Lift Up Your Hearts!

Whatever you think about Facebook, there's no doubt it can be unintentionally amusing

I mostly find its "Reels" feature to be annoying, and have more than once looked without success for a way to turn it off completely. The short videos it shows are mostly reposted from Tik Tok, which I don't otherwise see. Sometimes they are interesting, sometimes they are genuinely informative and helpful, but all too often I find them infused with a negative view of life, even when they are undeniably—even addictively—entertaining.

Sometimes, however, something unexpected shows up and catches my eye.

If you don't have access to Facebook, you may not be able to watch the video, unfortunately. I spent too much time trying to find a version I could embed here, without success. I hope that link will take you to something you can see, but if not, it doesn't matter.

My readers know that one of our granddaughters plays on her high school girls' soccer team, and that the team has been wonderfully encouraging and supportive of her family during her sister's leukemia journey.

Here's another way they showed their character.

What caught my eye (more accurately, ear) in this video, and made me listen all the way through, was that it's not often when I hear mention of their tiny New Hampshire high school in nationwide media. I think this is the only time I have, actually. So it made me jump.

The short version of the story is that some of the team members did not want to play against a certain other team on their schedule, which included a boy in their lineup. First, in principle, because theirs is a girls' league, not a mixed one, and also because they found the boy physically threatening. The team's coach handled the situation extremely well: those girls who objected to playing that game were excused without any penalty, and the team played the game without any fuss. Somehow it made the news anyway, but I'm proud of the way they handled the situation calmly and fairly.

Our granddaughter? She played the game, with the support of her parents, even though they all thought it unfair for a boy to be on the opposing team. Why? I can't speak for them, but here are a few reasons that came up in our discussion:

• After all she's been through, Faith wanted to support her team, and to play soccer.
• It wasn't the other team's fault that they had a boy on the team—it was a state ruling that forced them to do so.
• Boys and girls often play successfully on the same soccer team—although that's usually at the younger levels, before males gain a significant physical advantage over females.
• They've played against other teams with girls she found more physically threatening than this boy.

The game was played successfully and without incident. I honestly don't remember which team won. In a way, they both did. Don't misunderstand me: The teams should never have been placed in this position, and the state rule that made it happen needs to be fixed.

But bad things happen in this life, and when they are met with quiet grace, that deserves to be celebrated.

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying have the best analysis I've heard yet of President Trump's first executive orders.  I don't say that merely because I agree with them on most of their points—the ones they approve of, the ones that raise concerns, and their cautious optimism for our country—but of course that helps.

Approximate timestamps:

00:00:00 Holding Screen
00:05:33 Welcome
00:06:48 Sponsors: CrowdHealth, Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club, ARMRA
00:18:26 Bret & Heather’s Inauguration & MAHA Ball Experience
00:39:18 Executive Orders: The Positive
01:28:45 Executive Orders: The Negative
01:42:33 Executive Orders: The Environmental
02:00:18 Executive Orders: MAHA?
02:02:43 Bret’s Argument for Why Trump COULD Be The GOAT
02:15:34 Closing

With all the important things that should be said about current events, sometimes you just have to make room for noting the absurd.

Enter Heather Heying's latest Substack offering, "Not the First Woman President: but yes the First Raccoon". Anyone who has read (and re-read, and loved) Sandra Boynton's "But Not the Hippopotamus" will understand my first thoughts upon reading that title.

Heather is reacting to some particularly absurd responses to President Trump's executive order entitled, "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government." I have read the order and find it cogent, rational, and much-needed; it states the obvious that should never have had to be stated.

Here's one absurdity, from the Guardian, which headlined its article, "After his executive order on sex, is Trump legally the first female president?"

Despite Trump’s decree that sex is “immutable”, the wording of his executive order left some room for interpretation. Indeed, some critics noted that because the undifferentiated genitalia that males and females share very early in fetal development are “phenotypically female”, you could argue he just made everyone legally female.

“[Trump] just declared everyone a woman from conception, based on the language of the executive order,” Delaware representative Sarah McBride, the first openly transgender person elected to the US House of Representatives, told the Independent.”

As Heather states, Nope. Wrong. So wrong. She goes on to detail why. There a lot to that, which you can easily read for yourself, but here's a snippet:

Early in development, everything is undifferentiated. Decades ago, some researchers argued that early “undifferentiated” genitalia are phenotypically female, but they’re not. They may be just a bit more female-like than male-like, but are actually, again, simply undifferentiated. Furthermore, at conception, there are no genitalia at all—nothing exists at that stage to be differentiated or not. Conception is when two cells come together—an egg, from the mother, who is definitionally female, and a sperm, from the father, who is definitionally male.

