God, Guns, Guts, Glory - Part 3 "GUTS"

God, Guns, Guts, Glory: On 'GUTS'!

'Guts'! The word has different meanings for different people. That is simply a statement of fact.

The thing is, most of the time in written definitions I've seen, the word 'Guts' is defined as something physical, something within each and every one of us as a part of our anatomy, not something defined, as many of us perceive it to be, as being related to the slang usage most often attributed to the word in a verbal sense.

In that context, 'Guts' can mean courage, fortitude, determination, and a whole slew of other such descriptors each of them with their own set of descriptors, all of which inevitably circle around and come right back to the word 'Guts', albeit in a euphemistic sense, all related to each other, all synonyms of each other.

Also, sometimes it might be safe to say the use of the word 'Guts' is viewed by some to be more of a 'male' thing than it is a 'female' thing.

How so, you ask?

Well, when was the last time you saw a female hefting a .50 caliber rifle? Oh, wait.....

Margorie Taylor-Greene 50 Cal Giveaway

What about when females arm up, or they arm up their own family members regardless of their age?

"The Boeberts Have Your Six"....

Truth be told, I don't believe for one second the likes of Margorie Taylor-Greene and Lauren Boebert are the 'norm' in this country. Not many folks own a .50 caliber rifle like the one shown in the Marjorie Taylor-Greene photo, but she did, after all, give that one away. Lauren Boebert has been notorious for arming up the wait staff in her now closed restaurant in Rifle, CO that goes by the name Shooters Grill (there are plenty of other photo-ops of Boebert armed up herself not included here). Both have been loud and what I consider to be obnoxious in their rabid support of 2A rights. Does that mean, however, they both have 'guts'? Sorry....rhetorical.

The analogy is appropriate simply because there are, in fact, military style weapons that are available to the general public....weapons like, say for instance, the AR-15 as just one example.

Hallelujah! And praise GAWD! These here women are gonna save the day! They have some a them GUTS' we's talkin' about! OORAH! 

Well, DAMN:

"As far as I had been told, 'Oorah simply means 'let's kill,'" said Staff Sgt. Hugo Monroy, drill instructor for Platoon 1094, Delta Co., 1st RTBn. "As far as its origin, I really don't know. I always assumed it was simply a Marine tradition that was passed down from Marine to Marine."

What are they using those weapons for, anyway? Hunting? Making sausage? Fighting the Gubmint and its jackbooted thugs? Killing someone?

If it's that last one, then, according to the quote from Staff Sgt. Hugo Monroy above, these women might just be prepping to kill someone. 'Guts'? Maybe....maybe not.

Gotta wonder how they'd do, and feel, actually going up against the U.S. military. I mean, really.......how would they do? For that matter, how would guys like The Nuge, Wayne LaPierre, Ted Cruz, and so many other male 2A defenders do? Serious question.

Would they have the 'Guts' to face that military if that's what they said they would do? Did any of them actually serve in the military. Do they understand what they'd be up against? Sorry....rhetorical once again.

Would they turn tail and run at the first sight of a tank coming at them over yonder ridge?

Please don't blame me if I go with the latter. Seems more legit than the former, at least to me it does. Unless they're actually Vets, unless they've actually seen combat, then all bets are off.

The reality is there are groups out there, groups everywhere, that advocate for guns everywhere. 

But I digress.

Now, let's ponder a bit on how people use the euphemism:

"Now, THAT took guts!"

We've all heard this euphemism being used to describe something someone has done that goes beyond the norm.

I think it might also be safe to say we've probably all used this euphemism ourselves at some point in our lives.

However, how many times have we heard females using that phrase compared to males, especially as it applies to God and guns, specifically?

That's not to say females don't use it. They do.....just arguably not as often as males do.

That's not to say females don't have 'Guts', either.....they do, especially when it comes to protecting their own families and so many other things way too numerous to mention here when going outside the 'Guns' limitations of this essay.

In fact, another euphemism perfectly describes how women have 'Guts', especially when it comes to protecting family and as described rather appropriately by none other than Sarah Palin:

Mama Grizzly

I think you get the picture.

So, I'm asserting, right here and right now, the usage of this euphemism, as applies directly to 'God' and 'Guns', is pretty macho and is not associated with feminism in any viable, tangible sense, per se. Remember, that's merely an assertion. It isn't based on any factual data (witness Sarah Palin and her stance on guns, in general) I've been able to find thus far. It's an assertion. My assertion.....nothing more.

The euphemism is, more often times than not, also accompanied by some kind of expletive. Expletives like:

• "Good GAWD"!
• Or "HOLY sheeit"!
• Or "GAWD DAMN"!
• Or "good GAWD DAMN"!
• Or "Jesus H. Christ"!
• Or even "Jesus Haploid Christ"!

C'mon, admit it! If you haven't actually done it, actually used one of these expletives, you've certainly given thought to doing it. Right? It's been right there....right on the tip of your tongue. C'mon! You know you have!

There are more expletives associated with this euphemism. But, because those expletives listed above have something else in common - they all express expletives that include reference to 'God', although the spelling of same could probably be a little better - those are the ones being focused on here.

C'mon, you know I'm right. 

But I digress.

More often than not, these kinds of expletives precede the 'Guts' part of the exclamation. Which came first? The chicken or the egg?

Male? Female? Maybe that's irrelevant in the overall scheme of things, but I don't think so. Using these kinds of expletives is more often associated with males than with females. It's sometimes even associated, by some, with a redneck persona.

C'mon, you know I'm right.

Although........here lately there's been kind of a spike in females and their guns.

What's that, you ask? What's she holding? Why, I'm assuming it might just be an AR-15.

No? In her other arm? Well, that would be a Bible, my friends. More than likely a King James version of the Christian God Bible fame.

And just so there's no misunderstanding here, that's an American flag behind her.

The Bible?......'God'!

The AR-15?.....'Guns'!

The flag? Could it be? Might it be......Patriotism? American exceptionalism?

All wrapped up in each other in one neat little package, right?

The only thing missing in this photo is a cross. Yeah, you read that right. A cross - the universal sign of Jesus' Crucifixion. Kinda would have made it more complete, don't you think?

But, again, I digress.

Females: 'God, Guns, Guts'.......right alongside other females of a different religious persuasion with their very own take on 'God, Guns, Guts':

Not the same, you say? Why not?

