THE 'TRUTH' IS OUT THERE

 I had a visit from two elderly women Brethren or 7th Day Adventist types today.

I saw them walking down the road and being turned away at the doors of neighbours houses. I decided to invite them in for a cup of tea.

"Have you found Jesus?" one of them asked as I was rummaging in the pantry looking for biscuits.

"Yes" I replied "He was behind the sofa in the living room all the time."

Neither of them replied.

*************************

Actually, I just made that up but some of it was true.

I was making coffee in the kitchen and saw the two old dames walking along the road towards our house. They did visit neighbours' houses and I assume were turned away or no-one was home. When they arrived at our driveway they sort of froze, conferred and walked past. I saw them find the neighbour's house on the other side unoccupied and heard the next door neighbour to that turn them away.

I was disappointed as I did intend offering them tea as I thought they might be tired and thirsty and in need of a cuppa and a toilet break. I also wanted to find out about them and their beliefs figuring that it would make for good blog post material. The Curmudgeons Inc.ⓒ, unlike the other blogs, conduct thorough research before writing posts believing that truth and exactitude is essential. This was not to be unfortunately.

I told The Old Girl, who was working in her office and she was flabbergasted, wanting to know why I'd want to invite the nutters in (her words not mine). I told her that I was interested in listening to them but, if they banged on too long would introduce her to them which would have given them short shrift. She wasn't surprised that they didn't come up to our door. "They must know that we're atheists" she said. This made me wonder - do we have some sort of aura around our house that keeps  religious people away? I notice that children at Halloween no longer approach our house as well. It would be good if this power could be harnessed so as to keep cold-callers and unwanted visitors away.

It doesn't bode well for selling the house though.

DOGS*

 * No pun as the topic is too serious.

We had a lovely dog.

Rosie was beautiful, smart, well-socialised, gentle-natured and loved by us and our friends.

All too often though, dogs are not good additions to families and can be nuisances in neighbourhoods and dangerous to other pets, native fauna and even people - particularly children.

I was upset to read this today: 4 Y.O KILLED IN DOG ATTACK

Last week in Northland a woman was set upon by a pack of dogs that also attacked her rescuer: KAIWAKA DOG PACK ATTACK

Every week we read about dog attacks here in New Zealand and abroad but so far there hasn't been any strengthening of dog control legislation. In fact, it seems that a lot of the current regulations are being ignored and not followed up on.

Dog Control Act 1996

Dogs attacking persons or animals

(1) A person may, for the purpose of stopping an attack, seize or destroy a dog if—
(a) the person is attacked by the dog; or
(b) the person witnesses the dog attacking any other person, or any stock, poultry, domestic animal, or protected wildlife.
(2) The owner of a dog that makes an attack described in subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $3,000 in addition to any liability that he or she may incur for any damage caused by the attack.
(3) If, in any proceedings under subsection (2), the court is satisfied that the dog has committed an attack described in subsection (1) and that the dog has not been destroyed, the court must make an order for the destruction of the dog unless it is satisfied that the circumstances of the offence were exceptional and do not warrant destruction of the dog.
(4) If a person seizes a dog under subsection (1), he or she must, as soon as practicable, deliver the dog into the custody of a dog ranger or dog control officer.
(5) If a dog control officer or dog ranger has reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed under subsection (2), he or she may—
(a) seize and take custody of the dog; or
(b) if seizure of the dog is not practicable, destroy the dog.

etc.

Kaipara District Council

As a dog owner, you have a number of legal and moral responsibilities to ensure the safety and well-being of your pet and those around you. Make sure you are aware of all your responsibilities before getting a dog. Ensuring your dog is registered and microchipped (where applicable) is a legal requirement and helps us reunite lost pets with owners.
It is important to remember that any dog can bite, so care must be taken to ensure your dog is kept under control at all times to prevent any problems occurring. Keeping your dog under control includes situations within your own home and outside, ensuring it obeys your commands and is either on a leash or under voice control in areas where it is allowed to run free.
To be on the safe side, it is always best to avoid letting your dog run free in areas where small children, livestock, poultry or protected wildlife are present. There are a number of places where you can exercise your dog off a leash, within a safe and controlled environment.
If you own a dog that is classified as dangerous or menacing, then you have more obligations to ensure everyones safety and to avoid any offences against you and your pet.
Remember when exercising your dog in parks or on our beaches, be especially vigilant of our wildlife and please keep your dog from disturbing or endangering any other animals.
Most importantly, love and have fun with your dog.
Dog control offences

Every dog has the potential to bite, regardless of whether or not you think your dog is friendly. As an owner you need to be aware of the legal obligations and consequences to you, should your dog attack people or other animals.
Legal consequences around safety issues

Some dogs have the predisposition to attack. Some attack people for no obvious reason and some attack other animals or stock. Because dog attacks are common in New Zealand, we have special laws and bylaws that dog owners must be aware of in order to help prevent recurring attacks. These rules are:Owners of dogs involved in a serious attack can be prosecuted
Dogs may be impounded and/or put down if they attack people or animals (including protected wildlife).
If your dog attacks any person, stock, poultry, domestic animal or protected wildlife you can be prosecuted and fined up to $3,000 if convicted. On top of this, you are also liable for the costs of any damage that occurs.
Your dog will be required to wear a muzzle. If you breach that requirement you may be fined an additional $3,000 and the dog may be then put down.
If any attack by your dog causes serious injury or death to a person or protected wildlife, you may be liable for a prison term of up to three years and/or a fine of $20,000. Your dog would also most likely be put down.
An Animal Management Officer, Dog Ranger or Police Constable can enter any premises to seize and impound a dog that is deemed to be threatening the safety of any person or animal.