One commenter on the post pointed out another problem with the absurd headline:  Even if one accepts their premise, the first female president would not be Donald Trump, but George Washington.

After all that seriousness, Heather moves into a diversion about the First Raccoon (typical biologist!), who made her debut in the Coolidge White House.

From an article in Harper's Magazine:

Rebecca, who would soon become the First Raccoon, had been sent to the White House in 1926 by a citizen of Mississippi, who perhaps thought that she would taste good with cranberry sauce. President Coolidge declined to eat her. Soon she would be wearing an embroidered collar and taking baths, which she particularly enjoyed when given a cake of soap with which to play.

Here's where I burst out laughing and decided to share Heather's post with all of you:

“And so she lived a life of luxury until she did a thing many of her fellow Americans have dreamed of but very few have achieved: she bit the president of the United States.”

I know nothing about any of the people or organizations involved in the following video, but the poem hit me hard when I discovered a few months ago. It expresses deeply one part of the groundswell that resulted in the election of President Trump, and seems particularly appropriate in light of President Biden's recent preemptive pardon of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Let me be clear: I am thrilled by much of what I know about the executive orders President Trump issued on his first day in office. And equally thrilled that he rescinded the harmful executive orders executed by President Biden in his time.

But is this any way to run a country? A rich garden that never bears fruit because each president pulls up the "weeds" planted by his predecessor?

President Trump and his team have a lot of true weeds to remove. I wish them the best and pray for them daily. As I also prayed daily for President Biden, I must admit. What sane person would wish harm to his own country just because he didn't like the sitting president?

However, it is the Legislative branch of our balance-of-powers system that is supposed to make the laws. Are you listening, Congress? Making wise laws is your job. And remember this: You are not kings to enact your own will; you are not knights and bishops whose power is to be bought by the highest lobbyist; you are not pawns to blindly follow the will of the majority of your constituents. It is your responsibility to act with honor, wisdom, and honesty for the good of your districts, states, and country.

And it is our responsibility to elect legislators who can and will do so.

[I wrote this post back in early September of this year. L'il Writer Guy often works in spurts: As I've said before, some time periods have more than their share of interesting material to write about, so I write more than I want to post immediately. I like to squirrel the excess away for occasions when life and/or other priorities leave me, not without many things to say, but without the resources I need to craft them into blog posts.

The negative side is that I often find myself thinking that I've already posted something that's still waiting in the pipeline, as happened with this one. I was working on a thank-you note for some books I received for Christmas, and wanted to reference this post. That was when I realized that I couldn't reference what I hadn't actually posted. So here it is, none the worse for being almost four months old.

And lest you think I've forgotten the current season: I hope you are all having a Merry Christmas—which for us Episcopalians is only on its third day, so I still have a a few days in which to make an actual Christmas post.]

For decades, Christianity Today was one of the few magazines we subscribed to. I appreciated its orthodoxy, its intellectual approach, and its willingness to tackle difficult topics. The magazine's downfall was gradual (as most downfalls are) but undeniable, and we eventually dropped it. Later, I dove back into their online version for a while, but was appalled at how much further its content had fallen. 

Megan Basham's book, Shepherds for Sale, ended up on my Amazon wish list at some point, though I no longer remember who recommended it. Maybe I ought to raise its priority, because it was recently brought back to my attention, and piqued my interest further:

Tucker Carlson interviewed Basham, and it's a 25-minute show well worth watching. Now is not the time to bury our heads in the sand (or our busy lives). Among other things, it makes perfect sense of what happened to our once-favorite Christian magazine.

This post began with a simple meme that made me laugh.  Then I thought about it.

(I didn't make this up. I took it from Elon Musk on X, and who knows where he got it?)

The problem did not start with Joe Biden. It didn't start with Donald Trump. It didn't start with George Bush or Barack Obama. I don't know how far back the corruption goes. I don't even know what it is. The Deep State? The Administrative State? Bret Weinstein calls it Goliath. Others call it the Blob. A Christian might recognize it as Satan. It's not a person, though a large number of highly influential people are deeply involved; it's not a committee; it's not even an organization you can put your finger on, though plenty of committees and organizations are in it up to their necks. It's a force, and it has been driving our country at least since the Lyndon Johnson era, and probably before that.

