INFJ, Semantics, and a Soaring Eagle

As you may be well aware, I've gotten stuck with one of those ultra-rare personality types (3 - 5%, a definite minority). I only mention it now because knowing ahead of time that I'm INFJ (Meyers Briggs Type Inventory, look it up) MIGHT help you to 'get' where I'm coming from.

I'm the one going the speed limit when everyone else is zipping along.

I'm the one who thinks proper usage of language matters, unless I'm using a vernacular or there are quote marks involved, as people don't speak in grammatically correct sentences.

I'm the one who picks up on every emotion in the air and feels it, even if it doesn't belong to me.

I'm the one you might not want to lie to. I'll likely let you get away with it, but I'll know.

I'm the one who will walk away from small talk but spend hours on end discussing and exploring topics like the impact of entanglement (quantum physics) on people's everyday lives, or the life cycle of Earth, or the ramifications of history.

I'm the one who gets 'peopled out', can and will work alone, but most of the time (ironically) prefers a strong team (leadership typically pops in crisis situations; otherwise it will likely show up as ideas).

I'm the one who goes with my gut because the times I haven't done so haven't turned out that well.

I'm the one who deliberately seeks out the good, the positive because, unless I do so, the bad, the hateful can and does overwhelm me.

I'm the one who will probably recognize you by 'feel' rather than name or face. I won't remember what you were wearing but will remember what you were feeling.

I'm the one who will seem 'stand-offish' unless there's a good reason to interact; if there's a cause I believe in I'll not quit on it - ever. I'll take a stand on things that seem to be diametrically opposed, and find no conflict between them or inside of myself.

There are lots of other 'characteristics' but you get the general idea.

So when it comes to 'semantics' I understand that referring to something like a sub-group of a larger population is going to vary according to where the speaker is 'coming from'. Generally speaking, as long as the meaning is clear I'm not going to quibble about the word choices of different folk. I fully know that you will likely not understand me but know that I will understand you.

At the moment I'm finding it interesting, and a little puzzling, that people have taken to referring to the exact same sub-group of a larger population in completely different ways, depending on personal beliefs. To me, as the J part of my equation rises (the only one that has any flexibility at all; the INF part is solidly carved into stone - it's 'opposite' is P and the two take turns) and I find myself wanting to make a choice as to whether to go with 'undocumented citizens', 'undocumented immigrants', or 'illegals' - my mind recognizes that the law identifies them as 'illegals' and so that's my choice as it's the only one that makes any sense to me.

Citizens are documented as such; without the documentation they are not citizens. Immigrants likewise. To present this population as either, to me, smacks of deceit. Deceit is right up there at the top of the list of things that I find abominable.

Regarding our DACA folk, which I've done a couple of posts on, the program gave them a DEFERRED time. That time is up as their deferment program comes to an end. Yapping and yiping about it isn't going to change that. The fact that the deferment itself was unconstitutional in the first place, in the J part of my mind, makes the whole thing wrong from the get-go.

Ignoring our immigration laws (reprehensible to the J part of my mind) allowed the current situation to develop, and I'm not even going to comment on that as we cannot go back in time to make it not have happened. If we closed our borders right this minute to everyone, we would still have our quota of Mexican immigrants already inside our nation to cover well over 400 years worth of legal migrants from that country. I ain't even kiddin' ya. (there's vernacular phrasing).

To the logical part of my mind, that means IF we allow everyone to stay who is already here, we can accept ZERO more folk from Mexico for the next 400+ years. Going by the overall quota, we wouldn't be able to accept anybody from ANYWHERE until we get this resident population properly legally immigrated.

So there's that part of it. Cut and dried. The alternative would be to locate and evict something like 20 million people who are here illegally. Twenty million is a really big number, they are all illegal, shouldn't be here in the first place, and ought to be sent back to Mexico and points south.

Well.

I cannot, with any of the rest of me, find it in any sense okay to send ANYBODY into the situation that exists south of our border, with the exception of the bad guys of course.

So what are we going to do?

Congress has six months to come up with a solution and good luck to them sez I (another vernacular usage).

Our House and Senate folk have got to be seriously in a quandary. Because the only points of view that they're probably hearing come from the extremes of our political left-right graph, our Senators and Representatives likely (and perhaps correctly) assume they're damned if they do and damned if they don't - either way.

What nobody seems to be taking into consideration is that the further to the left and the right that those extremists go, the more of us there are who flat refuse to have anything to do with either side.

