Author: Ghoh

  • ​Rural Folks Voted for Trump Because He is BAD!

    “The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans believe people are fundamentally bad, while Democrats see people as fundamentally good,” said Mr. Watts, [That’s JC Watts, not James Watts the Reagan Secretary of the Interior] who was in the area to campaign for Senator Rand Paul. “We are born bad,” he said and added that children did not need to be taught to behave badly — they are born knowing how to do that.

    “We teach them how to be good,” he said. “We become good by being reborn — born again.”

    “He continued: “Democrats believe that we are born good, that we create God, not that he created us. If we are our own God, as the Democrats say, [Never heard anything like that myself] then we need to look at something else to blame when things go wrong — not us.”

    If this is true it explains a lot, but since I believe that people are fundamentally good, I find it terribly demoralizing.

    On on lighter note, perhaps it explains very simply why they voted for such a bad, very bad, person. I recall a Reagan cabinet appointee from Alaska for Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, who was accused of being mediocre. I looked hard but couldn’t find any reference to that, but did find his most famous quote. In defense of the diversity of his department he said, “I have a black, I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple.”

    Be that as it may, my recollection was that he, or whoever it was, was defended as being representative of the mediocre, “who needed to be represented.”

    So if we apply the analogy and realize how profoundly bad people need to be represented, we then understand why they voted for Donald Trump, their ultimate representative!

    Why Rural America Voted for Trump, New York Times, 1/5/2017

  • ‘1+1=1’

    So Imaginative! I Love the Geometrics!

  • Amazing Landscapes for Inspiration

    More wonderful images!

  • ‘1 + 1 = 1’ – So Imaginative! I Love the Geometrics!

    Link:  ‘1+1=1’

    Resistant to the idea of putting the environment and familiar objects around him into a particular box, Denis Cherim walks towards his goal of appreciating the ‘un-apreciable’ around the world. With the simplicity of duplicating the same image and rotating it, this artist opens the doors to a quasi-surrealist landscape.

  • Tu Penses Qu’on Existe?

    What a Fine Eye!

  • Poetic Landscapes of the Romanian Carpathian Mountains

    Poetic Landscapes of the Romanian Carpathian Mountains

    These images are truly astonishing! Unexpected! And beautiful!

  • I did not read all that he had written, after his first four words in response to my piece were, “Hit pieces, like this.”

    My response:
    “So this is a hit piece[!]”

    After, presumably, realizing that that was all I was going to say, he came back with:

    “I have attempted to rectify the situation between us, I really don’t know how we will communicate if you do not read all of what I have written.  I am assuming that [you] are reading some of what I write, and we can go from there, however, without you telling me, I will have no way of knowing how much of what I wrote you read.”

    I replied that I had read only his first four words:

    “You called my article a ‘hit piece.’ You said, ‘Hit pieces, like this…’ Honorable people do not write hit pieces. To say I wrote a ‘hit piece,’ is to attack my character. The instant I am attacked I will stop reading. If I inadvertently read more, I try to suppress what I read, no matter how nice what comes after an attack might seem to be. What can what comes after an attack actually mean?

    “The accusation that I wrote a hit piece must be addressed. Any responses to what I wrote cannot contain implications that challenge my character.

    [Refers to an earlier attempt at conversation:] “You said you didn’t even understand what ad hominem was, when it clearly meant from the context, character assassination. You could have googled it. Instead of addressing my complaint you said you didn’t understand what I was talking about. What am I to make of that?

    “Address my complaint. Understand that by not addressing it, I still stand as accused of writing a hit piece. That is, of doing a dishonorable thing!”

    He later replied with a true apology. I was and am truly grateful!

  • We Were Like Frogs Dying in Water Boiling – That’s How Trump Won!

    When I learned that long ago as a young man, Trump racially profiled prospective tenants, it was enough for me to disqualify him for the Presidency, let alone [intending no insult to dog-catchers] dog-catcher.

    And it should have been enough for everyone else! I italicized “young” because it will be asked, “He was young then, why should that matter now? I italicized “long ago” because it will be asked, “That was so long ago, why should that still matter now?”

    It matters now because, even if he has never done that again, he is still the same person who did that. The issue is not what particular thing or things he did or even does, but the kind of person he is now, the kind of person he is!

    It matters now because he has not redeemed himself from that, or anything else that he has done since. He is not just the same person he was then, but exponentially worse!

    Our contemporary context begins with the “birther” issue. Sound familiar? The racial profiling back then, when we became aware of it, should have been enough for us to eliminate him. Since then, we have been subjected to an unending flow of escalating bad behavior, each action more disqualifying than the last, and continuing even now. Threatening a renewed nuclear arms race should suffice for a discussion of the present. Why isn’t even that enough? Why hasn’t any one thing along the way been enough? Why hasn’t the accumulated total of all the individually sufficient reprehensible behaviors been enough?

    The answer is the same for each sufficient thing taken one at a time and likewise for the astonishing astronomical sum of all of them taken together.

    The program has been from the beginning, whether just to change the subject or by plan, to replace the last outrageous thing with an even more outrageous thing. Although each individual action was, on its own, more powerful to disqualify him – and of course the ever expanding sum – and for the people to respond by rejecting him, each action was co-opted by the next one, and the next one, and then the next one, and then …. So we were captured by each distraction in succession, unable to focus on the one in hand, sufficient on its own, or all of them together, being thereby neutered!

    The frog in hotter and hotter water, may or may not realize that it is being killed! Our tragic irony, different in kind from the benign early water for the frog, is that each individual incident, beginning with unconscionable racial profiling, was sufficient in itself to do us in! And that, without us realizing that we were being killed!

    And we are still like frogs dying in water boiling!

  • A Gift at Christmas.

    Wonderful!!!

    Story told by the author – critically ill in early childhood – and his adventures with the fanciful Junior Angel Muddleduck who rescued him from his sickbed to go on wonderful fanciful journeys.