Gabbard could have done more

Last night, the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald Trump. The vote finally ends the chapter of whether Liberals would move forward with the impeachment process.
The first article passed 230-197. The second passed 229-198. Not surprisingly, the voting fell along party lines.

Representative Tulsi Gabbard, who is also running for the Liberal Party's nomination, did not vote for or against the impeachment. Gabbard simply voted "Present". Gabbard explained on her Twitter page why she did not commit to "Yea" or "Nay". Gabbard said it was, "an active protest against a zero-sum game," and hoped people could work together.

I have said before that the impeachment process is, in my opinion, nothing more than one political party upset about losing the Presidential Election. Trump's policies have been working and the economy is red-hot. I don't know how Gabbard feels about the work the President is doing. Did she speak on the floor asking people to come together at this time. Did she ask to end the divisive politics that people had been engaging in? I don't recall if she ever did such a thing. Stepping up and addressing her friends within the Party would have sent a strong message to the entire House of Representatives. It would have shown Americans that she was not afraid to stand up to people in her party and that she was truly willing to put the country first.

What then? Would she be on the outs with her party for not participating in the impeachment. Would she lose support not only in her presidential run but also in a re-election attempt? Was Gabbard upset with the process on Capitol Hill but not so upset she was willing to offend the Rank-and-File of her party?

That's too bad. It would have shown Americans that she wasn't afraid to stand up for what is right. It would have shown all that she was someone who could reach out to the other side of the aisle and work with everybody. Everyone has been talking about it. Gabbard had an opportunity to do just that.

Open Mind, Open Ears

Earlier, I wrote a story about our neighbors. I was wondering if they talk to you or if you talk to them. I'm disappointed in the decline of neighborhoods and how little people talk to each other anymore.

I read an article in Medium.com about conversations. I found the article to be a great read because it dealt with things people do when they're in conversations. I'll give you a hint: they're not listening.

It seems a lot of people are in a rush these days. People run into each other and start to talk. Sometimes, they will act like they are talking to an old boyfriend or girlfriend. Everything is a competition and they are trying to make they're story seem better than the one their counterpart told or are in the middle of telling. People don't listen. "When can they finish so I can tell him/her how much better my story is?"

That's when the interruptions start. It's not a conversation anymore. It's a contest. You can't even call it a debate. Conversations involve listening as well as speaking.

We've all encountered this before more than once. I'm sure of it. When I hear it, I don't get involved. I just give them the victory their ego seeks and move on. Sometimes I will add a little something about what I was saying: a little more detail. Sometimes I will ask them something about their bigger, better, grander story. Sometimes they enjoy it and seize the chance to expand on their exploit. Sometimes I inadvertently call a bluff and they can't detail their made-up story and the subject is dropped. It's too bad because I am genuinely interested in hearing what they have to say.

You don't have to win every little thing when you run into somebody. Sometimes it's okay to just have a conversation for the sake of having a conversation. There are bigger problems to worry about after you've talked to him/her. Enjoy it. Maybe you'll even learn something walking out of it.

Beacon Hill Plastic Ban

Beacon Hill is currently debating a bill that would make it illegal to use plastic shopping bags. The bill is intended to protect the environment by having consumers use reusable shopping bags and refrain from plastic and paper. Provisions of the bill would call for a nonrefundable 10-cent fee for every paper or plastic bag used until August 19. The money will be kept by the store.

This legislation is well-intended but it will not solve all of the problems. I ask for paper bags when I go shopping and recycle the paper bags. There are times I will ask for plastic bags and that is when there is nothing to line the wastebaskets in my house. I reuse the plastic shopping bags. They can come in handy.

It is also less plastic being used. Reusing the plastic bags means you are not buying more plastic bags for trash. There are people who use the plastic bags for trash bags in their homes and their cars. They are used for diaper bags. They are used for transporting things when they travel. Some people even use them for lunch bags. Getting rid of the plastic bags is well-intended but it will open doors for more plastic products to be consumed.

