Who and What is the Happy Warrior
This blog is a representation, in conversational form, of my voyage to wrap my arms around the world in which Mr. Worsdworth's warrior finds happiness.
(Standing disclaimer: Luckily tests of spelling accuracy ended in 4th grade otherwise I would still be in Elementary School. Be forewarned, spelling errors ahead. I subscribe to the wisdom of a great man who said, "I have utmost disdain for a man who can only spell a word one way." -Benjamin Franklin)
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Upond consultation with the dictionary (not quoted but accurate nonetheless):
Leadership- to lead, as in to be out in front. To show the way...
Following- to follow behind someone...
Leading from beind sounds a lot like following to me. Line up a hundred First Graders and present them with a simple scenario where several people are taking a walk in the woods. Then ask them what do you call the person in front and what do you call the person in back... Hmmmm. Not too difficult. I'm betting my money that all hundred students would get it right.
Mr. Obama the post-modern wordsmith can't yet convince me that the emporer is wearing clothes. America is a leader in this world. Like it or not. Being a leader is sometimes very lonely. Sometimes there are people that do not like the leader. Let me ask you this, which countries or groups are making a play to take over leadership if the United States abdicates its position? How would the world look if they became the leaders? That is a very scarey hypothetical...
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
1. I will never allow a law to become effective until every elected representative of the House and Senate (as well as myself) reads every single word of that law. That is why we are called "law makers". It is not too difficult. If a leader of the House or Senate suggests something absurd like "we have to pass it to find out what is in it" I will immediately call for his/her resignation.
2. I will refuse to sign a law, policy or executive action when I fail to get at least one vote from a member of the other party (Senator or Representative) even and especially if I am the author or chief advocate of that law. I recognize that if I were to sign such a statute without any support from "the other side of the aisle" I am going against the wishes of nearly one half of the population of this country. I admit that to do so is the very definition of partisan and devisive. I will not be the author of such divisiveness in the country where I claim to be president of all the people.
These are my two challenges and I think they are not only fair but I think fair minded liberals and conservatives would agree that these two challenges, if put into action, would be beneficial for the United States. So why do I have a preference for Gov. Romney when he hasn't made such a pledge and suggest that this is a reason why I would not vote for Pres. Obama? Because Pres. Obama has already SHOWN where he stands on these issues. He has already shown that he is willing to run rough-shod over the political decency and the unifying principles that underly both of these challenges. Am I confident that Gov. Romney would do differently? Not 100%, but with Pres. Obama I know the answer already.
Monday, September 24, 2012
Fast foward two and a half centuries and our secularized society is making a full court press to extinguish God from the public square, to debate him out of existence and to shame His moral foundations (i.e. traditional concept of marriage, the primacy of the family in the social order, individual responsibility, submission to authority, conception of the sacred, etc.) out of society. Does anyone need a more obvious illustration of this effort than the recent vote at the Democratic national convention?
Behind President Obamas political philosophy is the substitution of God by the government. We, as citizens should not rely upon God for our daily bread but upon government. We should not declare our allegiance to some untouchable, inmaterial Being (certainly not at some high school graduation ceremony or in a court room) but our allegiance should be declared to government. The most fundamental expression of allegiance is by the contribution of our money. God's tithe (10%) has been far eclipsed by government's requirement that we pay upwards of 50% to accomplish their "good" works. Government is by far the more oppressive overseer.
So sorry but I included two reasons (although interrelated) why I'm voting against President Obama in this post. I'll try to keep my discussions more focused.