The person who holds the office of president certainly matters—consider what has happened in just the last three and a half years—but not as much as one might think. There's something that has been driving our country steadily in the wrong direction for decades. It is unelected, responsible to no one, and doesn't care if it corrupts Republicans or Democrats as long as they do what they're supposed to do. Some people are more amenable to control than others, but no one is clean. This may sound like a conspiracy theory, but the evidence is convincing. I've been observing our culture for more than half a century, and this hypothesis is a curve that best fits the data points. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

We face a formidable foe. I don't know who they are, but I know they've been running the country behind the scenes for the past three years—it sure couldn't have been President Biden. Based on what has happened on her watch, which she has not repudiated, I'm 100% convinced that even if Kamala Harris is not complicit, she would, as president, continue to be led along the same disastrous path.

I don't know if Donald Trump has much of a chance; he tried in his first administration, with some success but some notable failure, too, especially in the COVID-19 debacle. I think he has become smarter and wiser from his experience. There's a lot about the man I don't like, but at least he, J. D. Vance, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and many other brave souls recognize what we are up against and are determined to fight against it. Yes, I do recognize that the people I just named, who are so enthusiastically working with President Trump, came from the Democratic Party. That's a good part of where I find encouragement: people of all parties are beginning to understand the situation and take action.

With two doctors in the family, and plenty of friends in the medical world, I have it on good authority that neurosurgeons, as a group, are a particularly nasty set of people. In general, I'm told, they are brash, egotistical, and opinionated to the point of extreme rudeness. Not the kind of people I would like for neighbors. Or friends. But if that's true, I strongly suspect that those personality traits are exactly what is needed for the kind of work they are called upon to do. If you're going to operate on people's brains, you need to believe you are the best for the job, and demand the best from everyone in the operating theater. You need supreme confidence in your opinions, your skills, your decisions, your equipment, and your coworkers. How else would you dare to touch a human brain? Would you want someone operating on your brain to be indecisive? To make his cuts without being certain that he is doing the right thing?

Jordan Peterson has wrestled with trying to figure out Donald Trump—he's a psychologist; that's what they do—and has suggested that the traits that turn people off may be exactly what he needs to succeed in his David versus Goliath mission. They had better be, because for now, he leads the greatest earthly hope we have.

Florida's state surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo, just went up another notch in my book. He is now recommending that Florida's cities that add fluoride to their water supply reconsider that practice.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not against fluoride as an aid to dental health. And once upon a time I was pleased to have fluoridated water, considering it to be a sign of a progressive city. I now believe I was wrong. (I have been wrong on occasion. Once upon a time I even thought it was a good idea to get the COVID-19 vaccine, a decision which I now regret.)

Maybe there was a point in time when it was a good idea to mass-medicate the population, but looking back, I don't think so. In any case, there are now so many other ways to obtain fluoride for dental purposes that it seems ridiculous to impose it on all the city's water customers. I'm not against fluoride, per se, but I am 100% against government-mandated ingestion of fluoride. Let those who want it avail themselves of the many options available, but let our water be pure and safe! Here's hoping we can convince our city to follow the surgeon general's recommendation.

In this I do envy our Swiss family, whose city water comes out of the tap as it comes out of the ground: no fluoride, no chlorine, just great-tasting, pure water.

UPDATE: I wrote to our mayor and our city commissioners, and received a response from the city manager, with whom I have already clashed on the issue of recycling. It was not encouraging. He hastens to reassure me that "you will be happy to know that the levels in our water [are] far lower than the level of fluoride in the study that concerned the Surgeon General," and "we are guided by the science." Well, no, that does not make me particularly happy. Any level of added fluoride is at best outdated, as fluoride for dental purposes is readily available in many forms for those who want it. Medicating the population, en masse and often against their will, is not an acceptable function of government.

Plus, the phrase "we are guided by the science" automatically raises red flags, as all too often it translates to, "we are guided by the pronouncements of whatever authorities we choose to follow," with little regard for how the process of science actually works. This is the same city manager who, when I asked where the materials that the city collects for recycling actually end up, showed no interest in what happens to it once the city passes it on to another agency.

I guess there's more work to be done. I hate politics, but the least I can do is speak up, so they can't insist that they must be right because no one is objecting.

I certainly should have known better.

