Maybe They Make It All Up

Being in the least is best school of public management and politics, I tend to favor most of Ron Paul's agenda. But even if I didn't I would find it transparently manipulative the way Romney and Perry keep getting shoved to the front of this republican debacle.

Hell, Cain is as much or more of a front runner than either of them. Just like always, two choices are being narrowed down for us through clever PR. What gets me is how the major media outlets are tools of whatever or whomever is orchestrating this farce.

It is hard to watch this game. Given my philosophy as hinted at above, it is obvious I am not at all on the same page with Obama. Allegedly this band of republicans is out to get one of their own elected in his place. Is it just me, or does it look like they are doing everything they can to ensure another term for the big O? And in the process pave the way for more Pelosi types.

You'd think the time is right for people who don't believe in the present economic policies, foreign policy, etc. to do well in elections. The trouble is, anyone like that is painted as a kook regardless of documented support.

It is impossible to know the truth of the Occupy events without being there, and I have no desire to go see for myself. But from what I hear it is not a ground swell of support for the present administration. That doesn't mean much. I suspect it is like many such events; people show up and say whatever doesn't rock the boat with their peers.

It is also reported that 15% are unemployed. That means the vast majority of them are not people frustrated because they don't have a job, if that statistic is correct. Not that I care. Still, it is bizarre that Obama, whose policies enriched those being villanized, is the one attempting to capitalize on whatever this movement is. Looks to me like it could have been hijacked by almost anyone.

Anyway, I can't believe the spectacle the supposed opposition to the current administration is making of themselves. At least the ones the news covers, insisting they are front runners. They insisted they were front runners before their numbers actually supported it. They forgot Dr. Paul was even around. He at least conducts himself in a civil manner and shows a bit of class. So does Cain. I think, given fair coverage, that Cain and Paul would be the front runners. And lately friggin Grinchgrinch (I know. I just like to make the name how I choose) is showing more class and savvy than the two appointees of the press and whoever pulls their strings.

Since the laws and structure make third party efforts almost impossible, I have to pay attention to this circus. Besides, I still tend to dig Paul. Especially because he's come out wanting to eliminate a slough of federal agencies. I haven't checked the list yet, but I doubt I'd mind if he got his way.

It just seems so staged, or surreal, or something. It just can't be real. I only caught bits and pieces of the latest debate which unfortunately stopped short of a cage fight between the Mittmeister and Ricko. I guess they figure any attention is better than none so they went for it. It is becoming obvious that the repubs will once again offer something I do not consider acceptable. Just like last time.

I don't think McCain would have been much better than Obama, or different. Not worse, most likely. So, I had to vote third party. People say that is throwing away the vote. I think not. I couldn't vote for the winner, and I prefer to have my vote count among those who want something akin to freedom.

But, putting what I think aside, does anyone believe the GOP is actually trying to set up for a win? I don't. I saw them insist on losing when Clinton bumped Bush 1 out of office. It became clear during the fray that he had no intention of winning.

If I didn't know better, and I don't, I would say forces are at play which would fit the criteria of a conspiracy. And that could give rise to a theory. Only I have no theory.

The other bit of news that is true but sounds too bizarre to be true involves a guy in Nevada whose jewel package weighs over 100 lbs. It only grew like that in the last few years and they don't know why. They ruled out diseases which can cause that. Seriously, to put it in G rated terms, I'm talking the family gems. 100 lbs. It has ruined his life. He has to wrap them up and can hardly get around. No love life for sure, and he can no longer work. They can do an operation but it will cost a million bucks. He's hoping the publicity will get him some kind of donations to get his junk back down manageable. All his junk hasn't blown up like that, just the two eggs. I don't think he can even see the remaining item in the package trio at this stage.

It makes one appreciate what he has without any thought that maybe he got shorted. Maybe someone said, "Why don't you grow a set!" and he took it too much to heart. No one would say that now. I hope he gets it fixed and lives happily ever after. It does confirm the notion that more trouble is generated from that part of the body than from all other sources in the universe combined. Usually the trouble is of a different nature, but trouble all the same.

On the other hand, if having cajones gives you the nerve to do great things, this guy should have no shortage of gall and initiative.