I understand the fee. It is meant to get people to use reusable bags but why not have more recycling services instead of literally nickel and diming people who are shopping. Give people more of an incentive to recycle and reuse instead of looking for another way to cost them money.

Don Cherry just the latest Casualty

Don Cherry is known as much for his hockey knowledge as he is for his flamboyant suits. His segments on "Hockey Night in Canada" were popular throughout the country not only for his insight but also for the "What's he going to say next?" element. Cherry's unpredictability made for some extra work for Co-Host Ron MacLean who would have to jump in from time to time in case "Grapes" was getting to close to the edge.

MacLean offered no such services last Saturday when he and Cherry appeared on HNIC's popular "Coach's Corner" segment where Cherry's insight frequently ranged from Left Wing Locks to what local eatery had the best wings and included everything in between. Nothing was out of Cherry's peripheral.

Grapes' delving into non-hockey issues was on the forefront on what turned out to be his swan song with CBC Television. Saturday's opinions involved Canada's Remembrance Day. Although he did not specifically mention immigrants, Cherry left little doubt who he was referring to when he mentioned, "You people come here. You love our way of life..." Don Cherry was fired by CBC for what the Network called, "divisive remarks that do not represent our values or what we stand for."

MacLean's original reaction to Cherry's opinion was a nod and a thumbs-up. MacLean later apologized for the segments and said he, "sat there and did not respond," despite looking right at his co-host and nodding as Cherry made his comments.

Don Cherry is the latest example of not being able to say something without offending someone. His employer made a knee-jerk reaction just incase there would be protestors outside Headquarters and wanted to show the entire country there is no place for intolerance.

By the way, what did Grapes do that was so hateful and vitriolic? Did he tell the immigrants to leave Canada? Did he tell foreigners to go back to where they came from? No. He reminded people that they love Canada's way of life they should pay a couple of dollars for a poppy to wear to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. He said nothing derogatory about the immigrants. He just reminded them about those who fought to defend Canada's freedom and the meaning of the poppy in Canada and why they should do it.

Cherry did not mean any ill will to foreign-born or native-born Canadians. He just wanted to remind the people watching of the real reason for the holiday. Some Canadians took it the wrong way. Sportsnet took it even more wrong than that.

Local Eatery Leaves Another Void

Stoughton is a middle-class town on Massachusetts' South Shore located off Route 24. Washington Street is a main drag that will take you to routes 93 and 95 via the neighboring town of Canton. There is a lot of fun things to do in town but unfortunately, you can't seem to find a lot of restaurants to sit down and eat. Stoughton, like a lot of towns, has it's share of fast-food joints and there are a few diners where people can get a good breakfast or an early lunch but when it comes to a place you can have dinner, the town is lacking.

The two places that come to mind for dinner are Amelia's and Foleys. Foley's is a family-friendly restaurant that serves great comfort food. Amelia's is an upscale restaurant that doesn't disappoint. Both restaurants are at opposite parts of town. In between is Cheng-Du for Chinese food and various pizza and sandwich shops. A sports bar "Last Shot" was in Stoughton before shutting down for good and LaStoria's, an Italian restaurant, wasn't far from downtown before it closed down. The building was briefly taken over by Morrell's, a barbecue joint that never disappointed. Morrell's started as a food truck that operated at various points in town before moving into the former Lastoria's. Recently Morrell's announced on its Facebook page it was shutting down its restaurant and going back to operating its food truck and would continue to serve food at various locations including private parties.

This is disappointing to me for two main reasons. First, I like going to Morrell's. The menu is rather limited but what they offer is incredible. If you haven't tried it, you should. Find their food truck and send me a nice "Thank You" note when you finish. You're welcome.

The second reason is that Stoughton doesn't have much in the realm of restaurants. It is saturated with fast-food restaurants and sandwich shops. Stoughton is a town that always has events and festivals year-round. The events don't cost you anything. All you have to do is show up and have a good time. Someone along the way is picking up the tab and if it isn't the town itself, it's a small business that wants to give back to the community. A place to sit down for a meal would be a great way for people who might be hungry but tired to cook and their kids probably want something to eat and there's nothing at home. I hope the town of Stoughton has a plan to bring restaurants in. There has been a lot of talk about revitalizing the downtown area. A place for people to get together would go a long way toward that revitalization. It will bring more money into the local economy. That never hurts.

