Redux: "I Cecil You, Too" (First Fortnight in February)

          I have never celebrated the fake holiday in mid-February.  It's a scam holiday which businesses use to sell cards, flowers, candy, and all that foolish shit.  I give gifts or messages of love whenever the time feels right, not when someone's calendar says I'm supposed to.

          Anyway—what the fuck is this thing we all have labelled with the word: LOVE?  I know what mix of emotions I feel/have felt for those I've loved and do love (not a very large list) but it's amazingly hard to explain how certain fluctuations in my brain's chemicals affect my heart/brain/gut/libido and even harder to understand/compare when others explain their "feelings of love".  We just assume everyone must be feeling the same way we feel when we use the same words they use.

          "See that color?  That is what I have labelled: Red."
          "Oh, that's red?  Ok, I'll begin to refer to everything which is colored that way: red.  Umm, what about when I feel all these crazy feelings at the same time?  I need a label, so that when I am feeling all these feelings I do not need to explain each of them every time."
          "That is labelled:  Love."
          "What about all those same feelings, except one:  I don't want to be physically intimate?"
          "Still labelled: Love.  You could add the word Platonic, but that'll require an explanation because that word has different interpretations."
          "What about when I feel all those feelings for my pet?"
          "When I say, I love my cat, Cecil, I think I must be misusing the word 'love'.  Instead, I should-maybe find a word which is a compound for the meanings of the words: pride, enjoyment, happiness and admiration."

          I'm proud of Cecil's training and I enjoy his 'loving' attention; he never makes me angry (mostly because he can't communicate with words, has no malice, and enjoys my company); and I admire him for his actions, looks, demeanor, and thoughtfulness (Is he being thoughtful? Am I just anthropomorphizing?).  Maybe I should consider his name, Cecil, to be a label for what I feel about him—so when I say: "I Cecil you," I'm currently feeling a combination of pride/enjoyment/happiness/admiration for you.

          When I receive an "I love you" I—almost never—respond with an "I love you too". 

          It's wrong to treat an I love you as if it requires a mandatory reply.  It is not supposed to be interpreted as if it were the question: Do you love me?  Also, it should not become a replacement phrase for goodbye.  When people do that, they cause their incessant I love you's to lose their value.  Eventually, it becomes a throw-away line.  If said all the time, what do they say when they really want someone to know they have caused a rush of complicated emotions which are identified (when felt all at the same time) as the feeling of love?  

Recap:  "I Love You"—all three words—are reserved for when the emotion of love is actually being felt.  I do not want my I love you to cause an immediate response of I love you too.  I prefer either no reply or a response like: "those words make me feel good," or "Thank you," or "I like it when you tell me that," or "those words make me happy," or "when you say that, I get warm inside".  It is better that the person you love smiles and says nothing, and some time in the future, if they tell me they are currently feeling the emotion they call love—for me—I know they're feeling love at that moment and I can decide to reply with my present feelings, or not to reply.  I appreciate their statement of love when they are feeling it and then I consider what I did to make them feel that way.  This is my normal.

          When she was young, I tried to encourage my daughter, Denise, to understand and to communicate her feelings of love.  It was a long and complicated issue.  I found talking about my thoughts to her and her mother, on expressing family love, difficult.  I felt there was a lack of love in our family and wanted us to tell each other that we loved each other more often (it worked occasionally).  I also wanted us to communicate our love by kissing (which never caught on).  The compromise I got from my daughter was cheek-bumps.  I failed at explaining to her that bumping cheeks was how people communicated respect to either: an old and feeble relative; someone who was contagious; or (in France and Belgium) because that was their custom.

          Denise now says I love you to each of her children many times a day.  Each of her kids reply with a I love you too.  I see and hear their devotion and their respect.  With them, it does not seem to be a "worn out phrase" or a "throw away line".  In fact, when a child is upset (and, intentionally, does not reply to their mother's I love you) they—routinely—apologize (later) and remind her that they love her.