Friday, September 21, 2012
Our "CEO" appeared on the David Letterman Show and could not (or would not) identify the current national debt figure. This is as fundamental and central a measure of national health as is a thermometer to a fevered infant... and Mr. Obama feigned as if he did not know what that figure is. Are you serious? No corporate executive would dare face the shareholders and proclaim such ignorance.... He would summarily be thrown out on his disgraced arse! It truely boarders on gross negligence. I expect my cheif executive to know that number and be so preoccupied with it that it keeps him up at night. In our current condition he should not be able to sleep; ever waking hour should be spend devising one solution after another to fix the current economic malady. Why? Because it represents our future! Are we so arrogant as to think we can escape the fate experienced by every once mighty nation in the history of the world? And yet this Chief Executive appears to trifle with our fiscal situation. We (the people... the United States) have not had an annual operating budget for four years -his entire tenure as sitting Chief Executive. His most recent budget proposal was so un-serious (if that is a word) that it was was rejected not only by every Republican but also by a host of Democrats as well. Members of his own party! This begs a serious question of effective leadership which will be a topic of a future blog... but back to the matter of fiscal recklessness: It is either gross ineptitude or wanton negligence. Economic laws are set and sure, not unlike the laws of gravity. Consequences must always follow... it may be artificially delayed but we will reap a whirlwind. Our present macro-economic course could kill this country and plunge the world into chaos.
What... we have an option of replacing our current CEO with a guy whose entire career has been a chain of unbroken fiscal successes, of turning around dying entities and making them solvent again... what? Is there even a debate about who is best equipped to fix our present condition...
Thursday, September 20, 2012
I believe President Obama when he expressed the central theme of his candidacy and his presidency: fundamental transformation of the United States of America. He has commenced exactly what he promised and if elected to a second term I fear he will nearly complete that transformation. I don't know what many people think he means by "fundamental transformation", but from the first time he overtly declared his objective, it scared me to death. So for the next several weeks until he elections in November I will be offering a very short (15 to 30 second) synopsis of why we cannot afford another term of a man who wants to fundamentally change what has been the most miraculous, most beneficient, most free, most charitable, most successful, most affluent and most benign country ever to exist on this planet. We've had blights on our history, we still have some challenges but these require fine tuning, not fundamental change.
Here is my first thought for your consideration:
A person, family, group or community that comes to depend (becomes dependent) on government is consequently less free to make their own choices, to exercise their autonomy, to exercise freedom and pursue their own wishes. Dependence and freedom are mutually exclusive. Now ask yourself, is the Obama led government encouraging policies that will make citizens more free or more dependent? Look up the statistics on the increase in the number of people who receive some sort of government assistance (and I don't just mean welfare or unemployment although that is a good place to start) over the last four years?
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Wishing everyone a happy, meaningful and promising Rosh Hashanah! Shalom to my cousins from Judah. In this time of introspection it is always appropriate to ask yourself: Am I everything I should be? Am I what God expects me to be?
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Let's cut to the chase. Where you stand on this one statement is the most important factor in deciding who you vote for: Government is, by its nature, oppressive. This is undeniable. Governments make laws. They limit individual liberties. They take money from their citizens. They have power to lock up those they define as deviant. This is tremendous and terrible power. There are compelling reasons why individual citizens voluntarily subject themselves to the oppressive power of government. We must never ignore, forget or be duped into the idea that individuals are endowed with rights founded in man-made government. Governments take rights away (unless limited and restricted as in the Bill of Rights) and contest the power of individuals to do what they wish. Power of self-direction, autonomy and agency (the ability to choose for him/herself) rests with the indiviual as an endowment from God. Individuals volutarily give up some of that soverignty to form collective society. Governments are formed to channel, control and protect groups of similarly minded citizens. The balance between the rights of the individual and the power of government has been historically tense with the advantage almost always swinging to the side of government. Historically, theoretically and in practice, government is, by definition, oppressive.
This summary of political theory brings us back to our choice in this current presidential election. The question is how oppressive will we allow our government to become? What is the point at which we say, "enough". No more encroachment into our lives. We do not want any more intrusion in the name of social gifts or economic protection. Do not tell me what light bulbs I have to use or how large a drink I can purchase or if a meal contains a child toy. Stop dictating the details of my life. If you are comfortable with this level of oppression you must vote in one direction. If this level of oppression -and the trend it portends- frightens you then you most vote in another direction.