So there's this massive population who (again) isn't being represented AT ALL in Washington except by the (essentially unaffiliated - thoroughly opposed by the democrats of course and the republicans also fought him until they could fight their own people no more) President we elected. And I'll put in a side note here, just because I feel like it: if said President is as smart as I'm convinced he is, he will locate and endorse Independent candidates who DO represent us - and if we're even a fraction as smart we'll see to it that folks who represent us get onto the ballot/s. Let the democrats and the republicans duke it out all they want. Most of us are sick of the both of them, and are hoping President Trump runs as an Independent or SOME other designation (Constitutional would be my preference, if it's not already taken). We've got just over three years to get ourselves pulled together and we aren't particularly all that interested in who is put on the ballot by the democrats or the republicans because we aren't going to vote for them anyhow - we'll re-elect our President with write-in votes if need be.When it comes to a 'color' to represent the in-between folks (who happen to make up the vast majority of us) I wanted white as it is the presence of all the other colors in the spectrum and is the third color in our flag, but unfortunately white carries connotations ... so it would have to be all three I think. Doing that would include the 'blue' folk and the 'red' folk, as well as all the rest of us. Now to think of a symbol. Do we want an animal, like the donkey and the elephant, or simply the American Flag? If an animal, I'm almost certain the Bald Eagle would be appropriate. While the donkey and the elephant are fighting, the eagle flies away with the votes. Yep. (colloquialism) 

Back to topic.

My point here is that, as far as I can tell, almost all of 'the rest of us' who aren't at either end of the extremes mainly want a clear end to the immigration issue. Close and lock the borders while we get things sorted out. No it's not fair to those who legitimately want to come but we're so far over our reasonable quotas right now that there's no way that I can see to justify any more until further notice. The loud-mouths on both ends can yipe and gripe all they want. If it came down to a referendum, I'm betting we would say, 'Okay, they're here. We're used to them and they're used to us. Let the law-abiding ones stay as long as they remain law-abiding, deport the bad guys and anyone else who commits a felony in the next five or ten years, and no more at all until we've caught up to ourselves.' Period.

Frankly, humanitarianism aside, it boils down to (for me) laying to rest the semantics of the whole thing. No more need to figure out how you're going to refer to these 20+ million people who live among us. There will be nobody calling them 'undocumented citizens' or 'undocumented immigrants' or 'illegals', which are all trigger words to the opposite sides. They will be, simply, Americans just like the rest of us.

As an INFJ I'm the one who is all about conflict avoidance.

I'm the one who wants balance.

I'm the one who so very firmly believes in Justice for All. And Mercy. And, ultimately, Peace.

DACA, Visa Over-stays, Illegals ... IF ONLY ...

IF ONLY our laws had been enforced all the way down the line.

IF ONLY our judicial system had stepped up to the plate and given a resounding 'NO!', backed up by the House and the Senate when somebody just upped and made a unilateral and unconstitutional decision all by his lonesome (because, you know, he had a phone and he had a pen).

We can 'if only' until the cows come home.

The fact of the matter is that we have been handed a rather daunting situation and somebody's going to have to figure out what to do about it. We cannot go back and change anything; all we can do is the best we can with what we have to work with.

Thankfully, we do have our Constitution. Although it has been kind of ignored in recent years it is still our guide and our law.

Because somebody did ignore it, and nobody stepped up to say, 'Hey, you can't do that; it's unconstitutional!' we've got a mess on our hands. That it didn't have to happen in the first place is entirely moot, except for the unlikely possibility of somebody getting held accountable for what he has wrought. As I say ... unlikely. I think the DACA folk ought to sue him as an individual (not the government), a class action suit, for landing them in this boat. He could have chosen otherwise; he could have enforced the law of our land; he could have insisted that their parents obtain citizenship; he could have made it mandatory that they apply for citizenship upon reaching their majority (or leave at that time) ... they've all got to be going through some powerful anxiety as a result of his actions ... he himself, out of his own pocket (although over a million/year plus a lot more for secret service is coming out of OUR pockets) ought to at LEAST pay any associated fees for them to obtain citizenship as well as any mental health services required for them to cope with their lot. HIS pocket, not OURS. We're the ones who are already lining his pockets; why should we have to pay multiple times for how he chose to use his phone and his pen? Which we also paid for, come to think of it. Uffda.

There are now hundreds of thousands of folks who are not guilty of anything except having had parents who broke the laws (which weren't  being enforced anyway). They are innocent (unless they've broken laws themselves - other laws, not the ones broken by their parents) and do not deserve to be punished for something they did not do. That's a fact.

Because one branch of our government, without being checked or balanced by either of the others, did something that was illegal, We the People have been saddled with the sorry situation of having to look askance at all three of our branches of government. Many of the 'guilty parties' are still right where they were when they failed us as a nation. That too will have to be dealt with.