Lots of Errors in this Era

A pedestrian was killed by a self-driving Uber car in Arizona last year. The accident prompted a 20-month investigation by the NTSB and re-kindled the debate over self-driving cars.

The main point of the report released by the National Transportation Safety Board was that Uber's technology was not able to detect "jaywalkers" and can only detect people crossing the street when they are in crosswalks. A spokesperson for Uber has reported technology improvements now allows for cars to detect pedestrians and bicycle riders who do not follow the rules of the road.

Anyone who has driven a car just once knows there are drivers, bike riders, and pedestrians who do not follow the rules of the road. How does a company that wants to introduce self-driving cars not account for that before the first models are rolled out? There are always people in a rush. People who are late for work. People who are tired and want to get home. Everyone, myself included, has had a situation where they roll through a stop sign, speed to get where they need to be, pass cars legally or illegally because of some type of emergency and they need get there.

It's not right but people do it. You get out of Driver's Ed armed with the rules of the road and think you are ready to take on the Urban Jungle, then you encounter your first rotary, roundabout, or traffic circle and watch all the law and order fly out the window because someone forgot to tell you they are more important and don't need to follow the rules.

Now let's get to the "User Error" part of the story. Where was the car's driver/passenger in all this? According to a story in AZCentral, she was watching a video on her phone; Not paying attention to the road. Why should she? The car was driving.

Is there some type of human override in a self-driving car? Is there a way for a person in the car to apply a brake or steer if there is a situation the car cannot anticipate? Again, how does the manufacturer not allow for these scenarios when designing or building the car? Was there a horn that could have been sounded? Did the passenger look up from time to time to check out her surroundings?

Driving for me is fun. Sometimes I am the passenger and that allows me to do things that would take my eyes and mind off of the road but if I am the only one in the vehicle, I am paying attention to my surroundings. I don't see the fun or need for self-driving cars, personally. Tragedies like the one that occurred in Arizona are precisely why. There are too many unknown factors when being out on the road that can arise when you are getting from point A to point B. If we are going to continue with technology and "Progress" entering our lives and making things easier and convenient for us, there needs to be an allowance for the unknown. We can all start by looking up from our technology from time to time and check out what or who is around us. There's a big world out there with a lot of people trying to live their lives.

Punished for Practicing Religion

Noor Abukaram is a junior who runs for Sylvania Northview High School's cross-country team in Sylvania, Ohio. She is a Muslim and wears a hijab when she is running.

Abukaram learned after running a race last Saturday that she had been disqualified for wearing her hijab, which is a violation of the uniform code.

Before the race, it was reported in Yahoo! that a teammate of Abukaram was told to change her shorts because what she was wearing violated the same code. Abukaram later said she was worried she would be told to remove her hijab, which she wears as required of her religion.

The officials concluded their inspection without saying anything to Abukaram. Unbeknownst to her, officials informed her coach she would be disqualified from the race because of her hijab and her time would not be recorded in the official results.

A student was told to change her shorts before the race. Abukaram was inspected at the same time and nothing was said about her hijab. Officials not doing their due diligence in making sure students are eligible to participate in athletic events is the smaller of the problems with this story. Abukaram has a First Amendment Right to practice her religion. Her hijab is required by her religion. If officials had really wanted to make sure the she was in line with the uniform code, why not mention something to her before the race. Why was the hijab out of code? Did the color not match her uniform? I'm sure there was a sporting goods store nearby where she could have gotten one that would have matched the rest of her uniform.

Abukaram's coach, Jerry Flowers, said there was no time to appeal the decision and said, "the official didn't feel he had the authority to do the right thing and not disqualify her." This does not take the onus off of the coach. Where was the Athletic Director? Where was the principal. I'm certain Flowers had a cell phone on him at the time. Why didn't he call his superiors? Why wasn't more done for a teenager whose violation stemmed from practicing her religion? Does Sylvania Northview's handbook trump the Unites States Constitution? Is there a clause that voids Abukaram's Federally-guaranteed right to practice her faith?

