I am so into seasonal rituals, I guess I could rightfully be called a Pagan. My celebrations are few and far between; my measurings of the seasons and the Wheel Of The Year are more subtle, but if you visited me year in and year out, you'd probably notice some of the following:
Seasonal-themed dishes and table linens, in seasonal colors with seasonal symbols.
Seasonal curtains and valances.
Seasonal potholders and crochet-top towels.
Seasonal candleholders with appropriate-scented candles that burn in them, mostly in the three seasons not called summer.
These are placed atop seasonal doilies, some knitted by my mother. Beautiful!
And of course, seasonal bed linens, including Peanuts-themed sheets for October and November, because I am a big kid at heart in many ways.
And I have movies for certain times of the year. Encounter With The Unknown, Carrie and Night Of The Living Dead for Halloween. Murphy's Romance, LastHoliday, The Magic Of Lassie and one or two others for Thanksgiving, mostly because they were movies my mother and I watched together one year or another while eating T-Day dinner. Too many to mention for Christmas, but some that come to mind are Auntie Mame (which we watched while making Christmas cookies one year), and Little Women (we favor the 1949 version with June Allyson, Peter Lawford, Elizabeth Taylor and Janet Leigh). Lotsa Christmas TV out there too.
Of course, I have movies for times you wouldn't expect, too. Like February 3rd. Yep, The Day The Music Died. I pay proper homage by watching The Buddy HollyStory and La Bamba.
And then there's Labor Day.
Working at The Plaza for nearly 23 years was very much a seasonal affair. At The Plaza, we had three seasons: Summer, Holidays, and Winter. Summer was from Good Friday through Labor Day. Holidays was from the day before Thanksgiving through New Year's Day. Winter was actually divided into Winter 1 (the day after Labor Day through the Tuesday before Thanksgiving) and Winter 2 (January 2 through the day before Good Friday). Winter was, for the most part, dead. The busiest and most dreaded season was, of course, holidays, whether winter or summer. Summer was just a long grind, mostly busy on the holidays, weekends and anytime we ran specials.
Labor Day was therefore always a day I looked forward to especially. And the last several years I developed a movie tradition, born in two cases from availability of certain movies to rent that happened to begin Labor Day weekend, and one literally entitled Labor Day. Let's take a look.
Ricki And The Flash - Meryl Streep as Ricki, a rock musician who comes to terms with family and all her years of running from relationships. Look out for a still-sexy Rick Springfield as her guitarist and love interest. Meryl has decent singing/guitar chops, and Springfield and her back-up band cook, making the rock sets fun, loose and enjoyable.
The Way, Way Back - coming of age story about a boy, his rather neglectful mother, her verbally abusive boyfriend, and the summer the boy, Duncan, works at a water park, where he finds acceptance and camaraderie. Liam James is amazing as Duncan, Steve Carell does asshole really well, and I can't imagine anyone better than Sam Rockwell as Owen, water park manager and "good friend of the three". Also starring Toni Collette and AnnaSophia Robb. This is my favorite of the three movies, the one most likely to bring me to tears, and linger in my mind for days afterward.
And Labor Day, with Josh Brolin and Kate Winslet, about a boy whose mother falls in love with a man jailed for a crime he didn't commit, who escapes from jail and stays with them one Labor Day weekend, changing all their lives in a way no one can predict. Even if I have to work Labor Day, I always show this movie on Labor Day. And the novel by Joyce Maynard is not too shabby, either.
Not the usual hullabaloo associated with Labor Day this year, as I have not worked outside the home this summer, nor last. So, not so much feeling the usual relief and gratitude that the grind is over. But I am feeling relief and gratitude that I am still alive and healthy, (plus or minus a little vertigo and balance disorder, please pray for me, dear readers). And I am enjoying my seasonals, especially my Labor Day movies. God grant that you all are doing the same.
Marian Wright Edelman! Marian is 82 today. You can read about Marian here, but if it's TL;DR, that's cool, these are some reasons I admire Marian:
She went to Spelman College, where she earned a scholarship that enabled her to study at the Sorbonne and the University Of Geneva in Switzerland.
She graduated from Spelman as valedictorian in 1960.
She studied law at Yale, earning her degree in 1963 (wow)!
Was the first African-American woman admitted to the Mississippi Bar.
Worked in the Civil Rights Movement.
Founded the Children's Defense Fund in 1973.
Helped establish Head Start for children.
Won the Presidential Medal Of Freedom in 2000.
Has worked her entire career attempting to overhaul foster care, supporting adoption, improving child care and the lot of underprivileged children, advocating for prevention of youth pregnancy, for prenatal care, for childcare funding, for increased parental responsibility in teaching values, and calling attention to the amount of violence children are exposed to via mass media.
Some wisdom from Marian:
The first piece of wisdom I ever saw quoted by Marian Wright Edelman, was this piece written as a eulogy for a fellow of very high character named Joseph Overton (not sure of the identity of the author), and it piqued my interest because it states a part of my values system so much more eloquently than I ever could (as long as we keep in mind that everywhere you see the word "men" below, I believe we should substitute the word "people"):
"The world needs more men who do not have a price at which they can be bought; who do not borrow from integrity to pay for expediency; who have their priorities straight and in proper order; whose handshake is an ironclad contract; who are not afraid of taking risks to advance what is right; and who are honest in small matters as they are in large ones.
The world needs more men whose ambitions are big enough to include others; who know how to win with grace and lose with dignity; who do not believe that shrewdness and cunning and ruthlessness are the three keys to success; who still have friends they made twenty years ago; who put principle and consistency above politics or personal advancement; and who are not afraid to go against the grain of popular opinion.
The world needs more men who do not forsake what is right just to get consensus because it makes them look good; who know how important it is to lead by example, not by barking orders; who would not have you do something they would not do themselves; who work to turn even the most adverse circumstances into opportunities to learn and improve; and who love even those who have done some injustice or unfairness to them. The world, in other words, needs more true leaders. More to the point, the world needs more Joe Overtons."
To me, it says alot about Marian that this eulogy spoke to her enough that she would share it. I'm glad she did; It really resonates with me. Marian, I am proud to share a birthday with you. I hope you have a happy one. Thank you for dedicating your life to lifting so many folks up.
Before we roll tape, a little note, and I direct this to the Repugs. And by "Repugs", I don't mean fair, reasonable, decent, salt-of-the-earth conservatives, of which group I know and respect a fair number. I'm talking about the ones who are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, classist or anti-Semitic. The ones who see the world changing (finally!) and are railing in fear and rage because they think they're being muscled out or losing something. The ones who are Q or Q Adjacent, falling for Facebook trolls, personality politics and/or The Big Lie. You know what? Y'all just dug yourselves a hole. Y'all just took a collective selfie and showed it to the rest of us saying, "This is who we are, and we're loud and proud!"