The issue at hand is poignantly heart-rending. Hundreds of thousands of innocent lives are on the line. Maybe not literally, but they will most assuredly be affected (as will we all) over the course of the next months as the legislative branch of government, who should have been the ones to either deal with this in the first place or at least stepped up to either confirm or deny what the executive branch chose to do unilaterally (AND - I presume - the judicial branch, who also should have come out with a very clear statement about the constitutional validity - as in the lack thereof - of said choice) are at last called to task about the whole thing.

I'm just a little old lady and not personally affected by DACA, except in the sense that as a citizen of the United States of America I am inherently as culpable as anybody else.

So what are we going to do about all these folks who are just living their lives out as best they can, but are suddenly faced with the consequences of the actions of others?

Are we going to turn them out?

I think not.

That they are now adults is a factor that has to be taken into consideration.

That they have been well aware of their status for all this time has to be taken into consideration.

That they have, each and all, had ample opportunity to apply for legitimate citizenship, and could have done so as soon as they reached their majority, has to be taken into consideration.

Some of the culpability here belongs squarely on their shoulders as well as on those of the (now-ex) executive branch of our government, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch - and our own as we didn't step up to say, 'Hey that's unconstitutional, what are you DOING!?!' either.

We're all guilty, when it comes right down to it.

Solutions?

I have no 'solutions', only thoughts on the matter.

I'm thinking that every last one of our DACA folk need to get themselves posthaste to the closest immigration office and get their paperwork started.

I'm thinking the legislative branch needs to clearly and definitively put an end to the continuance of something that was unconstitutional in the first place.

I'm thinking that the judicial branch has got to present a decisive ruling on the matter.

I'm thinking that enforcement ought to be stepped up even more, to clear out the criminal elements.

All of these things ought to have been done long since but 'long since' is long gone.

Now is going to have to suffice.

I looked up the DACA thing and the guidelines are pretty clear. The people affected fall into specific parameters, which does help.

It's not like this is the end of the world, folks. It's just got to be taken care of so everyone can calm down and get on with getting on.

The same goes for those who are over-staying their visas. They can follow the rules about renewing them if that's an option, or they can go home. It's not complicated.

I have a feeling it's liable to come as a shock to some peoples' systems that there really are actual laws in our nation, and that (until/unless duly changed) they're (GASP!) supposed to be followed. I know there has been a great deal of 'flexibility' these past years about that little detail, and it might take a while for the concept to sink in. Hopefully it won't take too long.

When it comes down to it, the same goes for all of the illegals among us. It seems to me that, while our legislative branch is dealing with this one part of the whole they may as well extrapolate and deal with the rest of it at the same time. If your paperwork for citizenship is in the works, and; if you're gainfully employed or enrolled in a bonafide educational/training program, and; if you've been here straight through for five years or so, and; if you have no criminal record ... welcome home. Everyone else, so sad too bad, you had your chance, out you go.

Effective immediately, until we as a nation get back onto our feet and can assess our ability to take on anything more, the doors are closed. To everyone.

That's about the only way I can see the whole thing.

No doubt I'm not being 'politically correct' here but honestly I don't much give a rodent's behind about being 'politically correct'.

It's not the current administration's fault, this mess. It's part of the 'legacy' of the one/s before. A disrespect for the laws of our land, coming from the highest of our governmental positions, has been disheartening for a lot of us. For those who didn't know, didn't care, or welcomed it ... I don't know what to tell you except that now you know. You might still not care, and you might not welcome the return of our Constitution, but now at least you know.

God bless us all, and most especially those directly affected by what's coming down the pike including those whose paths are to enforce what has to be done.

And ... you know ... God bless our President. Mr. Trump's destiny is not one many of us would envy. His is the task of righting the wrongs of others, on our behalf I might add. The least we can do is give him our prayers and not get in his way.

Taking care of our DACA folk is a step.

Our legislative branch has six months to get something done that ought to take a whopping fifteen minutes tops. IF they can't manage to do even that much, I hope they're busy getting alternative careers planned and prepared for. It's too bad they can't be 'recalled', but they sure as heck don't have to be re-elected. None of them, on either side of the aisle. We can't repeal them, but we can most certainly replace them.

Our DACA folks have those same six months to get their rears in gear and get their paperwork started, get a job or enroll in a training program, prove their residency for the past five years, and make sure their records are clean and clear. The ones who can't/won't do those things might want to take this opportunity to vacate our nation voluntarily.

IF (yes that IF is in capital letters and in bold) our legislative branch isn't completely dead, and they know the meaning of the word 'extrapolate', it's not just the DACA folk who might want to be taking care of the paperwork, the job/training, the documentation of residency for five years, and proof of a law-abiding lifestyle.  As for the Visa folks, just get 'em renewed or go home.