For several years I worked in a research lab at a major university medical center. True, I only did the computer work (I have exactly one published paper to my name from those days), but even back in the 1970's it was obvious that the peer-reviewed papers/government grant system was, if not totally broken, at least rigged.

Moreover, I spent much of my life learning that "the system" was not to be trusted in many fields. I think it began when my mother, following the customs and recommendations of both society and the medical experts, fed her newborn infants a mixture of diluted evaporated milk and Karo corn syrup, instead of breastfeeding.

But it didn't really hit me until I had children of my own, and observed again and again that the best course of action seemed to be to do exactly the opposite of what the experts recommended and society accepted without question. From birth and childrearing practices to educational decisions to nutritional and medical choices, life taught me that "going with the flow" was often a very bad plan.

So why, why, why did I willingly, even eagerly, accept the COVID shots? Two reasons.

One, working in medical research had provided opportunities to perhaps make a difference in the world, and one of these was being a test subject for the development of the Haemophilus Influenza B vaccine. Porter and I have been blood donors for decades. Our DNA is part of a medical research database. In other words, we've always tried to be good citizens on the medical front.

I like to think that was a good thing. But it predisposed me to being willing to try the COVID shot for the good of the world. Plus, the pressure was great back then that COVID-19 was deadly for the elderly, and our children were worried about their parents.

Still, I feel really stupid for trusting the medical establishment that this was "safe and effective and the only way to keep from killing grandmothers." I knew better. I knew, and even proclaimed at the time, that when the government and medical authorities make such broad statements they are lying. They must be, if only because nothing—especially nothing so novel—can be known to be safe without long-term trials.

By far the biggest factor, however, in our decision to get the shots was blackmail. We have family living overseas, and the only way we could visit them was to submit to the jab. Grandchildren change so fast, even in the course of a year. Even stateside family was largely cut off. We missed a big family reunion, and a nephew's wedding, and barely made the wedding of another nephew. Florida relaxed its restrictions relatively early on, but several long-planned events could not have happened without our vaccination cards, thanks to the restrictions imposed by other states. It was much worse for other people; at least we didn't miss any funerals, or lose our jobs.

Knowing what I know now, would I have willingly closed the door that the magic compliance card opened? I certainly hope so, but I can't honestly say I'd have made the sacrifice.

Nonetheless, I feel stupid, betrayed, and very, very angry.

We're all probably going to die when a more dangerous pandemic hits, because the trust is gone. At least the boy who cried wolf only got himself killed.

I know some mama bears who need to hear this message from yesterday. I don't want to send it to them individually, for a couple of reasons. One, even though I may be convinced that something about a video will resonate with a particular person, I could be wrong, and maybe even offend that person. I'd much rather make something available and let people decide for themselves. Secondly, even in a small audience like mine, I know there is someone who would benefit from it, though I have no idea who. Maybe some papa bears. Maybe some young people who are facing life with courage and joy yet are feeling old before their time. Who knows? So I put it out there. If you're not feeling overwhelmed and overstressed, feel free to skip this wisdom that is both Christian and Cherokee.

It is from the YouTube channel, Appalachia's Homestead with Patara. I've only been following it since Hurricane Helene, when I friend sent me a link to one of Patera's posts about the devastation there. News from Western North Carolina and East Tennessee was spotty at best, and those with already established communications channels (who weren't totally cut off) were a godsend. This quote is from her About section:

How a suburban family left it all behind in order to homeschool & homestead in Appalachia. Learn how to begin homesteading and to learn vital skills such as gardening, food preservation, animal husbandry, homeschooling, genealogy and more! We have chickens, turkeys, geese, quail, ducks, dairy cows, dairy goats, rabbits, 3 Great Pyrenees & the cutest farm cat around! Come along with us on our journey as we follow our Appalachian roots!

The video is 25 minutes long and does well at increased speed. I hope it is meaningful to some of you, but if not, that's okay, just move on.

Consider this: The election of President Trump may be all that stands between us and nuclear war.

Does that sound crazy to you?

Okay, here's something crazier: President Biden just authorized the Ukraine to attack deep into Russian territory using American missiles.

This, like encouraging the Ukraine to join NATO, crosses another "red line" for Russia. From the BBC article linked above:

In September President Putin warned that if this were allowed to happen, Moscow would view it as the "direct participation" of Nato countries in the Ukraine war.

"This would mean that Nato countries… are fighting with Russia," he continued.

The following month, the Kremlin leader announced imminent changes to the Russian nuclear doctrine, the document setting out the preconditions under which Moscow might decide to use a nuclear weapon.