Here's an interesting study on dog related injuries in New Zealand. EPIDEMIOLOGY OF DRIs IN NZ 

It's worth a read.

I don't like the purple rating (highest) that Northland has but it's no surprise.

The report concludes:

Conclusion: The incidences of injury from dogs in New Zealand is increasing. Inequity exists with substantial regional variation, and higher rates among those living in areas of greater deprivation and Māori in the setting of the ongoing effects of colonisation. Children aged 0–9 years are no more likely than other age groups to present for medical attention but are more likely to be hospitalised. Reasons for these disparities require further investigation 

We've lived in Whangarei since 2009 and have noticed a significant increase in dog ownership over this time exacerbated I think by the COVID lockdowns where people seemed to take on dog ownership and dog walking as a pastime.  That's OK if the dogs are trained properly and are well cared for and if the owners are responsible and follow the regulations. Many don't. I often remonstrate with dog owners who take their 'fur babies' on nature reserve walks and to kiwi sanctuary areas where dogs are expressly forbidden and where there are signs stating this. I was bitten by one little bastard on one such track and had a blazing row with the owners. A friend of mine has been attacked twice by an unleashed mongrel dog and had to call out the dog control people. And we live in a 'nicer' area of Northland.

I think that things are getting out of control and we'll see more deaths and severe injuries from dog attacks. The councils and government need to step up and put in new and tighter controls and bloody well enforce the ones that are already there.

Sheesh!

SLIPPING INTO THE REALMS OF FANTASY ...

 

.. well, those other jokers are.

Robert is having adventures in the dark web which, to be fair, isn't that far removed from his dalliance in the arcane beliefs of Christianity and the Catholic Church. He may well be safe from harm as Robert Kennedy Junior (apparently his namesake) believes that everyone contracting measles and avian flu is safe from future sicknesses.

Richard's fantasy is, again, in using his made up, slightly silly and definitely vulgar alter egos like Philip Penis and other genitalia influenced imaginary friends to place comments trying to create the illusion of popularity. Good luck to him I say.

Here, back in the real world I've been getting through a Saturday like real gown-up people do.

I did all the 'chores' that The Old Girl set for me.

We entertained some visitors.

We shared a bottle of Australian sparkling shiraz.

I cooked a fantastic (didn't have to slip into the realms of fantasy as I've cooked it before) meal of linguine in a tomato pasta sauce with home-made lamb meatballs (delicious).

In the background we've had the ODI cricket match (still going) between Pakistan and New Zealand. Looking like a 'shoo-in' with New Zealand scoring a really big score, the Pakistanis have been giving an incredible chase and only just now flagging.

Life is good.

WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT WOULD HAPPEN?

Donald Trump's bizarre selection of unqualified people to positions of supreme power within his administration based on their financial contributions to his run for the presidency and their sycophantic support for him is starting to bite him on the bum.

Sorry, not you lovely people ....

... I meant these clowns.

No doubt you've heard about the fiascoes, catastrophes, criminality, cruelty, stupidity and egregiousness as perpetrated by Trump and his cronies in just the first two months of his second term as president - things like alienating Canada and Mexico. raising inflation by imposing silly tariffs, insulting EU and European nations, threatening to annexe Greenland and Panama Canal, making a balls-up of Ukraine Russia peace negotiations, trashing Gaza and Middle East relationships, cosying up to Russia, destroying Federal agencies concerned with health, education, social security, civil response and the environment .... the list does go on and on and on ...

Maybe just when you thought the bozos both elected and unelected couldn't do any worse - they did. 

****************************************

The USA takes pride in its war machine and its ability to bomb the crap out of anyone it doesn't agree with supported by 'cutting edge' technology. Their 'war cabinet' is usually made up of: 

• President: The President, as Commander-in-Chief, leads the group and makes the final decisions.

• Vice President: The Vice President, who is also the President of the Senate, is often involved in national security discussions.

• Secretary of State: The head of the Department of State, responsible for foreign policy and diplomacy.

• Secretary of Defense: The head of the Department of Defense, responsible for the nation's military.

• Secretary of the Treasury:

The head of the Department of the Treasury, responsible for the nation's finances and economic policy.

• Attorney General:

The head of the Department of Justice, responsible for enforcing the law.

• National Security Advisor: The President's advisor on national security matters, who often chairs meetings of the "war cabinet".

• Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: The highest-ranking military officer, who advises the President on military matters.

• Other key advisors: Depending on the situation, other officials, such as the Director of National Intelligence, may also be included.

All good so far.

In the current fiasco nicknamed (as stupid and puerile Americans do - 'SignalGate') the 'war cabinet' was made up of 18 Trump officials and Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg:

• National security adviser Mike Waltz 
• Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth 
• Vice President JD Vance 
• CIA Director John Ratcliffe 
• Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard 
• Special envoy Steve Witkoff
• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent,
• White House chief of staff Susie Wiles
• Secretary of State Marco Rubio
• Deputy national security adviser Alex Wong
• Joe Kent National Counterterrorism Center leader
• Brian McCormack for NSC, 
• Walker Barrett?
• Jacob?
• Trump adviser Stephen Miller. 