          I am now an old distant relative with whom respectful cheek bumps may be apropos.  And, now, I am adjusting to her normal.  Now, I reply to her I love you with an I love you, too.

 

(original 2018 post)

 

mor e lov e motion:

 

canoe-ship vs rowboat-ship

 

life-love fictional story

from my paramour

 

shades of love

Flags of Hate

 

Hundred racist flags & vile banners waved proudly

That first Wednesday of the fortyfifth's last month

 

Hateful MAGAs built gallows n then prayed loudly

With thirst for foul-play, 'forthwith' incited Trump

 

Gatecrash, helm bash, Sicknick dead - sky cloudy

Baton burst bearspray election myth power drunk

'Patriot' riot whyn't coup badge of dishonor dowdy

Perverse as Q's savethechildren toxic waste dump

Impeach twice (2mil pardon-price?) '24 vowed he

US worst curse: fortyseventh President Heffalump

     hundred racist flags:  echoing 'hundred acre wood' from A.A. Milne's Winnie The Pooh.

     6 Jan 2021:  The first Wed of the 45^th President of the US (Trump's) last month in office.

     MAGAs:  Make America Great Again's; a label for Trump supporters, based on his red hat.

     forthwith:  Immediately, together with; Trump claimed he would "walk with" the crowd to the US Capitol.

     Sicknick:  US Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was murdered by the crowd on Jan 6^th.

     election myth:  For months (with no evidence) Trump promoted the 'big lie' that the Nov 3^rd election was fraudulent.

     power drunk:  Trump, his administration, followers, and the crowd who attacked the Capitol.

     patriot:  someone showing support for their country (prior to Jan 6^th).  Now, a racist-inssurectionist label.

     riot whyn't coup:  echoing red white and blue; whyn't (dialectic why don't, from Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men). 

     badge of dishonor:  opposite of badge of honor (the label 'patriot' is now stained by association).

     dowdy:  unfashionable, out-dated.

     Q's savethechildren:  Q-Anon hijacked the legitimate century-old organization for nefarious deceitful purposes.

     Impeach twice:  Trump's second impeachment was caused by his orchestration of the Jan 6^th events.

     2mil pardon price:  Trump's personal lawyer was reportedly selling/attempting to sell Trump pardons.

     '24 vowed he:  Unless Trump is found guilty by the US Senate, he has vowed a run for president in 2024.

     47^th President:  If Trump is re-elected in 2024, he will become both the 45^th and the 47^th President.

     Heffalump:  A.A. Milne's Winnie The Pooh imaginary nightmare-elephants who cause chaos.

more on racists:

 

thin blue line

KKK Arkansas HQ

"That's not who we are" — is what it is.

 

          I always cringe when a mature, educated, adult allows the phrase 'it is what it is' to fall out of their brain.  Those five succinct words, in that order, jangle-pucker my opinion-of-you muscle like a sharp kick in the gooch.  Some part of me refuses to stop thinking about, mentally investigates, attempts to further identify, and wants to maybe-hopefully come up with a better answer—to everything.  So, when someone idiomatically declares 'it is whut it is'?  I smell a putrefactive-proclamation!  They sound like they're saying: all is futile; any further thought or discussion by anyone (which includes me) is a fuckin waste of time; case closed.

 

          Which causes me to want to dig it up and determine why they want it buried.  This fantastic article details the 2007 ubiquitous use of the phrase as witnessed by a US Army commander in Iraq.

          When I hear i.i.w.i.i. my grey-matter gavels loudly on my sensibility's sounding block and I have difficulty repressing the urge to say: "I hate that phrase" or "I disagree" or (if I'm feeling kind) "I'm always confused by that statement."  The new after Jan 6^th me will no longer repress that urge and I will tell you to your face that I hate that fatalistic sentence.

 

          The equivalent idiom du jour: 'that is not who we are' has been ubiquitously uttered by President Biden, dozens of talking heads (from every political party and media outlet), as well as personal friends and neighbors.