Yeah, we see you. And hear you. And believe you the first time. And when you say you don't want a commission to investigate the events of 1/6/20, we get you. And since we know there were commissions to investigate the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the assassination of JFK, 9/11, etc., we know what your not wanting one for the events at the Capitol means. You know your own are responsible. That's right. Because if y'all really thought Antifa or BLM were behind the awful events of that day, your @$$e$ wouldn't be able to pony up fast enough to create a commission to investigate every nook and cranny, would they? Damn skippy.
11 years ago, I wrote a post on my other blog, Soup 2 Nutz where I talked about some common mistakes that I feel many of us make in regards to the care and feeding of our republic. Many are still making them. Will we get a clue in time?
In our previous post, Prescient, Melissa Pedersen and I complained about the lack of critical thinking, the dumbing down of our society, and the damage we believe the rise of social media has done to our culture. Here is an article that explains how to regain our critical thinking skills, and I think it's so important, I have reproduced it here:
Bobby Azarian Ph.D.
Mind In The Machine
To Fight Misinformation, We Must Think Like Scientists
Logical reasoning and theory testing can protect against fake news.
Posted December 31, 2020 | Reviewed by Devon Frye
Fake news is running rampant, but blaming social media sites like Facebook for not filtering it out doesn’t address the larger issue at hand. Bogus news isn’t the real problem, because that's always going to be out there. The problem is that we undervalue the type of critical thinking needed to spot it. We shouldn’t expect a social media site to tell us what is and is not real. We are bombarded with nonsense on a daily basis, and navigating through it is a life skill we must learn. We can’t expect others to do it for us.
A lack of critical thinking and skepticism creates problems beyond politics. It makes us vulnerable to scams and pyramid schemes as well as phony products like weight-loss drugs and “miracle cures” that are really only as effective as placebos. It leads us to ignore existential threats like global warming and perpetuates harmful conspiracy theories such as the idea that vaccines cause autism.
If there’s overwhelming evidence for something and you don’t believe it, you aren’t being a skeptic; you are living in denial. Being skeptical means demanding evidence, not ignoring it.
In this new age of social media, our news is no longer being filtered through major media outlets that (ideally) have teams of meticulous and principled fact-checkers. As a result, empiricism is more important than ever. We all must be trained to navigate through false information, and we can do that by thinking like scientists.
We must be empiricists, not ideologues.
Our ideologies can blind us and bias our behavior. For that reason, we should all be empiricists, not ideologues. Empiricists form their beliefs and opinions about the world based on facts and observation; ideologues, by definition, are uncompromising, dogmatic, and committed to specific principles. They are therefore unlikely to change their views based on new evidence. By self-identifying first and foremost as empiricists, we commit ourselves to a worldview that is shaped by reality.
Unfortunately, we often don’t feel compelled to check the accuracy of something that already aligns with our ideals and worldview. This is bad practice. We must continue to demand evidence—even when the claims in question come from the side that shares our beliefs and values.
A recent Buzzfeed News analysis of Facebook activity found that while 38 percent of news shared on popular right-leaning Facebook pages was false, so was 19 percent of the news shared on popular liberal Facebook pages. Given that liberals have also been known to peddle pseudoscience and ignore facts, as can be seen by the anti-vaxxer movement and the success of homeopathic remedies, this should be no surprise.
But how do we all become empiricists without training? Scientists and researchers are trained to sniff out untruths, but you don’t need to be a scientist to do what scientists do.
We must create tests.
When scientists want to understand how reality works, they devise experiments to test their questions. If they want to know if a specific treatment works—for example, if a certain diet makes people healthier, or if a particular medicine is effective—they design a study that will determine whether or not a hypothesis is true. If the hypothesis is supported, it becomes the reigning explanation while it continues to be tested further. This is an ongoing process that should continue until almost no uncertainty remains.
Derren Brown, a famous British magician and mentalist (think David Blaine, but more focused on mental tricks) is an expert at appearing to have psychic abilities. He is also a skeptic who exposes those who try to claim they have them for real. In an interview with prominent evolutionary biologist and outspoken skeptic Richard Dawkins, Brown describes a simple test that he has suggested to non-empiricists in the past.
“I think it feels unfashionable to talk to people about the importance of evidence, of testing things,” Derren said to Dawkins. “A friend of mine, who’s a psychic, told me she puts crystals in her plants and they grow better. So I said, well you’ve got loads of plants—have you ever put two in the same window? Maybe just put crystals in one and not the other?”
This anecdote illustrates just how easy it can be to start testing your beliefs.
It is also important to teach children to demand evidence and think critically from an early age. A few months ago on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson told a wonderful story about the way he and his wife gave their child a lesson in critical thinking.
After their daughter lost a tooth, they told her that they heard if you put a tooth under your pillow, the tooth fairy visits. That night the little girl did just that, and Tyson swapped the tooth for money while she slept. The next morning, after their daughter had shown them her gift, they asked her a question that prompted her to think skeptically. “How do you know it was the tooth fairy?” they asked, to which the daughter replied, “Oh no, I don’t know, I just know that there’s money here.”
With her curiosity stirred, their daughter began setting traps for the fairy—for example, foil on the floor to hear when it arrived—and when those didn’t work, she and her equally suspicious schoolmates thought of a test. The next one to lose a tooth would put it under their pillow—without telling their parents.
The next day, when the tooth did not turn into money, the children worked out that their parents were the perpetrators of the hoax. This doesn’t mean that you should crush all the magical beliefs that children have—it only means that you should teach them to question. As adults, we must do the same to set a good example. When something sounds outlandish or simply incredible, we must investigate. Without conducting our tests in controlled settings, it can be difficult to make any definite conclusions. But these steps will still likely help us identify many bogus claims without stepping foot inside a lab.
We must encourage others to be empiricists.
It is often said that we should let people believe whatever they want as long as they aren’t hurting others. “Ignorance is bliss,” as some say. However, we can no longer ignore the fact that when people don’t think critically, it actually harms others. When candidates who peddle false information get elected into office, they are more likely to also ignore crucial evidence when making decisions or policy. Do we want the person making decisions concerning climate change to be someone who ignores all the data that’s been carefully collected by scientists? That’s a recipe for catastrophe.