Once again, the central question is the size, intrusion and power of government. One philosophy almost deifies government -it is the solution to the challenges plaguing society. The other philosophy recognizes government as a necessary but dangerous entity, one that should be controlled, checked and minimized -the power of the citizen (which is centered in his inalienable rights) is the solution to the challenges plaguing society. Two very different philosophies that will take us down two very different national paths. Paths which lead to two different realities. The choice is ours.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
our previously unknown neighborhoods. Now Aurora, Colorado joins company
with lower Manhattan, Leesburg, Jasper and neighboring Columbine in a
growing list of murderous and unimaginable massacres. These communities
frequently become defined as “ground zero” to the social disasters that
unexpectedly and violently erupt. It is nearly impossible to speak the
word Columbine and avoid the association with “massacre”, “shooting” and
“trench-coat”. This is not a uniquely American experience as is manifest
by our association with such names as Beslam, Utoya Island (Norway), and
most recently Toronto, Canada. Indeed this type of social disaster
appears to be a part of the human experience. The heinous actions of a
few penetrate our generally civil societies and unexpectedly create chaos
and confusion. It may be impossible to predict when and where an
individual will engage in such deviance; certainly we cannot control all
the negative actions and the serious consequences which impact our lives.
We can predict, however, a number of pertinent subsequent conditions that
have a bearing on our physical, psychological and social well-being.
Curiously, in many social and natural disasters the secondary events –our
reactions- have the ability to seriously mitigate or exacerbate the impact
of the original event.
Being unable to predict the disastrous and tragic event, what do we know
–what is our predictive ability regarding what happens next? The great
aim of science is to achieve a level of understanding such that we can
reliably predict and subsequently positively control an otherwise chaotic
reality. The natural sciences which explore, among other things, some
equally destructive phenomenon like earthquakes, tornadoes, fires and
hurricanes have the advantage of natural or geophysical laws that
facilitate our predictive powers. The social and psychological being,
however, makes it much more difficult to predict and preempt the
destructive behaviors of individuals.
We have, however, gained tremendous insight about the social reaction to
such events. Therefore the objective of this article is to predict and
postulate some of the psychosocial conditions that we may expect to see in
the next several hours, days and weeks of this tragic experience:
Media rush: there will be a saturation of media coverage of this event
until another “rival” story emerges. A literal horde of media will
converge on Aurora and immediately begin to generate stories.
Unfortunately many of the reports will contain speculation and errors
presented as fact. These errors will have potential to taint a true
conception of the facts generating rumor, confusion and an overly
simplistic analysis of a sophisticated situation.
Vigils and communal cohesion: the next several days will be filled with
increased solidarity and “ceremonies” of social support. Most frequently
these take the form of candle-light vigils and religious services. These
serve a powerful social and psychological healing function. Tragedies
bring us together and temporarily open doors for change. This necessary
period of altruism is threatened by politicization and media
Aurora stigmatized: one of the most reliable responses to these events is
captured in a phrase taking this theme: I never thought it could happen
here. This will be followed by, “it could have happened anywhere.”
Ground zero communities are frequently associated with the heinous event
and scrutinized as if something inherent in their community, like tainted
water or too much or too little religiosity, makes them culpable for the
crime. Aurora will be forced to engage in a formal or informal public
relations campaign with the essential tagline: we are just like Anycity,
Politicization: the day following this tragedy will not end without
political parties and various interest groups seizing upon the experience
as an example for their agenda. Aurora, the Batman movie, and guns will
become pawns in the larger chess game being waged by interest groups of
every ilk. The race, religion, socio-economic status, and political
affiliation of the perpetrator will be scrutinized and dissected
ad-nauseum. The purpose of this is to provide interest groups with
ammunition and evidence of their cause. We will see an emergence of
“public political figures” who will be drawn to the spotlight of an
engaged media. The cameras will provide a stage for these figures to
vigorously pursue their agendas.