 

          Stop saying: "that's not who we are"!  When you say it, you sound like you're either a coward with your head buried in the sand, an idiot who denies reality, or both.

 

          Use of the "editorial we" or "royal we" is a nosism [say: Nose-is-um].  During the culmination of the Trump presidency's 'final boss battle' on Jan 6^th (the echoes of insurrectionist's chants may still be pinging and punching around inside our befuddled brainpans today) the racism, bigotry, prejudice, and in-your-face hatred of millions of white-Republican men and women was proudly on display.

 

          That Is Who We All Are - As A Nation.  Depending on your daily statements and actions, you may be able to say, "that behavior is not representative of who I, as an individual, am."  (From now on, I will require you to prove it.  I intend to ask everyone their opinions.  Fair warning!  Be prepared to defend your statements.)  Because, clearly, WE as a country are a collection of hypocritical, terrible, racist, fucktards.

 

          It is who we were before the civil war a century and a half ago.

 

          It is who we were during the civil rights movement 60 years ago. 

 

          It is who we were when the Black Lives Matter movement began in 2013 when the murderers of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown and Eric Garner (ad infinitum up to today) were acquitted or not indited. 

 

          It is who we were last month when thousands of hypocrites waved hundreds of flags, like: blue-lives-matter (as they struck and killed Capitol Police officers); Q-Anon (as they chanted 'kill Mike Pence'); as well as the confederate battle flag and flags of the NAZI party (as they chanted U.S.A, USA).  

          Our hatred is not buried.  It's constantly out in the open for all to see.  Watch this video and learn why when you say 'it is not who we are' that you're obviously lying to yourself:

          Are you now thinking: 'that is not my community'?  You're fooling yourself.  The vocal few are always surrounded by the silent majority in that city and in every city.  For every person who rolled down their window to shout, hundreds more drove by keeping their mouth shut while they were thinking the same thoughts (which Ms Gorman's poem artfully refers to as: 'quiet isn't always peace').

 

          The vocal few took planes, buses, trains, and pickup-trucks (chock-a-block full of a cacophony of flags) to DC on Jan 6^th—the silent millions voted for Trump twice, they still think the same racist thoughts, today and they'll vote for him a third time in four years.

 

more american-isms:

unfriended the old fashioned way

republican vs democrat thought patterns

 

how to create millions of jobs

Death Decade (2020-2030)

 

          President Biden said two weeks ago, during his incredibly boring inaugural address (which hammered hollowly about the need for the country to do something he called 'unity' without even the slightest hint of an emotional tone): "we must reject a culture in which facts themselves are manipulated and even manufactured."

 

          Facts:  

 

February 2020:  The WHO recognized Covid19 as a global pandemic.  Most countries (with competently functioning CDCs) readily agreed.  The virus had been identified several months earlier (late 2019 in China) and labeled: 2019 novel coronavirus disease.  World Death Toll (WDT) estimated between 1,000 and 200,000 (huge discrepancies due to Chinese government intentionally down-playing and under-reporting as well as health officials in other countries being unaware Covid19 already existed in their countries). US Death Toll (USDT) between 25 and 200 (discrepancies due to local health officials unawareness). 

 

November 2020:  Several international pharmaceutical companies begin to request and receive government approval(s) to release a variety of different messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) injection-based drugs, which they claim will provide "protection from serious illness and death from Covid19".  All of these drugs are discussed, on all forms of media, using the term: "vaccine".  WDT between 1,500,000 and 2 million; USDT between 250,000 and 300,000.

          Definitions and examples:

 

          The commonly understood definition for vaccine is: "...a drug which provides an active acquired immunity to a particular infectious disease..."  The vaccine for the measles virus is normally administered to very young children with a second booster shot administered a few years later.  These two immunizations provide a lifetime immunity to the measles virus (with rare exceptions).