Oh, that's right......the first one is Christian which actually means 'God, Guns, Guts', right? After all, it took a whole lotta 'Guts' for her to express her beliefs in both 'God' and 'Guns' and to plaster this image all over the Internet, didn't it? But, hey, it's OK because she's American, right? Standing up for freedom (aka patriotism) and Christianity, right?

And the second one.....what can one say? Depravity based in terrorism, that's what!

Quran?.....Allah (Quran in arm) or, as some Christians would have us believe, NOT 'GOD', NOT 'BIBLE'.

AK-47 (assuming that's what it might be)?.....TERRORIST GUN probably got it from those Russkies who were Commies who were, gasp, atheists before the end of the Cold War. She's gotta be a SUICIDE BOMBER or something like it, right (in reality, she allegedly was a suicide bomber, blew herself to smithereens and took others with her, too)? 

Flag?..... Not sure, but it appears to have Arabic writing on it. That means, you guessed it......TERRORIST!

By now, you must be wondering where I'm going with all of this (sometimes I kind of wonder, too). Well, please be patient, because this is going on a lot longer than I thought it would.


One of the Ten Commandments, the third one to be precise, says:

You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

Gotcha! You thought I was going to quote that Thou Shalt Not Kill Commandment, didn't you? Well, that one's kind of relevant to this overall discussion too, but it's being reserved for another essay in another series down the road apiece.

Right now, we're going to focus on the Lord's name......his/her name being taken in vain, and how that applies in this essay.

We ALL do it. We ALL take the name of the LORD, our God in vain. It doesn't even have to be in a moment of awe at an incident that took 'Guts' to accomplish.

The name of the LORD, our God, can be, and often times is, taken in vain in a moment of anger, of frustration, or any number of other triggers (pun intended) that set each and every one of us off.

We all do it. We all say it. We are all guilty of breaking this Third Commandment. We do it over and over and over again. 

It's when we associate using that expletive with 'Guns', hence the trigger pun in a previous paragraph, that lines tend to get blurred really fast. And therein lies the direction in which I'm trying to take this essay.

Reality is that those who advocate a God given right to keep and bear arms, and who also take the name of the Lord, their 'God' in vain, really have no credibility to cite 'God' as giving them any rights whatsoever if the Ten Commandments, the Third one specifically, are to be taken seriously and followed to the letter.....something way too many fundamentalist Christians and gun humpers, themselves, advocate for.

Ooooh, now I'm getting a bit nasty! And it feels soooo good!

Looking in the mirror......what do we see?

Finally! Make your point! Oh, oh, talking to myself again.

Not really a mirror, but kind of the same thing - trying to get us to focus our attention on ourselves as perhaps being part of, or all of, the problem swirling around the issue of gun violence (aka: 'God, Guns, Guts, Glory') in this country and, yes, abroad.

The guy in the mirror above is someone almost universally known in the U.S. as the face and voice of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, Vice President of that organization.

He's quite a guy. Sometimes whiny, sometimes forceful in his delivery, always calculating.

Following the massacre at Columbine High School April 20, 1999, he had this to say:

Following the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School December 14, 2012, he had this to say:

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

More guns. More guns everywhere. 

The NRA then came out with a National School Shield Program calling for armed staff in every school in the country.

It's kind of been a shitstorm ever since.

They want to eliminate gun free zones. They want to arm teachers and other school staff. They want armed guards in schools (School Resource Officer Programs were already in place way before this). They want open and concealed carry for everyone everywhere, regardless of eligibility, regardless of background, regardless of......well, of everything.

The kicker? They base these 'wants' on their perception that owning guns, lots of guns, any amount of guns, any type of guns, is a "God given right", and that right is entrenched in the not to be messed with in any way, shape, or form 2nd Amendment of our sacred Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. Never mind the rest of the Amendments to the Bill of Rights or any Amendments thereafter. That 2nd Amendment.....that thing is sacrosanct, cannot be altered, is cast in stone sort of like those Ten Commandments we keep hearing so much about, and no matter what the Supreme Court says in rulings that sanction an individual's right to keep and bear arms.....regardless of specified limitations......GAWD DAMMIT, my right shall not be infringed!

Asshole. Oops! Did I just call Wayne LaPierre an Asshole? Why, yes....yes I did. And it felt soooooo good!

'God, Guns', and now 'Guts'. Good guys with guns are the only way to stop bad guys with guns. Yep, takes 'Guts' to be a good guy with a gun. Problem is, here lately good guys with guns are also becoming bad guys with guns more and more frequently. And those bad guys with guns are also basing their right to keep and bear arms on that "God given right" thingy as cast in stone by the NRA and other gun lobby groups just as radical, if not more so than the NRA. 

Yep, God gives everyone the right to keep and bear arms. God also gives those same folks the right to share their beliefs with others, to demonstrate their 'Guts' based on their 'God' given right to keep and bear arms.

Domestic tranquility according to Mr. LaPierre and his NRA apparently requires guns, lots of guns, guns that cannot be kept out of the hands of domestic violence perps. No sirree. That would be a violation of their 'God' given right to keep and bear arms, don'tcha know!

Methinks Mr. LaPierre needs to look into his mirror, or scope, or whatever. Get a moral or an ethical backbone. 

So does the NRA, in general.

Is that even possible? Forgive me.....a rhetorical question.

A 1980's metal band known as Queensryche released an album in 1988 called Operation Mindcrime. One of the more seminal albums/rock operas I've ever listened to. It tells a story, a story relevant to the times in which it was first released, and, arguably just as relevant today.

There is one song, in particular, on this album that made a huge impression on me the very first time I heard it. It's called Eyes of a Stranger.

Take a listen. Please, do take a listen. I've shared it here for you. Well, for me, too. Because, dammit, I like the song. The drummer's pretty damn good, too.

Granted, the main character of this song, of this story, of this entire album/opera, is a drug addict. He's also an assassin looking to find himself, similar to what so many others of us are also trying to do......every single day of our lives. So, when he gets up, he looks in the mirror to try to find himself.

What does he see? The eyes of a stranger.....that's what he sees.