There are some additions and deletions to the 'list' which I guess is fluid depending on the situation but here are a couple of glaring ones:

The absence of Donald Trump as president is the first. It's almost as if he wanted to keep away from this situation even though, in the past his hubris and narcissism has wanted him to be in the limelight to take credit in 'heroic' situations.

Special envoy Steve Witkoff was there who just happened to be visiting Putin at the time - at the actual time - in Moscow at the Kremlin following the Signal chat on his phone.

Mmmm...

Related to this is this excellent editorial by Frank Bruni in the New York Times on March 27, 2025:

TRUMP'S CRACKERJACK CABINET

This is a great read and, if you don't or cannot access it here are some outtakes:

"Who could have imagined it? That Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, of all peacocks, would commit an egregious error in judgment, display a complete lack of professionalism and be sloppy enough to divulge war plans in a group chat that included a prominent journalist?

Sure, there were reports of Hegseth’s gross mismanagement of the veterans’ groups that he once led. There were accusations of public drunkenness and a violent temper. But how many of the men who previously held his job could rock a bright blue suit the way he did? Or pose shirtless to such fetching effect?

What he lacked in rectitude he made up for in pulchritude. Give that man a big say in military operations and a Signal account. What could possibly go wrong?

And Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s immunity inanity — I mean, no one saw that coming. When the Senate held hearings on his fitness to be the secretary of health and human services, he assured lawmakers that his vaccine denialism was overstated. That his views were measured. That his words and deeds would be cautious.

Then came a measles outbreak in western Texas, and he sagaciously decreed: Hey, this isn’t a failure of inoculation. It’s a failure of diet. If those sickly children were just eating better — and maybe taking some cod liver oil — they’d be superheroes resistant to these vestigial viruses. And bird flu? Here’s a thought: Let it run rampant through affected flocks. Yes, it might mutate and spread catastrophically among humans, but perhaps we’d glean important insights along the way. Think of the approach as a new, microbiological season of “Survivor,” only with pathogens in the mix and countless lives on the line.

As President Trump’s crackerjack cabinet settles in and unsettles any sentient American, we are not beholding a series of discrete embarrassments and outrages. We are witnessing iterations of the same horror story. Trump chose people for senior administration positions not because they had demonstrated the skills and disposition that those jobs required, not because they had paid their dues, not because they had proved their mettle. He wanted provocateurs. He wanted sycophants. He wanted to test his supporters’ compliance and send his detractors into a tizzy.

Competence didn’t enter the equation, so competence isn’t among the results. He got exactly what he paid for, and now a nation is paying the price.

During a congressional hearing on Tuesday morning, his preposterous director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, preposterously downplayed the security breach of the Signal chat, insisting that none of the information shared was classified. That transparent fiction followed her initial refusal to confirm to lawmakers that she was even a part of the sensitive conversation; she never did tell them whether she’d participated using a personal phone, which would have exacerbated the breach, or a work-issued one.

On Wednesday, she was back before lawmakers, back on defense and armed with a new script: The divulged plans were being shared simultaneously with allies, so, I guess, they weren’t all that juicy a secret. Who could have anticipated such insouciance from Gabbard, a Russia-loving contrarian whose principal qualification for her lofty government position was being so unqualified for it that she’d owe Trump whatever spin his administration wanted, whatever subservience it demanded?

Even members of Trump’s cabinet more credible and seasoned than Gabbard knew the deal: You take the title, you bow before the king. This brings us to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, or “Little Marco,” as Trump once mockingly (and prophetically) called him. Rubio was supposed to be the (reasonably) safe member of the cabinet — every Senate Democrat joined every Senate Republican in voting to confirm him. They assumed the best. That’s a fatal error in matters Trump-related.

Although Rubio had long been an impassioned advocate of American military support for Ukraine, he watched Trump and Vice President JD Vance gang up on President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine in that shameful Oval Office meeting, got the message, got out the pompoms and got on Elon Musk’s social media platform to cheer his boss.

“Thank you @POTUS for standing up for America in a way that no President has ever had the courage to do before,” Rubio wrote. “Thank you for putting America First.” Junking his principles that merrily and fawningly suggests that he was poised for surrender all along — and that Trump could smell as much.

Hegseth may actually be exceeding Trump’s expectations. His mimicry of Trump is uncanny. After Jeffrey Goldberg, the journalist privy to the Signal chat, wrote about the breach, Hegseth simply denied reality, saying, “Nobody was texting war plans.” Goldberg clearly demonstrated otherwise. Hegseth also went on the attack, Trump-style, by smearing Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Atlantic, as someone who had “made a profession of peddling hoaxes.”"

I'm bewildered at how 'the world's greatest nation' (a self congratulatory statement like "Richard's Bass Bag - the original bass bag") can so quickly and completely disintegrate. It's like they all got together and said "we're tired of all this democracy and world-leading shit, let's just do what we've always wanted to do - be autocratic dictators and take the money and run".

WHAT'S UP?

.

Here's a ranking of the most popular social media platforms. 

Rank/Platform/Monthly Active Users (Millions)

1. Facebook 3,070
2. YouTube 2,530
3. Instagram 2,000
4. WhatsApp 2,000
5. TikTok 1,690
6. WeChat 1,370
7. Telegram 950
8. Facebook Messenger 937
9. Snapchat 850
10. X (formerly Twitter) 600
11. Pinterest 518
12. Reddit 430
13. LinkedIn 310

So why an interest in social media all of a sudden?

