Jim Stillman
Nevar
I’m back: Thoughts at 4 A.M.
April 16th 2008 23:22
For the past four months, I have been working many hours a week, preparing income tax returns for Jackson-Hewitt Tax Service. While I have been reading the postings of many Orble contributors, I have not been able to agree or challenge any of the ideas presented.
That is to be corrected from now on! Meanwhile, a number of random thoughts have been floating in my head. Some will be the nexus of more complete posts, but in no special order, this is I’ve been thinking in the middle of the night.
I have been working on a serious article in my fledgling debate in AssociatedContent with friend and political adversary/challenger. Randy Inman. He has the disturbing ability to discern when my political views stray too far to the Left and need moderation. A recent conversation with my sister, an iconoclastic soul seven years my senior, made me awaken at 4:00 o’clock the other morning with a few random thoughts.
Middle-Age
I have just celebrated my 73rd birthday. At least, that’s what I am told. Frankly, I do not remember all of them, but then I don’t remember a lot of stuff. For example, I have been employed by Jackson-Hewitt Tax Services as Manager of a busy office situated in a large retail store started by a now- deceased gentlemen from Arkansas. This store is huge and its parking lot immense. There are two entrances into the store and I try and park near one of them; when I leave to go home, I never am certain about which door at which I entered. I look for Big Red, activate the alarm from the doohickey attached to the key and follow the noise. The point is, however, unless some miscreant has moved the car during the day, I should remember.
I have heard that the difference between forgetting things as we age and a serious disease is that, if I forget where I park, it’s normal and natural. On the other hand, if I do not remember that I own a car, it’s serious.
Anyway, I have always contended that “middle-age” starts ten years from wherever I am at the time. I am now, formally, announcing and acknowledging that I have entered “middle-age “ but just by a hair -- like dipping a toe into cold ocean water at the beach.
Reading for fun
I have a habit of reading two books at once and I am now working my way through two truly fascinating books. First is Jeffrey Toobin’s The Nine, a brilliant analysis of the United States Supreme Court, the Justices and the pressures and backgrounds that make them interpret statutes and the Constitution ion so vastly different ways. The other book is the newest John Gresham, The Verdict. It is, in my opinion, one of his best.
Both of these books explore the nature of decision making by Judges.
Recently there have been many discussions regarding the United States Supreme Court; some Justices decry an “activist court” rather than sticking to the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution. In reality, every Justice, liberal or conservative in his or her background, puts a spin on the literal language of the Constitution. Those Justices who consider themselves “originalists” state that the words of the Constitution are to be taken “as is”
But the truth is that many ideas, concepts and, even, things, were never conceived by the Framers and we must deal with today’s circumstances.
For example, the Bill of Rights is clear: no legislative action shall interfere with free speech or the press. Justice Black years ago said that the clause is to be taken as it is written. No interference with the right to speech and the press. Would anyone today seriously argue that a law that decriminalized pornography picturing sex between eight year old children or sex between adults with infants was wrong?
Another example in the news involves the right to bear arms, a topic on which I have written. I contend that the Second Amendment does not give an unrestricted right to carry a handgun. When the Constitution was written, "arms” meant muskets and rifles. No one in the late 17th Century considered small concealable hand guns. They didn’t exist. Would they have been included? We won’t know until the “activist” judges tell us. (At this time, the Supreme Court has under advisement , for the first time in over 60 years, a case that may well resolve the issue.)
The Constitution states that there should be no restriction on the freedom of religion. Would we accept a faith that demanded that babies be encouraged to play and interact with poisonous snakes?
“What’s the matter with kids today . . .”
In the movie version of the musical, Bye, Bye Birdie, there is a song lamenting the sorry state of 1950-era youth and comparing them to children of earlier years, “perfect in every way” and so forth.
The other day I was preparing the tax returns for a relatively young couple with two children, ages 6 and 9. While the parents were completing some forms and I was trying to gather information and explain what was required, the children squirmed and whined. Mom excused the noise and bouncing with a mild admonition that unless the children were better behaved and quiet for another ten minutes, there would be no “Happy Meal” in their future. The children moved in back of my desk and started to unplug telephone and computer
connections. The result was that our company was out of business for six hours! On another occasion, a young man in his twenties insisted on watching a television program on a small hand-held device the name of which I do not know.