Law enforcement protocols questioned and changed: a productive evaluation
of the response will generate a number of broad policy recommendations.
Since the perpetrator seems to have employed tear gas which limited the
speed of the police response, gas masks will now be standard equipment in
every police vehicle. Such refinements are generally positive but
sometimes run a danger of errant generalization since, like natural
disasters, an effective response in one scenario may not be the best
course of action in another.
Copy-cat crimes: the shock and gravity of this crime will likely create
an initial response in the form of police presence at theaters across the
country particularly during showings of the Batman movie. This will be
both a visceral reaction as well as one that anticipates the tendency for
spectacular crimes to illicit copy-cat actions. Unfortunate as it is
there will be a certain number of observers who gain some morbid
“inspiration” from the events in Aurora. These will attempt to mimic the
initial behavior in like manner.
Law suits: The process of litigation will unfold somewhat slower than
other reactions we’ve identified but this response has become a certainty
in our current litigious society. The company owning the movie theater
will be a primary target but so will any businesses that can logically be
tied to this event. There will be a legal feeding frenzy in the name of
and on behalf of the victims. Justice and recompense are currently
measured in dollars.Oversimplification of Perpetrator: there is a psychological need to establish
the perpetrator as someone fundamentally different from the rest of us. We
are uncomfortable thinking that he is like us -or that we are like him and there-
fore liable to act in similar manner. This is a failure to recognize that evil exists
and even worse, potentially exists in all of us. "Monster" is a word that is
frequently used to dehumanize a person engaging in this type of crime.
On the other hand, some will attempt to explain such grossly deviant behavior
based on politically correct caricatures as: he was bullied, society created
the monster, he was unerpriveledged, he is mentally unbalanced, he espoused
ultra-conservative beliefs, etc. Both simplifications are wrong. The truth is the
perpetrator will turn out to be a complicated person, not entirely or altogether
different than any of us -except for the fact that (for some reason yet unknown)
he acted against the moral, social and religious constraints that influence the
rest of us.
Academic studies: Disasters, natural or man-made, are extreme but ever
more frequent occurrences. The necessity for understanding the causes and
consequences of such phenomenon is imperative. The direct result is the
potential to save lives and minimize maladies (medical, psychological,
social and financial). The obvious failures of recent responses to
hurricanes together with the increasing harm caused by natural,
technological and social disasters elevates the importance for
preparedness and effective response. Sadly we do not even have a tool
that allows us to measure and then prescribe the needed resources or even
the impact of disasters. We are tragically reactive in our responses to
the wide range of threats (dangers extend far beyond immediate shelter,
food and medical needs) posed by disasters . Until recently disaster
response has focused on a service delivery model administered by distant
state or federal authorities. The irony is that most disasters wreak
havoc at the local –individual and community- levels. Furthermore the
resources most immediately marshaled and most effectual are those we
naturally trust: family members, religious institutions, networks of
friends, neighbors, local workplaces, area businesses, hospitals and
community service providers… not some distant bureau or agency. For all
of these reasons researchers will descend upon Aurora and face the
challenge of studying human behavior outside of a laboratory environment
and largely without controls normally essential for scientific study.
Aurora and the larger Denver community will encounter some difficult days
and many decisions. Sometimes knowing what is ahead provides a measure of
security that these crimes take from us. The most poignant question,
"why" is not easily answered but knowing the answer to "what comes next"
can help get us through a time that may seem impossible.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
The amazing thing is that this streak, this tendency, this effort (call it what you will) was forseen years ago. Some saw it twenty years ago, others fifty years ago and it was even forseen by foreign observers (i.e. Toqueville) and the men who established our foundation in the late 1700s. They foresaw it because they understood human nature. They have provided warnings and systematic controls but we have largely ignored both. Take five minutes and watch this amazing clip which is just one simple but frank example of such warnings:
Do I sound like a zealot? Perhaps, but ask yourself how many of the identified points are accurate?