I really don't care but, as a way of keeping contact with Richard who runs a blog named Richard's Bass Bag (the original and only one in the world apparently) and Robert who once ran a blog named - something or other, I've been running this blog since 2008. I also, in order to keep up with local issues subscribe to Facebook using the Neighbourly sites in Whangarei and Wellington. I'm not a nutter though and rarely publish or comment on Facebook, finding the average Facebooker to be vicious, feral, ill-informed and slightly dangerous. Mind you, that could be a description of those Blogger guys I just mentioned.

Anyway, Robert once again deleted his blog but, as usual, started up another one that no-one seems to read or comment on. Richard apparently has read and tried to comment but has been unsuccessful. He, in his latest post wrote that Robert isn't following the blogs but has now taken up with WhatsApp.

WhatsApp is rated at number 4 with 2 billion monthly users - 2 billion and one now I guess. Go figure.

What is WhatsApp? A Google search told me this:

What is the downside of WhatsApp?

Security features are lacking: Vulnerable to hacking and impersonation. Arbitrary account bans: Accounts may be banned without clear reasons. Misinformation spread: The platform can be used to spread false information. Impact on mental and physical health: Overuse can lead to social isolation and health issues.

Is WhatsApp nevertheless a useful communication tool?

Here's an example so you can make up your own mind:

 

I for one won't be subscribing and joining in.

I'M OFF TO LA-LA LAND SOON

 I have some affinity for The Green Party's policies as I am a bit of a dreamer and, as I've told you before, I sort of voted for a Green-type party back in 1972 when I voted for the Values Party in Wellington.

STORMIN' NORMAN

Over the years though I've been disappointed at the direction that they've been taking as there's no room for naivety in world politics. You have to try to achieve ideals within a pragmatic environment.

The latest debacle from The Greens is MP Tamatha Paul criticising Wellington Police foot patrols and suggesting that a "visible police presence" makes people feel "more on edge." 

WTF! I suggest that the people who feel on edge do so because they are doing things that are either unlawful or antisocial.

Lilian Hanley, RNZ political reporter commented that Tamara Paul said that people in Wellington didn't want to see police officers everywhere, and "for a lot of people, it makes them feel less safe ... it's that constant visual presence that tells you that you might not be safe there, if there's heaps of cops". 

Paul accused police of "waiting for homeless people to leave their spot, packing their stuff up and throwing it in the bin," In fact what the police did was to retrieve stolen supermarket shopping trolleys from some of the rough sleepers and to return them to the rightful owners - the supermarkets. What's wrong with that?

I for one, when I get to Wellington and want to visit Courtenay Place, Cuba Street and the general inner city area, will be happy to see foot patrols of police keeping everyone safe and happy.

For once we have all of the major political parties agreeing on something:

Chris Hipkins:

• "The comments were ill-informed, were unwise and in fact were stupid".

• "I don't think responsible members of parliament should be undermining the police in that way, I think the New Zealand public have huge confidence in the New Zealand police and they should have."

• "I thought these comments were very ill-advised." 

•  "Undermining confidence in the police" was not the way to have a discussion about police resourcing, and preventing crime."

Chris Luxon:

• " Paul's comments were outrageous and insane. Police were out there doing an incredible job."

• "It's a load of rubbish that police were throwing items owned by homeless people out. I think she's on a completely different planet."

• "No disrespect. She is totally wrong and the Greens are in la-la land on law and order."

• "New Zealanders want to feel safe in their homes, their businesses, their communities - the police are doing an excellent job."

• "Beating up on our police and accusing them of all sorts of things, she is on a completely different planet from where New Zealanders are at."

Winston Peters:

• "Our party's view is that we are "not for anarchy. Paul, is clearly for anarchy."

David Seymour:

• "The people I represent want to see the police out there. They provide security, they deter real violence."

• "A lot of people feel unsafe locking up shops in his electorate, and seeing the police around gives people a lot of reassurance."

• " Her comments were just weird and the Greens need to clarify if they are in favour of the police or some other world, and how would that work?"

LET'S TALK ABOUT JOKES THIS MORNING

Richard's been banging on about humour recently and has suggested that my puns, witticisms, aphorisms and wry observations might be a little too highbrow for Wellington and in particular The Hutt Valley and Wainuiomata. 

Wainuiomata, it seems, is still into 'dad' jokes and has recently discovered the 'NOT!' jokes.

It's not surprising that Wainuiomata means big water or stream of Mata ('Wai' means water and 'Nui' means big in Te Reo).  A big stream of piss seems appropriate. I don't know who Mata was but what does it matter.

Humour is defined in the Oxford dictionary as:

"... the quality of being amusing or comic, especially as expressed in literature or speech.

"his tales are full of humour""

And in The Cambridge dictionary joke  is defined as:

" ... something, such as a funny story or trick, that is said or done in order to make people laugh".

Obviously in Waiunuiomata, 'Oxford' and 'Cambridge' are only known by the old cars they drive. No doubt Richard will be replacing his big and snazzy Mitsubishi automobile with something from the now defunct Morris or Austin stables.

Robert, who has resurfaced with a new blog - 'the spiritual diary of a sinner ' started off strongly with a Christian joke:

"The devine presence

Jesus is always there. When I say Jesus I'm thinking the Trinity. Jesus, Father and Spirit. That gets hard on the brain, and Jesus is tangible. It's shorthand. Jesus equals and represents the sum of God.