We must therefore encourage our friends to think critically and to test things. When they make claims or decisions that ignore the evidence, they should be confronted. We speak up when someone we love has an addiction or some chronic bad habit. We should feel a similar moral obligation.
Lastly, we all must demand that our celebrities, influencers, and politicians also think critically and refrain from making claims that ignore evidence. Spreading lies and misinformation to millions of people can have some serious real-world effects. Conservative or liberal, there’s just no excuse for it. Consistency is crucial.
Scientific advances come from critical thinking and curiosity. Science is also successful because it is self-correcting. When new evidence doesn’t support our previous conclusions, they must be abandoned and replaced by evidence-based assertions. Good science is also consistent in its methods, so that opinions and biases do not get in the way of logic and measurement. We do not get to pick and choose which rules to follow. Instilling these principles in society will bring about progress.
For those who (still!) think Covid is no worse than the flu...
For those who think the only metric by which to measure the bad results of this virus is death, and the mortality rate is "low", so, you know, no biggie! Or that the only people dying or getting long-Covid are elderly or people with pre-existing conditions...
And those who don't want to wear masks...or get vaxxed (freedom, or free-dumb?)
Or those who are tired of Covid, think enough people are vaxxed now, it's safe, and are just kinda letting their guard slip...
A Texas trauma surgeon says it's rare that X-rays from any of her COVID-19 patients come back without dense scarring. Dr. Brittany Bankhead-Kendall tweeted, "Post-COVID lungs look worse than any type of terrible smoker's lung we've ever seen. And they collapse. And they clot off. And the shortness of breath lingers on... & on... & on."
"Everyone's just so worried about the mortality thing and that's terrible and it's awful," she told CBS Dallas-Fort Worth. "But man, for all the survivors and the people who have tested positive this is — it's going to be a problem."
Bankhead-Kendall, an assistant professor of surgery with Texas Tech University, in Lubbock, has treated thousands of patients since the pandemic began in March (2020).
She says patients who've had COVID-19 symptoms show a severe chest X-ray every time, and those who were asymptomatic show a severe chest X-ray 70% to 80% of the time.
"There are still people who say 'I'm fine. I don't have any issues,' and you pull up their chest X-ray and they absolutely have a bad chest X-ray," she said.
In X-ray photos of a normal lung, a smoker's lung and a COVID-19 lung that Bankhead-Kendall shared with CBS Dallas, the healthy lungs are clean with a lot of black, which is mainly air. In the smoker's lung, white lines are indicative of scarring and congestion, while the COVID lung is filled with white.
"You'll either see a lot of that white, dense scarring or you'll see it throughout the entire lung. Even if you're not feeling problems now, the fact that that's on your chest X-ray — it sure is indicative of you possibly having problems later on," she said.
Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease expert and senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, told CBSN that some patients with severe COVID-19 could feel the impact for years to come.
"When someone recovers from pneumonia, whether it's a bacterial pneumonia or a viral pneumonia, it's going to take some time for their chest X-rays to improve. Chest X-rays lag your clinical improvement. So you may be better, but your chest X-ray still looks bad," he said. "And we know that people with COVID-19 can get severe pneumonia, and some of that pneumonia will lead to damage to the lungs that will take time to heal. And some of it may be permanent."
He said the potential long-term health consequences are another reason people should take warnings about the disease seriously.
"It's not something you can blow off. This isn't something you want to have. Because even if you survive, you still may be left with some severe complications that make it very hard for you to go back to your baseline functioning."
Bankhead-Kendall said it's important that if you're experiencing shortness of breath after your COVID-19 goes away, you stay in touch with your primary care doctor.
She also points out, "There is no long-term implication of a vaccine that could ever be as bad as the long-term implications of COVID."
COVID-19 symptoms can sometimes persist for months. The virus can damage the lungs, heart and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems.
By Mayo Clinic Staff
Most people who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recover completely within a few weeks. But some people — even those who had mild versions of the disease — continue to experience symptoms after their initial recovery.
These people sometimes describe themselves as "long haulers" and the conditions have been called post-COVID-19 syndrome or "long COVID-19." These health issues are sometimes called post-COVID-19 conditions. They're generally considered to be effects of COVID-19 that persist for more than four weeks after you've been diagnosed with the COVID-19 virus.
Older people and people with many serious medical conditions are the most likely to experience lingering COVID-19 symptoms, but even young, otherwise healthy people can feel unwell for weeks to months after infection. Common signs and symptoms that linger over time include:
Fatigue
Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
Cough
Joint pain
Chest pain
Memory, concentration or sleep problems
Muscle pain or headache
Fast or pounding heartbeat
Loss of smell or taste
Depression or anxiety
Fever
Dizziness when you stand
Worsened symptoms after physical or mental activities
Organ damage caused by COVID-19
Although COVID-19 is seen as a disease that primarily affects the lungs, it can damage many other organs as well. This organ damage may increase the risk of long-term health problems. Organs that may be affected by COVID-19 include:
Heart. Imaging tests taken months after recovery from COVID-19 have shown lasting damage to the heart muscle, even in people who experienced only mild COVID-19 symptoms. This may increase the risk of heart failure or other heart complications in the future.
Lungs. The type of pneumonia often associated with COVID-19 can cause long-standing damage to the tiny air sacs (alveoli) in the lungs. The resulting scar tissue can lead to long-term breathing problems.
Brain. Even in young people, COVID-19 can cause strokes, seizures and Guillain-Barre syndrome — a condition that causes temporary paralysis. COVID-19 may also increase the risk of developing Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.
Some adults and children experience multisystem inflammatory syndrome after they have had COVID-19. In this condition, some organs and tissues become severely inflamed.
Blood clots and blood vessel problems. COVID-19 can make blood cells more likely to clump up and form clots. While large clots can cause heart attacks and strokes, much of the heart damage caused by COVID-19 is believed to stem from very small clots that block tiny blood vessels (capillaries) in the heart muscle.
Other parts of the body affected by blood clots include the lungs, legs, liver and kidneys. COVID-19 can also weaken blood vessels and cause them to leak, which contributes to potentially long-lasting problems with the liver and kidneys.
Problems with mood and fatigue. People who have severe symptoms of COVID-19 often have to be treated in a hospital's intensive care unit, with mechanical assistance such as ventilators to breathe. Simply surviving this experience can make a person more likely to later develop post-traumatic stress syndrome, depression and anxiety.
Because it's difficult to predict long-term outcomes from the new COVID-19 virus, scientists are looking at the long-term effects seen in related viruses, such as the virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).
