Joy to the World

The particular event doesn’t matter as much as the reaction.  In the case that finally moved me to write this, it was a gift, but it could just as easily have been any pleasant surprise, or event. In this case it was a gift.  A simple, inexpensive, but thoughtful and personalized gift from good friends.  Because the gift came just before Christmas, these friends very intentionally made very clear that this gift was NOT a Christmas present, but rather a token of appreciation for… well, basically for our friendship.  They mentioned various acts, but each fell under what I would simply consider “friendship,” and so we’ll leave it at that for now.  What’s important in this story is not the gift, but my dearly beloved’s anticipated reaction.

As long as I’ve known my dearly beloved, she has been the worrier.  I may be the analyzer who cannot be content with the surface of anything without wanting to dive into it and ponder its essence, but that’s very different from worry.  I actually enjoy digging around for the “how” or the “why” of something. For me, it is a self-sustaining, perpetual source of joy and wonder, just as it is often a source of consternation to those around me.    To say that my analyzing reduces stress for me is to under-emphasize how pleasurable I actually find it.   My wife, on the other hand, is a worrier, and from what I can see, it’s not because she derives pleasure from it.

When I got home with the gift, she was already in worry mode.  It was 2 days before a Christmas Eve get together of mostly family and close friends – the kind of non-judgmental people who would show up in any situation under any circumstances and just be there and enjoy themselves and each other.  These are people who accept others (us, anyway) for who we are.  They are free of affectation, salt of the earth, easy going, unpretentious, friendly people who have known us most of our lives. They do a good job of at least pretending to love us, warts and all.  There would be no “business associates” or “potential clients” or employers. There would be no need for “acting” or “behaving.” There was no reason to try to impress anyone, and no one expecting to be impressed. We weren’t planning this event due to societal pressure or expectation. There would be no speech-making or performances. In fact, we’ve NEVER planned any events like that at home. (Those kinds of events could be legitimately stressful.  This one would not.) This was going to be as casual and relaxed as a get together could be.  We still had a couple of days to finish getting ready, although “getting ready” basically meant being here, making sure the holiday lights were on outside, and having some snacks and beverages ready. She had just hauled in the first load of groceries, putting us that much closer to being as ready as we could be for this non-event event.  Naturally, she was worrying about it.

I purposefully chose to not mention the gift at that moment because I knew the stress of bringing in the rest of the groceries and getting them put away was too much competition.  We hauled in the groceries.  On the last trip, with counter space running low, she grabbed the gift to move it out of the way but stopped to say, “what IS this?” 

It was my fault.  I shouldn’t have left it on top of the mail – another source of worry – on the kitchen island, but I didn’t want to put it with presents under the tree since I’d been instructed to emphasize that it was NOT a Christmas gift, and because I feared I’d forget about it when just such a crisis as this inevitably popped up, and we’d end up finding it there, under the tree, Christmas morning, which would really defeat any attempt to emphasize that it was NOT a Christmas gift, and so I sat it on the counter and forgot about it for the moment.  Now, trapped by my own lack of planning, and the crisis of having groceries to put away,  I simply said, “open it.”  As she unfolded the tissue paper, I told her "it's from Ryan and Sandy and they specifically instructed me to tell you it is NOT a Christmas gift.  

“We didn’t get them anything.” she said.

“I don’t think we were supposed to. They said it was a 'thank you' for our help with their recent move and some of the work on their new place and because we are friends.  Isn’t it neat?” I replied.

“We didn't even get them a housewarming present. What is it?”

“It’s a, __(it really doesn’t matter what it is, I promise)__, pretty cool, huh?” I said, attempting to remain in what should have been a pleasant moment.

“Oh, yeah.  That is neat.”  (and therein did the pleasantry cease and desist) “They got us a Christmas present last year too.  They even gave each of the girls gift cards.  We’ve never gotten them anything.” 

 

“It’s NOT a Christmas gift.  Sandy specifically, emphatically told me to tell you that.”

“Well why did they give it to us? I feel really bad.  We didn’t even get them a housewarming present.”

"You already said that."

This went on for a little longer as we put the groceries away and she thought out loud about not knowing what we should get them for their new house, but clearly worrying about how important it is that we do, and sooner rather than later.  Soon after, her need for a different source of worry turned back to the party, wrapping presents, food prep, and the usual weeknight evening stuff.

A few hours later, lying in bed, watching Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, me, relaxing before sleep, her, worrying about something else before sleep, on the TV, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Jerry Seinfeld talked about the oddities of marriage, conflicts, and the like.  Dreyfus shared with Seinfeld her grandmother’s advice: “always have something to look forward to.”