Jesus is always there. Never for a moment does God stop being aware of each part of his creation, including me. I wish that I could say the same in reverse. Ereht syawla si susej. No I mean that I gave Him even a moment of thought. Though I'm sure he's happy when I'm with his mother, praying the rosary.

I think we would be greatly surprised at the graces that would be showered on us for remembering his presence."

That's a cracker - there's nothing like the old classics. This has everything going for it - misspellings, convoluted logic, twisted syntax, clumsy grammar and, of course, utter nonsense. Well done that man.

He followed the opening with this howler:

"I came across Isaiah 65 in someone's profile. It speaks to what I was thinking about today.

“I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me;"

Ha ha - I hope that he doesn't get arrested.

***********************************

I removed a Clement Freud joke that I copied and pasted as, when I did a Wikipedia search on him I discovered that (posthumously) he'd been accused of child sexual abuse and rape, a charge that his widow seemed to accept and who apologised to the victims. I detest that sort of things so I won't be 'visiting' old Clement again.

************************************

 

A BETTER VISION OF THE FUTURE*

*    Sorry - more USA stuff but, let's face it, it affects us all.

Three years ago, I said in a post that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez known as AOC would be my pick of a future US president and one who has the brains, guts and determination to win and maintain the position for two terms like Barack Obama did. See: AOC

Earlier, I posted on Kamala Harris being the best Democratic leader and had the makings of being a very good president. See:HERE, HERE and HERE

Harris ran a very strong contention for the Presidency last year but ultimately failed due to the general weakness of the Democratic Party, the outright lies and false promises made by Trump, the behind the scenes manipulations of the right wing power base in USA e.g. 'Project 2025', the ignorance of the majority of the population, Russian interference, massive contributions by Elon Musk and his fellow Oligarchs amongst others.

In 'the others' category is the elephant in the room and I don't just mean that Republican elephant.

It's the fact that Harris is a woman of colour! Oh no! Not just a woman but a woman of colour (Indian mother and black West Indian father). Unfortunately too many of The United States of America voters just couldn't hack that. They are cowards, racists, misogynists and general bastards holding on to outdated and very unwanted beliefs. It was too soon to challenge their biases.

Harris may come back but I doubt it. Her vitality and enthusiasm has been knocked badly and - time moves on. Probably the best bet now for the USA democrats is to put forward the Californian governor who I suggested should have been put forward last year. See: ENTER STAGE LEFT

That might work if he doesn't curb his enthusiasm (a TV joke there) and disappear beneath Californian hubris and indulgence. He certainly, to me, appears to offer a life-line for the democrats who've been making asses of themselves recently as seen in Democratic Chuck Schumer (Senate Democratic Caucus leader)'s recent debacles. 

That said, and it will be an interesting next 3 plus years of the orange idiot's term (if he lasts) and then hopefully a major switch back to the centre with someone like Newsom or other male Democrat ... I believe that AOC's time will come.

Sure she's a Latino and a left-leaning Democrat and (gasp) female) but, given a few more years so they can't keep throwing the 'too young' card at her, AOC should be the best prospect in a new and enlightened world.

Yes, I'm an optimist and a dreamer despite having The Curmudgeon as my alter ego but .... the world needs positive change.

Have a look at this where AOC is speaking to huge audiences in traditionally Republican regions as part of the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez where they set out to show Senate and Congress representation where the sitting senator or congressperson (Republican) has been too cowardly to show up.

Good old Bernie and well done AOC but, reading between the lines this could be a glimpse into the future. Sanders is 83 years old and a Senator representing Vermont. He might be considering passing on his mantle to someone he sees as representing his values and, who better than the powerful congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? I'd like to see this happen and, later (not too much later) see AOC given the position that she deserves and the rest of the world needs.

Watch this space.

IT WAS ME ...

... today.

I played 7 holes of golf this afternoon.

It's been a scorcher of a day so I waited until after 4pm before going out. The T20 Women's cricket looked like Australia were going to thrash us again so I didn't mind missing out.

I played the second nine of the course which I rarely play, preferring the first nine. I started off very well on the number 10 par 5 and scored a birdie (4) for the first time ever on this hole, Beauty!

I played the next hole, the 11th well scoring a par 4. I was happy.

Heading off over a bridge across a stream to the 12th hole (par 5) I spied some joker making a bee-line across several fairways towards me. I ignored him. As I set up on the tee of the 12th this joker called out to me asking if he could join me to play. WTF! I called back "No, I prefer to play on my own". He wasn't expecting this response and sort of stopped and said "Oh". I didn't feel guilty as I like to play golf at my own pace and not be pressured or delayed by someone else. What the hell was he thinking? Was he lonely? Was he friendless? I thought about referring him to one of my old blog posts about The Friendless Society (Ivor Cutler) but thought he might not understand. Anyway, I didn't want to encourage him into conversation. He wandered off and I teed off very well ending up with a par 5.

I got a par (3) on the 13th but then my golf deteriorated and I badly played the 14th and the 4th but got a par(4) on the 3rd. I don't think that Jesus/God/Godman was watching. That's probably just as well because he seems to be a stickler for the rules and would have disapproved of me mixing and matching the holes I played.

I hope that this post doesn't cause any Christians reading this to remove their blogs.

IT WASN'T ME

 Yeah, I know that I've used this before but it's funny and catchy OK?

Robert's blog's gone again. Richard suggests that I influenced this but ... it wasn't me.

I don't know why Robert aka ROB 'flushes' his blog so often, not that it's a bad thing.

