returned home and thought about it.  Then I looked around the house and yard and realized I JUST COULDN'T GET MYSELF TO MOVE!  I have become part of the property.  I'm rooted, affixed, nailed down.  I don't want to change, I don't want to learn a new house, I like the taste of the water here, etc, etc, etc.  I have never lived in "someone else's" house before

For possibly the 1st time, I understand both sets of grandparents.  All 4 died "oldish" in the houses they moved into in their late 20s.  They had become part of their houses.  Or their houses had become their larger "skin".  My house and yard are part of me, and I can't shake that feeling.  Everything in the house is exactly where I want it to be.  The yard needs work, but that is always an ongoing process.  If I moved, I would feel like I abandoned a friend in need of assistance and care.

I don't need to move for a new job or anything.

For what it is worth, I can easily afford to buy the new house outright, empty the current one, and then have it professionally cleaned before selling it afterwards.  I could even sell the current place "as is" and not even bother with making the kinds of repairs that 30 years of living have inflicted.

Has my train gotten completely de-railed here?  Am I talking myself out of a good life decision?  Have you faced a similar uncertainty of moving, and if so, what decision did you make?

Annoyed

Well, I'm a bit depressed today.  I've lived here 30 years, improved the property, improved my gardening area, and I gain NOTHING!  Because every year, the neighbors' trees bordering my property grow taller and cut out more sunlight. 

If I had known those trash saplings of 2 feet 30 years ago would grow to massive shady sunlight-sucking monsters 50' tall by now, I would have mowed them dead!  I have asked the neighbors' if I could pay to have the tall trees replaced with fancy flowering smaller ones.  They say "no" because they like the shade.  Hint, hint; on the east and south sides THEY DON'T GET ANY SHADE FROM THOSE TREES!  But they are oblivious to that.  "Just saying NO" is easier.

So last year, after the gardening season was over, I looked at new homes on the internet.  I would like an open house layout with rooms defined vaguely by 30" high walls (all the better to put plants on). and a large enough property so that trees can't block the sunlight in some 40'x40' garden.

I visited some open lands.  They were all corners of farmland being sold off for cash, with working farmland next door.  Well, if you don't know what farmland fertilizer and/or a horse stable smells like all Spring and Summer; *I* do!

So that idea was a failure.

Last week, I looked for existing houses on 1-3 acres of rural land away from farms.  I found 5 that looked good.  Within a day, I learned that 2 were under contract for sale, 1 had a fussy homeowners association controlling almost anything you can image, and 2 were still available.

I visited those 2 houses with a realtor agent today.  Gosh, photographs can be deceptive.  Both were 3 bedroom/2 baths and 3-5 acres. 

The first, pictured here, was great inside.  Lots of great features inside, nice interior, high wood beam ceilings, a kitchen island with an induction cooktop, granite counters, large rooms, 2 car garage (in my case that would be 1 car and 1 boat), dual fireplaces (right in the center of the house), etc.  The basement was chopped into small rooms ( I want a workshop).  But mostly, the back 2 acres fell right into a ravine practically straight out the back door.  No chance for gardening there.  The house is basically like a Monopoly Hotel sitting on a baseball cap (good front visor, nothing behind).

So we went to the other house.  An acre wide and 5 acres deep.  The backyard was sunny ("gardeny").  And it was flat further back, so I could get for open space cutting down some trees.  Nice toolshed.  The upper interior was cramped but more space than I have now.  The basement was large; plenty of room for woodworking equipment.  

But it stank of mildew and showed water damage.  The reason was obvious when I looked under the deck.  The foundation is crumbling from long-term rain exposure.  The backyard drains TOWARD the house.  Whoever leveled the terrain originally should be drawn and quartered!  There were chunks of foundation spalled off from water damage.  Looking back into the basement, it became obvious the basement had been routinely flooded and the owners had tried a cheap paint job to cover it up.

Both properties were being sold for $350,000 in a rural area with well water and septic fields.

The realtor pair with me had never shown the properties previously and were dismayed by the problems I pointed out.  They seemed genuinely upset.  To the point were they took pictures of the problem areas and even noted some they found themselves ( a water-stained ceiling tile, for example). 

I'm sure that won't stop them from selling either place to anyone who wants them; that IS their job.  But they WERE surprised at what they saw.  I'll bet both places drop below $300,000 very soon. 