The key element of the lyrics comes in a very small package. Just a few lines of this song ARE, in fact, the package as far as I'm concerned:

And I raise my head and stare
Into the eyes of a stranger
I've always known that the mirror never lies
People always turn away
From the eyes of a stranger
Afraid to know what
Lies behind the stare

The "mirror never lies". The stranger in the mirror has secrets, and people who don't know that stranger (each and every one of us, yes us) turn away because they/we don't know what lies behind the stare.

And therein lies the connection of this blog post on 'Guts' to this series of blog posts on 'God, Guns, Guts, Glory'.

The mirror never, ever.....not once.....lies. Unless we choose to ignore what it is trying to tell us, to deny it to ourselves, and to others who can, and do, sometimes see right through our own wall, our own defenses, our own fallacies, bigotries, prejudices, biases, and, yes, even our own hypocrisies. Recognized or unrecognized. Accepted or not accepted.

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall......

We need to look in the mirror.....to delve into ourselves......to self-evaluate......to reflect on who we are, on what we espouse, on our core beliefs.

What do we want? How do we want to achieve it?

Do we want more guns everywhere? Will that really solve our problems? No, really.....will it? After all....

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

Or will more guns make our problems worse?

Does God promote the use of guns? Is he/she fer em' or agin' em? Guess that's an individual decision to make. I just haven't seen reference made to guns in any Bible so far. Seems like kind of a conundrum then, doesn't it?

Can't quite seem to wrap my head around how God might, much less would, promote the use of guns for anything but sporting, target shooting, and self-defense.

Once again, I digress. Back to looking in a mirror.

Looking in a mirror can serve dual purposes. In fact, looking in a mirror to try to find self-introspection, or to engage in self-evaluation, is more metaphorical in nature than anything else.

A mirror isn't physically necessary to do this. A mirror is really nothing more than a symbolic illustration of a process people must go through to engage in these types of activities. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Keeping in mind this symbolism, it might be safe to say there are many who look in their symbolic mirrors frequently. Problem is, at least from what I've been seeing here lately, that activity is yielding some troubling results.

When it comes to 'God' and 'Guns', 'Guts' is going to arguably be pretty damned important. The reason? Because those who don't grasp both the negatives and the positives surrounding the issue of 'God' and 'Guns' will likely end up being very apathetic about it, and apathy breeds contempt. Contempt breeds intolerance. Intolerance breeds hatred. Hatred breeds.....

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall........

Do you ever look at the person staring back at you from inside that mirror, recognizing that that person is you, accepting that that person might have questions, serious questions that demand answers about who you are, what your core beliefs are, whether those core beliefs are morally and ethically right, especially with whichever God you might believe in.....or not? Think about it. 

Introspection and self-evaluation are an art form. Truly, they are. If you can actually be objective about yourself, you're way ahead of the curve.

On the other hand, denial is not.....an art form, that is. Denial of factual data, spreading false data to further an agenda, trying to force others to accept your own dogma, your own rigidity is fraught with danger.

Sometimes, that person staring back at you might just be subliminally telling you to look deeper.....deeper within yourself to find those answers you seek.....to perhaps ask yourself who it is, exactly, you are looking at.

More importantly, if you do look in the mirror for things other than cosmetic, is it possible, perhaps, that based on your belief system, your mirror might lie to you? Or that you question what that person staring out at you from inside the mirror is trying to tell you? Is it true? False? Somewhere in between? 

Or, might it be possible that the person staring out at you from inside that mirror is trying to tell you you've been lying to yourself? Think about it.

What do you see in the cartoon above? Is the mirror lying? Is there some kind of message the mirror is trying to send this American, this Uncle Sam of ours? Could this Uncle Sam of ours actually be us.......you and me?

I could be wrong, but I don't believe I am, in stating that many of those who espouse 'God' and 'Guns', per se, also espouse having the 'Guts' to use them...for whatever purpose. Otherwise, why would we even see memes like this one?

Does this meme offend you? Does it flaunt your emotions, your sensibilities about what the Statue of Liberty is supposed to represent? Should it? I mean, after all, freedom isn't free, is it?

The question here is, what does the Statue of Liberty actually represent to each of us? To me, this beacon of liberty is supposed to strike a welcoming pose, not one of you better watch out because we are armed and ready.....for whatever.

I guess, when one comes right down to it, if one is so inclined (especially toward current nationalistic tendencies and the associated idiosyncrasies), an armed Ms. Liberty could also mean fighting for one's liberty.

Somehow, though, that simply doesn't ring true for me as to what the Statue of Liberty is supposed to be. It doesn't resonate with the original intent I believe the makers of this remarkable landmark had in mind when they gifted it to the U.S. originally either.

More like this image, perhaps?

A beacon of hope, of promise, of freedom of a different kind?

Do both these images require 'Guts' in order to be valid? By definition, I'd have to say yes, yes they do. It's then up to each of us to decide for ourselves which kind of 'Guts' we'd like to have and to use.

Which one do you identify with the most?

Is it possible that trying to conflate 'God' with 'Guns' with 'Guts' might be a conundrum that flies in the face of everything we hold dear, everything that represents life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and, yes, that oh so elusive peace and well-being of the whole of humanity?

It's been said that war is not healthy for children and other living things. Well, DUH! Truth is, peace cannot be achieved, much less maintained for any length of time, at the end of a gun, period!

It's also been said many wars have been waged in the name of God. Perhaps we should start trying to wage peace in the name of God, instead.

Something like that would require an entirely new paradigm shift in thinking. Waging peace instead of waging war.....think about it.

That......that right there would take more 'Guts' than anything else....the right kind of 'Guts'.

My two cents.....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Passive Activism in School Safety --- NOT a Good Look

Passive Activism in School Safety --- NOT a Good Look!

You can lead a horse to water, but.......

The blame game is fast, furious, and intense after each and every school shooting, both large and small. Social media is always awash in memes and stories following school shootings, both large and small. Most times, school shootings, both large and small, are just one more in a long list of similar incidents that will result in not much, if anything, being done to curb this currently rising trend.

Lots of folks will opine that things ARE, in fact, being done. That is, in fact, true. Some things ARE being done. Guidance, laws (active shooter drills sound familiar?), school safety initiatives, gun violence prevention initiatives/movements, etc. All are actively involved in specific areas to promote school safety. But, if that's true, then why do school shootings, both large and small, continue to occur and appear to be on the increase? Sorry. Rhetorical.....