Truth Is, I'm Not Tempted

Previously, I pretended to be tempted to take a side. The truth is that there isn't a side worth taking in most of the matters that enter the public media outlets.

My side is that what you do is not my business until you cross over into my world's limits. That is called freedom.

The other night I was listening to one of Art Bell's old shows. They play vintage Art Bell on Saturday nights. He was talking to a guy from PETA. I only listened for awhile, partly because I was driving, and partly because they were debating carnivore vs vegetarian. Both of them were out in left field somewhere.

Most people seem to assume that I have an agenda when they don't me, but find out I'm not a carnivore. I do not. If you don't try to cook me, then eat what you want. I support hunters and ranchers. They are exercising their choice, and serving the desires of others.

The bad part is when the people who decide I have some evangelical dietary agenda start arguing before I've said anything. I'm not going to defend my choice, and I don't care why you make your choices. It is highly annoying when it can't be left at that. I recently got lectured about enzymes and all manner of things which do not interest me. I do not plan to change because I already considered it and found I just couldn't do it willingly. Nurses can be the worst when it comes to things like that. They tend to believe everything the AMA puts out there. I don't, but I don't try to make anyone do it my way, either.

That must be the difference. Most people do not possess the self control or reasoning ability required not to try to make you do it their way, even though it in no way actually affects them. That is the crux of many conflicts and problems in the world.

That is what irked me about the PETA guy. He was pleasant but definitely wants the world to operate as he does. I figure if it really is more energy efficient and beneficial, then eventually that is what people will do, given that gangster groups in the form of lobbies and government don't get in the way. I am not expecting a change of everyone's tastes and desires, nor do I care if they change what they eat.

It offends me that Michele Obama goes around telling people how to eat. At least on public money, it offends me. We've got enough ridiculous discussion about obesity, all of it an excuse to dip into the taxpayer's pocket. So, take a side as to what and how you should eat? I'll pass. Don't eat me, and don't give me lectures about how unhealthy and unnatural I am, or must be.

But you see how easy it is to get a topic going which is really no one's business to push one way or the other, then define camps and go at it? That's one of the areas where I veer off from PETA and most nouveau vegetarians. I've always been this way, and it is not a political or public policy statement. It should not be with anyone. IDIOTS.

But my experience has been more from the other side; people constantly wanting to change me or argue my diet without the slightest suggestion from me that I am interested in their opinions or care what they do. Dare to stray from the herd and you will get fried. Or grilled, or roasted.

Some of that is human nature rooted in survival, but much of it is rooted in insecurity and a refusal to evolve to keep up with where we ought to be by now. The new push for tribalism and grouping in antagonistic ways is not a move forward, and feeds the petty pleasure of being part of a herd. It is not the best of human nature by any stretch of the imagination.

I suppose I could find solace if I were a transgendered lesbian vegetarian, and then if you hurt me it could be a hate crime. As it is I will leave the politics of what people eat, and of religion and color to the usual suspects.

Fighting, Sleeve Rolling, Shovels and Boots

The longer I live, the more I'm amazed at the total nonsense highly paid officials speak, while on our dime, without shame, and without consequence.

The last couple of years have seen meaningless phrases like "boots on the ground" and "shovel ready". I say meaningless because in the context used, those phrases have proven to either mean the opposite of what you think, or nothing at all.

Why use a term like "shovel ready"? First off, shovels aren't always used, and rarely the tool of choice for meaningful ground breaking. We use front end loaders and other heavy equipment. Whatever the case, the money being played with in that shell game did not actually find its way to much that makes sense to anyone.

But, got to give credit where credit is due; when the going got tough--in politico terms that means they are having trouble pushing the paper they want to push---they "roll up their sleeves" and get to work!! That roll up the sleeves thing is used a lot, but what does that prove? Is the A/C on the blink in the Dirkson building?

But wait, "we're fighting for you"! What does that mean? Is it like Hoffa and the union guys who will club me with a stick if I choose to work at a place where they won"t? Fighting who and what, I wonder.

Do you think they roll up their sleeves and start punching out people in the Capitol? Maybe that is why they are always talking about things on the House floor. Lots of the boots on the ground in the congress chambers must be attached to people flat on their backs who've been fighting for money to spend on shovel ready jobs.