In that context, I woke up this morning realizing just how special the gift had actually become. I now have something truly epic to look forward to. (aside from actually looking forward to our get-together, which I truly do and would even more if it didn’t worry my dearly beloved so much)

How many people seem to have no purpose in life?  How empty must a life like that be? How many marriages dissolve simply because folks forget to find something to look forward to with each other?  How fortunate am I to have finally stumbled upon an endeavor that solves all of that pointless wandering, and guarantees I will always have a direction…a purpose? I will never be without something to look forward to, something to work toward, and something that rededicates me to the dearly beloved woman I married more than two decades ago.  My life’s work has finally dawned on me.  Before I leave this current configuration, I will teach (convince, cajole, coerce…??) my wife to be able to accept an act of kindness, or an opportunity to have fun, or experience joy for what it is – an act of kindness, or an opportunity to have fun, or experience joy - rather than as a source of worry and fret, or a trigger to examine one’s own perceived flaws…or I’ll die trying!

  If I’m successful, one day I will have the pleasure of seeing my wife’s face light up (I’ve seen this before, I know it can happen) without that light immediately turning to a cloud of worry about all of the subsequent implications.  One day I will experience the joy of seeing her experience joy.  Just joy.  Not fear, worry, or stress over the infinitely-possible-and-thus-not-worth-considering possibilities for next steps.  Just joy.  Joy, that for a moment, has no implications, costs no one else anything, has no consequences.  I really think that’s how joy is supposed to work and I now know it’s my life’s purpose to prove that to her. Joy is not one shoe, always followed by the other, more ominous shoe.  It's just joy.

As adults and parents, I think we're all a little conditioned to think this way. Joy at the birth of our wonderful kids is naturally followed by the fear of how we will screw them up.  Joy at the purchase of our first home is naturally followed by the stress of making payments and maintaining it. Joy as they're accepted to college is followed by sadness that they're leaving. Joy at each milestone is coupled with the inevitable, unavoidable recognition of time passing, but the joy, in and of itself is pure, and need not be associated with anything other than joy. What comes after it could actually be more joy.  That's up to us.   The joy (and honor and privilege) of having guests in our warm, comfortable home, for no other reason than to acknowledge what a blessing it is to have a home and friends and family to share it with, should not be a source of stress.  There should be no implications.  There are no consequences.  There should only be joy.

I now have a mission of convincing my wife of this.  As proud as I am of some of the cool stuff we’ve accomplished, together and alone, I don’t think I’ve ever had a more important mission than this one I’ve just discovered:  unencumbered joy, first to my wife and then to the world!

So thank you, a second time, for the wonderful gift, and happy holidays everyone!

Luth

Out

Don't Read Too Much Into Yesterday's Election Results

Dear Ohio Legislators,
Please don’t read too much into yesterday’s elections.  Even though we voted down Issue 3, which some called the “legal weed” issue, a lot of Ohioans still think we should quit wasting precious resources enforcing outdated, biased, irrational, inefficient weed prohibition and the resulting prison cycle.  We just don’t think we need to amend the Ohio Constitution, or grant an Ohio Code-endorsed monopoly to a handful of “investors” (like we did with the casinos) to do it.  We made that mistake once.

And even though we approved Issue 2, the so called “anti-monopoly” issue, we now know (or will soon learn) that Issue 2 actually paves the way for future monopolies by placing the decision into the hands of voters rather than the Ohio Supreme Court.  Confused?  Let me clarify before we move on. We rejected legal weed because it came with a monopoly, but then we paved the way for future monopolies by approving “anti-monopoly” legislation (Issue 2,) which will allow us to approve future monopolies proposed by future “investors.”  Clear as mud, eh?  Nice work legislating!

What have we learned from this nonsense?  First, that clever and deceptive names for bills work.  I can’t blame you for that.  After all, we’re the ones who elected you.  But don’t take too much from that either.  You may recall that the prevailing sentiment during the last mid-term elections during which you came into power was “re-elect no one,” so all you had to do was show up and you were in. We Ohioans voted not based on your qualifications or willingness or ability to legislate, but solely on getting rid of the incumbents (as long as they were Democrats.)  We got what we paid for with that strategy.

Instead of writing effective new laws or getting rid of outdated, costly, inefficient ones that have proven their lack of value over time, you sat back and let 10 weed investors (ResponsibleOhio) write proposed legislation, and then you sponsored it.  Then, when you realized what you'd done, other folks ran out and created Issue 2, and you sponsored it too. What made it to the ballot yesterday was a mess of nonsense most folks didn’t even bother to try to fully understand.  Who can blame them?

Issues 2 & 3 were in conflict with each other…how is a voter to make sense of them?  Editorials across the state said “vote YES on 2, NO on 3 if you don't want your toddlers to eat weed-sicles” but they never bothered to mention that we didn’t need Issue 2 in order for the monopoly part of Issue 3 to be illegal.  Others said “vote NO on 2 and YES on 3 if you want to end the costly and ineffective prohibition on weed” but they didn’t really mention that in order to do so, you’d be approving a monopoly for 10 investors, which was likely going to be struck down by the Ohio Supreme Court since Ohio has anti-trust/monopoly laws in place already, with or without Issue 2.