 

          The commonly understood definition for inoculation is: "...the introduction of a pathogen or antigen into a living organism to stimulate the production of antibodies..."  Because variants of the influenza virus constantly change, "seasonal flu shot inoculations" are required.  To retain life-long, year-round, flu virus immunity, new inoculations are required every year.  Pharmaceutical companies test/produce new flu shots every 6 months so as to combat the constant new variants of the flu virus.

January 2021:  Governments began to release millions of mRNA inoculations, which stimulate the production of antibodies to "teach the body's immune system" to identify the 'spike proteins' on the surface of the Covid19 virus.  WDT between 2.1 and 2.75 million; USDT between 425,000 and half-million.

 

Manipulation of facts, currently causing confusion:

 

          There are thousands of articles, videos, and news items—on every form of media—with the words "Covid vaccine" wrongfully conjoined and/or mistakenly associated with the words "eliminating the virus" or "reducing the spread" or "acquiring herd immunity, individual immunity, or global immunity".

 

          Because Covid19 inoculations do not prevent infection by the Covid19 virus, no pharmaceutical company has made any claim that their drug will do so.  The only claims, made by any of the drug companies (or the clinical trials testing their efficacy) are that these inoculations reduce serious symptoms and eliminate deaths between 60 and 95 percent of the time (with an effective boost in spike-protein antibodies lasting between 6 weeks and 6 months, depending on the drug, the individual, booster shots, and many other variables).

        
February 2021:  The new US federal administration is attempting to fix the US CDC and NIH responses (hampered, nonexistent, or broken by the previous administration) to the Covid19 pandemic.  These inoculations/booster shots designed to drastically reduce serious hospitalizations and deaths are optimistically projected to be available to all US citizens "hopefully by summer".  WDT between 2.5 and 3 million; USDT between 450,000 and 600,000 (previous US under-counts now being "found" and belatedly reported). 

          I can find no reporting, discussion, or any research being conducted on a vaccine which imparts lifelong immunity.

          Are you—dear citizen of Earth—calmly satisfied with the facts (or even aware of them)?  Do you understand everyone needs to wear masks, social distance, receive booster inoculations about every 6 months, and will STILL BECOME INFECTED, ASYMPTOMATICALLY CONTAGIOUS AND STILL COULD INFECT OTHERS ??  Do you realize that, until a lifelong-immunity vaccine is found, everyone will be gambling on not becoming part of the 5 to 40 percent?  Can your brain understand this new paradigm?  That you'll forever be contributing to the serious illness or death of those who either do not understand these facts or who foolishly choose to not be inoculated?

          As pharmaceutical companies rake in tens of trillions from the world's governments over the coming decade, and WDT/USDT shrinks but never, ever, goes away, I will get inoculated (as soon as it's my turn).  And I recommend every-one-of-you do the same.  But.  Covid is here to stay.  The decade 2020 to 2030 is, unfortunately, going to be the Death Decade.

rants, comix, poems, warnings:

 

Curve Deaths

T-Rex

 

Covid Diary

 

Art Corvid Poem

Claims About Gods: Theirs, Yours, (as well as) Mine

 

          While I claim my god exists (and can prove it), you claim to believe your god exists (but can't prove it).  My god is very-much not what you claim yours is.  While mine's omnipotent and omnipresent—as you also claim yours to be—my god is completely incapable of any form of awareness, and you claim yours possesses omniscience.  This is the crux.  Specifically, it's the most crucial distinction between your brain and mine (which I'll come back to).

          The foremost reason I avoid talking about religion, as a topic of normal conversation, lies in the mandatory requirement to discuss and agree-upon the definitions of words and to, then, go-back-over common misunderstandings (for every 'new use' of previously defined words).

          Example:  When someone begins a conversation with "I believe god created the universe."  I have to interrupt / hit the pause button and reply:

          Wow! A six word sentence and four words require extensive definition.  Since you didn't preface the most confusing term god with the word a, I must assume you think there's only one?  So . . . first question: what's your opinion of the other religion's gods?  And, please explain what you mean when you use the term belief.  I also need to know if our understanding for the label the universe is comparable.  Finally, are you able to explain your use of the term created with more than the simple context found in the bible or quran?