The boots thing just seems almost disrespectful. Usually, boots on the ground, as I understand it, refers to humans in the military "over there" possibly getting shot at. So to make it sound more pristine and to cloud the fact that we are involved in a skirmish, we call them "boots". If they are walking around in the crossfire I guess that constitutes on the ground. If they are doing some other thing then we just ignore that matter altogether.

I wonder if they issued moccasins and bedroom slippers to get around that boots snafu. I haven't noticed any less involvement, or any more success in the wars which have other names I can't keep track of.

There's been some bedroom slipper talk. "Time to take off the bedroom slippers and put on the marching shoes, we got work to do". Not sure what that means, but never do officials speak of work in the terms I do. They aren't sanding down teak furniture or running front end loaders, or chopping wood. What they mean is that they want others to do things they don't want to do, or buy things they do not want to buy. Work to the elected official, and appointees, is generally synonymous with extort. "We've got money to extort! Everyone, roll up your sleeves!!"

Work to do usually means make laws to somehow filter more money through them. That's always how it works.

This administration does seem to have thing about footwear; boots on the ground, take off the bedroom slippers, putting on your marching shoes. There may be other examples, but I only keep up so much. My stomach is strong, but I have my limits. I don't even remember what Bush talked about in the way of fashion items. I admit I rarely listened, much like now, except this guy does far more speech giving, so it is hard to miss entirely.

I think sleeves is a general fixation for all politicians. I've heard the thing of rolling up sleeves forever. Some official says he's going to roll his sleeves up, watch out! he means business.

The sad thing is that people think they are supposed to glean some meaning from the rhetoric of these clowns. I guess it is because reporters pretend it has meaning and spend hours analyzing it, discussing such things as "his mood", "forceful demeanor" and sometimes his clothes or shoes.

People who are lying, and know they are doing, or have done, something wrong, talk like that. Everyone has seen it in daily life, from their wayward sons and daughters, neighbors who ruin your lawn mower, crooked boss or coworker, sneaky customer, etc. You know in those cases you're being scammed and the issue is being smoke screened. We don't always do anything about it, but we know. In the case of these officials, the personal attachment is not even there, so why do we allow ourselves to be continually talked to like ripe marks by these con men/women?

Most likely because they tell us we'll somehow get paid and that none of our troubles are our fault or could possibly be remedied by anyone other than them. They offer to relieve us of responsibility, and even though anyone knows the language of liars, we pretend because it is easy.

Tomorrow, I am going to roll up my sleeves, with boots on the ground and fight to complete a shovel ready job involving Raul's secret santeria wood goo, and some shutter clips.

Secretariat

I was able to see the movie on DVD. Someone involved with the ownership of the horse had a house near me in Miami. I never spoke to them but my mother did. What I recall is how they described the horse to her. That made the movie all the more interesting.

Back then, I had no idea what the Kentucky Derby was, but then came Secretariat and my mother's conversation with the people. I watched as the horse set records in all legs of the triple crown. Although his Preakness record wasn't granted, two independent sources clocked him as finishing in record time. The official clock got screwed up and one track guy hand clocked it slower, but it is likely that guy erred.

No horse ever won by such a margin or in the record time he set when he blasted through the Belmont Stakes course. The amazing thing was that the crazy horse was still accelerating at the end.

The actual name they called him was Big Red. It was news to me, but the reason you see such bizarre names in those races is that some committee has to approve the name you submit. I think the first ten names they sent in for Big Red were rejected.

In the movie and in the story told to my mother it was stressed how intelligent that horse was. And how much he wanted to win. I have no idea why I find something about great horses so appealing, but I do. I've hardly ever ridden, but I understand how people could get hooked on that world. It is often a hard life but there is something about it.

Secretariat was the coolest horse ever. And his owner has a story all her own. She went against all odds just to keep the farm, thanks to oppressive estate taxes. I'll never get why something which has been taxed forever has to be taxed again just because it is willed to a person. That is not right, and those who think you do not have a right to see your property go to whom you choose when you die are just mad because it doesn't go to them.

Anyway, I liked the movie. I'm not too critical of how it could have been done differently because I love seeing the race scenes re-enacting what actually happened, then seeing old footage of the real thing. There is no way they exaggerated. What that horse did was amazing enough that it would have seemed pure fantasy before he did it. Especially his Belmont win.

