At least the current New Year is evenly numbered in keeping with the eternal plan to alternate odd to even. Small thought that is let us see it as good news, possibly.

If the best a person has to offer is telling others how wrong and bad they are I recommending avoiding them as travel companions. Come to think on it, that includes life’s travel as well.

Earlier in life I enjoyed laughter at those silly believers who in the past put valuable time and energy into determining how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. Remember that?

I do and stood firmly on the side of secularists with far worthier philosophical views. Yes, to progress we could believe in. This led to today’s accolades and awards for the new clerics exploring the limitless possibilities of piling on ever more non-existent characters, cultures and devices on the make believe pin head of a wheel that weaves time.

Maybe our philosophy isn’t so different after all.

I’m inclined to question diversity requirements voiced by groups representing specific interests. CAIR is an example of a place that might benefit by a Diversity Officer.

There are Four Es’ – Equality and Equity are meant to make life Easier by avoiding Evolution.
I confess appreciation for sweet ironies such as Papal authority downgrading the Latin Mass as an out-of-step throwback. This infallible pronouncement coming from an elderly font of wisdom dressed more archaically than any public figure gave me a mental “Huh?”

Should Pontiff Dear not have bespoke theirself wearing sporty cross trainers, colorful shirt and contemporary slacks better suited to a modern day oracle? (The Pope may yet overtake me in irrelevance.)

Tricky propositions are best avoided. I mean, how on earth can a person reconciles a universal right to human migration and a borderless world with trespass on stolen land? Best not to ask I’d say?
Fun has nothing to do with it. Fun (and eating) was about all a young child was capable of, so it is understandable elementary level instructors used it, especially with 30 frogs in a room.

As the process of education isn’t to keep students at grade two level it’s necessary (isn’t it) to put fun in a different place as a person learns to recognize accomplishment, defeat, achievement, and struggle, etc.
My skin crawls with disgust when an adult presenter claps hands like a grade two teacher saying “Let’s have fun, children.”

Pah! Fun is easy. Kids do it, don’t they? What’s the point (or benefit) of promoting fun over dedication, hard work, sticking-to-it, or other learned traits productively more enjoyable than fun.

How good would it be if you agreed and that satisfied me?

In Minnesota we know the assumed fact of police racism apparently isn’t bound by gender, that is if Chauvin is of one and Potter of the other, that is.

I get frequent appeals from a group representing the plight of girls in places like Afghanistan. I’ve come to see this as sexism gone daft because it’s really not so hot being a boy handed an automatic military weapon.

Nine out of 10. Long time ago nine out of 10 dentists were touted in a commercial as valid proof of product efficacy.

A more accurate current number is 93% of scientists in support of a particular position. In both cases, really? Just where is the validity here?

It would be a huge task to survey all dentists in a single city, state or nation. Finding nine of 10 in your own building is not the same as 9,000 of 10,000 in a three state area.

Ninety three percent of scientists is usually given as a worldwide figure giving global support. Again, really?

Define “scientist” and then go nation to nation inventorying them. Was that done do you thing or too big a task or even an impossible one?

Finding 93% agreement among scientists of any sort is unlikely as the same percentage of humans agreeing on the same lunch choice. Taint likely.

Appeals using statistical proofs typically look better than they are, which is to say “expert” conclusions. There again is a problem.

The expert is an authority, so when authority is used as supporting proof it’s good to remind ourselves authority from Bible source to PhD are similar biases.

My training taught “Easy writing makes hard reading.” Turn that into “Easy reporting makes bad messaging.”

When reporting is easy the reader ends up either eating the Pablum report or having to do work skipped by the lax reporter.

Easily misused, “Our Democracy” means what? (Let me ask similarly of Diversity. Does the word mean dressing differently while thinking the same way?)

Here’s how I see it. A two-party democracy recognizes a basic condition. None of us knows it all contrary views are useful we want a worthwhile result. Bipartisan is more than a “nice” idea, it’s useful except to the “my way or the highway” folk who want it their way, sometimes with an “or else!”

Political order built on bipartisanship presents more struggle and confrontation than unityship where you go along (that’s where “or else” comes in).

Our democracy has meant centuries of back and forth with relatively little one-side authoritarianism. (On that some would say “until Trump” and others say “until Biden” with both views having some credibility.)

Authoritarian government isn’t avoided by use of authoritarianism any more than life is promoted by advocating suicide. Much as it may be onerous to do (God knows we’ve latched onto the habit of vilification over understanding), it is essential to respect others in an exchange of ideas, beliefs, visions, practices, and etc.

The other hand reminds how easy democracy is frustrated by pigeon chess where disruption flaps onto the board, defecates on the squares, scatters the pieces, and flies off cooing victory, victory. Is it sinful white privilege to respect rules?

Or is the issue that more and more of us are lured by fun and are unwilling to face the difficult work of being a diverse people in fact and not fancy?