Just sayin'.

Ach. But what do I know?

Since I'm In 'Artist' Mode ... Uffda ...

Over a year ago my sister suggested I try a painting that would look something like the one in the post this LINK will take you to.

Well, what with one thing and another, it completely flew out of my mind ... until recently.

I've been looking on line at relevant photos, found some rather impressive ones of both outer space and geologic formations that would be awesome to use.

I'm NOT going to even try to shoot for anything even close to the photo created by the person who created the beauty you'll see in the photo the link will take you to, and have serious doubts whether or not I'll be able to even come close to getting the general concept put together, but the thought intrigues me so I'll likely give it a try anyway. We shall see what we shall see when the time comes.

If you click on the link, you'll read that I thought 'PHI in the Sky!' when I saw the photo - that's because in HELL AND HIGH WATER (it's fiction, in case you're not familiar with the SONG series) there are references to relatives back in the far ancient days (think mammoth and saber cat) who went 'Hiving' in the stars, up there out there, before the advanced civilization of Phi got wiped out by the Extinction Level Event which triggered what we call the Younger Dryas. It took the mammoth, the saber cat, and many other species, that ELE did, and it annihilated a mighty big hunk of Earth in general.

Some of our Characters are separated from family members when they are caught on Earth away from those who are up there out there among the stars. Communications, let alone access, between Earth and the Star Folk are severed irreparably, one more loss to bear when the ELE and its aftereffects are already too much for people to cope with.

At any rate, I have no idea if I'll ever be able to portray what one of the 'hives' of the Star Folk might have looked like, but it's going to be fun just going through the photos of the Universe, and whatever I can find that might be used to represent the settlements up there out there. They're not going to be Space Station things, though. That much I can tell you!

I'm daunted, and I don't daunt easy.

Still gonna be fun though!! Pop that image, or one along the same lines, up to a four foot by six foot canvas and see what you think ... me, I'm thinking 'Challenge!' and I'm thinking 'Oh boy what am I getting myself into?' and I'm thinking 'My sister is either a genius or she hates me.' She wants it in high relief sculpted form no less. 

Uffda.

How about I just paint one and display it on a frame at a 45 degree angle or some such?

Heh.

I can make it the cover of a big triangular box and store stuff in there. It'll have to go out in my lean-to since this little house I'm living in now ain't got space for no such thing. 

Lord have mercy.

Like I don't have enough to do. I'm supposed to be rewriting the first book of SONG, making new book covers, concocting trailers, updating ALL of the books, yada yada and MORE yada. Do I have time to ding around with a huge painting? Well, maybe. Procrastination is my middle name. One of my middle names. I'm going to try to shoot for Spring Equinox to have this stuff all done, but it's not like there's any real 'deadline' for which I'm eternally grateful. Summer Solstice would be just as good a time, right?

I'll say it again, with emphasis.

UFFDA! 

Painting On 100 Year Old Cedar Roof Shakes Again!

And I have to admit to feeling a mite odd posting about artwork when I can't get any photos at all to load into my blogs, but there you have it. I'm posting because it's been too long since I've done any artwork at all, and I do love these little pieces.

If ever I can figure out what the problem is with getting photos to post, you'll be inundated with them!

At any rate, this new batch has mostly textured designs, meaning I'm essentially sculpting in low relief and putting the paint onto the 'picture'.

So far I've got one white on black winter-scape using acrylics over the sculpting medium on the wood, a couple of monochromes using translucents (one blue, one burnt sienna) again over the low relief sculpting, a couple using both acrylics and translucents over the sculpting, and a couple that are basically abstracts.

Sad for me that I have a heavy work schedule for the next few days. I hate when I'm just getting into a project and have to cut it short, but ... it is what it is and that's all there is to it.

Ah, the monochromes ... the translucents are antiquing the sculpting to bring it out. Layers will deepen some parts, and I can wipe off places I want highlighted.

You already know the bases I'm using: cedar roof shakes (shingles) salvaged from my old 100 year old house as I was putting on the new shingles.

You want to know what I've been using for the 'sculpting' medium? Acrylic latex caulk. Yes the kind that comes in tubes and you use a caulking gun for application. I put a bunch onto the shake and use a regular table spoon to move it around and into place. Build up some places that you want in the 'foreground', and even more if you're going to put grasses or other details in. The grasses are made by simply 'slicing' into the texturing wherever you want the blades. A person could use whatever tools they wanted to. Once I did everything 'finger-painting' except for the base coat. Finger-painted the texture on, did the base coat, then used my fingers to highlight the black base coat with gold (and possibly silver; I can't remember as it was a while ago and the painting is long sold to a great home). It's the same way I did the white on black winter-scape highlighting, and is the technique I'll use for probably a hundred more simply because it works the best, gives me the best control.