I note that many young children fear “boredom” more than anything. Sitting reasonably still while Mom or Dad complete a business transaction, even for five minutes, is unheard of. Coloring books, puzzles, books are not enough; the distraction must be loud, electronic and expensive. I’ll let the child experts figure out a solution but, my personal opinion is that the little ones are royal pains in the neck. I revert to my parents’ curse, “You should get married and have many children who are as rotten as you!”
On the other hand, my opinions were dramatically modified over the past weekend.
The Lovely Joan and I have very close friends of thirty years or so. Lida and Roy’s granddaughter celebrated her Bat Mitzvah. Paige did magnificently, was beautiful, charming – in short was, as are all of our grandchildren, far above average in intelligence and looks.
In any event, at the party Saturday evening, there were many, many young people, primarily in their early teens. At the outset, I have to acknowledge that neither I nor the disk jockey playing dance music that, to my ears, was discordant with lyrics pure gibberish, nor the teens themselves, could state the actual lyrics of the songs to which they jumped and screamed with great abandon. After watching these teens, I am left with several conclusions.
First, these teens were all clean-cut, all unfailingly polite, all respectful to those old folks in attendance, all, in short, great people. The several with whom I spoke, were knowledgeable about current affairs, were articulate (notwithstanding an over use of “like”) and utterly nice.
If these kids are a glimpse of the future, our world and country should have no fear. Thank you, Paige, and Mom and Dad, for giving an old guy reason for optimism!
Proponents of Intelligent Design use a different language.
A Florida state legislator has objected to the State Department of Education’s proposal to include Evolution, by name, and to require its teaching in Florida schools. Thus Florida, the state that cannot get an election right, underpays its public employees, usually turns to developers to make land use plans, is considering traveling back to the 19th Century.
Why is there such a continuing dispute over the alleged conflict between the Bible, in particular the first two Books of the Old Testament, and the scientific concept of evolution? There is a conflict only because the parties are failing to use a common language.
The Bible was, obviously, the result of nomadic peoples to explain the creation of the world – but it was far more. The Bible was an attempt to explain why we are here, what is the moral bases of our existence; science, on the other hand, is not concerned with values and value judgments, with good and evil. Science attempts to discern and explain the how we got here. As long as the two “sides” ignore the differences in their respective ambitions, there will never be an accommodation.
The coffee is brewing and my random and fleeting thoughts have vanished.
I would really love to have others jot down ideas and bothersome stuff. It might be fun to compare.
That is to be corrected from now on! Meanwhile, a number of random thoughts have been floating in my head. Some will be the nexus of more complete posts, but in no special order, this is I’ve been thinking in the middle of the night.
I have been working on a serious article in my fledgling debate in AssociatedContent with friend and political adversary/challenger. Randy Inman. He has the disturbing ability to discern when my political views stray too far to the Left and need moderation. A recent conversation with my sister, an iconoclastic soul seven years my senior, made me awaken at 4:00 o’clock the other morning with a few random thoughts.
Middle-Age
I have just celebrated my 73rd birthday. At least, that’s what I am told. Frankly, I do not remember all of them, but then I don’t remember a lot of stuff. For example, I have been employed by Jackson-Hewitt Tax Services as Manager of a busy office situated in a large retail store started by a now- deceased gentlemen from Arkansas. This store is huge and its parking lot immense. There are two entrances into the store and I try and park near one of them; when I leave to go home, I never am certain about which door at which I entered. I look for Big Red, activate the alarm from the doohickey attached to the key and follow the noise. The point is, however, unless some miscreant has moved the car during the day, I should remember.
I have heard that the difference between forgetting things as we age and a serious disease is that, if I forget where I park, it’s normal and natural. On the other hand, if I do not remember that I own a car, it’s serious.
Anyway, I have always contended that “middle-age” starts ten years from wherever I am at the time. I am now, formally, announcing and acknowledging that I have entered “middle-age “ but just by a hair -- like dipping a toe into cold ocean water at the beach.
Reading for fun
I have a habit of reading two books at once and I am now working my way through two truly fascinating books. First is Jeffrey Toobin’s The Nine, a brilliant analysis of the United States Supreme Court, the Justices and the pressures and backgrounds that make them interpret statutes and the Constitution ion so vastly different ways. The other book is the newest John Gresham, The Verdict. It is, in my opinion, one of his best.
Both of these books explore the nature of decision making by Judges.