Abukaram was disqualified because of the incompetence of the league. Worse than that, school officials and her coach essentially abandoned her when she needed their support, which she got from her teammates. Unfortunately, teenagers' moral support doesn't hold water compared to the ruling and decisions of adults, no matter now ignorant and absurd those decisions may be.

Offended? There's a Law for That

Daniel Hunt, a Massachusetts State House Representative for the 13th District (parts of Boston and Quincy) has introduced legislation that would make it a civil infraction to use the word "bitch" if directed at or used to describe someone.

Boston Magazine reported on the matter, citing an earlier story by the Boston Herald. Hunt, a Liberal. was quoted as saying a constituent approached him regarding the word and its offensive nature in certain contexts and asked if the State representative would do something that could curtail its use.
Hunt's proposed legislation is actually an amendment to an existing law regarding "night walkers... street walkers," and, "disorderly houses".

This looks like another case of not being able to say something without someone getting offended. Once again, the right to express an opinion, albeit derogatory, is ending where one's feelings begin.

Where does this new law end? Is it a crime to call someone a "son of" one? Is there a "second-degree" charge if someone gets caught up in the heat of the moment? What if someone is in traffic and commits the civil infraction? Will others in the same traffic be called to testify if allegations are made? I'm not making a joke. I'm being serious. How will this be enforced?

Aren't the police saddled with enough petty offenses passed by Beacon Hill? It's a crime now to not have your headlights on if you're using your wipers. Don't forget about the other laws that are already on the books the police need to enforce. Some of these laws do actually hurt people bodily; not just their feelings.

There are plenty of issues larger than this one that require lawmakers' attention. You'd think they would focus on that. Then again, this is Massachusetts.

The Improbable Road to Impeachment

There are people calling for Trump's impeachment. How much of this is crimes against the Constitution and how much of this is just people who are upset that Hillary Clinton lost the election?

Not surprisingly, the opinions are divided among party lines. More conservatives are happy with the job President Trump is doing and more liberals feel he should be removed from office.

Let's look at the impeachment process. The first step is underway. The House of Representatives, controlled by the Liberals (54%), have delivered articles of impeachment against the President. An investigation is underway and at the conclusion of that, the Senate will vote on whether to remove the President from office. Let's assume it reaches the Senate before the 2020 election. There are 53 Republicans in the Senate Chamber. You need at least 67 votes in order to remove the president from office.

As of right now, this is not a likely scenario. If the process were to continue beyond the 2020 Election (a more likely possibility), the Liberals would need to win 20 seats in the Senate. I personally do not see this as likely to happen.

Let's say it does happen. What then? Who becomes President? Mike Pence. Do you think Trump's policies will end the day he becomes removed from office. Hardly. Pence has done what any other vice president would do: speak with the same voice at the rest of the administration. What do the Liberals in Congress expect? Do they think there will be a shift in ideology and policy? Maybe, but it won't be one that will move much in the direction they campaign for.

Donald Trump is not a perfect human being. No one is. In my opinion, the attempt to impeach the President is motivated by the same reasons that motivated calls for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton: One party lost the election and people can't live with that. When it's your candidate that lost the election, you can look for ways to remove the victor from office or you can live with the results. Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Liberals have chosen to look for ways to remove the victor.

Would Less Taxes be More?

I have a property tax that is due in a few weeks. No one likes taxes unless you work in the assessor's office, right? I'm kidding. I'm sure the paperwork and workload can be a hassle sometimes.

There's a lot of talk about the municipal taxes, especially about property taxes. People are concerned about the home values rising and senior citizens not being able to afford the property taxes on their homes. Capping values for senior citizens has been a way of keeping the tax to an affordable amount.