I did find out that the Derby is 1 1/4 miles, the Preakness is 1 3/16 and the Belmont, 1 1/2miles. All the hot shots thought he'd fade on the long race. What they did not know is that Secretariat's heart was actually over twice the size of a normal heart for a horse that size. And it was very healthy. I love it when the smug ones get their come-uppance.

Some people think it is a violation of animal rights to race horses. In the case of Secretariat, I think he liked to race and enjoyed it like a performer loves doing a show in front of a big crowd. Maybe that was one animal who didn't need a self appointed lawyer to speak for him. Save it for the bears and sharks.

When you consider the relationship between humans and horses, and dogs, it is clear that the development of civilization would have been far different without them. It's a strange thing, really; riding on the back of an animal. Somehow it does seem perfectly natural, though.

So Tempting to Pick a Side

When you can name enemies and have plenty of company who will go along, it is hard not to vent frustration on the selected groups. The trouble is, the broad brush almost always leaves out important facts and ignores the real path of cause and effect.

There are always plenty of people who will spout facts and such so actually taking the time to tediously research every facet of thing is not necessary. Never mind that the story told is never all inclusive. That would be almost impossible to do anyway, like trying to control the behavior and choices of millions from some central planning committee. It's like trying to balance nature by decree.

When Tea Party stuff first came out, I was in agreement with most of it; contain governmental power and size, quit trying to spend money to fix problems which arose from spending too much and in places better left not in government hands. But then various people jumped to the front of the line and it became clear this movement broadened in scope and often the self appointed leaders espoused things I find irrelevant when speaking of what government ought do or not do. I still agree that it is good to have a constitution and eliminating things which violate the limits it placed on central power is fine.

I'm somewhat on board with a state's rights agenda, but I fully believe their powers ought to be severely limited as well. I give them the right to secede but if they are just wanting to limit individual freedom, bad news. It is a sticky thing.

If it is news to anyone that very wealthy interests have served to corrupt every process in which the government is involved, then you've been deaf, dumb and blind up until now. They've even used the military in ways which seem odd and not fair to the people who serve, let alone the people who just work, raise families and try to get by.

So, in some ways I agree with the Occupy crowd. Things should not be as they are. Beyond that, I doubt many would be in accord with my views. For one thing, I abhor mob actions which stop traffic or impede the daily lives of others. I think it was in Boston that there activities prevented the Food Bank's planned food drive. And the Brooklyn Bridge thing was out of bounds in my mind.

I've yet to see a sign which says "This Is What Respectful Individual Freedom Looks Like". Maybe because none of us have ever lived or known of a time when people resisted the temptation to curb the behavior of others, even when it was not a threat to them or others. The twentieth century was cluttered with rationalizations and weak arguments justifying dictating the choices of others in the name of cost to society or the greater good. Too bad. It has done the opposite of raise the level and character of civilization on most fronts.

What often happens in times like these is that one group pushes the buttons of other groups, who are equally loathe to figure out they are all being played in one way or another, and the next thing you know, someone goes home crying, or in a box. Then that is used to fan the fire even more. True reason and principle are so far lost that trying to find the root of the mess is impossible.

I do not know how things should be structured. My feeling is that minimal structure and minimal restraint on individual freedom is the place to start. All the best efforts in the other direction have led to amazing theories and rationalizations but not a more sane peaceful world. Instead of having a war every now and then with clear losers and winners who go home and relax for awhile, we have never ending "peace keeping" missions, nation building and reorganizing enterprises and police actions. Half the time we fight those we armed for some other vague purpose. I just can't buy the excuses, based on how the efforts are conducted.

And the results? Most of it is so foreign to anything we know, we aren't even sure what the results are. Someone is making money and achieving more and more control over the public. I think the broad title of Wall Street misses the mark by a mile. I would say I can't prove it, but I believe if I dedicated my life to it, I could prove it. But I admit, I have no desire to do that.

I just want to have a clean house and no complications before I die. And I hope to steer clear of all official authorities and mobs who may decide that I am the problem.

Occupy My House

Wait, if I focus on my own banking practices and other habits, then I have to protest myself.

I take it back. I'm all for occupy everything else. Whatever it is, it is all their fault.