Once I'm done with this set of textured pieces I'll go to working on the flat surfaces of the cedar shakes, mostly with acrylics. One thing I love about the cedars is that they've all got weathering patterns that either suggest or outright dictate what the piece is going to become. They've also all got saw blade grooves, which can make it awkward to try to paint, say a sky, sideways to them. Even when I go 'with the grain' so to speak, the swoops of the saw blade lines show through. I don't mind it because they are after all what they are!

Yeh.

Still frustrated as all get-out that the photos won't post but ... oh well. I'll add them eventually I hope.

Another experiment I want to try is putting enough gesso onto the cedar shakes to give me a smooth surface and trying some of the Prismacolors on them. So there's that to look forward to, and that's a fact.

I once did a painting of a forest pond using the translucents, with metallic highlights. The thing about that one is that it looks different depending on what kind of light is on it. In regular room light it looks like a quiet peaceful little glade in the woods, a little on the dark side. But if you try to take a photo of it like that, and use a flash, you'll get all the metallic highlights and a completely different look.

Hmm ...

I wonder.

I betcha I've got a photo of that one somewhere in this blog. Maybe, just maybe, I can find it and do a copy and paste thing. It's worth a try, right?

Wish me luck.

HERE IT IS!

You may as well see the post :) It's not a long one, I promise! You'll see what I mean.

Seeing the photos makes me realize that they just can't capture the painting, which is an inconvenience to say the least.

Ah well.

I'll likely give it another try, and see what shows up in more of those kinds of paintings. Translucents show up differently on different types of surfaces. When I'm able to add photos (IF) you'll see what I mean about that too. The burnt sienna monochrome in particular emphasizes that. The 'base' of the piece is bare wood while the textured part of course is not; there's a big difference in how the translucent 'takes'. It soaks right into the bare wood, staining it dark, and kind of 'rides' on the smoother surface of the textured part. The 'riding' part of the equation comes into play when I'm working on canvas. It makes it easier to wipe off parts I want lighter, sort of like water colors, but takes longer to dry, giving me more time to fiddle with it.

Working the layers can be a bit challenging. You have to wait in between or you'll wipe off the under-color with the over-color ... and it's a bit like working with soft 'chalk' pastels in that you really need to begin with the lightest colors and work the darker ones over them - even when dry, it's next to impossible to lighten anything as each coat serves to deepen the colors. I suppose if I got desperate I could use acrylics over the top, but that takes away most of the challenge and compromises the depth of the painting's layers.

And that's about all I've got for tonight.

I've got a couple of pieces that are about ready for their next layer so had better get to applying them I reckon!

Something You Might Or Might Not Want To Hear

note: I have no idea why this blog isn't posting any of the photo images these past months :( 

A few years ago it would never have occurred to me that what you are about to read might possibly be anything that anyone would need to be reminded of, let alone be something that some people may not have even heard of. It’s not new news; it’s not a new take on anything; it’s not unique in any way – at least until these past few years … the growing up years of our young adults. 

Below you’ll find excerpts from three separate blog posts. Together they say something you might or might not want to hear.

this is an image of the Constitution of the United States of America, which isn't showing up

1)  We are governed not by any one sitting president, not by any single current congress, not even by our courts. 

We are governed by the Constitution of the United States of America which grants sovereign rights to the PEOPLE of the United States. It is We the People of the United States of America who wield the final authority. We are not just saying 'NO' to corruption in our government; we are also saying 'NO' to those who have for too long been disregarding the fundamental premise of our form of government. 

  

these are images of a flying Bald Eagle and a standing American Bison

2)  Both the National Bird of the United States and our (apparently soon-to-be) National Animal/Mammal - the Bald Eagle and the American Bison - were both around for that last big ELE (Extinction Level Event, almost 13,000 years ago) - and somehow survived.

In much more recent years, both were on the verge of extinction (again) and both were 'brought back' from that verge by the collective will of the American People.

That we as a people, once we recognized what we had done, were doing, did what we had to do to correct ourselves ... something about that is reassuring, gives me hope.