Cities and towns need money. We all do. Municipal employees need to be paid: teachers, police, DPW, town officials. There has to be a way of bringing money in to meet those bills. we have property taxes, vehicle excise taxes, water bill, sewer. Some towns charge extra for trash pickup and other towns go so far as making you buy trash bags from the town itself and if you don't use those bags, your trash won't be collected. True story.

There are an awful lot of taxes and fees today. I'm not using this forum to bash City Hall for nickel and diming people. I understand there are bills to pay. We all have them. What if your city (town) tries something different?

• Take your "Taxable Income" line from your 1040 when you file your taxes.
• Take a percentage of that number (anywhere from 2.5% to 5%).
• Divide the number into quarterly installments.
• Give a 5% discount to employees of local business and business based in that city (excluding town/city employees)

Would this bring in more money? I don't know. I don't know how much you make and I don't know how much money your local government brings in. There's been a lot of talk about people, "paying their fair share," so here's a chance to do that. You can stop worrying about your home being assessed. No more squabbling between neighbors over why one house is valued this way but the other house is valued that way. Pay what you earn. The more you earn, the more you pay, and the more you can contribute to improving where you live. Hopefully, this could be a way to further improve cities and towns. Less Bills would be sent out meaning less paper. That's better for the environment. Maybe enough would be brought in to eliminate user fees for school sports. Ease the burden for all and people wouldn't worry about having their properties assessed and feeling penalized for taking care of what they own.

It's Haunted!

There was some talk last weekend about haunted places on Indie617, an internet radio station I enjoy listening to for my fix of alternative music. The talk was about finding haunted places and ghosts and if anyone had visited them and if they had seen or heard anything while they were there.

Before I go on, I want to remind you that some of these places are private properties and trespassing is forbidden. Please make sure it is alright to go on these properties and be sure to respect the wishes of property owners and the orders of law enforcement.

I have visited some places that are reputed to be haunted but have not witnessed or experienced anything. I hope you have better luck than me. One of my favorite websites to visit to find out about haunted places is theshadowlands.net. This site has an extensive list of places around the world that are said to be haunted. If you have anything to verify or refute this, please let me know. Also, if you know of other websites that can lead people to haunted places, I would like to know about those to. It's a great thing to check out with Halloween coming up.

Redskins need just a simple fix

The Washington Redskins are 0-4 and this week they will host the 4-0 New England Patriots. There are a number of storylines surrounding the Redskins and they all seem to stem from the same issue: the front office or, to be more specific, Owner Daniel Snyder.

To me, Snyder comes across as the spoiled little boy who has a big pile of money and spends it anything he wants. That's fine. That's his right. Unfortunately, he doesn't know how to use what he buys and no matter who tries to show him the proper way to use it or at least tries to prevent it to be broken, they are wrong and little Danny is right.

The owner of the team is the top of the heap. It is they who is able to call the shots and pull rank on the employees when it comes to all decisions in the company. Running the business is one thing. Having people who know the intricacies of handling player selection, talent evaluation and hiring coaches is another. Let's go back to the Patriots.

The New England Patriots were the tackling dummy and laughingstock of the NFL in the late 1980's and early 1990's. They were bought and sold multiple times during that period until Bob Kraft stepped in and bought the team in 1994. Kraft was a fan who wanted to keep the Patriots in New England. Any fan younger than 30 may not remember the Patriots being so bad you couldn't get the game on TV. A waiting list for season tickets? You couldn't give the tickets away.

Everything was going well for the Patriots until a slight misunderstanding between Kraft and Head Coach Bill Parcells at the 1996 NFL Draft. Kraft was enamored with Terry Glenn, a wide receiver from Ohio State. Parcells wanted to spend the number one draft pick on a defensive player. As owner of the team, Kraft overruled Parcells and Glenn was drafted by the Patriots. The move led to Parcells saying, "If they want you to cook dinner, they should at least let you shop for the groceries." The quote has embedded itself in New England sports lore.

Glenn's time with the Patriots was unpredictable and filled with controversy on the field and off.. He played with the Patriots until the 2000 season. By that time, Parcells had left the Patriots and Kraft was starting to realize he didn't know as much about football as he thought he did.