Maybe others do not notice, but I find that when people pile on to some movement such as this, especially the ones which appear to not respect private property and other rights of those not involved, it becomes less about ideals and more about senseless power.

I hope it doesn't end badly---I am sure those who funded this and are sitting in their mansions enjoying it are depending upon their "Kent State moment" emerging soon.

Remember, what pure democracy looks like is a lynch mob. It may not be the lofty goal its touted to be. Street mobs are more what the French revolution and things like that look like. It very rarely ends well, and almost always creates a cleanup and maintenance headache for others.

The world is such that I couldn't really improve my own lot significantly without some changes in the way everything else works. I blame too many people and institutions to list. I even blame you. I'm kidding. My demons are not something all the king's men can fix. I doubt they are even detectable by the TSA. I think that only I can fix my troubles.

To me it is not a move toward the sort of society I'd like when mobs gather in front of people houses. Of course it isn't the society I want when someone like Jimmy Hoffa is given the national stage and treated as respectable when everyone knows he's behind thuggery.

All of it is a tangled mess because there are very wealthy tricksters and it goes round and round. Glad I haven't borrowed anything lately and refused credit cards I knew I couldn't afford to use.

Metaphorically Speaking, I Suck

It sometimes worries me that I don't offer elegant descriptive narrative full of poetic metaphors, similes, and whatever else falls in that realm of prose. Somehow describing my life as, "Like spring on a summer's day", just doesn't resonate with anyone.

I'd use phrases such as, "it's like taking a bath...in the nude". But I couldn't live with myself.

I remember way back in early post flower power years when the big thing was herbal shampoos and such. They had this young woman on an ad, being all woodsy in her woodsy hippy chick garb, saying, "I like the idea of nature, and all". I couldn't live with myself if I wrote that, either. She was cute, too.

The IDEA of nature? WTF? But, that is how it is seen. There is nature, and there is humanity; mutually exclusive sets. You can't possibly reason with that sort of thinking. It is to attempt to ride with Hells Angels, on a Suzuki 450, while reciting and explaining the Constitution, and pointing out why violating the rights of others is an affront to freedom.

See what I mean? That one hit the nail on the head. (<--a metaphor and cliche all in one, if I'm not mistaken. If I am please gently correct me)

I'm still trying to find out what the "bridge" in the "cross the bridge into the 21st century" represents. From the measures those people wanted to push, and are pushing, I'd think "herd you with bulldozers into the compound from which no one escapes" would have been more fitting.

What kind of fools need to be led from this day to the next day? Doesn't matter what you call it, a day is just a day whether it occurs at a point in time which coincides with 2100 years since the point at which they want to count or not. If you live through the night, you wake up and you are there. Just like yesterday and the day before.

But don't mind me, I'm but a lone wolf howling at the moon, hoping against hope** to get lucky before night's end.

**Does that phrase, "hoping against hope" make anyone else cringe like it does me? Friggin Dan Rather used to say that a lot. Those were the times when he most got on my nerves. He was a tick that this old hound couldn't get rid of. Much like the damned army of raccoons who make mischief here on Ballistic Mountain.

It is as if the night sky is falling and my only hope is to stand erect, head held high, as a towering lighthouse, piercing the heavy darkness as it weighs down upon me, finding home within its mysterious and stormy depths.

In A Vacuum

That's OK 'cause you'll be sorry.

I miss the critic's misguided insights dammit. Maybe I complain too much.

Every once in awhile I realize how spoiled I must be-=-living in the spectacular western USA in an area where you can survive with only a fan and a space heater. The mountains and the ocean are close enough to go and come back in one day. The west, in general is just a different animal.

Despite the fact that too many people in CA are absolutely nuts, and would regulate whether you leave the toilet seat down or not if they could, something about "out west" has a different feel about it. As different as this is from Colorado, it still has a kindred aspect to it. No question, I find parts of Colorado to be beyond amazing. But, it does a body good to know the ocean is nearby.

Too bad it isn't the Atlantic. The east coast beach swimming conditions are far better but CA has many many miles of really good beach. If only this climate change thing would make the gulf stream run over here and swap the Atlantic and Pacific. And send these crazy monarchists and fans of totalitarianism back east as well. Leave the good looking wimmins here as long as they aren't trying to outlaw eating fish or bears or something.