For someone who never bought a used house (and only my current one new-built) I sem to have a knack for discovering evidence of problems.  I noticed some other tricks the homeowners tried.  One front door rubbed hard on the carpet, yet there was no wear showing.   That meant the carpet was new.  So when I rapped on the carpet, the subfloor didn't sound solid.  That meant rain-damage through the roof.  Sure enough, there was discoloration in the ceiling above.  It had been re-painted and poorly, so you could see the spot if you knew to look. 

So my search continues.  A rambler on a basement on an open yard.  That's all I ask.  Looks like I will be staying here another year, though I will continue to check the listing "just in case".

Bad as my sunlight is, I refuse to move in the middle of Winter or in the middle of gardening season.

My plan is to buy a house, move, then clean/repaint/renovate the existing house.  I can have 2 for a few months because the current one is paid off so there is no expense holding it for sales prep.

But I'm sure not going to move unless I like the house better and I can garden better!!!

VP Debate

 The VPs had one job in their debate; defend their Presidential candidates.

My initial thoughts (listening to it on radio twice) is that Pence defending Trump and Kaine did a good job defending Clinton and got some jabs in on his own.  Kaine came out ahead.

Pence mainly denied things that Trump had said, while Kaine kept pointing those things out.  That made it hard for Pence, who doesn't really support most of Trump's opinions.  But given that, Pence did the best he could, and in a technical sense, skillfully.  He has set himself up as the top contender for the Republican nominee in 2020.

But he will face most of the losing Republican candidates of 2016 , so it will be another crowded field.

Kaine did a good job of defending Clinton, Obama, and Democratic positions in general in general, so he has a future also.  Whether an elected VP, or the losing one, he did well enough to establish himself as a leader in the party.  Obviously, being a winning VP will be better than a losing one, but either way, he is "noticed". 

If Trump wins and fails at leadership, the 2020 election could well match Pence and Kaine and I'm sure they are both planning for that.  Or if Clinton wins, as seems likely, Kaine will bide his time as VP and go for the Presidency in 2014.

But overall, Kaine won because he supported the likely next President and Pence won because he represented the conservatives who hate Trump.

This election might be the last of the Boomers, with Clinton.  The next might be even more contentious.

Trump/Clinton Presidential Debate

I just can't help responding to the Trump/Clinton Debate  as it was just so odd.  In my 48 years of watching presidential debates, I have never seen anything like it. 

Right after the debate, Trump tweeted that the Moderator was very good and that he (Trump) had clearly won.  Then, after a few hours, Trump learned that he had not done so well in the debate, and suddenly the Moderator was merely "OK".  The next day, when the first polls came out showing that Trump had lost the debate in the opinion of the viewing public, he decided that the Moderator had been really tricky and against him personally.

Since when does the Moderator's performance change over time as one's ratings of the debate performance go down and it is not your fault?

I'm not claiming that Trump lost the debate because polls said so.  I'm not claiming that Trump lost the debate because CNN said so.  I'm claiming that Trump lost the debate because even Fox News admits it!

And it gets worse for Trump.  He jumped at a Clinton suggestion that Trump paid no taxes like most of us have to, saying "I'm smart not to".  Well, maybe that is good for his business, but it means he can't claim to support our military forces, our economy, or domestic security groups.

He lost the rest of the debate by constantly making snide remarks during Clinton's turn to speak and insulting groups of voters in his turn to speak.

Then he attacked a former Miss Universe ( a business he controlled at the time) saying she was "too fat".  Have you seen pictures?  She was as forced-self-starved as all beauty-pageant contestants are.  As I understand it, she gained a few pounds after the contest, and that was probably good for her health.

And Trump couldn't let it go about her.  I tweeted several times after midnight to dawn about her.  Really?  How wants a President how fixates on irrelevant issues in the middle of the night?

Trump claimed that "polls" suggested he won.  Yeah, those were the kinds of online surveys where people can set up their computer to vote repeatedly.   The real polls, conducted by professionals say he lost the debate about 55% to 25% (the rest unsure).

I wish Trump would discuss some details of his plans to defeat ISIS, solve US poverty, reduce crime in cities, and apportion our tax dollars among problems like infrastructure rebuilding, military training and equipment, tax reform, rebuilding the middle class, education, etc.  But he just won't discuss those things beyond "I'll Make America Great Again".  Good, tell me how you'll do that!

I want to hear details.  Blind assurances do not move me.  Clinton gives details. 

I read an fairly neutral analysis that Trump stated a positive lie every 3 minutes 15 seconds as he spoke (12).  They caught Clinton on 1 (about a trade agreement staement).  I can accept a few deceptions for "Reasons of State", but a 12 to 1 ratio does not encourage me to support Trump.  Most of his lies don't even make sense! 