Many people who have recovered from SARS have gone on to develop chronic fatigue syndrome, a complex disorder characterized by extreme fatigue that worsens with physical or mental activity, but doesn't improve with rest. The same may be true for people who have had COVID-19.
Many long-term COVID-19 effects still unknown. Much is still unknown about how COVID-19 will affect people over time, but research is ongoing. Researchers recommend that doctors closely monitor people who have had COVID-19 to see how their organs are functioning after recovery.
Many large medical centers are opening specialized clinics to provide care for people who have persistent symptoms or related illnesses after they recover from COVID-19. Support groups are available as well.
It's important to remember that most people who have COVID-19 recover quickly. But the potentially long-lasting problems from COVID-19 make it even more important to reduce the spread of COVID-19 by following precautions. Precautions include wearing masks, social distancing, avoiding crowds, getting a vaccine when available and keeping hands clean.
(Emphases in bold mine).
***
People, it behooves us to keep our guards up. The time to close the parachute is when you've safely landed, not when you're still 50 feet up in the air. And we should remember that we haven't even begun to see the effects of some of the worst variants, including the one now laying waste to India:
There have been a few additional variants identified since I found this table in March. And more to come, no doubt. Not to mention the possibility of recombinations. It is also important to remember that viruses play the long game. We have already seen some of the side effects of Covid. I would bet the farm we haven't seen nearly all of them yet. This pandemic is frequently compared to the Spanish Influenza Pandemic of 1918. Here is some of what that pandemic surprised us with:
And a P.S. to all you freedom/rights fighters: During the 1918 Spanish Influenza Pandemic, you could be arrested if you didn't cover your sneezes in public -- and saloons and churches were raided by police if they didn't keep their windows open.
First of all, I hope all my readers had a Happy Mother's Day, whether you are a mother, a substitute mother to somebody (or many somebodies) who needs one, or someone who has been blessed by a mother or mother figure in your life, I salute you!
My felicitations and sympathies also go out to those of you whose experience with their mother or mother figures was not so positive. We tend to make motherhood such a sacred cow. I remember reading in one of author Robert (All I Really Need To Know, I Learned In Kindergarten) Fulghum's books that when he was an active Unitarian minister, one Mother's Day his homily alluded to these kind of relationships where the mothers were mentally ill, dysfunctional, or even abusive. And Fulghum took alot of guff for even mentioning less-than-ideal maternal connections. "Shame on you for spoiling this day!" was one of the more printable reactions to Fulghum's sermon that Sunday. But for those of us who have had complicated relationships with our mothers, it is unrealistic and dishonoring to our experiences to make no mention of that reality at all.
My relationship with my mother has been a marathon, from living with Grandma (her mother) to my abusive stepfather, to just the two of us now. The tenor of our tie has varied from the utter devotion of my childhood, to the feeling of betrayal after coming to the realization that, even if my mother was unaware of the sexual abuse my stepfather inflicted, she was mostly a silent but present witness to occasional physical, and nearly daily verbal abuse, as well as the many times my stepfather drove less than sober with me in the car. One has to wrestle with questions like, "Why didn't my mother leave him, or at least protect me? Didn't she love me?" There are more questions than answers in this life, and this situation is one of them. Maintaining even a semblance of a close relationship in this scenario requires either alot of denial, or forgiveness. I've practiced both. Neither route is easy; both can be fraught with complication and heartache. But I can honestly say, there's no one in this life I have loved nearly as much as my mother.
One of my earliest memories is from when I was 3. My mother and I were still living with Grandma. One day my mum came home from her nursing job and she had a small quantity of blood on her uniform. The amount looked big to my little eyes, and not being being real aware of the nature of my mother's work, I thought the blood was my mother's, and I demanded (!) to know who had hurt her so I could go beat them up (!). As the reader can imagine, that allegiance came to be tested in the years after my mother's marriage, and just as I had worked through my childhood wounds, my mother became disabled, then the fight to retain her house began. For more than 2 1/2 years I worked every day at one or another of three or four jobs, frequently 12 hours a day, without a day off. I learned alot from the experience. I learned how strong and resourceful I was, that my limits were not where I thought they were. But most of all I learned that love is an action verb. It is very easy to say we love someone, but the truth is in our actions, and our commitment to those we claim to love.
When I was young, like most of us, I didn't love the chores I was required to do, and as an only child, I had alot of 'em. When I was about 14, my mother explained the reason behind the chores, "When you leave my house, these are the things you're going to need to know how to do in order to be on your own: Cook, clean, shop, laundry, ironing, simple sewing, and balancing a checkbook. You're not leaving my house without knowing how to do all those things!" And when I left my mother's house, I knew how to do all those things. And because I did, I believed in my ability to learn how to do other things, like bake and make simple home repairs. (Parents out there might consider my mother's list, and add a few other skills, like changing furnace filters, making those simple home repairs, and simple car repairs, too. These skills are very handy to have, and quite expensive and inconvenient not to have, not to mention harder to learn when you're older and female. It's best and easiest for parents to do the teaching). Needless to say, growing up as I did taught me a good work ethic, which I'm sure most of us agree is indispensable in our post-modern world.
My mother taught me material honesty too, not just by saying, "Don't steal!", but by two incidents I remember from my childhood.
One day we went through the bank's drive-thru to cash and deposit my mum's paycheck, and my mother received $2 too much. We were in a hurry, my mother had to do a little grocery shopping and then go home and cook supper for us, and it was past 5:00. (The bank was open till 8:00 on Fridays). But she went right back through the line and gave the cashier the money back. When the cashier thanked her, my mum said, " That's OK. I didn't want your drawer to be short." On the way to the grocery store, my mother explained to me that before she was a nurse, she'd had a job as a cashier in a little store, and if your drawer was short, you had to repay it, and if it was really short, you could be fired. It's easy to make a mistake, and you couldn't always count on people to be aware or honest, and that was why she had been so scrupulous about returning the bank cashier's money. We had a similar experience a few years later when the bakery overpaid her by 38¢. The results of such diligence became apparent several years afterward, when my mother tried to pull $300 out of the ATM for an emergency. She had taken some out the day before to treat us to some Chinese, and now wasn't allowed to withdraw what she needed because she'd be exceeding the daily ATM limit. Of course it was after-hours.
I saw the branch manager working inside the bank and said to my mum, "Let's knock on the bank door, maybe Kerry can help us!" and after we did, Kerry the branch manager was prepared to give my mother money out of Kerry's own account because "you're a good customer, and I know where you live." And my mother told her, "I'll give you a check right now, if you'll just approve it, for me to take it out of my own account," which Kerry did. But can you imagine, being ready to give my mother money out of her own account?! That is what I call having a good name! My mother never commented on it, but just let me make of that lesson what I would.