I'm not sure though if he's got his settings right as sometimes readers can comment and at others they can't. Maybe Aunty Google cancelled his blog out of sheer frustration.

THERE WAS BEER, BEER, TO BRING US ALL GOOD CHEER ...

My eyes are dim I can not see
I have not got my specs with me
I have not got my specs with me

       Chorus from The Quartermaster's Store 

No, I haven't taken to drinking beer and got 'rat-arsed', the lyrics refer to me mastering my new eyesight.

Having been shortsighted for nearly 60 years I've had to wear prescription spectacles all the time. While being a hassle for playing sports and other activities, as wearing them was an absolute necessity for being able to see my way through the world ,I always had them on and never went anywhere without them.

The 'new eyes' I have, have corrected my long vision to 20:20 so I no longer need to wear spectacles all the time, no longer have to have an endorsement on my driving licence, can freely go swimming like I did today and generally it is life-changing.

The downside though is that my near vision for reading, checking my phone, typing at a computer etc. needs correction - not by much but enough to require using reading glasses occasionally. I've been using some cheap, low magnification hobby glasses I bought at the supermarket. Not knowing the exact strength needed I bought a 1.75, a 2.0 and a 2.25 magnification pair. None of them are exactly right but are useful. I leave one pair in the car, one pair by the computer and the other as a 'floater' for reading. I'm finding that it's a fankle having to keep track of them and, while using them have to keep putting them on and taking them off. Often I'm in another room from where any one pair is and have to go and find them to say, read recipe instructions in the kitchen.

The Old Girl has very powerful long vision but, over time her short vision has diminished necessitating having to use reading glasses. She obviously faced the same issues I am as she bought several pairs of cheap hobby glasses that she would leave all over the house. She was forever misplacing them and I'd have to help her hunt a pair down. I always threatened to buy her one of those 'old lady' chains for hanging them around her neck.

Recently she bought two pairs of prescription glasses with progressive lenses. One she keeps close by and the other is permanently by her computer in my study her office. These work very well (I've tried them). The top part of the lens is clear so long distance vision isn't impaired and the bottom part of the lens has a low magnification (measured to match exactly her short sightedness for reading). They can be worn constantly with just a slight tilt of the head catering to long or normal vision and close up reading. I've decided that I'll do the same. I'll get two pairs - one for the car and the other, hopefully to be within reach at all times.

Maybe I'll have to get a spectacle chain like Mrs Richard's.

Hoisted by my own petard.

GODMAN

 Robert wrote something strange in his latest blog today:

"TC's posted a very disrespectful video. Not something I'd do if I was 72 and liable to come face to face with the Godman he's laughing at any day!"

Despite the dodgy syntax I think I understand what he's saying. He's suggesting:

1. That I'm disrespectful of the Catholic religion. OK - guilty as charged.
2. That I'm old and likely to snuff it soon. Fair enough.
3. That when I soon snuff it I'll meet up with his god. Well, we know that's a load of bollocks.

The thing is though that he refers to his god as "the Godman". This is new - or new from Robert at any rate. It must be from the latest talking points (propaganda) from the Vatican that are sent out to Catholic churches around the world so as to keep everyone 'on song'.

I decided to look up 'Godman' on the internet.

AI Overview told me:

1. Godman (India):
In India, "Godman" refers to a type of healer or con artist who is often elevated to a demigod-like status by their cult following.
These individuals typically claim to possess paranormal powers, such as healing, the ability to see or influence future events, and mind-reading.
They often have a high-profile presence and attract support from large sections of Indian society.

 

2. God-man (Christianity):

In Christianity, "God-man" (Greek: θεάνθρωπος, romanized: theánthropos; Latin: deus homo) refers to the incarnation and hypostatic union of Christ, which are two of mainstream Christianity's most widely accepted and revered christological doctrines.
This doctrine states that Jesus Christ is both fully God and fully human.

 

3. Other Notable Uses:
Ike! Godman: A Japanese tokusatsu Kyodai Hero kaiju television series.

 

OK, all good, it's interesting to learn something new every day especially as Robert says that I'm on my way out. Maybe Godman will give me a test when I meet him. I hope that it's multi-choice as the old memory's getting patchy nowadays .

I'm pleased to see that the Catholic Church hasn't got sole claim to 'Godman' although, like they've misappropriated most things in the religious world, no doubt soon their acolytes will be going about saying things like 'Jesus the one true everlasting and original Godman' (sounds like something that Richard says when advertising his blog).

I knew a guy named Goodman a while ago. He was older than me so might have passed on now. It could have gotten confusing when he met up with Godman. It could have been like one of those Marx Brothers, The Three Stooges or Abbott and Costello circular logic routines:

That's what discussing the Holy Trinity with Robert is like.

Anyway, whether I meet up with Godman (and maybe Goodman as well) is hopefully well in the future. Meantime Robert's going to put in a good word for me as he said:

"I've got a nice quiet day ahead, just 9 am Mass (where I'll pray for TC's soul)."

- Rob

Richard picked up on this and reminded me that free stuff is always worth having:

 "He's praying for you. Ah well, free prayers. You don't have to lift a finger."

        - Richard of RBB 

ABOUT JESUS - SOME MORE

 Due to the popularity of the previous post - Philomena Cunk on Jesus Part One we are bringing you Philomena Cunk on Jesus Part two.

No need to thank us.

SO, WHERE DID JESUS COME FROM?

 Philomena Cunk investigated this as you will see below in Jesus Part One.