         When someone begins a conversation with "I believe the massive storm was created by La Niña."  I do not have to interrupt.  Instead, my internal dialogue goes something like:

          I understand their use of the word belief was an alternative to think; the massive storm would be something empirically measurable (with human senses and machines) and I have a general understanding of the global, cyclic, climate pattern which has been labeled La Niña.

          The actual creator—which I refer to as 'god'—is the effect commonly referred to as:  Gravity.

          No scientist, no astro-theoretical-quantum-physicist, not Steven Hawking, nor Albert Einstein has yet identified the mechanics of gravity.  Nobody knows how it does what it does.  There are theories (think: conjecture, not actual scientific theory) as to the hypothetical existence of a graviton particle (similar-in-size to a quark, which makes up protons and neutrons).  So far, every experiment has failed to locate an element or particle, contained within objects with mass, which warps spacetime around those objects.  [This is Gravity's carefully-worded definition; it's no longer simply called an 'attraction force'.]

          We all know Gravity exists because we can empirically measure it with our senses and machines.  It's all powerful.  It is everywhere in the visible universe.  Thru telescopes, we can see Gravity at work 14 billion-light-years ago/40 billion-light-years away (which, because of space-expansion, is the same distance).  Without Gravity: the star we call The Sun wouldn't exist, the ball of rock we call Earth would never have formed, and oxygen and nitrogen molecules would not have collected to form our atmosphere.  All life exists because Gravity exists. 

          Gravity has no awareness, does not think, and can not communicate.  It does not plan.  It has no agenda.  It does not listen to prayers.  Anyone who prays to Gravity, does so because they don't want to become hypocrites in their own eyes.

          Your god—on the other hand—was 100% fabricated by humans.  How do those of you who label yourself, christian, or jewish, or muslim, or hindu, (etc, etc, three bags full) come to terms with the hypocritical elements in your religion's dogma?  Do you cherry pick the parts that you like and disavow the evil portions?  How do you come to terms with the inability of your religion's books to document any facts or knowledge about the world, beyond that known by those long-dead humans who claimed to merely be transcribing their god's words?   Is it hubris on your part?    

          At an unknowable time in the unforeseeable future, someone will identify Gravity's origin-particle or, specifically, they'll locate the element which, when present, permits spacetime to warp in the nearby vicinity of mass (or energy).  To prove their theory, they'll remove it from a small sample of matter.  And that tiny chunk of gravitation-less matter will either:

          ⁕ Instantly disappear from existence.

          - or -

          ⁕ Grow exponentially.  Infecting every particle/molecule/atom it comes into contact with, until everything with matter is without Gravity.  In a few short minutes the Earth will dissolve and dissipate.  In a few short millennia, the entire universe will become a quiet, dark, cooling-soup of protons, neutrons, quarks, and electrons.  (Similar-but-different to what happens with ice-nine in Cat's Cradle by Vonnegut.)

          - or -

          ⁕ Form a new type of gravitation-less category of matter.  Immediately making all transportation (especially space travel) exponentially more efficient.

          PS: It's OK to look for god, but please don't remove the glue that holds the universe together when you locate it.

          PPS: For those rare few who both read-to-the-bottom and are "science-savvy" you'll probably recognize some additional facts (not beliefs) related to my claim that Gravity is the origin of life:  Gravity is inexorably intertwined with time (there are current hypotheses that time wouldn't exist without Gravity and, obviously, vice-versa) also, time is inexorably intertwined with space (thus the term spacetime).  Extrapolation—at the same instant, Gravity is making it possible for objects with mass to experience a progression of events in Gravity's vicinity and a three-dimensional location for those objects . . . Gravity creates time and space.    

more god stuff:

proof of evolution

convo 'tween god n angel

convo 'tween me n staunch-cat

Level 1 and 2 Thinking (with Amanda Gorman)

           As summarized in Astrid Groenewegen's article on Kahneman's theory related to the human brain:  we have a fast and a slow button in our decision making process.  Fast (level 1) is our default mode.  Our brains do not want to expend the effort to slow down, focus, or pay attention (level 2).