In fact, my mother really isn't much of an advice-giver, unless I specifically request it. And my mother isn't one who gives the conventional advice one might expect, you know, like clean-underwear-in-case-of-emergency-type of advice. The most conventional advice my mother has given is along the lines of, "Don't lie, not only because it's wrong, but because you'll have to remember who you told what lie to, sooner or later you'll forget, and people will realize you lied, and everyone will be mad at you. No one will trust you." Yikes!
One thing I admire about my mother, when I ask her opinion, she gives it. I don't always like my mother's opinions, but out of all the people I know, I can always count on my mother to tell me the truth, even sometimes unpleasant truths. And my mother won't hesitate to tell me if she thinks I'm wrong. My being her child doesn't mean she wears blinders. I respect that. It's helped keep my internal compass oriented a little closer to true north, and that makes my mother a valuable friend to have.
And many's the time my mother told me, "Claudia, the Good Lord gave you a brain. Use it!" That advice is coming in handy now. I see people believing garbage that is being promulgated and spread, like so much fertilizer, over social media, etc., for the express purpose of furthering an agenda, whether it be lining their pockets, or strengthening their power base. It makes me sick. But I know it when I see it. And that's because the same woman who told me to use my brain, also taught me to use reference materials, and did so by pretending not to know things I knew she knew. Or not telling me answers to my endless questions, which would've been so much easier than making me look them up. People whose mothers teach them to use reference materials tend to develop more critical thinking skills. Thanks, Ma!
But my favorite piece of advice is totally off the wall, and I'd like to share it: "When you're in a strange city, watch where the old people go to eat, and always go there. It'll be the best food (cuz old people know good food) at the cheapest price (cuz old people are on fixed incomes)". Sounds really off the wall, but I used that advice in Niagara, as well as the strangest of strange cities, Norfolk, VA, and it's definitely sound advice.
Because my mother is a nurse, and because so many members of my extended family are in the medical field (two doctors, another nurse and an EMT), and because our TV set broke and was not replaced for a year when I was about 10, (during which time I read everything in the house, to the tune of a set of encyclopedias, medical encyclopedias, and the Merck Manual), I had an unorthodox education. So I was prepared enough for the pandemic not to believe the mountain of misinformation I saw, and I knew therefore how a virus operates, and what in general to expect.
Sometimes, perhaps like most of us, I have wished for someone else as my mother. But not this past year. This past year I have come to realize that though my mother made many mistakes that wound up hurting me, because she is my mother, I have been encoded, both by nature and nurture, with strength, courage, a hunger for knowledge, and a work ethic. Among many other things. Who's to say that these qualities haven't served me as well or better as other characteristics I may have wished for in a mother?
Citing "abuse of discretion that deprived the Defendant of a fair trial; prosecutorial and jury misconduct; errors of law at trial; and a verdict that is contrary to law", Chauvin's attorney filed the request yesterday, just two weeks after a jury found the former officer guilty for the death of George Floyd.
Among the reasons: the fact that the jury was not sequestered prior to deliberations, possibly providing opportunities for the jury to be prejudiced; the defense's belief that the location of the trial should have been moved; the defense's contention that the judge did not sufficiently lay down the law to prevent prosecutors disparaging the defense, (which is considered prosecutorial misconduct in Minnesota); and lastly jury misconduct.
The alleged jury misconduct cited is the photo of Brandon Mitchell wearing a Black Lives Matter hat, and a T-shirt that said, "Get Your Knee Off Our Necks" at a march commemorating Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech in Washington, DC last August. The pre-trial jury questionnaire asked whether the prospective juror had participated in any marches or demonstrations within a recent time period, as well as other questions designed to gauge the level of preconception about racial issues, especially in relationship to police. It is apparent that Mitchell did indeed attend a march.
While it is doubtful that Chauvin's guilty verdict would be "impeached" or struck down, this blogger very much wants all concerned to be sure that a verdict in this case would be arrived at by obeying every jot and tittle of every letter of the law. So Chauvin's attorneys have indicated that they probably will appeal after Chauvin's June 25 sentencing, and I hope they do. But I don't think it will do them much good, because I don't think they lost their case because of jurors' prejudice, intimidation, inadequate sequestration, or attorney misconduct. I believe the defense lost its case because it didn't have a case to begin with, and they did very little to make a case after.
Let's face it: in America, every detained suspect has the right to legal counsel via 1966's Miranda Decision, so someone had to defend Chauvin. The prosecution was extremely thorough, calling 38 witnesses over a course of 11 days, and showing dozens of video clips. The defense called only 7 witnesses over the course of 2 days. Chauvin invoked his Fifth Amendment Right To Avoid Self-Incrimination, declining to testify on his own behalf. So, all over America, Chauvin's nine and a half minutes kneeling on George Floyd's neck was shown countless times. It didn't reflect well on him. The prosecution did their job and heaped a ton more incriminating detail on the pile. Did the defense show us anything we hadn't already seen or heard? In short, Chauvin looked guilty in the videos, and nothing that he or his attorneys did in those two (!) days explained his actions, rehabilitated his image or truly defended Chauvin in any way. They needed to play way over their heads, and they didn't even play up to par. If the defense wants to win on appeal, they will have to present a much stronger case. The American legal system owes justice all around: to the American people, to the plaintiff, to the defendant, to the concept of justice itself. So impeach/overturn the verdict if that is ruled judicially proper. Or give Chauvin his day in court to appeal, if he so desires. But if they really want to make it worthwhile to him, Chauvin's attorneys need to up their game.
Wow, this is Call-Outs And Shout-Outs Blog's 100th post! Thank you, readers, for making it such a pleasure :)
It sucks to be Dayanna Rodas right now. Imagine having Adam Sandler walk into your restaurant, and you don't even recognize him. Instead you tell him he has to wait half an hour for his IHOP pancakes. (As someone who only eats homemade pancakes, I think she did him a favor, but I digress).
I worked at The Plaza for nearly 23 years. In that time I experienced The Advent Of Famous People three times. And I had three wildly different experiences with each of The Renowned.
The first time was back in early 2006, after The Plaza Building Formerly Known As Arbys was taken over by HMS Host, and I was promoted to Overnight Supervisor. Just like Dayanna, unbeknownst to me, I waited on A Famous Person. And the customer after him said excitedly (honest to God!) "Do you know you just waited on Walter Ray Williams, the bowler?! That was him!" I peered at Mr. Williams, taking his tray over to a table to start on his breakfast. When his potatoes were done, I took them over to him and said, "You know, I watched the Pro Bowlers Tour on Saturdays before Wide World Of Sports for a million years. I should have recognized you".