God Bless America

Indivisible

3)  … I refer you to the stars that grace the Flag of the United States of America. Yes I know they represent each and all of the States of our Nation. They can also represent the forging of this Nation, one made up of many. You notice that each of those stars is the same size; each is equal to all of the others. The fact that Texas and Alaska are far bigger than Rhode Island and Delaware is entirely moot. They share equal status, and our Flag needs ALL of her stars in order to be complete. Not a single one of those stars carries a label but together they, and the stripes of red and white that flank them, represent one nation. One. Recognizing and respecting individuality in NO way diminishes what that means but enhances it.

this is an image of a flying dove carrying an olive branch

All of the above having been said, here’s what I want to remind you of:

First, regardless of who is in the White House, regardless of who fills the Seats of Congress in Washington DC, even regardless of who sits the benches of our courtrooms, the United States of America’s Constitution and Bill of Rights are what govern us.

Administrations come and administrations go, one after another after another. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights cannot be changed, only added to by the collective Will of the People via amendments (which are not easily achieved).

Second, we as a people have made mistakes. That we have, and do, and will come to recognize our mistakes, speaks well of us. That we have, and do, and will take steps to correct our mistakes speaks even louder.

Bringing back the Bald Eagle and the American Bison from the brink … how many of our younger folk even realize what that means? How many care? I would venture to say  :  few – very few – too few. Yet it is symbolic, and perhaps therein lies the issue at the moment. It is symbolic of something we as a people did RIGHT. These days, everyone’s focusing on other symbols, interpreting them in ways that are twisted.

Third, connected to second (and to first when it comes right down to it) the individual groups that make up our larger population have been, are, and will be collectively We the People of the United States of America.

That’s a statement of fact folks, not a recommendation.

There was a time, brought to mind by recent events, when mistakes were made by more than one ‘faction’. The effect was not pretty. The result was a still-united nation, albeit a wounded one.

The three points merge.

Today we can, if we look, see what has come of ‘that time’ which is of course our own Civil War, something that I hear some people threatening again. We will not go there, people. We will not.

For those who think perhaps it is a viable option, think again.

You have only to look to our southern states of Texas and Louisiana, right now, in August of 2017, to see the incontrovertible conclusion of that war. In the midst of horror and pain We the People, once divided and again threatened with division, are oblivious to the factors that once divided us. Watch, and listen. You can’t help but see what I’m talking about. There is no South any more; there is no North. There is no Urban; there is no Rural. There is no Rich; there is no Poor. There is only ONE People of the United States.

What you will see, if you care to look, is the United States of America, full-blown and just doing what it does – pulling together in a time of crisis. Addressing with steadfast resolution (a cliché I know but here it fits so yes I’m going to use it) those who would use the hurt of others for their own ends – the looters are being arrested; the politicizers are being shouted down or ignored; the price gougers are being documented and will be dealt with; the haters are being called out and shown up for what they are.

So, contrary to what ‘current events’ in the form of riots and protests and the destruction of symbols of our past successes and the haters might want us to believe, our nation as a whole is actually reaffirming what we have needed to be reminded of: we are ONE nation, indivisible. Made up of many and many different folks, this is true, but nevertheless ONE.

In our ‘crisis mode’ nobody cares about anything that doesn’t matter. Nobody cares about who someone is sleeping with; nobody cares about skin tones; nobody cares about how big someone’s house is or how fancy their vehicle is; nobody cares about who anybody else voted for; nobody cares when or how or under what circumstances anybody else’s ancestors came to these shores. Nobody cares about what anybody else ‘identifies as’ – because at the moment the only ‘identity’ anybody has is ‘American’.

Part of me weeps that it has had to take a Powerful Act of Nature to bring home to us what should have been recognized and celebrated all along. Instead, we’ve had divisiveness shoved down our throats for so long that we were starting to believe in it, even while choking on the very thought of it.

So y’all haters can just sit down and shut up now. We do accept that even you are a part of us. You are the part of each and all of us that we know we have inside, the dark ugly part that we fight to subdue and overcome. You are in the dark corners of our internal ‘gardens’, where we put the rotting detritus that we don’t want to see. You are there, and we are not denying it – but just as we nurture and care for the beauty and productivity of our own selves and our nation and set the detritus aside in a dark corner, so too will we set you aside. You need no nurturing; natural processes will decay you until you become again something we can use to further nurture the beauty and productivity. In the meantime, we do not want you front and center – not of our own selves and not of our nation.

Going back to our points …

The laws that govern us as American citizens forbid harm to any, for any reason.

We the People of the United States of America have been making a mistake; we can and will take steps to correct ourselves.

We cannot, and do not, and will not deny the value and importance of any part of our collective population. We might have to put you haters in a corner for a while, but in so doing we are but protecting the beauty and productivity while you’re decaying enough to become again nurturers of said beauty and productivity.

Just as, at the moment, Houston and other places are addressing the weeds (haters) in their sodden garden while caring for the beauty so too will the United States as a whole.