Some folks call for metal detectors and armed guards at the entrances to every single school everywhere. That's one that kind of gets my knickers in a knot. While this so-called solution might solve some problems, it simply is NOT a panacea. It's passive in nature, and allows those who push for it to be passive in their activism in school safety. But it IS something people can see. So, they take comfort in someone somewhere having done something to enhance school safety. Breathe a sigh of relief, right? Sorry. Once again, rhetorical.....

Some call for the elimination of gun free zones. How many times have we heard that one before? Gun free zones aren't the boogeymen some would make them out to be. Again, eliminating them is very much passive activism that allows people to continue down that road of complacency and of doing nothing, really, to realistically address this problem. But they do get to sit back and take a measure of satisfaction that something was done somewhere by someone to make our schools safer. Do I need to point out, once again, that this is rhetorical?

Some want more laws restricting guns, in general. Perhaps that would be part of the answer, but, once again, it is nothing more than passive activism. It doesn't require anyone to get, and/or remain, actively involved in school safety. Let those armed teachers and citizens at large roam those halls of schools just waiting for an active shooter to storm their school!! Please note the sarcasm here.

Some want the government to do something, anything, to help curb the epidemic of gun violence in this country. Others want the government to just stay out of the issue altogether. Some of those who push for metal detectors and armed guards at every school entrance want the government to act immediately to make this happen, and, in the next breath, condemn the government in the arena of viable, common sense legislation intended to help curb the gun violence epidemic....an epidemic that I believe has a direct, and negative, bearing on the issue of school shootings, both large and small.

Passive activism is cheap. It requires little, if anything, from those doing the advocating. What those folks are advocating, however, like hardening schools, is often times very expensive to the tune of over $3,000,000,000 nationwide every single year. Those are statements of fact.

Truth is, we can sit at our computers all day long every single day bitching and complaining about how something needs to be done. But the truth hurts if we do nothing ourselves to help get it done! And that's how my essay here started out: You can lead a horse to water. And I'll finish it here: But you can't make them drink.

So many contradictions. So many conundrums. So many simplistic, unrealistic methodologies that, by themselves, represent a band-aid approach to the issue of school safety. So much passive activism.

What's the 'solution'? 

As the Dalai Lama states in so many words: Stop looking at others as being the problem, or even to others for solutions. Look within. Realize and accept that in order to get something done, everyone must participate in the process. By doing so, we will ultimately learn that peace and joy this man of peace and wisdom is promoting is attainable in the school safety arena.

I'm using this meme, this passage, as an example that applies to the school safety arena to illustrate a point: Talk is cheap, especially when that talk consists of the same old tired talking points we see trotted out on both sides of the issue following virtually every single school shooting, both large and small.

There are a TON of school safety resources available to those looking to get involved in the school safety arena. Most of them are free of charge. My blog has a fairly comprehensive, but by no means complete, list of  School Safety Resources to help get people started. REMS TA Center, FEMA, DHS, U.S. Department of Education, and many other government agencies at Federal and state levels have school safety resources available. I've always said, "Where there's a will, there's a way". Thus far, what I've been seeing is a 'way' lacking the 'will'. And that's been going on since well before the Columbine massacre, a benchmark I allege that many still use as their own starting point for their passive activism.

School safety resources are only as good as the folks who choose to use them to help make our schools the safest educational learning environment they can possibly be. But each of us must take on personal responsibility to help school safety efforts spring from each and every one of us.....a grass roots movement made up of parents, age-appropriate students, schools, and communities. We must all stop looking to others to do for us what we should be doing ourselves in the school safety arena.

The responsibility for safe schools doesn't rest solely with the government. It doesn't rest solely with the schools. It rests squarely on our shoulders. We can, and we must, get involved. We can, and we must, STAY involved. That's the only way ALL the myriad of issues leading up to the kinds of school shootings, both large and small, we keep seeing over and over and over again will ultimately be addressed.

Please consider becoming familiar with how you.....yes, YOU.....can make a difference in the school safety arena because: 

Enough for now. This missive/rant could go on forever.

My Two Cents....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

"Massacre Fatigue"

Massacre Fatigue is REAL

Virtually every time there's a mass shooting, the first thing I note is the number of folks who opine we never thought it could happen to us (or here). 

There are also times when I'm just taken aback by the abject stupidity of some folks. Apparently, Jordan De La Garza for Texas is one of them. 

As a Columbine parent, I would ask him if he thinks Columbine is a 'dead horse'? It's often cited as a bellwether for other school mass shootings. I would also ask him if he gets that the families impacted by the Robb Elementary school massacre will NEVER truly "have what they need" (speaking from personal experience as a result of the Columbine massacre)?

It appears Mr. De La Garza deleted his Twitter account after this Tweet. Might that be because of the pushback he received? 

But I digress..... 

Please excuse me if I sound more than a bit cynical when I ask if it's really that much of an inconvenience that news coverage of mass shooting massacres interrupts regular television programming? Can't watch favorite sporting events? Soap operas?

It would seem that bitching and complaining becomes some folks' modus operandi following these kinds of incidents.

So, I assert that Massacre Fatigue is not a new phenomenon. It's just known by a few other names.

After the Aurora Theater massacre, for example, the term Massacre Fatigue came into widespread use to describe how society began to view how these sorts of incidents played out in the aftermath. 

Following the massacre at Columbine High School, as another example, Columbine Fatigue came into use. In fact, following that massacre there were many who got angry that, according to them, Columbine families received so much help, and then kept asking for more ala Jordan De La Garza opining that the Uvalde families "have what they need" (Columbine receives, asks more and Enough milking of tragedy). That perspective was taken by some of those impacted by the massacre (myself included) as being more than a little offensive.

Families affected by mass shootings get bombarded by media, family, friends, hospital staff, psychologists, psychiatrists, grief counselors, law enforcement officials, public officials, and more.

Does anyone outside those communities even have a clue as to how fatigued these families eventually become, and will be for the rest of their lives, by the nightmare that was thrust upon them?

Whether anyone realizes it or not, accepts it or not, to some degree these kind of massacres define those families merely by association. How they individually choose to let them define them, or whether they choose to take an active role in defining themselves as a direct result of their experience, is entirely up to them....not to those who express Massacre Fatigue due to all the media coverage.