And he smiled slightly and said, "Let me guess, you were an Earl Anthony fan?" I laughed and replied, "That was my mum. But anyway, it's nice to meet you -- welcome to Pittsburgh!" He gave me a tired smile, and went back to his coffee.
The second brush with The Illustrious came a month or two later. This time The Celebrated One could hardly wait to share his identity. Seems he was the lead singer of The Povertyneck Hillbillies, surely I had heard of them. (In the interest of full disclosure, I had heard of them. It was hard to walk around in Pittsburgh in 2006 and not hear of them, such was their publicity machine. And I had seen them at a free concert down at Pittsburgh's Three Rivers Regatta and danced to their cover of the old Kiss tune "I Wanna Rock N Roll All Night"). But, rather nettled by his self-importance, I said, "No, 'fraid not". He asked, a tad incredulously, "Do you listen to country music?" And I answered truthfully, "Sorry sir, I really haven't listened to country since the mid-80s". (People, don't ever do this. Maybe I deserved what followed -- did this band actually get any of the food they bought into their mouths?)
The third time's the charm. A few years, and one Plaza demolition and rebuild later, I was working in "the new building" at Coffee Paradise, when a man came in and ordered a latte and a pastry. I marked the cup, and while my co-worker made the drink I totalled up the order and took his money, then slid over to get the pastry my customer had ordered. Something about his voice was familiar, and I stole a look at him as I got his pastry. An older man with dark eyes and a mustache, and a very distinctive voice. The face was familiar, too, and as I ran his voice back in my mind, it clicked.
I stepped back to my register and observed, "You look and sound like John Astin". And his face opened into a mischievous smile I recognized and he said, " Well, there's a very good reason for that, young lady. I AM John Astin!"
Mr. Astin was very gracious. I asked him if he minded hanging around a minute because I knew someone who would like to meet him. He agreed, and after I paged my Manager-In-Charge, I told him I had read his former wife Patty Duke's autobiography Call Me Anna, and noted how she had talked about how people still remembered The Patty Duke Show fondly and would come up to her and sing the theme song. I wondered if fans sang The Addams Family theme to him? Probably anticipating I might do so, Mr. Astin wisely said no. Then we talked about a few of my favorite of his TV roles, whereupon Mary, my MIC, joined us.
"Whaddayou want, Claudia?! It's Saturday and I'm busy!" came Mary's typical bellow.
"Too busy to say hello to John Astin?" I queried with a smirk.
Well, then she recognized him, and they talked for a few moments. Mr. Astin courteously stayed to sign an autograph for Mary, shook our hands, and off he went. But we buzzed about it for days. That man has class, and I will never forget him.
Those are my work-related "Famous People" stories, and I'm sticking to 'em!
As you can tell, I'm really mad, so I'm going to make this brief and not very diplomatic. If anyone out there believes this happy horsesh*t that an apparently previously healthy 42-year-old police officer died of "natural causes after suffering two strokes" in the wake of being conked on the noggin and sprayed with bear spray, well, I have no printable words for them.
If the reader will check out this article, they will be able to discern what likely happened to Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. And something else: the use of bear spray/tear gas is forbidden by the Geneva Convention, and for good reason. It can kill people with disorders of the respiratory and central nervous systems. That doesn't make it illegal to use on civilians, and police may find it expedient to use on aggressive suspects and rioters. Whether this use is morally correct, or if there are better and equally expedient methods or not is a debate for another time. But bear spray/tear gas is not an innocuous substance for everyone ten minutes or more after neutralization. It kills some people, yet it is legal to buy and possess in all 50 states. I would bet everything I own and have been busting my hump to fix up for the last 13 months that it was at least a large contributor to the death of Officer Sicknick. Natural causes after two strokes, my @$$!
How will this autopsy result affect the cases against Julian Khater and George Tanios, charged in the death of Officer Sicknick? Stay tuned...
We interrupt this compelling blog series to present some earth-shattering news:
And this just in:
Water is wet.
Red is bright.
And horseradish is very, very hot.
What does Representative Boebert have in her head, cotton? Marshmallows, what?
In the aftermath of yet another mass shooting in the US, do we think we can get past offering the usual "thoughts and prayers", and actually figure out and execute a plan to heal our country of this hideous issue?
And can we please stop electing people this devoid of (circle your favorite: heart, brains, a soul), and start electing people who will bypass special interests and actually problem-solve and get stuff done? If that is not possible, then I would challenge our "fearless" leaders to brainstorm a set of alternatives to the way we currently conduct ourselves vis-Ã -vis guns, and offer them as a referendum in an upcoming election, and then legislate as per the people's vote. If our elected officials have that much testicular fortitude...
Sometimes people use "respect" to mean "treating someone like a person." And sometimes they use "respect" to mean "treating someone like an authority."
And sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say "if you won't respect me I won't respect you" and they mean "if you won't treat me like an authority I won't treat you like a person," and they think they're being fair. But they're not and it's not okay.
"The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark is a 1995 book by the astrophysicist Carl Sagan, in which the author aims to explain the scientific method to laypeople and to encourage people to learn critical and skeptical thinking." - (Wikipedia). It is the book from which these quotes are gleaned. It is this blogger's hope that folks (not just Americans, either) reading this post meditate upon Mr. Sagan's words. Especially the "QCumbers" and Q Adjacents among us.
I worry about the lack of critical thinking I see nowadays. Today, I saw a post that illustrates my point perfectly on Avian Flu Talk, AKA Pandemic Talk, a site on which I am an adviser. This post came from my friend Maggie, who is a mod on that site:
Now I do agree that people have the right to believe whatever they would like to believe. For instance, the anti-vax stance portrayed above. It is certainly the individual's right to hesitate in getting a shot because they fear thimerosal, the form of mercury used as a preservative in vaccines. But how many have truly looked up the the history of thimerosal in vaccines? And how many have a mammoth-sized reticence of the tiny amount of mercury in a vaccine, shed quickly by the body, but no thought at all of the massive amount of mercury and other contaminants in their air and water, which they are exposed to every day?! (Swallowing a camel while straining out a gnat? -- Melissa Pedersen).