You have to license your stupid dog every year here. Just like your car, they send you a bill to renew. I'm sure someone who loves regulation will explain why that is for the greater good, but I am not one who buys it. Even if the dog is not stupid you pay. Most of the time these supposed protections for the community are worse than the problem they claim to address.

Seems that little outburst of mine at the neighborhood craft fair/bake off/musical event made an interesting impression on some people. I suppose that is good.

At least more people now wave as they drive up or down the hill past me in their reckless abandon way. And from G2's wife who is all into ballistic mountain gossip, I understand I am a topic of discussion in some circles. I feel so important. I'm almost famous on Ballistic Mountain. Our group, Copper Creek is the celebrity band of Gaskill Peak.

You Can't Have It Both Ways

It is a well known fact that if you disagree with, or do not support the administration of, Barack Obama, you are a racist.

Now the same people who pronounced the above immutable law of nature have decided that if you are, or support, Herman Cain, you are a racist.

The first law of Obama politics seems to assume that you are a racist in that you could only disagree with him if you are anti-Black, or anti-African-American, or anti-African---you choose. I still stand fast in my opposition to hyphenating nationalities or continents.

Since Herman Cain is black, I am not sure how his racism, and that of those who like him, is defined. We can only assume that Al Sharpton and others who make their living off of racial conflict are the arbiters of who and what is racist, and who is properly "Black enough". Of course, Herman Cain isn't because he is a capitalist and he is not a democrat.

Everyone knows that if you aren't a democrat, you cannot possibly be Black. (even though the first free Black members of congress were Republican, and the KKK used to be a very active part of the Democratic party---last of which was maybe Robert Byrd who was eulogized not long ago by democrats in Washington after he finally died and quit running for office)

Until people quit suckering for the politics of race and condition of birth, the Plantation will continue to grow, people will continue to be blinded to their own humanity, opportunity, and chance to enjoy life. The autonomy of the individual will continue to be eroded unless this philosophically unsound way of thinking is seen for what it is; a way to make money for a few, and a way to perpetuate hate and misery for many.

I don't care if it is the Congressional Black Caucus, the KKK, La Raza, or the Black Panthers--all such groups are purely motivated by a few who want to feel powerful and stand above those they lead by instilling the victim mentality, and treating ethnicity, gender and any other condition of birth as some sort of character value. Race, gender, none of that is a character value, idiots!! It is not relevant to the word "rights". Reason and logic, right and wrong, do not know color, so repent your crimes and shut up, Al, Jesse, KKK, Nazis, iota of a Black Panther.

It is not relevant to individual freedom, to anything that has to do ensuring maximum individual autonomy in a civil society. That is what government is for--protect the rights of the people, starting with the individual. That is why it is supposed to have limits and if our judges and politicians had ever read and adhered to the Constitution instead of raping the spirit and meaning to accomplish their own elitist ends, maybe I wouldn't be discussing this.

That would please some people. I think it would please me.

If someone told me I wasn't white enough because of my philosophy of how my country ought be governed, I'd have to laugh at them. Why does no one laugh when people debate whether Herman Cain is black enough? Why didn't they do something of the kind when all those self appointed gauges of blackness were questioning if Obama was black enough?

I cannot believe people don't speak up en masse to shout down so-called black leaders, hispanic leaders, and while they are at it, so-called business leaders and labor leaders. It is conditioning and Herman is right, most of us have been brainwashed, even though he did not say that exactly since he was focussing on questions about one "community". Most of us are brainwashed in a Pavlovian kind of way. Or bought off real cheap. How many decent union members turn a blind eye to the mob connections and gangster tactics? And they call Wall Street greedy?

At least the KKK gets laughed out of town quite often. It is time to do the same to all these other racists, Hispanic supremacists, and Black supremacists. That is what they are. Racist charlatans conning people, at worst, and serious racial chauvinists who believe their race is better and should rule others at best.

Although, I'm not sure which of those two choices is better or worse. I let it stand. At least in the second case they actually believe something. In the first case they are just fueling weaknesses in human nature and cashing in, knowing they are unjust and crooked.

It is hard for people not to latch on to the victim mentality--it eliminates the need to undergo that uncomfortable process known as introspection; self examination. The victim mentality not only causes people to suspend normal values and respect for others, it causes them to let go of reasoning to a dangerous degree.