So here’s what we really said: (as if you care).  We may still want old marijuana laws to be overturned, but we don’t want to do so by granting a grow-and-distribute monopoly to the 10 organizations who wrote these ridiculous laws like we did with the casino laws, nor do we want the monopoly part of that to become part of Ohio’s Constitution, even though casino owners were successful in that same effort.  So we rejected that proposed monopoly even though it would have legalized weed.   We’ll keep pestering you to get the weed part right and leave out the “grant a monopoly to our rich sponsors as a constitutional amendment” part, and if you continue to ignore us, we’ll elect someone else.

But on Issue 2, you really fooled us and now the result of that deception is part of Ohio’s Constitution.  Rather than beefing up Ohio’s anti-trust/monopoly laws, (which is what we were really supporting when we shot down Issue 3...wondering how it ever happened with the casinos) or leaving well enough alone, we voted into law a means of violating existing anti-trust laws as long as the Secretary of State’s (un-elected) five-member committee puts the monopolistic issue on a ballot and voters approve it.  Notice it doesn’t say we’ll allow a monopoly if there’s a sound, compelling, or even legal reason to do so, as determined by legal experts like Ohio’s Supreme Court, only that voters approve it.  So your “anti-monopoly” law gives voters the power to create future monopolies.  Hooray!  Way to go Ohio voters! Here's how it could work: say Responsible Ohio wants to try again, since they know most Ohioans actually do support legalizing weed.  They get the ear of the Secretary of State whose commission agrees to put their issue on the ballot AGAIN, only this time, instead of it being paired with Issue 2, it gets paired with what Issue 2 created:  a twin proposal.  Half of the twin proposal is a flat out repeat of Issue 3 - legalizing a weed monopoly...and weed.  The other half is a ballot issue asking voters to decide whether or not to allow Issue 3's exception to Ohio's anti-trust laws.  Voters would first have to approve the exception (thus approving the monopoly part in general) and then they could approve (or reject) the actual Issue 3.  That's right, the "anti-monopoly"law sets up a process whereby voters can approve a new monopoly.  Should that be in the voter's hands? Perhaps, but those same voters are the ones who couldn't even grasp that this anti-monopoly proposal codifies the approval of future monopolies!  I think it was better off left to the Supreme Court.  Either way, and yes I'm repeating it again, our approval of the "anti-monopoly" law establishes a procedure for future monopolies.

So, we rejected monopolies in Issue 3 (and killed a veiled attempt at legal weed in doing so)... sacrificing the long overdue decriminalization of marijuana because it was wrapped up in pro-rich and powerful legal monopoly bullshit.  Then we approved Issue 2, which will allow us to create monopolies by ballot issue in the future, probably, I’m guessing here, because YOU called it an “anti-monopoly issue.”

How did we come to this last step before total Idiocracy?  I’m gonna guess this is what happens when we choose legislators not based on their ability to legislate, but based only on the fact that they weren’t there before.  Turns out that’s a worse qualification than “seems fun to have a beer with,” and now we’re stuck with the resulting mess.  We are idiots for electing you.

PS to the Media:  STOP saying Ohio voters rejected a proposal to legalize weed.  We didn't...well, some of us probably did, but the vast majority of us didn't.  We rejected a proposal to monopolize legal weed!  Big difference.  Most Ohioans support, at the very least, medicinal weed, and most Ohio cities have all but decriminalized weed, making minor possession a misdemeanor, and the penalty a fine, in many cases lower than that for a speeding or parking ticket. ...and yet the boogie man has been notably absent.  High school and college kids no longer go to jail for having a joint. Baby steps...baby steps. For god's sake, don't make us sound any dumber than we are.

Sincerely,
An Ohio Voter
aka
LUTH
Out

The Idiocracy (again)

From Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”

Sagan's book came out mid-1990, before the movie version of The Idiocracy, before Jon Stewart even thought about retiring from The Daily Show.  Now that Sagan is gone, and Stewart is hanging up the word processor, who will remind us that we should embrace rather than fear intellectual pursuits, skepticism, and continuous improvement?

As we approach this next round of presidential nominations and elections, can we please agree that the whole "best one to have a beer with" requirement was never a good idea? Don't we want a president who is smarter than the rest of us? It's no guarantee that he or she will solve all of our problems, but it's a good hedge against his or her doing something irrational and really stupid.

TLDR: If you're only happy being the smartest guy in the room, you should just kick everyone else out and lock the door.

Luth

Out

Where Can I Gets Me One Of Them There Charlie Hebdo Cartoons?

http://www.charliehebdo.fr/index.html

I say we all visit the Charlie Hebdo web site and try to buy every cartoon they've run in the past year, set off a bidding war until these dangerous cartoonists can retire peacefully and maybe enough to establish  A Satirist's Security Fund.

Please join Horsepoup in contributing to ASS Fund today!

This effort aims to unite those who value speech as well as those who want the cartoonists to just stop it.  It's a Win-Win, and that's what Horsepoupers are all about!

Let's go...get off your chair and try to make this the biggest ASS anyone's ever seen.

Luth

Out