Sadder and wiser, Kraft hired Bill Belichick, ironically, after speaking to Parcells and trading draft picks to the New York Jets. The result has been an era of success not seen in any of the four major sports.

It all happened because Kraft finally realized he wasn't as knowledgeable as he believed he was. His ego took a hit but allowing himself to take a step back has resulted in six Super Bowl wins in nine appearances. Snyder still doesn't get it. He thinks he know it all. He thinks being the owner is an automatic degree in the science of football. It's not. In the time the Patriots have tallied a 6-3 record in football's ultimate game, The Redskins have managed to make the playoffs four times and win one game.

What does this mean for fans of the Redskins. It means nothing. It means nothing is going to change. Snyder continues to drive the Redskins into the ground. The arena is half-empty and fans are waiting to see what will happen first: Will Head Coach Jay Gruden quit or will he be fired? Whatever the outcome, Gruden will not be back for the 2020 season. It's like the house in the neighborhood where the parents are always arguing and everyone sees it but the problematic spouse. They are going to be alone unless they change their ways. Even after they are left alone, they will not be able to see what happened or why the atmosphere is toxic.

What happens? My opinion is this: Things will get so bad Snyder will move the team to a city that will build him a stadium and people, excited about getting an NFL franchise will pack it in. This will continue until Snyder continues his destructive management style, the team continues to lose, and the stadium looks half-empty. Think that won't happen? Go ask fans of the Baltimore Colts or the original Cleveland Browns if a historic team relocating is unfathomable.

The Washington Redskins fortunes will not change until Dan Snyder learns he needs to get out of his own way and let football people make football decisions. When he does that, the Redskins will return to the success and lore that made them one of the most storied franchises of professional sports. Unfortunately, the problem person in a situation is always the last to know they are the problem... If they realize it at all.

Rodney Lynn was wrong

Greta Thunberg addressed the United Nations last week in another attempt to call the world's attention to global warming and climate change. I didn't agree with Thunberg's statements or the tactics used by whatever sponsors that brought her to the United States to give the speech. My opposition to Thunberg herself, however, starts and ends with that.

My opposition doesn't go as far as Rodney Lynn, a principal of an Australian private school principal who called Thunberg "a little girl with self-declared... problems." In an earlier post, I called on environmental protestors to refrain from demonstrating and vociferously spreading messages about the environment with megaphones and chanting. The environment would be better served if people just acted and did their part to make sure Earth remains a livable habitat.

That doesn't mean a child, or anyone for that matter should be slandered. How bad have things gotten that a school official needs to publicly insult a teenager? Someone whose duty it is to guide and educate other children has used that position to refer to opinions about the Environment as "Doomsday waffle talk," in a letter sent out to parents last week. Lynn went on to say the World's fate would be up to God and God alone.

Lynn's ignorance is dangerous. Professing belief in God and saying the world's fate is up to him is one thing but to insult someone, adult or child, is something completely different. Again, I don't believe in the context of Thurnberg's statements or in the tactics leading up to her speech but I certainly don't agree with mud-slinging either. At the very least, Lynn owes Thunberg an apology and it should be just as public as the verbal attack.

Change the System

The electoral college was created 232 years ago because news travelled slow when the Constitution was being written. The Founding Fathers weren't sure if voters would be totally informed. The Literacy Rate was low and they wanted to make sure the right person would be elected. the way to assure this at the time was to have people vote for the Electoral College. It is rather convoluted and some people may find it to be archaic but the goal was, "to form a more perfect union," not a perfect union. That is Utopian. Impossible.

There was a call to abolish the Electoral College in 2016 after Donald Trump defeated Hilary Clinton. Coincidentally, those who called for the abolition were supporters of Clinton, who won the popular vote despite losing in the category that counted: The Electoral College. I could have taken these calls seriously if they had been made before the election. Instead, it was just a bunch of people looking to change the rules in order to give their candidate the win.

There was more talk about changes to the voting system before that. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the Chair of the Democratic National Committee before it was learned she had interfered with the nomination process and conspired against Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. No one was crying foul over that. Why not?