Child Review: Offspring of Bureaucrats in High Positions

OK. Mr. Morebucks, who owns the place where I do various jobs, is very well connected politically, clearly because he is very well set financially. He's one of the back seat drivers of things governmental, and believe me, things governmental are guided more by those you don't see, riding in the back seat, than those in front waving and honking the horn.

I think that was some sort of metaphorish statement, but probably is full of flaws any English major would note and find disquieting.

Whatever it was, I stand by by it.

So, people in high places sometimes vacation at Mr Morebucks SoCal resort home. He is rarely there; maybe three weeks out of the year divided among two or three visits. He hires a full time house manager to handle the bills, hire people like me and make sure his rowdy friends have whatever they want when they descend on the place. Most of his friends are in one way or another connected to politics or government, either nationally or in the land of dead voters. That reference allows the astute who remember what put Kennedy and others over the top to narrow it down to a city. Others will just have to assume it is irrelevant.

OK, a guy who is high enough up that government agents accompany the family on vacation came to stay with his hot wife and bratty kids. The kids broke the electric wooden gate in the first fifteen minutes. Somehow they managed to force the operating arm of the thing to pull out from its mount which meant two lag bolts were ripped out of the wood. Not the best lag bolt installation to begin with, but this took effort and persistence.

I did not find out how it happened until today. The maid saw them arrive. I was called to go fix it that day. I was able to do a temporary repair, then the next day the gang was to be gone all day so I returned and did my usual excellent work installing a permanent fix. I had to pick up some things based on the previous day's observations. That is how such things work--fiddle and fit. You have to go see what the problem is then hope you can find the right thing to fix it. This one worked out.

Today I went back to do the usual putting things away and covering things up that I do when the guests hit the road...or in most cases, the private jet.

Those kids must have a thing about doors on hinges. They managed to destroy the hinges on a cabinet door. It is a pretty good sized cabinet which houses some sound equipment. It is all operated by remote and there is no reason to even be in there. Finding the same type hinge is going to be a trick. What I did was trade out the top hinge for the bottom one of a smaller door with the same hardware. The cabinet has three different types of hinges for various reasons.

The door has to close or a light stays on; like a refrigerator door, except this one is de-energized by a button the door has to press against when closed. I barely got it to work, but it is not noticeably screwed up unless you are a cabinet nazi. In that case you'd notice that it is not perfect.

The thing is, the parents watched as their kids set out to mess up the big wooden driveway doors/gate, and did absolutely nothing. Judging from the spoiled and entitled behavior of guests at this place; they break things, leave trash laying around, etc. and never say to the "help", oh we busted this or that. They just go on their merry way and maybe complain about something like, "We couldn't get the windows in the hall to open". Of course those would be the only windows that do not open because they are panes of glass mounted in the wall and not intended to open.

Seriously these people are mentally deficient. But, they are in high places and buds with the President. Far be it from me to draw any conclusions from that.

Their kids are destructive little brats, and the parents do not take responsibility for their actions, or for guiding the kids away from abusing that which is not theirs.

Late era baby boomers. Really, when a baby boomer has decent kids or is a human being of character, it is always an exciting event, so what do I expect? I honestly think my generation is mostly dimwits and devoid of common courtesy and understanding of the rights of others. Many of them have spawned even more vile beings than themselves.

I know it sounds like I am being harsh, but I've found it is not only I who have experienced maybe one out of twenty self declared friends who would lift a finger when it mattered to you, and one out of fifty who would do so if it in any way was an inconvenience. It is the nature of our peers.

My only worry now is that the actuator which moves the wooden gate is so well fastened that they might destroy it next time if they go about things the same way. It is not a lightweight piece of hardware. The thing is substantial. We'll see. I charged about triple because it was an emergency call and I was on my way home. The house manager was all about paying me a premium for my prompt attention to the situation. For that I am grateful.

I should remain grateful for the work but, I have to say, I am getting a little bored and feel like I am stagnating. Time to create what has not been created. What would that be? Maybe a start would be an organized domicile.

So, from my limited experience, I have to give bureaucrats' kids two thumbs down. One star out of five. A 1, on a scale of 1 to 10---10 being best.