So, please forgive me if I don't feel one little bit sorry for those outside each community impacted by a mass shooting massacre if they're feeling a bit of massacre fatigue themselves by virtue of their having to be subjected to what they consider to be too much media coverage of the massacre itself. Truth is, those kinds of folks don't have a freaking clue as to what true Massacre Fatigue is. Not...clue...one!

Those folks really do need to get a grip.

So, my bottom line is if you haven't personally and directly been impacted by a mass shooting, don't even think about talking to me about your own massacre fatigue! Your protestations will fall on deaf ears.

My two cents, and rant over.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

God, Guns, Guts, Glory: Part 2...."GUNS"

God, Guns, Guts, Glory: Part 2...."GUNS"

Awhile back, I published a blog post entitled God, Guns, Guts, Glory: Part 1....."GOD". This blog post is the second in the series of "God, Guns, Guts, Glory". I should probably make something clear before I start, though: While the tenor of quite a lot of this blog post appears to be directed toward Christian God, all things herein are equally attributable to Muslim God and Jewish God as far as I'm concerned. It's just that I am most familiar with Christian God. So, I admit to having a tendency to focus on what I do know, and to provide bits and pieces of information on Muslim God and Jewish God if the point I'm trying to make happens to be applicable to them, too.

With that in mind, would it be safe to put it out there the NRA is pretty much a lightning rod on the issues of gun violence and gun safety today? Kind of hit you between the eyes with that one, didn't I?

Their leadership have collectively taken a pretty consistent stand on the issue of guns every single time following high profile incidents beginning with Columbine and so many others following. In fact, I'm going to say right here and right now, too many.....WAY too many!

What does that have to do with Christian God, you ask? Let's take a look at some of the more famous, or should I say "infamous", things the NRA has espoused:

"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

"Guns don't kill people - people kill people".

"An armed society is a polite society".

"Criminals don't obey laws anyway".

"Guns are only tools".

"I don't expect a fire, but I have a fire extinguisher".

"Responsible gun owners shouldn't be penalized".

"Law abiding gun owners shouldn't be penalized".

Oh, yeah, and one more very important one, at least in the context of this blog post:

"Owning guns is my God given right".

Seriously that is, in fact, a really, really important one. Why? Because guns didn't come into being until well after the Bible was even written.

So, the logical question would be if Christian-Muslim-Jewish God granted the right of anyone to own guns, where is that right actually written down by Christian-Muslim-Jewish God? Even if it's his word written by man? Where? The Bible, the Quran, or the Torah? Where? Where does Christian-Muslim-Jewish God say anything, anything at all, just one little tidbit will do, about him granting a right to anyone anywhere to own a gun? I'll just leave it at that for now.

So, because in the view of the NRA leadership it's a God given right to own guns, that pretty much translates into more guns. Guns everywhere. That's the answer. Schools. Shopping malls. Churches. On the streets. Restaurants. Bars. Anywhere and everywhere! Yep! More guns is the answer.

Did I say churches? Why, yes.....yes, I did!

You name it, guns are the answer. Push that fear and paranoia! More guns!

Getting off track here a little bit.

Back to the NRA.

One of the more iconic images I've seen is the one of Charleton Heston:

Oops. That's two images - one with a staff held high and the other with a musket held even higher. Both arguably weapons when used in the context in which they are presented, both in the movie "The Ten Commandments" and in the NRA convention Mr. Heston took part in.

Under Christian-Muslim-Jewish God, Moses was able to part the Red Sea allowing his people to pass safely and then closing it upon the advancing Egyptian Army causing the death of everyone, arguably thousands, by merely waving his magic staff which had been empowered by, you guessed it, Christian-Muslim-Jewish God. So, it wasn't really Moses who generated the power. It was Christian-Muslim-Jewish GOD!

Staffs, no matter how one wants to look at it, don't kill people. People with staffs kill people, people with staffs (Moses) powered by almighty Christian-Muslim-Jewish God.

Seems a little odd to me, though, because an omnipotent Christian-Muslim-Jewish God should maybe take at least some of the blame for this needless loss of life because he was the one who hardened Pharaoh's heart against those fleeing Israelites in the first place.

If he hadn't done that, the Egyptian Army wouldn't have been ordered into the Red Sea bottom by hardened heart Pharaoh to chase those fleeing Israelites and prevent them from escaping, now would they?

Just imagine. If Christian-Muslim-Jewish God had just NOT hardened Pharaoh's heart, the entire Egyptian Army would have stayed back, watched those pesky Israelites make their way to the opposite shore, the Red Sea would have closed back in, and everything would have been good. No loss of life. No mass execution. All things copacetic, right? What was Christian-Muslim-Jewish God thinking?

So, who's to blame here for Egyptian loss of life? Moses or Christian-Muslim-Jewish God?

But, I digress.

The year after the massacre at Columbine High School, Mr. Heston's words at the national NRA convention in May, 2000 in North Carolina, would ring out loud and very clear (sort of like his words to Pharaoh in the movie - "LET MY PEOPLE GO!"), and would pretty much become etched in our collective psyches for all time:

"So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands'!"

Mr. Heston apparently felt the need to use that same statement at every ensuing NRA convention until he retired in 2003. For some reason, it seemed to resonate with him, although I'm not aware of anyone actually coming to try to get his gun/guns during that time, or, for that matter, to try to kill him or to even try to take him up on his challenge, his dare.

In fact, when Mr. Heston passed away in 2008, was anyone there to actually pry that musket from his cold dead hands? Did he even try to take it with him? Wait. Was that a little too insensitive?

Personally, I don't think so. In fact, his words have inspired others to follow his "cold dead hands" mantra. I kind of have to be honest here - the cold dead hands thingy didn't even originate with Mr. Heston. No, it apparently originated with a group called "Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms". It really doesn't matter though. What matters is that the slogan became popular. It became etched into our daily lives. It was perpetuated by Moses (Heston in disguise).

From Moses to NRA President, Mr. Heston seemed to choose those kind of heroic roles, or they were chosen for him (NRA President, specifically) in which people could look to him and think oh my, what a great man! Kind of like a Christian juggernaut so to speak, even though Moses was anything but a 'Christian'.