For some, of course, the concern is not the thimerosal, but the belief that, for example, "the Covid vaccines will change your DNA!!!" (People, calm down! The Covid vaxxes on the market are not DNA-based, most of them are RNA-based. RNA ≠ DNA!). Here is an article explaining why that is significant, and why an RNA-based vax will not change your DNA. And here is another. Nor do vaccines cause autism. Not that any of that will make a difference to those who seem determined to borrow trouble, for as Maggie states in her AFT signature: Believers don't need proof, and skeptics won't accept proof. And that is their prerogative. But then they take other, sometimes innocent people along with them for the ride, down the rabbit hole, or wherever the hell they go...🙄.
Hopefully, there will be enough of us taking the vaccine that we will achieve herd immunity (which the skeptics will benefit from) without them. The alternative is not a happy place to go... But I do not dispute their right to choose, I only question if making a choice without using critical thinking skills and doing due diligence on a topic, is truly making a
choice
NOUN
an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities.
"the choice between good and evil"
synonyms:
option · alternative · possibility · possible course of action · solution · answer · way out
Addendum, 3/20 -- And this is why I always saythat people have a Constitutional (and God-given) right to be stupid. It's not the act of making a decision that someone else might disagree with that is stupid, or the decision itself. It's the act of going thru life on auto-pilot, of doing things without thinking, and without stopping occasionally to make sure we still have all the facts, and have them straight. To make sure the decisions we made 20 years ago still work for us. Are we the same person we were 20 years ago, or even last week? And who are we listening to when look for direction to make a decision? People who have been studying something for 30 years, or some self appointed social media genius? Why are we sure someone on YouTube or Twitter has our best interests at heart or is less likely to have an agenda we don't know about? Because they seem to agree with us maybe?
It's also interesting that in America much more than in other countries unless it is threatening or sometimes hate inspired, most speech is protected by the Constitution, even if it's inaccurate, misleading, or downright erroneous. It's as a result too often left unchallenged and uncorrected and then it's read and digested and maybe added to by others who don't fact-check and the errors build upon each other.
When I was young, I admired Amelia Earhart. I was always surprised though that people would rather believe that she was captured and killed by the Japanese or that she had gone underground to do spy work during WW II and after that, had had plastic surgery to alter her appearance and then went to some quiet little town in New England to live as a mystery woman. More likely she and Fred Noonan just made a small miscalculation in plotting navigation and then unavoidably made more mistakes that built upon the first one, getting more and more off course, till they ran out of fuel, ditched their plane and drowned. Almost 85 years later and we still believe silly stories rather than likely logic. And we still make huge mistakes that really are a lot of small mistakes that build upon each other. -- Melissa Pedersen
So, the protests carry on in Portland, OR. The last two days of demonstrations have included crowbars, hammers, bear spray and firearms, as well as a fire set outside the federal courthouse entrance. The reasons for the protests included not only the trial of Derek Chauvin, who had third-degree murder charges reinstated in the George Floyd case, and is awaiting trial after a jury is seated; but also the extension of a tar sands pipeline from Canada to Wisconsin.
This blogger condemns anything other than peaceful protests, but it is hard to do so wholeheartedly.
I want to at all times stand for the advancement of progressive values. And I certainly recognize that there are those on the right hand side of the aisle whose minds are sufficiently open to the possibility of injustice and the righting of it. Protesters/fellow progressive patriots, we owe it to ourselves to take the high road in order to give those folks a chance to decide to stand with us. There is strength in numbers, and we sure could use their help. If we attend protests ultimately wielding weapons, setting fires, and destroying property (besides it being intrinsically wrong), we become everything those more conservative folks fear, and we turn them against us, making it easier for them to rationalize inaction against the injustice, and the injustice itself, which is almost universally followed by corresponding power grabs by the moneyed/powerful ones behind the injustices.
Not to mention making it easier to rationalize when some of their cohorts are the violent ones, like on January 6, and to a large extent last summer.
But then, if we do things by the book, we have the reasonable expectation that we would have our grievances fairly and thoroughly addressed. This would be the result we would expect of a peaceful protest. That is what the other side would owe us as befits good-faith actions on the part of us, the peaceful protesters.
And this is the crux of my less-than-whole-heartedness. Look at history, and judge for yourselves if peaceful protest and operating within the law has any more than rarely ended up in anything but status quo:
You can see by reading a bit on those links, and researching a bit, that those movements started off peacefully. Still, little or no change was enacted. Eventually push came to shove. Unfortunately, just about every major social change or revolution has been accompanied by violence. Why? Because those not being marginalized denied that marginalization was taking place, either out loud or by evincing no reaction to the marginalization. Since the majority consociation held the power, the marginalized group was able to achieve no change. The status quo prevailed until the marginalized group took a "No Justice, No Peace" type of position, then change was gradually, sometimes quickly affected. Isn't it just easier, more peaceful and cost-effective to grant and enforce everyone's equal rights?
Nonetheless, I am calling for both sides in this matter to do the right thing. Protesters, be peaceful, without exception. And establishment, address the grievances with thoroughness, equity and dispatch. To ignore them, as is history, is to say those grievances are meaningless. And is to say that the people who have those grievances are worth less than you. And a wise man once counseled against considering people "worth-less" - Matthew 5:21-22. That kind of treatment is its own form of violence. Socially-accepted, passive-aggressive violence, but violence nonetheless. And you have no right, therefore, to complain when karma comes back around in the form of more violence.
Most importantly, fence-sitters, those of you who know in your hearts that these injustices are going on or are considering that they might be: You are the ones who actually have the most power here. I implore you -- investigate, do what is right. If you don't, you will account for it in some way, shape or form later, I guarantee. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
For starters, Lindsey Boylan, former Deputy Secretary, and special advisor to Cuomo. Boylan claims Cuomo kissed her, and "would go out of his way to touch me on my lower back, arms and legs," as well as once suggesting they play strip poker. What a way to sweep a girl off her feet!
Or how about Charlotte Bennett, Cuomo's Health Policy Advisor? She reported uncomfortable conversations about dating, whether she was interested in dating older men, and the fact that Cuomo was open to dating a woman in her 20's. What a charmer!
"I understood the governor wanted to sleep with me, and felt horribly uncomfortable and scared. And was wondering how I was going to get out of it, and assumed it was the end of my job," said Bennett. The next week, she informed Cuomo's Chief Of Staff, Jill DesRosiers, of these awkward conversations, whereupon Bennett was quickly transferred to another job. The Governor's Special Counsel, Beth Harvey, acknowledged Bennett had made the complaint, and had then been transferred away "to a position in which she had already been interested." How convenient! But Bennett has told interviewers that she likes her new job, and other than hoping that telling her story will empower other harassment victims, she just wants to move on, a pretty common feeling after being sexually harassed. Bennett went on to say, in part: "To the Governor’s survivors: I am here. Lindsey is here. You do not have to say a single word. But if you choose to speak your truth, we will be standing with you. I promise.”