There has been plenty of talk of a long, dragged out election process, especially when it comes to deciding the President of the United States. Again, I wish to remind you that the voters have been holding the cards all along. Those who wish to elect third-party candidates can. All you have to do is vote who you want to win and not who you think will win.

Here's my suggestion: Let's abolish with the Electoral College, the Primary Season, and the Political Party system in general. One person, one vote. No delegates. No Superdelegates. I'll take the most recent Presidential Election as an example.

Candidate          Votes

Hillary Clinton   17,174,180
Donald Trump   13,310,471
Bernie Sanders   13,243,376
John Kasich          4,139,352
Ted Cruz               7,393,794
Marco Rubio         3,353,864
Ben Carson              807,920
Jeb Bush                  280,934
Martin O'Malley      110,216
Rand Paul                  58,127
Chris Christie            54,938
Mike Huckabee         48,397
Carly Fiorina             37,447

Under my proposed system, Hillary Clinton would be elected President of the United States. Donald Trump would be elected Vice President. The President could choose their own Secretary of State or we could go further down the list and make Bernie Sanders the Secretary. This system would resurrect the system that chose the President and Vice President for the first three presidential administrations of this nation.

The obvious issue to this proposal is that there could be people in offices from different parties but the basic idea is that there would be no more parties. Everyone is tired of the gridlock. Everyone is tired of the partisan bickering. Here is suggestion. Nancy Pelosi said it was time to put country before party. Here is our chance to do that very thing.

Trump Impeachment

The House of Representatives is debating the impeachment of President Donald Trump after Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for an impeachment inquiry. The inquiry comes after Trump asked the Ukranian Government to investigate the family of former Vice President Joe Biden.

Pelosi said, "The President must be held accountable. No one is above the law." She also went on to say it would be done to, "defend our Constitution," and, "keep our republic."

Pelosi invokes the responsibility Congress is charged with as a reason for going down this path. The truth is this: Liberals in Congress have been looking for any reason to get rid of Donald Trump. Stormy Daniels didn't work. Russian collusion didn't work. Now they have a transcript of a phone call and they are hoping there is enough evidence of wrongdoing to remove Trump from office.
Of course, none of this is partisan. Congress, specifically the Democrats, just want to preserve the Republic and the Constitution.

The same thing happened in 1998. In that time it was a Liberal, Bill Clinton. Clinton was being investigated for (wait for it) whether he was lying about being faithful to his wife. Can you imagine if there was an investigation every time a public official may have cheated on his spouse? Again, people just wanted the facts. A fair process. We can do this civilly.

It's not getting better. It's getting worse. People continue to talk and act, "for the good of the Nation." Are they, though? While people on both sides of the aisle call on their "friends and colleagues" to, "stand with them on the right side of History," what are they really doing? They are telling their political opponents to go along with their agenda. Do they really think they are selling their agenda to the American people?

Changes to Political Posts

I have been long-disenchanted with the political system for some time. Readers will find that to be no surprise. Therefore, I will not be referring to people as Democrats or Republicans anymore. The political spectrum has been polarized for a long time and I feel these terms no longer apply and insult the leaders and statesmen (statespeople?) of the past. I feel it is best to refer to people as they truly are: Liberals or Conservatives.

So You've Protested... Now What?

There's been a lot of talk about a lot of things lately. There's been a lot of posturing, a lot of talk, a lot of hyperbole. There's been a lot of mugging for cameras and a lot of nice speeches being made about a lot of things. You see people on TV standing in the streets holding signs and blocking traffic. People are talking and demonstrating but not doing much else.

You saw that yesterday when a crowd of protestors took to the streets in Washington D.C. yesterday. Protestors literally took their cause to the streets as they stood in the middle of major intersections with signs to show the world they are fed up with the "lack of action" on the part of world leaders and they want their clean and green planet back. Stealing the spotlight, however, was a 16-year-old girl from Sweden named Greta Thunberg. Thunberg was the United Nations to deliver a speech regarding the dire situation the Earth and its climate is in due to the neglect and abuse by people and corporations in first-world and developing countries alike. Her scathing, "How dare you," reprimand has become the latest YouTube staple and eco-rallying cry for champions of the environment everywhere.