And therein lies the gist of the point I'm trying to make about God and guns. There really does seem to be a connection between the two in today's American Christian Evangelical and more extremist sects of the Christian faith than many are willing to admit, either to themselves or publicly.

We talk about religious denominations all the time within the Christian faith. We also talk about sects breaking off from some of those denominations, but not nearly enough.

Why is it that so many who profess themselves to be Christians look with some amount of disdain at sects? Why is it that some who profess to be Christians look with some amount of disdain at members of other denominations for that matter? What actually separates denominations from sects within the Christian faith?

Muslim God recognizes sects. Jewish God recognizes sects. Neither talks about denominations - just sects. Can those sects be compared to so-called Christian sects such as Westboro Baptist Church as just one example? Does that even compute? What about the KKK? They profess to be a Christian organization. Both have been identified as hate groups. But to hear them tell it, they're God's children, just like everyone else. Yup. Uh huh. I'm buyin' it. I'd also go so far as to state there would be some pretty upset Muslim and Jewish folks if they knew they were being compared to those two groups, for sure.

And therein lies the conundrum. Christians look at American sects, A.K.A. hate groups like WBC and KKK, with utter contempt. When they do that, and they hear the word sect being representative of different groups within the Muslim and Jewish faiths, might it be possible they place "guilt by association" on the sects of Muslim God and Jewish God simply because of, well, sects = hate groups.

What that boils down to, as stated in my previous blog post (God, Guns, Guts, Glory: Part 1....."GOD"), is a failure to communicate what all of this really means. It's a logical fallacy. Christian sects = bad. Muslim and Jewish sects, therefore = bad. Not too hard to understand that connection, and, yet, it's actually a disconnect because the sects of Muslim God do not actually include ISIL or ISIS (whatever the Hell you want to call them), Al Qaeda, or the Taliban. Sects of Jewish God are even harder to pin down. The only radical sect I could find apparently doesn't even have a name, and at least in 2011 Israelites were pretty unified in denouncing them - publicly, no less.

So, the question must then be asked why are all the other sects of Muslim God and Jewish God so extremist in the eyes of mainstream Christian God's followers?

Could it be, could it possibly be because they're different from us?

Going back in time a ways for this next segment......

Quotes made by our Founding Fathers have been used and abused by both sides in our ongoing pro and anti gun advocacy arguments and debates.

Guns have been around for a very long time. No debate there.

Guns have also variously been used to conduct warfare, to commit crimes, to hunt, to provide for one's self defense, and a multitude of other things, both beneficial and barbaric.

Our Founding Fathers relied on guns during our very own Revolutionary War to secure our freedom and independence as a nation, albeit guns were kind of supplemented by cannons, now weren't they?

They even wrote the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contained in the Bill of Rights:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Please note, there are two clauses to the 2nd Amendment - the first of which many in the pro gun advocacy group choose to, more often than not, completely ignore while focusing solely on the second clause.

So, one can state with pretty good confidence, the Founding Fathers knew of, and accepted the necessity of being able to keep and bear arms....at least during their time.

Times, however, have changed. So have temperaments regarding guns.

Some people just like to own them. Some people just like to hunt with them. Some people just like to shoot them.

Others, well, others use them for pretty nefarious purposes like actually killing other people. Or themselves. Lethal more often than not in more instances than we care to acknowledge.

However, facts don't lie.

Heck, just the homicide data is humbling, if not downright disturbing.

But guns don't kill people, or so we're told over and over and over.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. With guns.

There are nefarious, shadow sects few people know about, sects based in their own Christian God dogma, sects that believe only in the Old Testament laws of the Bible, sects that really aren't organized in the truest sense of the word, sects that some people toy with but don't even realize they are part and parcel of.

And that's what we're going to talk about next......

Ever hear of something called the "Dominionist Movement"? If not, here's your chance. Learn about it, understand it, and, for all intents and purposes, be aware it is intimately linked with Christian God and guns.

There, I said it. Christian God and guns. Just as we, here in the U.S. equate terrorist groups of Muslim God with guns (pictures of masked marauders riding in the backs of pickup trucks with guns pointed in the air, pictures of a ring of masked evil-doers surrounding a man on his knees waiting for the machete to fall on the back of his neck), so, too, should we equate the possibility of genocidal killing, a new crusade of sorts, with those belonging to this group.

Religious discrimination? Yep.

Sexual orientation discrimination? Just listen to the rhetoric from some of those who've flirted with this philosophy.

Misogyny? Oh, yeah. Guys having a proclivity to keep women in their place really get off on this one.

Shall we try and put some faces to the Dominionist movement"?

Look familiar?

Add to all of this the fact these people have legitimate followings, and, believe me, I use the term "legitimate" very loosely here, and one must wonder how the slow, deliberate, eating away at our democratic, secular ideals might ultimately end up costing us dearly if one of these folks ever gets elected.

Now let's look a bit at each one of the Dominionists listed in the graphic above. First, Mike Huckabee. 

Mike once had Ted Nugent on his show.

Mike played a tune right alongside the Nuge. They played one of the Nuge's biggest hits, a sexually explicit melody called Cat Scratch Fever.

Mike, an ordained minister if I'm not mistaken, then doubled down on playing this song with Ted (Mike Huckabee pussyfoots around the truth) by stating the explicit words had been removed (video proved they were not) followed by his statement along the lines of it was for mature audiences. Yeah, right! And what was that he said about then President Obama's kids listening to lyrics sung by Beyonce'?

And:

Nuff said on good ol' boy, Mike!

Rick Santorum? Staunch supporter of gun rights and then some. As one example from one of his home town's media outlets: Former Pa. senator Rick Santorum said a lot of wrong things about gun control this weekend

Sarah Palin? Well, dang! There's Ted Nugent.......again! Palin pallin' around with the Nuge talking about, what? God? Guns? Getting elected, perhaps?

And, last on this particular list, but certainly not least, none other than Rick Perry? Oh, Rick of the woohoo fame, shoot a six shooter in the air at a public event fame:

Each one of these folks is very well known for their pro-gun stances. Each of them is also very well known for what some might consider to be their religious fervor. Each of them is politically ambitious almost to a fault. And, by the way, old Ted Nugent, alleged pedophile, has kinda sorta indicated he might even have some political ambitions (Heaven help us if he goes for it - or will Christian God forgive him his sins and make him a victor in an election?).