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
That is a summarized and accurate history of this day, the 4th of July. It is well and good but what is infinitely more important is a question that involves us and our day. Are we still committed to these same principles of independence? Ask yourself: within the past four years have you become more independent or more dependent upon your government? Are you able to make up your own mind about what you or your children eat? Is the government dictating more or less how to spend your money? Is government inserting itself more or less in the details of your life: in matters of healthcare, education, business endeavors, recreation, family life, etc.?
In individual terms and as a society the trend is undeniable. There are more people today who are dependent upon government than four years ago (granted this trend began more than 40 years ago but has now accelerated to alarming levels). Worse still is the fact that this growth and interposition of government is proselyted as a good thing. The idea that government should provide for our needs (our health needs, our food needs, our housing needs, etc.) is almost accepted without question. A great mass of society welcomes it, Congress is legislating it, the President is vigorously promoting it and the courts are upholding it. We are, by definition, becoming dependent upon government for these basics: food, shelter, clothing and a job. We have embraced dependence on government -the exact opposite of what gave birth to this nation as encapsulated in the declaration of INdependence. If independence led to unparalelled freedom and prosperity, the prospects of dependence are ominous.
What we celebrated over 200 years ago, a country built on independence from government, is rapidly becoming a country of dependence. We are capitulating and surrendering the core of what makes this country different, dinstinct and free. We cannot be both dependent and free. These conditions can not coexist, one must yield to the other.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
The most fantastic (and necessary) element of human existence may be the opportunity to fail. And yet failure appears to be public enemy #1 of a good intentioned culture. An entire generation (no, two generations including mine) has been socially engineered in an effort to surgically remove failure. Red pen marks were demonized (and educators strongly encouraged to use "kinder" colors when correcting papers); scoreing little league games has been prohibitted for participants under certain ages; tall slides, trampolines and dodge ball have been banned because someone might get hurt; school district policies forbid teachers from failing (giving an "F") to students which allows them to be promoted to the next level; banks and businesses have been artificially preserved from the consequences of business choices under the mantra "they are too important to fail". Many well sounding government services are designed to insulated us from pain, struggle and failure but these risk dependence, dignity and development. The visceral and kind hearted aversion to a natural process (failure) is ultimately exacerbating the problem.
The truth is that failure is too important to eradicate. In youth we gain essential experience and, shall we say, psychogical antibodies that immunize and strengthen our resistence to future failures. Failure is how we grow strong. Failure is how we overcome. Failure, ironically, is the key to success. Without failure we become weak, we do not have the inner resolve to persever, we do not have the psychological tools to get up after falling down. Speaking of falling down, every infant falls hundreds of times before they finally master walking. Failure is inherant growth.
Many things we learned in Kindergarten. Some of the most important things we learned before entering Kindergarten. Ironic how stupid we have become in this highly educated age.
Let's end this serious posting on a light hearted thought (visual):
Thursday, April 5, 2012
My last post focused on the media's provocation of the Trayvon Martin situation. Let me again state that we don't know the essential facts of the case to form an unbiased and a reasoned conclusion. All pundits throwing blame and stirring up the general populace are doing so out of a desire to further their own agendas. We simply do not know the facts of what happened to make an informed statement; it is all visceral and emotion. We -no matter what "side" you may lean toward- are better than that.
And SHAME on you media outlets who released an edited version of the 9-1-1 call that clearly painted Mr. Zimmerman in a racist light. Your weak retraction and apology cannot dispel the damage you created. If my readers have not heard the audio of the edited and the full version of the 9-1-1 call, you need to find it and listen. This is a powerful example of how the media can create a false reality. I could not locate the audio versions but have linked to this story that describes the situation. So far the one crime that is certain is that which was done by the media on the American public. Learn from it!