Recently there have been many discussions regarding the United States Supreme Court; some Justices decry an “activist court” rather than sticking to the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution. In reality, every Justice, liberal or conservative in his or her background, puts a spin on the literal language of the Constitution. Those Justices who consider themselves “originalists” state that the words of the Constitution are to be taken “as is”
But the truth is that many ideas, concepts and, even, things, were never conceived by the Framers and we must deal with today’s circumstances.
For example, the Bill of Rights is clear: no legislative action shall interfere with free speech or the press. Justice Black years ago said that the clause is to be taken as it is written. No interference with the right to speech and the press. Would anyone today seriously argue that a law that decriminalized pornography picturing sex between eight year old children or sex between adults with infants was wrong?
Another example in the news involves the right to bear arms, a topic on which I have written. I contend that the Second Amendment does not give an unrestricted right to carry a handgun. When the Constitution was written, "arms” meant muskets and rifles. No one in the late 17th Century considered small concealable hand guns. They didn’t exist. Would they have been included? We won’t know until the “activist” judges tell us. (At this time, the Supreme Court has under advisement , for the first time in over 60 years, a case that may well resolve the issue.)
The Constitution states that there should be no restriction on the freedom of religion. Would we accept a faith that demanded that babies be encouraged to play and interact with poisonous snakes?
“What’s the matter with kids today . . .”
In the movie version of the musical, Bye, Bye Birdie, there is a song lamenting the sorry state of 1950-era youth and comparing them to children of earlier years, “perfect in every way” and so forth.
The other day I was preparing the tax returns for a relatively young couple with two children, ages 6 and 9. While the parents were completing some forms and I was trying to gather information and explain what was required, the children squirmed and whined. Mom excused the noise and bouncing with a mild admonition that unless the children were better behaved and quiet for another ten minutes, there would be no “Happy Meal” in their future. The children moved in back of my desk and started to unplug telephone and computer
connections. The result was that our company was out of business for six hours! On another occasion, a young man in his twenties insisted on watching a television program on a small hand-held device the name of which I do not know.
I note that many young children fear “boredom” more than anything. Sitting reasonably still while Mom or Dad complete a business transaction, even for five minutes, is unheard of. Coloring books, puzzles, books are not enough; the distraction must be loud, electronic and expensive. I’ll let the child experts figure out a solution but, my personal opinion is that the little ones are royal pains in the neck. I revert to my parents’ curse, “You should get married and have many children who are as rotten as you!”
On the other hand, my opinions were dramatically modified over the past weekend.
The Lovely Joan and I have very close friends of thirty years or so. Lida and Roy’s granddaughter celebrated her Bat Mitzvah. Paige did magnificently, was beautiful, charming – in short was, as are all of our grandchildren, far above average in intelligence and looks.
In any event, at the party Saturday evening, there were many, many young people, primarily in their early teens. At the outset, I have to acknowledge that neither I nor the disk jockey playing dance music that, to my ears, was discordant with lyrics pure gibberish, nor the teens themselves, could state the actual lyrics of the songs to which they jumped and screamed with great abandon. After watching these teens, I am left with several conclusions.
First, these teens were all clean-cut, all unfailingly polite, all respectful to those old folks in attendance, all, in short, great people. The several with whom I spoke, were knowledgeable about current affairs, were articulate (notwithstanding an over use of “like”) and utterly nice.
If these kids are a glimpse of the future, our world and country should have no fear. Thank you, Paige, and Mom and Dad, for giving an old guy reason for optimism!
Proponents of Intelligent Design use a different language.
A Florida state legislator has objected to the State Department of Education’s proposal to include Evolution, by name, and to require its teaching in Florida schools. Thus Florida, the state that cannot get an election right, underpays its public employees, usually turns to developers to make land use plans, is considering traveling back to the 19th Century.
Why is there such a continuing dispute over the alleged conflict between the Bible, in particular the first two Books of the Old Testament, and the scientific concept of evolution? There is a conflict only because the parties are failing to use a common language.
The Bible was, obviously, the result of nomadic peoples to explain the creation of the world – but it was far more. The Bible was an attempt to explain why we are here, what is the moral bases of our existence; science, on the other hand, is not concerned with values and value judgments, with good and evil. Science attempts to discern and explain the how we got here. As long as the two “sides” ignore the differences in their respective ambitions, there will never be an accommodation.
The coffee is brewing and my random and fleeting thoughts have vanished.
I would really love to have others jot down ideas and bothersome stuff. It might be fun to compare.
| 68 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by katyzzz
Photography Tips
MS Paint Art
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions