The Druid Way

  1/  You are a worthwhile person.

  2/  Believe in yourself.

  3/  Think for yourself.

  4/  Follow your bliss.

  5/  Seek beauty in life, in Nature, in other creatures.

  6/  Enjoy beauty in music and art as you perceive it.

      Don't let others tell you what you "must" enjoy.

  7/  Read. Anything and everything that pleases you.

  8/  Do all things in moderation.

  9/  Say please and thank you.

10/  Find someone to love. Tell them so.

11/  Seek balance in all things.

12/  If it harm none, do what you will.

Responsibilty

To say, "The Devil made me do it," is to clear you of any blame.

To say, "I am nothing without God," is to deny you any credit.

You are responsible for your actions and behavior, whether  good or ill.

Dialect Dilemma

   Which is correct: Speak well or talk good?
   Or is it the reverse: Talk well or speak good?
   Someone can be  a good speaker or a good talker. Or someone can be well spoken. Why not the reverse of all of the above?
   Many folks will say it's not logical. And they would be right, because language is not logical. It is what it is.
   Many Americans are told to never split an infinitive, and to never use no double negatives.
   (There, I just did both. Sue me.)
   But in French, double negatives are required, as in "ne ... pas." Or in Spanish: "No tengo nada," which translates to "I ain't got nothin.'"
   As for the term "ain't," teachers insist that isn't good English. But we can shorten "is not" to "isn't" and we can reduce "are not" to "aren't" and some folks shorten "am not" to "amn't."
   So it's only a short linguistic step from "amn't" to "ain't."
   All those examples delete the vowel  from the word "not" and combine it with the relevant form of the verb "to be."
   Here they are again: "Is not" becomes "isn't" and "are not" becomes "aren't."
   Also, "were not" becomes "weren't" and "would not" becomes "wouldn't" or even "won't." Or maybe it should be "will not" becomes "won't." Maybe  "willn't" would be a better alternative. Perhaps the earlier form was "woll," which became "will."
   I hear you insisting that statement isn't logical. And you're  right, because language isn't logical.
   (There, I just used an apostrophe to substitute for a vowel that was abandoned.)
   Also, there are people who say "amn't" rather than "am not." Is that poor grammar? Try telling that to the Irish who use that term that it's not good English and it shows that the user doesn't talk good. See how far you get insisting that the Irish are not good with language.
   Conclusion: All dialects are equal. They all enable  their users to communicate with others. To say that some dialects are superior to others is a social judgment, not linguistic.

Prime Time Mug Shot

   Donald Trump chose 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time to "surrender" to Georgia police over accusations of election interference.

   That's 6:30 p.m. in Chicago and 4:30 p.m. in Los Angeles, just in time to dominate evening television newscasts throughout the country.

   Good timing.

   But whether he used that time slot to expound his message to the world  is a separate issue, since the court forbade him from threatening in any way other individuals in the case against him.

   That did not stop hundreds of his followers from gathering at the jail house to show their support to national TV cameras.

   The resident cynic, however, wondered how many of the demonstrators were paid to be there. Next question: Who offered to pay them, and will they actually get paid.

   Cynicism is its own reward.

   The subject of the allegations has a long history of not paying bills. That's a big reason why he had  to go to foreign banks for corporate financing. It's also why many law firms refuse to represent him.

   Within hours of the arrest and public release of a photo of the alleged perpetrator, a T-shirt with his frowning face was on the national market.

   That's a good way to raise funds to pay the bail bondsman and to pocket the difference, if he does indeed pay the bondsman.

   Either way, it's a good way to reap some cash while avoiding a major payout for full bail.

   Some folks wondered why the accuse millionaire didn't pay the full bail himself.

   Here's a good reason: It's a good opportunity to raise cash.

   As for not paying the bondsman ... There are legal penalties for that, including jail time.

History

Treason doth never prosper; what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.
               -- Sir John Harington, 1560-1612

   We live in interesting times.
    No president of the United States has ever been indicted
   So far this year, Donald Trump -- a former president -- has been indicted four times; twice by a federal grand jury as well as by grand juries in Georgia and New York State.
   Unlike most other states, the names of grand jurors in Georgia are publicly listed, so their home addresses became known and threats against them have been made.
   Will the subject of the indictment urge his followers to let the legal process continue peacefully?
   Stay tuned.

   Meanwhile, consider this definition of treason: An attempt to control or overthrow a government by force or by illegal, unconstitutional means.
   Question: Why have none of the participants in the January 2021 uprising -- including their leader -- been charged with treason?
  

Pobrecito

   Defense lawyers warn that Donald Trump faces "reputational harm" from the investigation of possible election interference, and therefore the probe must stop.
   His reputation may be sullied.
   Pobrecito.
   Evidence is piling up that the man and his friends may well have done just that, tried to interfere with election results. But the attitude seems to be that because he is who he is, he is therefore immune from prosecution for anything, of any kind, under any circumstance, ever.
   Money can enable the wealthy to stall and try to maneuver legal proceedings until the government has trouble paying for it, or eventually just give up.
   That may be part of the reason prosecutors sometimes focus more on low income law breakers, especially those who cannot afford high ticket lawyers.
   But this time the stakes are higher, and prosecutors have the opportunity to make a big name for themselves.
   Besides, there is the issue of doing what's right.

Censorship vs News Judgment

   Robert F. Kennedy Junior is suing the Associated Press, the Washington Post, Reuters and the BBC, claiming they all refuse to carry reports of what he says. Censorship, he alleges.
   Oddly,  I know this from a report on the NPR web site, where it also lists several examples of falsehoods he regularly proclaims in his campaign speeches.
   News media are not obliged to carry detailed accounts of everything every candidate says every day. That's not censorship, it's news judgment. If every news media outlet were required to carry full details of every thing a politician says and does -- but only the positive stuff -- that would be media control.
   Media can decide to carry only the negative stuff, but that also would be bias. Indeed, there are some news outlets that do just that, and the First Amendment says they can.
   By the same token, readers and listeners can ignore them, and subscribe only to neutral media. Or they can choose to subscribe only to those outlets that share their biases.
   There is always a choice.
   The NPR report also writes that claims of censorship are "a core grievance of many conservatives and liberals who see social media policies to combat misinformation, conspiracy theories and election information as infringing on their free speech rights."
   But are we they free to spread lies, and force others to expand the spread?
   Yes and no.
   They are free to lie, but there is punishment if the lie harms others. And no, we cannot force others to spread lies for us. They too have free speech, and with that freedom comes the right to be silent. Others also have the right to call out the liar.