We at The Curmudgeons Inc.ⓒ admire Philomena for her investigative style, observations and conclusions which are not unlike our own.

INCONSISTENCIES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT - PART ONE (of many thousands).

 

Robert, in a comment on my previous post said that all the old stuff in the Bible has "been shredded" whatever that means and that I guess reason and commonsense now is being used. The inference is that the Old Testament stuff was the raving of old Jewish loonies and that the New Testament stuff (nonsensically) is the informed opinion and fact of non-Jewish Christians. I was intrigued so looked up the web for inconsistencies in the New Testament and found this written by Paul Carlson. 

Christians will remember that they have been taught that Jesus had a family tree going back to King David. They were also taught that Jesus was miraculously produced by a 'seed' from The Holy Spirit.

Well, they can't have it both ways.

THE GENEALOGIES OF JOSEPH - Paul Carlson.

1. Matthew and Luke disagree

Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary’s, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph’s genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a “Church Father,” wrote in his The History of the Church, “each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages.”

2. Why genealogies of Joseph?

Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus’ father, then Joseph’s genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David.

Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus.

The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David.

The apostle Paul says that Jesus “was born of the seed of David” (Romans 1:3). Here the word “seed” is literally in the Greek “sperma.” This same Greek word is translated in other verses as “descendant(s)” or “offspring.” The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin – seed from the line of David was required.

Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man’s sperm (the woman’s egg being discovered in 1827). The woman’s womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children.

This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the “seed of David” through Mary.

I hope that this is of assistance to you. If this post is popular (as measured by at least one comment) I will 'research' more inconsistencies in the New Testament of the Bible. I doubt that I'll have to look far. 

PATERNITY TEST

.

BIBLE CONFIRMS THAT YOU CAN'T GO TO CHURCH IF YOUR TESTICLES ARE DAMAGED OR IF YOUR PENIS HAS BEEN CUT OFF

One commenter on the blogs has asked "who can go to a Catholic Church?" and for proof of this.

Obviously anyone can go to a Catholic Church even women as long as they keep quiet and cover their hair and naughty bits.

However, gay and other LGBQT people obviously cannot. That speaks for itself. The Holy Roman Catholic Church isn't the YMCA. There you are talking serious damnation - just look at the decadence and sin in our modern world. Sorry, but don't rely on Jesus being reasonable. He's caring and loves (most of) us but there are limits, especially this one:

You can’t go to church if your testicles are damaged, or if your penis has been cut off.

Deuteronomy 23:1 (King James Version 1900)  is clear on this.

“He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” 

Sorry John Bobbitt. (SEE: JOHN BOBBITT'S PENIS)

SHITS AND GIGGLES

For a while now I've read about Donald Trump's hygiene issues, in particular his rank smell that is said to emanate from the fact that he has bowel problems and regularly shits himself.

The problem is though that the conservative and right leaning news media makes no mention of this and the centrist and even most of the left leaning media don't either. It's the satiric and comedy media that run stories about it and poke fun at Trump.

A Google search uncovers many of these but here's one that nails it:

TRUMP'S BODY ODOUR

Here are some of the best and possibly believable excerpts:

• Leaked private texts from JD Vance reveal him complaining about sitting too close to Trump during meetings because of Trump’s “sauerkraut stench.”
• A Secret Service agent just confirmed that Trump’s codename is “Roast Beef” because agents have to spend so much time in close proximity to his body’s “foul deli odor.”
• Dozens of the attendees crammed in the Capitol Rotunda for Trump’s inauguration speech described Trump’s stench as “nearly unbearable” and “reminiscent of expired roast beef.”
• Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway claims Trump just has “alternative scents.”
• Trump is “poisoning the air of the country” with his stench.
• Trump reportedly hates NATO and wants to pull the US out of the alliance because the prime minister of Belgium told him he needed some deodorant and a mint during a 2017 NATO summit in front of all the other world leaders.
• Trump reportedly has no personal staffers left at the White House residence because they all quit citing his stench as being “much worse now than the first term.”
• One potential juror in Trump’s New York trial was dismissed after she explained to the judge that she had hypersomia, an unusually heightened sense of smell, and Trump’s well-documented stench was wafting over from the defense table making it difficult for her to focus.
• Let’s remember that it’s widely agreed Trump smells like a dying old man whose Big Mac sauce drowned organs are rotting from the inside out.

Now I'd like to believe this and I guess that there may be some truth to some of the things said - the man is old, overweight, unhealthy and has a terrible diet - but surely someone over there has the gumption to report directly to some reliable media or to front up to him directly and say "Mr President, you smell like shit!"

 

FICTION OR FRICTION?

Novelists are allowed to have political opinions. If not then we would never have had, for example,  Charles Dickens' social commentary novels, William Shakespeare's enduring plays, John Le Carre's sublime spy novels and Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures In Wonderland. Readers can select novelists and books by their own preferences. All good?

Well, it should be but the polarising politics of the USA are having an effect on the American literary world. Authors (and film directors) who I've followed are tending to take political sides (in USA that just means being a Democrat or a Republican) and trying to influence their readers via their characters. I find this to be annoying.

A writer I followed for a while is  C.J. Box who created the Joe Pickett series of a game warden in Wyoming and wrote the Big Sky series which also screened on TV. The stories were great and the characters strong so that they transferred well to the screen. The problem is though that, over time (the last couple of presidential terms in USA) Box became more and more reactionary, populating his novels and the story-lines with MAGA sentiment and becoming anti-woke and conspiratorial. It got to the point where I stopped reading the novels - in the middle of one actually like I did with Lee and Andrew Child novels - and won't continue with him.