This was widely interpreted as another less-than-subtle hint to America and Europe not to allow Ukraine to strike Russian territory with long-range missiles.

This is 'way beyond "poking the bear."

It almost makes me believe those who say there are many in our government (with both D's and R's after their names) who want us to go to war with Russia. Who want us to go to war with Iran. Who are actively pushing us into these wars.

That is no garden-variety crazy. That is pathologically insane.

I've said from the beginning of the 2022 escalation of America's involvement in the fight between Russia and the Ukraine that we seem intent on leaving President Putin no way to save face, to back off without being utterly defeated, which strikes me as stupid on any number of fronts. Who in his right mind could possibly want to set off World War III? Seriously. Why do we continue to push Russia into an ever and ever tighter corner? Desperate people—and desperate countries—do desperate things. This is no situation of "we think maybe Iraq has weapons of mass destruction." We know Russia has them, and we should not be leaving nuclear, chemical, and/or biological warfare as their only options.

Even if we could keep a confrontation to conventional warfare, do you think the American military is adequately prepared for such a fight, likely on several fronts? I have no such confidence. Certainly the American public is not ready. Military standards, recruitment, and satisfaction in the ranks are all suffering. If FEMA couldn't find enough generators to help out Appalachia after Hurricane Helene because we gave them to the Ukraine, what about all our military equipment that went that direction? Sure, we can rebuild with newer and better equipment, but That. Takes. Time. Time we may not have. And money we certainly do not have.

Do you really want to bring back conscription? Maybe if you haven't lived through the Vietnam Era you can't understand the devastation that the draft brought to individuals, families, communities, and the entire country. If you think we are broken and divided and hurting now....

"Bodily autonomy" has proved to be a powerful rallying cry on both sides of the aisle, with Democrats using it primarily to mean the right to have an abortion, and Republicans using it primarily to mean the right to not have a COVID shot. Everyone agrees that the government's authority over our bodies and those of our minor children should be extremely limited. Everyone except those who favor conscription, that is. 

Even that doesn't matter if the nukes start flying.

I'm praying that President Putin will remember that in a couple of months we'll have a new president, and be restrained in his response. New administrations can often be an excuse, welcomed on both sides, to break impasses—as when the hostages held by Iran for more than a year were finally released as soon as Ronald Reagan took office.

I suppose it's possible that this apparently unhinged action on the part of President Biden is actually a move calcuated to put incoming President Trump in a better negotiating position with the Russians. If so, I'd still call it more crazy than clever. But I'll be praying that it works.

I can't take credit for this, as it was inspired by something Bret Weinstein said in this DarkHorse Podcast (approximately 65 minutes in). But it's different enough that I can't make it a direct quotation.

It struck me this morning as both wise and widely applicable. As I've repeatedly said, we each have our part to do, and the results aren't up to us. But we can't know how close someone is to making a life-changing decision, and it would be good at the end of all things to discover that our own actions and attitudes have nudged people in a good direction, instead of hindering their progress.

I feel as if I could sleep for a week.  And not write another word for a month.  Neither is going to happen.

I won't deny that I'm relieved by many of the election results so far. Perhaps the most unexpected was the fate of Florida's most controversial proposed state constitutional amendments, one having to do with marijuana and the other with abortion. From all that I heard, they seemed certain to pass. But apparently enough voters, even if they agreed with the overall sentiments of the amendments, realized that both were over-reaching and dangerous. I'm not going to argue either point here; I'm just very pleasantly surprised. Florida's constitution is far too easy to amend, and I'm glad we escaped this. The same issues are likely to come up again as legislation, which is where they should be addressed.

As for the presidential race, I'm cautiously optimistic. And especially grateful for the Amish, who got 'way out of their comfort zones and voted, and for the people of western North Carolina, who quite literally went through hell and high water to exercise their rightful franchise.

Most of all, it is time to remember, as we should after every presidential election, that approximately half of our fellow-countrymen—our neighbors, co-workers, friends, and families—are genuinely saddened, frightened, and maybe deeply depressed by the results. This is not some football game; it is our country, our world, and our future. Celebrating a well-earned victory is appropriate; exulting in the streets, or otherwise gloating—anywhere other than among similarly-minded friends—is unkind. Whatever one may believe the essential battle for the health of America may be, it can only be won in human hearts; kindness and sympathy for those who are feeling disenfranchised might be a great place to begin.