And then there were a couple interviews with the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson.  What a sad joke.  He didn't know what or where Aleppo was.  And then couldn't name a single world leader he admired.   A smarter person, blanking on names might have said he didn't admire any of them.  But that wasn't his problem.  He actually didn't know any names.

Seriously, *I* could have come up with Merkel, Cameron (only recently out of office),  and Hollande,  and I don't keep track of foreign leaders (paying more attention to places as nations).

His VP candidate tried to mention former President Vincente Fox of Mexico, but I haven't liked him since he referred to the illegal hispanic migration into the Southern US as "The Reconquista".

So Trump is an unqualified habitual liar and ignorant of world affairs, Johnson is just ignorant and ignorant of world affairs, and Clinton is telented at dealing with world leaders, nuanced and thoughtful.

That's a contest?

The Clinton/Trump Debate Tomorrow

I'm worried about the debate.  Clinton has to show great command of all national and international issues (and she will).  She probably has to know the Minister of Finance of Slovakia and the exchange rate of Dollars to Laotion Kips (and she probably does).

All Trump has to do is not pull down his pants and moon the audience...

And then too many people will think him "presidential" for restraining himself. 

If there was ever a difference in expectations between 2 people in a debate, this is it.  And it is not fair.  I grew up taught that knowledge, experience, and nuance matters in life and leadership.  I went through my career that way and I have lived my life that way. 

If Trump becomes our President, my brain will just EXPLODE.  And not because he is, but because enough Americans thought he should be.  It will be a society I no longer want to be part of. 

I live in Maryland.  Maryland is not a contested State.  Maryland will go for Clinton without any doubt.  It is some of the other States I worry about.  Personal opinion of States that go for Trump; they are obviously insane.

I read a very interesting book decades ago (and re-read it sometimes) called 'They Also Ran' by Irving Stone.  It details the losers in presidential elections, why they lost and what kind of presidents the losers would have made.  Stone's general view is that the American voters have generally made good decisions, but sometimes really made bad ones.  His judgements on the elections seem sound.

As he said in his epilogue, the American People have made the better choice rejecting Hayes for Tilden (the election was crooked in Florida and Hayes was chosen badly),  Douglas for Lincoln, Blaine for Cleveland, Landon/Wilkie/Dewey in favor of Franklin Roosevelt, Dewey over Truman,  Nixon over Kennedy,  and Goldwater against Johnson. 

We erred grievously choosing  Taylor over Cass, Grant over Seymour, Coolidge over Davis, Eisenhower over Stevenson,  and Nixon over Humphrey

We made a difficult choice between Smith/Hoover  between equally good candidates.

The rest of the elections seem to have been the better choices.

Let's hope this election doesn't go down in history as the worst decision the voters have even made...

Groundhog

I have a particularly wary groundhog this year.  I set out my live cage trap but it wont go in.  I've named it Radar.

It is unusually observant.  And, apparently, groundhogs  have great long-distance vision and hearing.  Radar creeps out of the backyard underbrush (which I really ought to get out and cut down) slowly.  To the extent that it can think, it might call ME Radar too.

Radar can see at least 200 feet and can tell if I so much as slowly poke my head over a windowsill.  If I do, he stands up, looks straight at me and runs away.  On the other hand, he cannot creep out into my wildflower garden (which must seem like a Eden of food to him).  I know every stem as well as HE does and he can't hide his little head whenever I look out the window.

I see him as well as he sees me.  I've been kind.  As long as he eats the clover in the lawn, I don't mind.  And my garden is covered with chicken wire he can't get into so far.  If he would stick to the lawn clover, I wouldn't mind.

But he has a natural taste for the wildflowers I am trying to grow in a patch for the cats to prowl through, and when it comes to the cats desires to prowl seeking mice and voles vs the groundhog's eating habits, Radar has to go.

I have tried to scare him away.  I have tried to just discourage him when he wants to eat the wildflowers I'm, trying to grow.    No success on that.

So I will have to set up the Hav-A-Hart live trap cage again.  I set it up in years past when I had groundhogs and caught them right away.  Radar is more cautious.  I read that covering the cage with long grasses is good for suspicious groundhogs, even draping it with landscape fabric is good.

I don't want intelligent cage-wary groundhogs around.  From my point of view, stupid and catchable is better.  The websites say that cantelopes and peaches are the best cage bait.  I have a honeydew melon bigger than I will eat, so I will try some of that.  Radars predecesors ate my honeydews last year before I finished enclosing my garden are last year, so that should work.
I'll hang a slice from inside the top of the cage (because otherwise the ants just eat them).