          Want to see it at work?  *Of course you don't.*  Your brain's default mode has already begun to encourage you to not finish this essay!  It (you) scanned ahead and suggested (thought) 'this is waay too long' or 'those speed-bump words are tripping me up'.  Here's another trip wire for it . . .

          If your brain has previously, repetitively, relied on confirmation bias as one of its preferred modes of level 1 shortcut decision-making—and it's inside a body with lower-levels of melanin—it may have noticed the image of a person with high-levels of melanin in her skin and is now bringing forward ...don't prefer to associate with those people... thoughts.  

          For the 14 people who've successfully skipped over the trip wires, Amanda Gorman read her poem The Hill We Climb at the US Presidential Inauguration of President Joseph Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.  Maybe your level 1 decision maker has begun to fabricate an escape hatch for you?  Did it say 'already watched it' - or - 'click-away and find the video clip'?  

          For the nine people who made it to this point:  you should be proud your level 2 is not locked behind a unused rusty-dusty barrier.  Congrats.

          When reading Ms Gorman's poem, focus-concentrate on her intentional word choices, her rhymes, the verbal imagery.  Keep in mind:  she was sixteen-years-old when the Black Lives Matter organization was formed; nineteen when Trump was elected; and even though this poem may contain clichés (belly of the beast), utilize jargon (shade), and strikes a few too-optimistic chimes (for my taste) it was fantastically written, includes references to the insurrection of January 6th, and was beautifully delivered from the steps of the US Capitol—where hundreds of domestic terrorists attempted murder just two weeks before.  Her poem was the most memorable words spoken, or sung, by anyone that day.  Now, allow your level 2 thinking to understand the value of her words.

When day comes, we ask ourselves

Where can we find light in this never-ending shade?
The loss we carry.  A sea we must wade.
We’ve braved the belly of the beast.  We’ve learned that quiet isn’t always peace,
And the norms and notions of what “just” is,

Isn’t always justice. 

And yet, the dawn is ours before we knew it.  Somehow we do it.
Somehow we’ve weathered and witnessed a nation that isn’t broken,

But simply unfinished.
We, the successors of a country and a time,

Where a skinny Black girl descended from slaves

And raised by a single mother can dream of becoming president,

Only to find herself reciting for one.

And yes, we are far from polished, far from pristine, 

But that doesn’t mean:

We are striving to form a union that is perfect.

We are striving to forge our union with purpose.
To compose a country committed to all cultures, colors, characters, and conditions of man.
And so we lift our gazes not to what stands between us, but what stands before us.
We close the divide because we know, to put our future first, we must first put our differences aside.
We lay down our arms so we can reach out our arms to one another.
We seek harm to none and harmony for all.
Let the globe, if nothing else, say this is true:
That even as we grieved, we grew.
That even as we hurt, we hoped.
That even as we tired, we tried.
That we’ll forever be tied together, victorious.
Not because we will never again know defeat, but because we will never again sow division.

Scripture tells us to envision that everyone shall sit under their own vine and fig tree,

And no one shall make them afraid.

If we’re to live up to our own time, then victory won’t lie in the blade,

But in all the bridges we’ve made.

That is the promise to glade, the hill we climb, if only we dare.

It’s because being American is more than a pride we inherit.
It’s the past we step into and how we repair it.
We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it.
Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.
This effort very nearly succeeded.
But while democracy can be periodically delayed,
it can never be permanently defeated.
In this truth, in this faith, we trust,
for while we have our eyes on the future, history has its eyes on us.
This is the era of just redemption.
We feared it at its inception.