That's the short list. The long list would also include the likes of Michelle Bachmann, Ted Cruz, and, my favorite, Louie Gohmert.

There are plenty of groups, both affiliated with Christian churches and quasi-military militias that would qualify, too, and that would simply get on board with these folks if they are ever elected - groups, armed groups, well armed groups. Think about that. Seriously.....think about that.

When people talk about, and advocate for, taking our country back I invariably ask them, "take our country back from what, exactly?" This question is usually met with one of two answers:

1. Back to the way it was when it was one nation under God; or,
2. Back to the way it was when we had all our freedoms.

Logical question to the first answer, "whose God?" 

Them: Well, damn, there is only one God.

Me: So, Christian God. 

Them: Yep. 

Me: Well, what about Muslim God, or Jewish God, or any of the other multitude of Gods out there?

Them: ATHEIST GOD HATER!

Logical question to the second answer, "which freedoms have been taken away, specifically?"

Them: So many, I can't give specifics. 

Me: Why not? Should be an easy thing to identify if you're so upset they've been taken away. Right?

Them:

Me: ?

Them: ATHEIST GOD HATER!

And there you have it. A widespread call to put God back into everything American. Just can't be Muslim God, or Jewish God or any other God but Christian God. Those who worship those other Gods, not Christian God, are doomed unless they are born again, and by Christian God, we're going to either help everyone, or we're going to force everyone to believe in the one true God, Christian God, by golly! And if that force just happens to be deadly force like what Ted Nugent’s Final Solution For “Rabid Dog” Muslims is: “Kill ‘Em All”, then so be it.

Sounds sort of like this might all turn out to be another of those Crusades we learned about in school. In fact, we might even already BE in one right now.

What guts that takes, eh? In fact, those 'guts' are what I'll talk about in the next installment of "God, Guns, Guts, and Glory".

My two cents.



* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Don't Make It Too Easy....

 

Given the recent shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, in which an 8 year old boy was critically injured and paralyzed from the waist down,

Six weeks after getting shot at a Fourth of July parade, an 8-year-old left paralyzed feels 'hopeless' and angry as new reality sets in

I thought it prudent to share just a tidbit of what my own family went through after Anne Marie, my daughter, was shot and also paralyzed from the waist down as a result of the Columbine massacre. I won't dwell on what she, and the members of her family went through as she went through a very long and very painful rehab at Swedish Medical Center and Craig Hospital except to say she was admitted to Swedish Medical Center on April 20, 1999, the day of the massacre, and was discharged into my care on August 15, 1999. You, the reader, can do the math on that length of time in order to better comprehend how difficult that rehab was and what we ALL went through to help her survive. During that time, my first wife, Carla, and I virtually lived with her in each of these two hospitals. It wasn't easy, but we did it....for Anne Marie. To this day, Anne Marie still does not know the full extent of what was done for her and our family to accommodate her and her disability. But that's fodder for another blog post another time.

All that being said, when it came to everything that followed the massacre, one thing sticks in my mind: The experts virtually ALL said, "Don't make it too easy." They were, of course, referring to Anne Marie and her effort to live what can only be described as an altered lifestyle given her paralysis, her healing from the gunshot wounds notwithstanding.

The first thing that came to my mind upon being told not to make it too easy for Anne Marie was how could anyone in their right mind even suggest to me not to make things too easy for her? I couldn't believe it. After all she'd been through, now I've got experts telling me not to make things too easy for her? She's in a wheelchair, for Christ's sake! She's been shot, dammit! It's a miracle she's even here, for crying out loud! Don't make it too easy for her!? What are you people thinking!? 

That was my initial reaction to being given this advice. It wasn't easy to have someone suggest to you not to make it too easy for your own child, especially given the circumstances of her being shot and critically injured at Columbine High School April 20, 1999.

But I had to listen; I had to take their advice seriously - not because of who they were as experts in their fields. Rather, I had to listen because they, themselves, often times had experienced traumas of their own; because they, themselves, were in wheelchairs because of paralysis, because of traumatic brain injury, because of Multiple Sclerosis, because of Muscular Dystrophy.

Anne Marie's injuries were serious, critical in fact. There can be no doubt about that. As her Father, I took that so much to heart, sometimes it was almost unbearable. It would, in fact, sometimes even cloud my thinking, hinder me from being as rational as I could be, or should be, about these things. But looking to these experts for help who had a ton more experience than I did with these types of medical conditions, who actually were experiencing their own life challenges as a direct result, gave me more than enough reason to heed their advice as much as possible, to finally be able to accept that Anne Marie can do this! Yes, she can, and so can we. So can I.

One such individual, a certified subject matter expert, came to our new house that would be renovated and modified to accommodate Anne Marie's disability. He was an expert in his field, that's for sure. His wheelchair was motorized because his paralysis also affected his upper body. At least Anne Marie's was below the waist, and she still had full use of her upper torso and arms. 

Anne Marie was still an in-patient at Craig Hospital when this gentleman, along with some therapists from Craig Hospital, and I met at the new house. I noted he was driving a specially equipped van with a lift. It was a mid-size van, no driver seat (his wheelchair became his seat when in the correct position), and the lift came out the sliding side door. I took note.

With some extra maneuvering, we were able to help him inside the house. The house didn't yet have a ramp for access through the front door, so we had to get him up two steps into the house. It wasn’t easy.

I don't know if my trepidation showed, or not (we hadn't yet gone through the extensive training at Craig Hospital that we would need to go through on what would be required of us, Anne Marie's family members, to accommodate her disability). He didn't indicate he was aware of my trepidation one way or the other.

