THE PECKERS ARE STILL UP

Just a brief update. Back in the spring I reported on our new "tenants'", a pair of red-headed woodpeckers, who were occupying a dead palm tree next to our house. When we returned to our home after an absence of four months, we thought they were gone: there was no sign of activity or life. Then, a couple days ago, momma stuck her head out of one of the holes and later was spied on top of the palm. HOORAY!!! We certainly did not want to lose our prized guests! It's so difficult today finding the right kind of neighbors that you want to hang on to the good ones...

I'M SO OLD I CAN REMEMBER..,

I am reminded frequently of my accumulated years by the different way things are done today. Let me give you a short list of ten:

I can remember when

• banks made money by lending to and servicing accounts, not just by trading
• a hand shake validated a deal
• people talked to each other instead of screaming at each other
• you sat down to dinner and had conversations
• you wrote letters (called snailmail now) and shared ideas in English, not shorthand
• a kid's idea of porno was a four-letter word on a wall
• games were played outside in the real, not the virtual, world
• money was earned by hard work, not financial manipulation
• morality was an asset, not a liability
• love was a lot more than a four letter word

I'm sure you can add to the list.

THE NOBEL PRIZE: HONOR OR ONUS?

I have mixed feelings about the Nobel Prize awarded to Barack Obama. I am a supporter of our new President, but I think this award adds unnecessary pressure to a job which is already the toughest in the world. I think it is premature in terms of expectations and results.

I understand that the Nobel committee appreciated the direction in which our President was taking us in terms of seeking international cooperation and listening to what other countries are thinking. I believe the committee was also making a political statement intended as a slap at the imperialism of the previous administration. But our new President---it's only been nine months---has not had time to effect some of the changes in thinking and philosophy he has proposed. It gives the Neo-Cons the opportunity to chortle and disparage his accomplishments, a process that has already begun.

It would have been better to have waited and given Barack Obama some time to put his varied international programs into effect. I hope and pray he will be able to do so, as I hope that the Republicans can bring themselves to think of the good of the country with positive programs and a willingness to find a middle ground for cooperation in the varied agenda of urgent needs facing us today.

I want him to have the time to prove he deserves the Nobel prize and has truly earned it. I have every confidence he will prove it.

HOME, SWEET HOME

It's nice to be home---in America. Right now my wife and I are visiting family (a daughter and son) who live in Toledo, Ohio. We got back in time to get some really good corn on the cob, thanks to an extended season of perfect weather, the right amount of sun and rain in the proper proportion. Although we live in Florida, I was born in Ohio and still have that innate Midwestern prejudice that Midwesteners are the best: friendly, caring and generous.

Some things never change, it seems: my sports teams are as bad as ever. The Cincinnati Reds are far from a contender for the pennant, although they have ended the season on a relative high and are fighting for fourth place in their division. The Cleveland Browns are hapless, to put it as charitably as possible, and may possibly succeed the Detroit Lions as the worst team in professional football.

Another thing, unfortunately, that has not changed is the political rancor and extremes of opinions , like artillery shells being lobbed between opposing lines. Our President has commented on rudeness and lack of civility, as have I in past blogs. One of these days, we may surprise ourselves and actually hear what the opposing view is, and I hope that inspires the conflicting sides to seek a settlement.

I get annoyed at America and, when I'm in England, I'm exposed to a more international view. (I must admit, they have their share of screamers on the left and right, as well!) But the U.S.A. is still home and I love it, warts and all. Anyway, it's great to be home...

I DON'T THINK I'M READY FOR THIS...

This will be my last blog in 2009 from England as my wife and I are returning home to the U.S.A on Thursday. We're ready to come home, but, as I have said before, I'm not too pleased with the angry divisions tearing us apart back home. I've expressed myself on this before and no doubt will do so in the future. But let's turn to something else...


Today I read that 83 year-old Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the former President of France, has written a romantic novel in which he fantasizes that he has an affair with the Princess of Cardiff, a thinly veiled Priness Diana. I read a few quotes from "The Princess and the President" and all I can say is, "Gag me, yuk!" It will probably sell because of his prestigious past and the female subject matter, but it really sounds cornball sop and sentiment.


Now I don't mind a Dirty Old Man---since I'm one myself---fantasizing about a gorgeous princess in moments of erotica, but let's not get carried away, Valery. I'd rather remember you as the worldly and dignified President of France and an able diplomat---not as a hack writer of romantic drivel. Just keep your fantasies private.

BE NICE----PLEASE

I was delighted to see that the President of the United States, in his interviews with the major TV networks on Sunday past, emphasized having civil debate instead of the "rude" (his word) rantings we hear today.

The far right has every right to dissent and disagree, as do all Americans of whatever political persuasions. But why can't honest differences be debated in a rational and civil way? I often say that my age is showing, but one of the major changes I have seen in my long life is the loss of good old-fashioned, just plain civility. Is it really that hard to air differences in a civil way?

O.K., you don't have to love each other, which is hypocritical, but you can certainly exchange your views so that you can hear each other. I am shocked at the total rudeness of so many conflicting opiners who immediately square off in a verbal boxing stance. They're too busy screaming---and never hear the other side! They are too busy listening to their own rantings.
All that is accomplished is a further inflexibility in thinking and locking out honest dissent.

Does it make you a sissy or a wimp to listen to each other? Come on, America, demonstrate a new old idea---"Democracy in Action"---the right to debate, disagree but ultimately work things out.

SPORTS AND THE DOLLAR

The recent flap in the tennis world about Serena Williams at the U.S. Open and her barrage of "F-bombs", as the British press dubbed them, is getting ridiculous and hypocritical. In almost every sport in the world, athletes have bad moments and ""lose it". Tiger Woods recently threw his club and frequently curses; N.B.A. players trash each other with obscenities on a regular basis; baseball teams are involved in mass fights; British football (soccer) players tramp, kick or gouge each other, as do N.F.L. players, etc., etc.

O.K., give Serena a stiffer fine if that bobs your cork, but with her money, that becomes symbolic. Or ban her from a few matches, which is meaningless as she really only cares about majors. But the recent posturing of some tennis officials to ban her from tennis is an empty threat and stupid.

What really concerns me much more is the power of the dollar and commercialism on the length of championship sporting events. Remember the famous "Heidi" incident some years ago when a key N.F.L. game at the most crucial moment was replaced on the air by the prescheduled program of the children's classic? Or, in the case of the U.S. Tennis Open, because of "time considerations" (translate that, money), any five set match must be settled by a tiebreaker. That is ridiculous. Can you imagine the classic confrontations of Federer and Nadal and Federer and Roddick in Wimbledon finals being shortened for commercial considerations? You let first-class athletes fight it out to the end in such situations. It should be part of the contract between the network and the sponsor that all championship matches should be allowed, in the case of five setters, to reach their natural, not a forced, conclusion. The sponsors want their products shown to a mass audience, like the U.S. Open, so do you really think they would refuse to sponsor an event if this rule were in effect?

The networks need to show some guts. The public would back them up.