We did not feel prepared to be the heirs of such a terrifying hour, 

But within it, we found the power to author a new chapter,

To offer hope and laughter to ourselves.

So while once we asked, ‘How could we possibly prevail over catastrophe?’

Now we assert, ‘How could catastrophe possibly prevail over us?’

 
We will not march back to what was, but move to what shall be:

A country that is bruised but whole,

Benevolent but bold,

Fierce and free.

 

We will not be turned around or interrupted by intimidation,

Because we know our inaction and inertia,

Will be the inheritance of the next generation.

Our blunders become their burdens.

 

But one thing is certain:

If we merge mercy with might,

And might with right,

Then love becomes our legacy,

And change, our children’s birthright.

 

So let us leave behind a country better than the one we were left.

With every breath from my bronze-pounded chest,

We will raise this wounded world into a wondrous one.

We will rise from the golden hills of the west.
We will rise from the wind-swept north-east where our forefathers first realized revolution.
We will rise from the lake-rimmed cities of the mid-western states.
We will rise from the sun-baked south.
We will rebuild, reconcile, and recover.

In every known nook of our nation, in every corner called our country,
our people, diverse and beautiful, will emerge, battered and beautiful.
When day comes, we step out of the shade, aflame and unafraid.
The new dawn blooms as we free it.
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.

 more  s l o w  thinking:

 and how

de-construct a poem

Bernie Jolly Roger

 

          This is my contribution to the Internet's meme of the week.  You can now put Bernie with his bespoke mittens in front of your house using google maps.  There's an ever-growing list of him in hundreds of different locations and artwork, and, now he's the less-than-jolly roger.

Favorite Films of 2020

 

 

   1  The Hunt (darkly comedic satire; horror)

 

 

    2  Palm Springs (unpredictable 'groundhog day'; rom-com)

 

 

 

   3  My Octopus Teacher (unforgettably unique, 'tear jerker'; wildlife documentary)

 

 

   4  The Platform (suspenseful, 'closed box' survival; art-house film)

 

 

 

   5  The Forty-Year-Old Version (dramatic comedy; musical)

 

 
 

   6  The Gentlemen (fast-paced funny Guy Ritchie; heist film)

 

 

   7  The Vast of Night (suspenseful 'low-budget-high-quality'; indie film)

 

 

 

   8  Love and Monsters (CGI-heavy fantasy post-apoc-action; 'road film')

 

 

   9  The King of Staten Island ('based-on-real-life'; dramatic comedy)

 

 

 

   10 Enola Holmes (fast-paced, lighthearted, coming-of-age; who-dunnit)

Winter Wintalf-a-bet

          Living in the northern states, and enjoying the winter, takes a certain mindset.  While I do not live north of the US-Canada border, every sentiment and insight succinctly spewed (in the above Letterkenny three-minute video clip) isn't spurious and should satisfy.  Seriously.

          While 2021 has my spouse currently watching every season, I—on the other mitten—have caught a few clips and greatly appreciate its/it's amazing writing, but find some element of my brain's wiring prevents me from feeling almost all of the funny.

          I don't think my sense of humor is governed by my Asperger's, but maybe some element of qualifying membership in nefnd holds my humor sensing device hostage behind my continual attempt to concentrate on catching every quip as they blur past my slow-on-the-uptake grey matter.  This is not new to me.  My comedic radar has been on a three-to-five second delay my entire life.  I rarely am the first to get the joke and I'm absolutely never able to be quick-sarcastic or in lock-step with your double-entendres.

          If the above clip happens to tickle your funny bone in a manner you find satisfying—then, allow this to be my "you're welcome"—there are 61 episodes available for you to binge (as of Dec 2020) on hulu.