Once inside, his recommendations came at us fast and furious:

• Open up the two guest bedrooms on the main level into one bigger bedroom (that would mean Nathan's bedroom had to go into the lower walk-out level - one would need to be added because the only area that was already finished was a rec room - the rest of the lower level was storage and was huge, so adding a good size bedroom for him shouldn't be too much of a problem, right?
• Open up the wall from the main bath into Anne Marie's bedroom (that would mean Nathan would have to use the bathroom in the lower level - luckily it had a shower, but was very tiny);
• Open the cabinet underneath the sink in order to accommodate her legs while in the wheelchair (note to self - must ensure the "hot" water tap line wouldn't pose a risk to her when her legs were under the sink - remember, she had no feeling in her legs);
• Cover the opening with a cloth drape;
• The shower must have a curtain, no glass doors;
• A flexible hand-held shower head would be best;
• Don't get rid of the tub (make her work to transfer from her chair into the tub);
• A shower seat would be good, but not absolutely necessary in this case because there is a ledge at the foot of the tub that she can sit on;
• Do not widen doorways - The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) specified doorways to fit the normal width of a wheelchair's base of 28". Most doorways are already 28" wide or wider. Leave the doorways as they are (make her work to get through them);
• Don't even begin to worry about scratches to the woodwork - rather, expect them;
• Carpeting is okay, hardwood floors are better (sometimes carpeting can be a problem for turning of a wheelchair if the pile is too thick. But it isn't something that should be a special consideration);
• Are your washer and dryer top loading? If so, get rid of them and get front loading;
• Furniture placement should consider spaces in between pieces wide enough to allow her wheelchair to pass between unimpeded;
• Leave the kitchen as is (make her work to use it).
• Don't lower any of the appliances or counter tops. She can turn sideways in her chair to be able to access the sink, faucet, and stove-top. A stove with controls on the front is a must; can't have her reaching across a stove-top to access anything just in case a burner might be on. A microwave oven should be face level in order for her to reach into it. Over the counter cupboards should contain only those things she won't need to access much, if at all. Everything else should be placed in the lower cabinets. The refrigerator/freezer should be a side-by-side with most of the things she needs placed on the lower and middle shelves;
• A stair glide into the lower level would be good, even if it takes up most of the stairwell (which it did);
• Carpeting in the lower level should have a very short pile;
• A ramp meeting ADA specifications would be a good thing if she plans to use the front door. If she plans to go into the house from the garage (if she starts to drive), a lift from garage floor level to main floor level will be necessary.

These are just a few of his recommendations. There were many others. Most of them were incorporated as part of the renovation. Some of them were incorporated later at my own personal expense. 

Driving instructors recommended a vehicle with hand controls, of course. They had us watch several individuals with similar paralysis to Anne Marie's where they would transfer into a car, reach out and remove one wheel from their chair, toss it over their back into the back seat, turn the chair and remove the second wheel, toss it over their back into the back seat, and recline as far back as they could to pass the seat of the chair over their chest into the passenger side seat. The instructors also indicated vehicles could be specially equipped to elevate the chair into a container on top of the car, or a van with lift would also work well. Their recommendation was, once again, to not make it too easy for her. Their suggestion was to get a smallish vehicle fairly low to the ground and have Anne Marie take it apart as in the first example. That would also require that the chair, itself, be made from materials light enough for her to be able to handle.

After several fits and starts, the vehicle she ended up with a specially equipped Ford F-250. More on how this became her vehicle of choice another time.

There are so many things to consider, and the things I'm sharing in this blog post are just a snapshot of the big picture. Throughout the entire process, I still had a lot of trouble with the possibility anything at all might be too hard for her. I wanted to make her life as comfortable as possible.

Something extremely important needs to be mentioned here, and I'll talk about it in later posts, as well:

While Carla and I purchased this house with equity from the sale of our older home when we realized that older home would not, in any way, shape, or form, accommodate Anne Marie's disability, virtually all the interior modifications made to the new house to accommodate Anne Marie were donated by organizations and individuals who wanted nothing in return, who actually, in some instances, even refused any offers of compensation for their charity. I can't even begin to express in words the gratitude I felt for their goodwill and caring. But it was, still is, and always will be deep and heartfelt. It is a debt I will never be able to fully repay.

There was not only gratitude, but relief, as well. For a long time, I worried about how much of an impact the cost of everything would have on the Trust I'd set up for Anne Marie. We didn't have GoFundMe back then, so these donations, along with monetary donations into that trust I'd set up for Anne Marie's long-term supplemental needs were crucial to us being able  to survive. Now I could rest a little easier knowing the impact would be much lower than expected. I also knew that most people in similar situations to hers didn't have the kinds of resources, both financial and community, coming to their aid that Anne Marie and her family did. 

I can only hope that Cooper and his family will have the sort of resources available to them that we had in our situation.

My two cents.....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Active Shooter Lockdown Drills on Steroids

 

Active Shooter Lockdown Drills on Steroids

In March, 2018 East High School in Anchorage, Alaska put an active shooter lockdown drill they were conducting on steroids. 

They did this by having the school resource officer of East High walk the halls of the school while firing blanks to make the active shooter lockdown drill seem more realistic:  East High active shooter drill simulates real gunfire

They also did this to try and give students and staff a way to help discern the difference between actual live gunfire and firecrackers going off.

More than a few mass shooting survivors have opined they thought firecrackers were going off before they actually became aware something was drastically wrong. 

So, from that perspective simulating live gunfire with blanks during an active shooter lockdown drill seems like a reasonable thing to do, right?

Not necessarily – especially if one listens to those advocating against lockdown drills of any kind, and they are many. 

Meredith Corley, who taught math in Colorado in the aftermath of Columbine, says: “It (lockdown drill) re-traumatizes kids who have experienced violence. Getting the kids settled back into the work of learning after lockdown drills is a nightmare. That mind-set has no place in a learning environment.” (Taken from What Are Active-Shooter Drills Doing to Kids?).

Since the massacre at Columbine, lockdown drills have become a sort of gold standard without any 'real' standards when it comes to preparing staff and students for an active shooter in their school.

Most lockdown drills do not include simulated live gunfire, though. 

Was the East High lockdown drill over the top? 

Was it too realistic? 

Did it harm students rather than help them? 

Are active shooter lockdown drills even necessary? 

What we appear to be faced with is a ‘damned if you don’t – damned if you do’ conundrum: 

• If we don’t at least try to prepare for an active shooter, our kids won’t be safe, but
• If we do try to prepare for an active shooter, our kids might suffer psychologically.

What to do? What to do?

As Will Smith once said: 

Danger is real. 

Fear is a choice.

Do not misunderstand me. The fear that lockdown drills may be causing psychological harm may be real. Right now, though, that fear is still a choice especially if it paralyzes to the point of inaction of any kind.

My two cents....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.