So you can either go to the corner on your own or we can put you there. Your choice.

Frankly, it would be a great deal more pleasant if you choose to become a part of the beauty right away, for you and for the rest of us. I can’t imagine it would be at all pleasant to find myself rotting and decaying for as long as it takes to become fertilizer. You can skip that step. Pay the piper (can’t skip this step, sorry), be forgiven, and ‘come on home’ – if you want.

It took many of our folk a real long time to make that happen, but … look to Texas and Louisiana right now. Look to We the People of the United States of America as we respond to the needs of our own. Look to the various States kicking in and getting the job done. Look to our Federal Government doing its part.

Tell me you don’t want to be a part of that; tell me you’d rather be rotting in a dark corner instead. Go ahead; try to convince me; give it your best shot; tell me why you’d prefer divisiveness over unity. Your chances of convincing me are slim to none, and slim isn’t really in the running, but here’s your chance to try.

My words to you are: come home – just come home to the America who already accepts you and loves you enough to put you in a corner when need be. You don’t have to stay in that dark rotting corner. Your place is here in the beauty and productivity of this oh so precious nation that we all call Home.

Justice

+Mercy

=Peace

Can The States Do What Congress Can Not Or Will Not Do?

States Weigh In

The above link relates to processes and procedures I've been unfamiliar with (not  being a politician, y'know) so I had to read it through a couple of times to make sure I was understanding what it was saying.

The gist seems to be that, when it comes to health care (and probably other issues but not right now for me), maybe it isn't all totally dependent on Congress after all.

Lots of people know more about this stuff than I do, but I'm learning as I go here so bear with me.

This article talks about 'waivers' relating to aspects of current law (?) which the Governors of the States can submit applications for and the President either permits or denies. Apparently this is how the last administration got the expanded Medicaid plan going ... unless I'm getting it all wrong (which wouldn't surprise me) ...



Here's a bit:

"Recent analyses of pending 1115 Medicaid expansion waivers ... suggest that the immediate focus will be shared conservative policy priorities in the face of congressional inaction rather than on inducing policy changes by Democratic governors. The Trump administration, for example, has signaled a willingness to approve work requirements via 1115 waivers.The Obama administration denied waiver proposals that would have imposed similar rules as a condition of expanding Medicaid."


And:

"While history suggests that presidents do not always simply rubber stamp waiver applications from governors of their own party and desk reject those from their opponents, the Trump administration has signaled an interest in policy changes, like work requirements, that Democratic governors are unlikely to be enthusiastic about. Particularly given the Republican party’s recent legislative failures on healthcare, Republican politicians at the state and national level – governors and members of the Trump administration – face particularly strong incentives to deliver, at least in part, on their party’s promises to enact healthcare reforms. These conditions in turn may create fertile ground for policymaking via waivers in Republican-controlled states."


So, what exactly does this mean?

The above references have to do with Medicaid expansion, which apparently in effect added 38% to the requirement guideline, making a lot more people eligible - a waiver process available to States that wanted to use it. To my way of thinking it raised the 'poverty level' of those states by 38% but what do I know? Not a heck of a lot, obviously. (while I'm thinking here, I may as well go ahead and think that reasonable insurance premiums might have provided a reasonable alternative, but again what do I know?)

My next point of curiosity is what exactly can these waivers affect?

Could, perhaps, the States that want changes in the existing Health Care 'situation', frustrated by the lack of action in Congress, submit their own plans of action (so to speak) in the form of these waivers? If our President grants them, it would effectively make the wanted/needed changes independently of Congress, in those States, if I'm reading this right.

Being as I just read a thing about a couple of Governors who are apparently developing a plan to submit to Congress, I'm wondering how come they're doing that rather than simply submitting waivers for their States to make whatever changes they want. Maybe they think the waivers wouldn't be approved, or maybe they're thinking beyond the borders of their own states. I have no idea.

*laughing*

I have no idea about a lot of stuff.

On the other hand I do have a lot of curiosity.

Let's say a State wants to do away with the Individual Mandate.

Can they submit waivers to that effect?

It seems this procedure is nothing new (although to me the concept is entirely new as I'd not known it was even an option). If various States used it to get what they wanted before, is there any reason States can't use the same process to effect changes within their borders? It's essentially a tool that the States have at their disposal, not? They aren't guaranteed success as it's up to the President to grant or deny, but surely it would be worth a try.

How many of us even know about this? I'm not surprised that I had never heard of it because I'm pretty much 'out of the loop', but if it were widely known I would have heard about it, even in my relatively reclusive life.

Continuing with my point of curiosity about exactly what these waivers can affect, the next obvious question is what other areas of interest might be brought up for perusal in this context.