I was interested in seeing how many others thought this and a Google search took me to a Reddit site where a reader started a thread:

"As someone who is finding themselves really enjoying this series, are the books worth reading?
I feel like coming here and asking this question, the obvious answer is going to be yes, so I guess I have two more specific questions. Are they quick reads? Like 200-300 pages each? And do they get political at all or do they steer away from having a political slant?
I enjoy reading books and watching shows about this type of lifestyle, military thrillers, hunters, living off the grid type stuff. Guys like Stephen Hunter, Lee Child, Barry Eisler, etc. It is just something so different from my own life experience.
However, I have found that a few authors do seem a little too eager to take digs at ‘liberals’ or go on ‘democrats are bad’ rants in a way that never feels relevant at all to the story and more like the author or writer blowing off steam or venting their own frustrations.
Not trying to start a flame-war or argument here, a good example of what I mean would be, I recently read the book Whorl by James Tarr. And I actually thought that conceptually, the book had a lot of potential and some really fun ideas, and it had some great characters. However there are whole sections where Tarr just needlessly bashes Democrats, throws in a lot of thinly veiled racism or just goes way too heavy on the testosterone. I mean, in one chapter he pivots from making jokes about black people voting for democratic candidates against their interests (in a way that isn’t at all relevant to the plot) to describing one of the three female characters in a novel as ‘a walking sex popsicle’.
It isn’t as though any of this hurts my feelings, it just feels so comically misplaced and tonally jarring that it takes me right out of what would otherwise be a fun escapist conspiracy thriller and has me instead laughing at how ridiculous the whole thing comes across.
I guess I’m wondering if CJ Box falls into this same type of trap or if he manages to avoid it. Maybe that seems like an odd question but I guess, know your audience. There is definitely a bit of conservative lifestyle fantasy here so I’m just wondering how far that extends. I am really NOT trying to pick a fight or start an argument though, I genuinely have no issue with opposing political viewpoints, for the most part."

I won't bore you with other reviews except to say that there are many of them and - no surprises here - they are polarised. There's a split between the 'liberal' readers and the' right wing' readers that threatens to be violent. It's a reflection of what's going on in that country I guess.

I think I'll go back to reading the 'classics'.

Richard will expect this video clip I guess:

CHILLI FOR DINNER TONIGHT

 

DON'T BE ALLAMA-D

 I don't know why we are planning to leave McLeod Bay - oh, OK, I do know ... it's due to the fact that we are fairly isolated here with no public transport, are ageing and the house and property will be hard for us to manage in a few years but, on days like today it's hard to imagine living somewhere else.

It's a beautiful Autumn morning with blue skies, sunshine and no wind.

I went for a long walk first thing and then took a kayak out to check on the mooring I'm planning to buy. It's right out in front of the house (just to the right of the tree at the left of the second photo) so will be a good selling feature for the house.

I was surprised to see a pair of llama in a garden beneath Mount Aubrey on my walk. Given that these animals are mountain creatures I can imagine them heading off up and over the mountain anytime soon. It must be a hell of a job fencing them in. A vanity hobby no doubt by some new 'life-stylers' who've moved in.

"EVERYTHING HUMAN IS PATHETIC. THE SECRET SOURCE OF HUMOUR ITSELF IS NOT JOY BUT SORROW. THERE IS NO HUMOUR IN HEAVEN" - Mark Twain.

 

To continue with the humour theme, or lack of it, I looked at 10 each of the recent posts written by bloggers and measured them for humour content. The results are as follows:

Richard's Bass Bag * 

1. Why do I keep saying...                                                 
2. "I love you Richard."                                                     
3. Monday.                                                                         
4. Nice one!                                                                       
5. I slept in!                                                                       
6. We march forward. aka Ring the bell for hell.              
7. "Go to Hell!"                                                                 
8. Hell's Bowels.                                                                
9. Off to work.                                                                    
10. Two days without practising, but I'm just having a...     

No, no humour in any of those although, in "I slept in" his recounting how he had to hide his teddy bear from his friends was funny though, albeit in a pathos kind of way.

ROB

1. Saturday
2. "The Everlasting Man" G K Chesterton
3. Purgatory
4. hell...the last judgement
5. So what makes hell so very bad?
6. hell .... de Stefano. How and why souls go to hell.

Hell no! Humour was on holiday in those and even the author himself didn't have a chuckle. You might have noticed that there are only 6 recent posts as, per usual, he 'flushed' all the previous ones away (I hope that he washed his hands afterwards).

THE CURMUDGEON

1. THINGS TO DO IN WELLINGTON #1
2. HE'S BACK!
3. GONE
4. INTERVIEW #32
5. MAGA MAN
6. THE WORLD IS GETTING STUPIDER
7. SEA MOORING*
8. MAKING PURE NICER = PRURIENCE
9. LIGHTEN UP PART ONE (Maybe of a series)
10. NEW POST - THE RELIGIOUS CURMUDGEON

Ha ha ... what a hoot. Unbiased as I am I managed to find humour in 5 of those most recent posts - that's a whopping 50%!

I trust that you found that interesting as I know that you readers like statistics and reports of how the blogs are going.

Stay posted (and posting**).

* He deserves a point for his blog title alone.

** A little joke there for you.