          'Don't have hulu,' you say?  We're stream-cherry-pickers.  We have (or have had) almost all of them.  BUT.  We pause, unsubscribe, and cancel them all on a rotating basis.  I cancel Amazon Prime for months at a time and then re-subscribe.  I cancel hulu every three months (3 months off / 1 month on).  You get the picture.  As soon as we spend too much time searching?  Cancel.  Paused.  Unsubscribed.  And then Uncancel/unpause/subscribe to a different "channel".   I find this saves us about a c-note/benfranky/hunnabukz a month.  Again, you are most welcome.

more:

No eye contact Asperger's

ABCD films to binge watch

Our ships—previously moored together—got severed on Jan 6th

           My conservative readers, neighbors, associates, friends and family members, 

 

          In the past, amicable respect for individual differences has been our standard operating procedure.  Like most, we successfully maintained our relationship(s) by avoiding a few controversial topics of conversation.  In my experience, this mutual behavior was a courtesy each of us bestowed on the other.

          "Deep" conversations can be risky.  Fragile egos can get seriously bruised when long-held opinions are examined using critical thinking skills.  And, unfortunately, some of us store wishes and beliefs in boxes labeled 'facts'.  So, as to avoid "getting in over our heads" or receiving bruised egos or having to sort thru facts, it's been simpler to keep conversations focused on our shared interests.

          You and I may have ended many previous political debates with a cordial "we'll have to agree to disagree."  That behavior will remain forever on the other side of the watershed of 6 Jan 2021.  I can never again, in good conscience, politely agree to disagree with your political views because people you agree with, voted for, and support committed seditious, violent acts of insurrection in-and-around the US Capitol on Jan 6^th.

          Question time:  What term would you use to describe the citizens of a foreign country—after a few thousand of that countries citizens attacked our country and a few hundred killed, injured, vandalized, and attempted to kidnap Americans?  Would you refer to them as enemy sympathizers?  Accessories before and after the fact?

          Your fellow conservative Republicans attempted a coup d'état.  As of the date of this open letter, their attempts were not successful.  From my perspective, your silence on this matter looks exactly the same as what complicity looks like.

          Are you familiar with the term 'Good German'?  It was coined to describe the millions of German citizens who didn't join the Nazi Party, kept their mouths shut, and went about their lives in a business-as-usual manner while the Nazis took over their country and murdered millions of their fellow countrymen.  Is 'Good Republican' what you're striving for?

          In 1865, no union soldier would have "agreed to disagree" when discussing Lincoln's assassination with a confederate soldier.  Nobody alive today, with a functioning moral compass, would "agree to disagree" if debating the 2001, Sep 11^th attacks with a member of Al-Qaeda.  (You're the confederate and Al-Qaeda in these metaphors.)  

          I can not help but see the mooring rope that once held our friendship together has been cut with a sharp instrument.

• The edge of that blade is comprised of hundreds of violent insurrectionists who attempted to overthrow the US Government.  Enemies of the state who are neighbors are my enemies.
• Immediately behind that edge are the thousands of active supporters who cheered-on the insurrection (carrying a myriad of different flags, banners, patches, and slogans) followed Trump's guidance, marched to the US Capitol, but stopped short of committing crimes.
• Behind them, are millions of quasi-silent Trump-supporting republicans who are sad the insurrection failed and would have been pleased if it were successful.
• The handle of that blade is supported by millions of 'Good Republicans' acting like toady's, joking, and commiserating with their equally-complicit fellow republicans.
• That entire weapon is in the hand of over 70 million conservatives who voted for Trump, donated money to him, and who (so far) lack the requisite moral courage to admit they made many errors in judgement, (have yet to) distance themselves from the growing stain-of-association and (are reluctant to) take any positive action to rectify their complicity.
  

          Everyone who's met me—or who's read a few of my essays—knows what I think about hypocrites and hypocritical behavior.  If you ever claimed to "support the rule of law" and you now diminish, attempt to rationalize, qualify, act as an insurrection-apologist, or make any excuse for all the events surrounding Jan 6^th, you're the absolute worst hypocrite it is possible to be. 

        veachglines@gmail.com