I have a feeling our States have more power than most of us might be fully aware of, especially if this waiver thing applies to other areas if interest, and more especially if the Will of the States is in accord with the Will of the sitting President.

If a State wants things to remain status quo, it just sits tight and lives with it. The States that want changes are apparently free to submit waivers outlining the changes they want to make, and the President either says yes or no.

All things considered, it might be nice if State Congressfolk would confer with their voters to find out exactly what they want, take that information to their State Houses and Senates, get what their people want put into a Bill, get the approval of their voters on the Bill (or make whatever changes the people want), get it onto their Governor's desk, and submit the waiver to the President. Post-haste.

Alternatively, and frankly even less likely, the people themselves could sit down together, hammer out a cohesive and concise proposal, and light fires under their State Congressfolk to get the process under way.

Yeh.

No wonder we've not heard about this option, huh?

Do the Washington folk really want the populace to realize that they could actually do that? When it comes down to it, how often are we consulted in any real way about stuff, and how often do we gather the reins ourselves to take the initiative on stuff? Rarely, and more rarely.

Close, So Close To What I Visioned ...

Governors are getting closer ...

Click on the link above to go to a Colorado Public Radio article.

It's shy on specifics, but at this point it kind of has to be relatively non-specific.

The point here is that there are a number of Governors across the country working together to find a way toward a Health Care plan that will at least stand a chance of working.

Being a nobody at all, I'm free to speculate to my heart's content about things that aren't particularly relevant to me but that are of vital importance to a lot of people I happen to love deeply.

A functional health care/insurance industry is one of those things. In the course of my rather non-traditional thought processes it crossed my mind that a sort of compromise might be effective.

Have everyone buy their own basic coverage insurance from a much wider field of options; keep the programs in place that cover our vulnerable elders, disabled, and poverty-stricken; and spare the insurance companies some of the cost of catastrophic cases by giving us all assurance of help in extreme situations.

Continue, as I said, the Medicare and Medicaid programs, with the individual States in charge of distribution and also how much they want to add of their own revenues to that kitty.

I'll have to read the article again, but that sounds a lot like what our Governors might be getting close to. As they struggle through the process, which is bipartisan by the way, all I can do is pray for them.


Here's a bit of an excerpt:


"One specific they agree on and would discuss: Their desire to change the Affordable Care Act mandate that employers with 50 or more employees provide insurance coverage. The governors say that number is too low, which deters hiring at small companies.

They also agree that the possibility of national single-payer coverage is not on the table in their discussions."


And another:


"... Primary care is important. Catastrophic coverage is important. We don't want anybody to get bankrupted because they get sick."


And one more:


"... some sort of reinsurance [using public money to help insure the sickest people], to make sure the high-cost pool is not causing higher rates for all the people seeking insurance on the private markets ..."



The other part of my thought process revolved around both health care and insurance providers - with both stepping up to the plate to encourage people toward a more active participation in their own general health and well-being ... by providing incentives like lower costs/premiums as people meet health goals. For example, some medical facilities that I know of have already been trying to get their staffs involved in health-related goals with internal 'competitions' ... that's just one. There could be others. What if, because it's quick and easy to figure out, they used BMIs as a 'guide' for folks? What if both the insurance companies and health care providers focused more on prevention? What if they stepped out of their boxes even more and took ideas and challenges directly to the people? The people are the ones who will be choosing their insurance and primary care providers, right? They might choose an insurance provider that offers them better premiums the closer their BMIs are to the green zone (healthy weight) - and they might choose the health care facility that offers them common sense preventive information (and helps them plan and implement a program to get them to where they want to be so they'll be eligible for those lower insurance premiums, besides being healthier).

These are obviously only just mine own thoughts, not addressed by the Governors and probably not exactly at the top of the list for consideration by the health care and insurance providers ... at least not that I'm aware of (which isn't saying much because I've had no real personal reason to be paying a whole lot of attention in recent decades) and I'm hoping to high heaven that lack of awareness will change in a real fast hurry as these industries begin overtly and thoroughly publicizing their plans of action.

I want the information in my face every time I turn around. I want to KNOW who is offering what, right up front.

And I want the results of the Governors' efforts plastered all over the place, and NOT in 'legalese' either but in plain English that's clear and concise.

*heh heh*

Wantin' ain't gettin'; I know that.

Still, a woman can do a bit of wishful thinkin' now and then ...

And, you know, a person doesn't necessarily have to either like or agree with everything about an architect personally in order to appreciate what they're doing. So ... IF they come up with something functional that will work for everyone, let's not allow 'personalities' to get in the way of us taking a good look at what they come up with, eh?