In another stroke of media reality engineering, please notice that the photo of Mr. Zimmerman used in this story is a mug shot. The caption indicates that he was incarcerated several years ago. What is the message? What is the judgement you've formed about Mr. Zimmerman versus the ones you've formed from the images the media is using to show Mr. Martin? Why the difference? I don't know who was the aggressor in the situation that led to the tragic death of a fellow human being but I do know who the media is casting as the guilty party. The portrayal -with the larger implications that America is festering with racism- is disgusting as it is dangerous. I plead with you to resist the temptation to buy into the messages being framed for us. Most likely the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Consider the current media-created situation centering around Trayvon Martin. Does anyone really think the media (speaking of the major news media outlets in aggregate) has 90% of the relevant, accurate and complete information regarding the "facts"? Does anyone really think they have 50% of the story? 25%? I doubt (by virtue of some significant prior research on exactly this type of circumstance) they have a 10% understanding of what transpired... and yet their reporters and pundits are making claims of certainty. Their reporting is drawing the attention of interest groups with preexisting agendas. Their recklessness is dangerously stirring up supposition, misunderstanding and powerful emotions of hate.
Keeping the Martin case in mind, do you not think there have been fifty events just as tragic and even more gruesome within the past week. Other teens have been slain in manners more viscious. Other innocent children have been brutally killed... Why have we not heard of these? Why have they been filtered out of existence? They are no less horrific, no less insightful to the social ills of our day. We know about Trayvon because the media has made a decision for us. They have decided that we should focus on it and have cast it in the ugly light or racism. To be sure, this is a joint effort since we are a willing public and consumers of the media's product.
To the question: does the Trayvon Martin death mean that the US is steeped in racism? No. We don't know enough of the facts to make a determination in this one case. Beyond this it is not prudent or logical to generalize from one instance to society as a whole. I GUARANTEE that in the same time that this case has been broadcast across America, there have been thousands of good deeds, small and large, by Whites to Blacks, by Blacks to Whites, by Hispanics to Whites, by Blacks to Hispanics, by Hispanics to Asians... shall I continue? Why is the media not reporting this tremendous level of friendship and dencency? Where are the headlines and ranting talk show hosts exploring this phenomenon? The truth is friendship and racial harmony does not bleed and as such will never be on the news or motivate Al Sharpton to lead a demonstration. The media has made the choice to create a reality that is built on the dramatic, on the exception. It portrays this as the norm. It is a false representation and a lie. Do not beleive it. God grant that we do not lose ourselves to the hysteria manufactured by the media and perpetrated by narrowminded and self-serving interest groups.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Well he and his Uncle Ben took up the film making trade once again this past weekend. With the help of the Apple iPhone nad a very cool app, here is the result:
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Our middle toe is not unlike many of the things we have taken for granted or assumed in life. We live in a world that is challenging many of those beliefs and values. The importance of an intact, "traditional" family is one of them. This includes the importance of marriage and the definition of marriage. In the political realm it includes the idea of American exceptionalism, of limited government and of individual rights endowed by a soverign Creator (i.e. God). Now, I am all for questioning the world around us just as I am for considering the reality, function, limitation, evolution and feminist perspective of my middle toe. BUT I am very pensive and hesitant to lop off my middle toe -a convention that has been around for a very long time- in the name of 'change'. My point is, certain conditions and values have been extremely positive in the long march of human history and research (as well as common sense) continues to show their essential contribution.
The vitality of a functional family unit -the ideal of which is a man and a wife bound by a socially and spirituall recognized committment- is essential to the continuity of the human race and to civil society. Don't agree? The evidence is overwhelming. Subscribe to whichever source of truth you will, this evidence comes from science, from common sense, from God, from history. Here is a document establishing the necessity of marriage and the family from a scientific perspective (click here to read entire report):
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
... just one man's humble observation stated with resolution and clarity.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
1. an ingenius political heritage that is largely founded on these words, "we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."
2. principles of capitalism including private ownership or property, limited government involvement in the commercial sphere, and the promise that bad ideas, inferior products and malicious companies will die because the public will not support them.
3. the Judeo-Christian value system (which includes specific cultural concepts like the Protestant work ethic, etc.).