Again, this is a nice story for they climate activists and Thunberg has no doubt ingrained herself in the minds of people on both sides of the debate. A nice moment for the cause but what has it really accomplished?

Climate activists are demanding change. They are demanding action. What are they really doing?

"They're bringing people's attention to the problem," people may respond but hasn't that been the case for 30 years? Hasn't speaking, marching and protesting, calling for change been the standard for those who are so concerned about their future?

How did people get there? Thunberg came from across the Atlantic Ocean. She should have been,  "back at school on the other side of the ocean," according to her speech but instead she took a Transatlantic flight to make her point about neglectful leaders who "stole her dreams and childhood with empty words."

What exactly did this accomplish? What were Thunberg or protest organizers hoping to accomplish by staging this protest that came complete with a doctor's note? Wouldn't the environment be better served by having people like Thunberg staying home and finding local businesses whose practices benefit or don't impact the environment as much. Wouldn't the environment be better served by supporting those businesses? Why not call people's attention to such businesses instead of causing people to sit in idling cars while people block their way to work or home or a doctor's appointment?

Standing in people's way and calling attention to a plight doesn't accomplish anything constructive. It only fuels more frustration. The next time someone wants to show concern for the environment make sure you are supporting a business that uses "green" materials and be sure to let your friends know about it. Just be sure to do it on the sidewalk or over the phone so the rest of the world can continue with its business. Lead by example and let everyone know what can they can really do instead of grandstanding and telling yourself you have made a difference.

Hello, Neighbor (With apologies to Naragansett)

Yesterday I ran into a couple who used to live in my neighborhood until last year. I would see them from time to time sitting on their front steps and I would chat with them as I was doing things around the yard or coming and going to and from various errands people do everyday. It was a common occurrence but one that I always liked. I grew up in a neighborhood where everyone knew everyone and people were always talking to each other. Kids were always playing with each other and the grown-ups would be together at a planned occasion or just a chat that turns into a couple of beers and a little more chat.

We lamented to each other about our respective neighborhoods and how that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. This is partly because of the realities of Suburbia today. More and more neighborhoods are bedroom communities. People spend most of their time out of work getting to and from work. One of my neighbors leaves his house at 6:00 in the morning to be on time to his job. He is understandably tired at the end of the day and he is in bed early at night, tired from the commute, the job, and he needs to be up early the next morning so he can be back at it again.

My old neighbors and I came to the same conclusion: No one talks to people anymore. There are houses with lights on and flickering television sets. Nothing else. I take walks around the neighborhood and see the same thing on every street: dimly lit houses closed up for the night.

I'm not going to pretend I shun electronics or don't watch TV. I do and I like it. I just remember the warmer nights of the year when kids would be playing until their parents had to threaten them with punishment if they didn't, "get their butts over here," and parents would stop from raking the front lawn or watering their grass and flowers and take some time to chat with whoever was walking by. It usually wasn't anything Earth-shattering or something you would remember for the rest of your life but it was a little time with people in your part of town checking in on each other.

No one does that anymore. One night I suggested to my wife we grab a bottle of wine and drop in on some people we had been friends with for years and hadn't seen in years. Her response was, "No one does that anymore." Why not? Since when? When exactly did people stop having a social outlet in their neighborhood and roll up the front walk at the end of the day.

I understand people work and they have their obligations to their families. My family has its share of extra-curricular activities just like every other family. But what happened to sitting around and having a beer and chewing the fat, the rag, or solving the world's problems. I do have one glimmer of hope: Once a week friends gather at someone's house on Thursdays during the summer. It's a time we can catch up with friends of ours who live in different parts of the neighborhood for a cookout. Back home, the weather is cooling off. We will be heading back indoors lighting up the fireplace and I will be wondering if we will be seeing people outside when the weather warms up again.

By the way, the old neighbors I saw moved out almost a year ago. We've seen the new neighbors maybe three times.