After we heard from those two ladies, Anna Ruch came forward to describe her encounter with Governor Hot Pants. Ruch, who met Cuomo at a wedding in 2019, says Cuomo placed his hand on her lower back, and when she removed his hand with hers, Cuomo remarked that she "seemed aggressive" (!!!), so he put his hands on her cheeks, and asked if he could kiss her! (Governor-dude, if you think Anna Ruch was aggressive, you oughtta be damn glad you didn't try that stunt on Your Crusading Blogger, who would make Lorena Bobbit look like Pollyanna if anyone unwelcome tried a move like that on me). Obvious case of blood pooling too low and not circulating up to the brain.
After thinking about it for awhile, the good Governor decided to cooperate with an investigation launched by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Considering that he is in the super hot seat with two scandals going on, that might have been the prudent way to go.
Your Crusading Blogger held her tongue (and her keyboard) in her hands last year when it came out that Cuomo had signed an order requiring nursing homes to admit Covid patients. I withheld judgement (and scorn) because our elected officials just about universally ham-handed the pandemic, first by inadequately planning for one, and thus having to constantly play catch-up with a novel, quick-changing and complicated virus. Let's face it, the lowest-hanging fruit that we had to deal with first was personified by President It'll Go Away In The Spring-Inject Bleach. And I certainly felt alot of sympathy for our nation's governors as they tried to navigate the pandemic with no real, consistent, solid leadership from a centralized federal government. Instead Trump left pandemic response up to the states, and allegedly showed favoritism for red states, and those states whose governors showed "proper appreciation" of his efforts on their behalf.
Now that controversy is back in the limelight as it has come out that Cuomo's aides allegedly fudged numbers on reports containing nursing home deaths. Not cool. Not furthering of progressive values. Most importantly, not compatible with preserving the life, health and welfare of the people whom Cuomo was elected to serve. If Cuomo felt he did right last year, why the cover-up? This blogger believes that if they had known Cuomo would conduct himself in this manner, most New Yorkers who did, would not have voted for him.
Many other countries keep their politicians honest with the concept of a "no confidence" vote, where opposition parties can, under certain circumstances, call a special election to settle whether a given politician should be retained after a controversy. Certainly there are circumstances, and I believe this is one of them, where such a concept would be of great utility in the American political system. I maintain that there are occasions (the previous president being one, also), where the American system makes it unnecessarily difficult to remove a particularly bad leader, especially when unfitness for office is caused or abetted by moral or mental illness, and further buttressed by politics. I refer to the blind loyalty of most leading Republicans to the previous president, no matter his conduct. I put such blind loyalty in the category of selling one's soul to the devil. There is always a day of reckoning for such enablers. But I digress. I certainly can also see how a "no confidence" vote situation could be just as easily misused by an opposing party to "play politics" when political winds aren't blowing their way, so "no confidence" should not be permitted to be entered into easily, but with ill-suited leaders abounding, I'm sure most of us agree something needs to be done.
I'm starting to wonder, between this ignominy, the recent conduct of former New York (remember when he was America's?) Mayor and former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani,
plus that of a few other folks from that neck of the woods, if there isn't something in the water in the Great State of New York...
Addendum: As I was writing this post, two more accusers have come forward:
America frequently goes on a nostalgia kick and rediscovers artists and acts who were popular "back in the day". And once in a generation, it seems like for a season all attention will converge on one particular artist or act. At the beginning of the milennium, all attention was focused on The Band, and I must have seen The Last Waltz eleventy-eight million times, between USA Network, MTV and VH1.
The latest "It" artist seems to be Dolly Parton. We had a Holly Dolly Christmas, Dolly contributed $1,000,000 to Covid Research, Dolly turned down the Medal Of Freedom, the highest US civilian honor. All of a sudden, Dolly Parton is everywhere -- it's like the 70's all over again!
So guess who I'm gonna talk about? Yep, Dolly.
Of course, growing up in the 70's, with the opinion of my stepfascist being that country music was the only music worth listening to, (read: the only kind we were allowed to listen to), in our house Dolly Parton got alot of airplay.
The highest compliment I ever give to a person is "There's alot to be said for (name)." Well, there's alot to be said for Dolly Parton.
She started out dirt-poor. She moved to Nashville the day after she graduated from high school and quickly began succeeding as a songwriter. Elvis wanted to record I Will Always Love You, but his manager, Colonel Tom Parker, required all songwriters to surrender half the publishing rights before Elvis would record their songs. Dolly said no. Can you imagine? You are a brand-new songwriter, just cutting your teeth, and one of the most successful performers of all time wants to record your song, the only catch is doing so will result in you giving up half of your profits on that song. Forever. But making this deal will give you your first (huge) visibility. Do you say no? How much guts, how much faith in yourself and your talent do you have to have to do that?! Brass ones on that lady!
Of course, like me, she wears those brass ones high on the chest ;)
As everyone knows, Dolly went on to soar in the stratosphere of entertainment, with dozens of hit songs on both the country and pop charts; collaborations with Kenny Rogers, Emmylou Harris, Linda Ronstadt, Loretta Lynn, Tammy Wynette (probably a slew of others I'm not remembering); eight movies, seven books and countless awards.
What brought Dolly back to my attention after all this time was a convo I had with Melissa Pedersen, she who has gotten me into some awesome Americana music lately. Melissa noted that I seemed to "perk my head up" every time a band called The Wailin' Jennys played. I remarked that I liked their harmonies, and Melissa enthused, "Oh, yeah? Then you'll love this song," and proceeded to direct me to their recording of "Light Of A Clear Blue Morning", which, unbeknownst to my friend, was written and also sung by Dolly Parton back in the 70's. I played The Jennys version. It was pretty, rather ethereal in style. But compare it to Dolly's tour-de-force -- starts out soft, uplifting lyrics, a little perfect vibrato, electrifying percussion, and then rockin' it out and taking it home. What a song! Hear for yourself:
This version was a revelation to Melissa, who otherwise was only familiar with Dolly's more pop-flavored and collaborative work -- think Islands In The Stream with Kenny Rogers, and Trio with Ronstadt and Harris -- so now while I get more into The Wailin' Jennys, Melissa is taking a backwards journey to 70's Dolly (as well as to 1999's Western Wall: The Tucson Sessions, a Ronstadt/Harris collab, which features a more eclectic sound than anything they did with Parton).