The US became the leading world power -defending this planet multiple times from tyrants and oppressive systems- BECAUSE of these principles. This is why America is exceptional, better than any other country on the face of the planet. Is America perfect? No. Have there been blemishes in her past? Yes. But practices and beliefs like slavery, racism, poverty and isolated travesties (like the WWII Japanese camps, like the Trail of Tears, like Jim Crow, like the Extermination Order... yes, I recognize that these took place while our great country went through some growing pains) do not negate that exceptionalism. The fact that these wrongs have largely been righted (and yes, we are still a work in progress) is a testament that this country is exceptional.
There is, however, a concerted effort to say we are no different than anyone else. There is also a concurrent effort to transform us into a country following a European or global citizen model. In this effort we are to abandon things American and adopt other foundations including financial, legal and cultural systems from other countries. Global legal theory are challenging Constitutional principles. A large government welfare state is being posited as an attractive alternative to personal responsibility and local decision making. Many of these changes are promoted in the name of "good intentions" or "inclusivity and tolerance". Entire books exist that illustrate this transformation much better than I can. Here, however, is a link to a speech that is well worth the time and consideration of anyone who thinks the United States should be, is or was exceptional:
Friday, January 20, 2012
This clip of surveillance-camera footage is very much worth avoiding. Trust me on the grisly essentials: a two-year-old is toddling across a market street in the southern Chinese city of Foshan when she is hit by a white minivan. The driver pauses, assesses the situation, and moves on, running over the girl again with the back right tire. In the minutes that follow, she lies on the pavement, is hit by another driver, and is ignored by more than a dozen passersby, including a woman walking with a child. Eventually, a garbage collector stops and pulls the child to safety.
Synopsis: October 13th afternoon around 5:30, a car accident occurred at the Guangfo Hardware Market in Huangqi of Foshan. A van hit a 2-year-old little girl and then fled. No passersby reached out to help and then another car ran over her. Over the span of 7 minutes, a total of 17 people passing by failed to extend a hand or call the police, up until the 19th person, a garbage scavenger ayi [older woman], who lifted her up after discovering her but the little girl in her arms was like a noodle, immediately collapsing back onto the ground. The trash scavenger ayi called for help, and the little girl’s mother, who was in the vicinity, immediately rushed over and rushed her to the hospital.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
One of these books is a fun but also serious look at death. I call it "Ten Ways to Die". I won't reveal more at this point other than sharing a very interesting article (from CNN) about what is killing us in 2012. What kills us and what does not kill us (on a macro or societal level) is telling. Enjoy:
“Most of the changes were positive,” said Sherry Murphy, a statistician at the National Center of Health Statistics and one of the authors of the annual mortality report. “Homicides fell from among the 15 leading causes for the first time since 1965.”
The rest of the common killers remained fairly consistent compared with 2009, according to the report released Wednesday. The death rate in the United States dropped slightly from 749.6 deaths per 100,000 in 2009 to 746.2 deaths per 100,000.
The life expectancy in the United States inched up a tiny bit from 78.6 years in 2009 to 78.7 years in 2010.
The leading causes of death in 2010 remained nearly the same as in 2009 – kidney diseases became the 8th leading cause of death –- it had been 9th in the previous year. It swapped spots with flu and pneumonia.
The 15th leading killer is pneumonitis due to solids and liquids, an illness more likely to strike the elderly. This is inflammation of the lungs due to inhaling substance inside the lung such as dust, mold or inhalants.
Here are the top 15 killers:
1. Diseases of heart
2. Malignant neoplasms (cancer)
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases (such as chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma)
4. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
5. Accidents (any injuries that are unintentional)
6. Alzheimer’s disease
7. Diabetes mellitus
8. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)
9. Influenza and pneumonia
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide)
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
13. Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease
14. Parkinson’s disease
15. Pneumonitis due to solids and liquids
|Live long and prosper (and be good to your heart)!|