Wisdom

Why are martial artists so intrigued with Zen sayings when there is just as much wisdom in our own homegrown sayings? How is a Zen master’s wisdom any better than that of a country farmer? Both are stating the obvious; both are merely using common sense. So, why do martial artists tend to consider a Zen saying profound while considering a country saying quaint? Here are a few country sayings that are just as profound as any Zen sayings.

• Never name a pig you plan to eat.
• Life ain't about how fast you run, or how high you climb. It's about how good you bounce.
• Keep skunks and gossipers at a distance.
• Life is simpler when you plow around the stumps.
• Words that soak into your ears are whispered...not yelled.
• Meanness don't happen overnight.
• Forgive your enemies. It messes with their heads.
• Don't sell your mule to buy a plow.
• Don't corner something meaner than you.
• It don't take a very big person to carry a grudge.
• You can't unsay a cruel remark.
• Every path has some puddles.
• Don't wrestle with pigs. You'll get all muddy, and the pigs'll love it.
• The best sermons are lived, not preached.
• Most of the stuff people worry about never happens.
• Never miss a good chance to shut up.
• Always drink upstream from the herd.
• If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
• There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.
• Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
• If you're riding' ahead of the herd, take a look back every now and then to make sure it's still there.
• You know you are getting old when everything either dries up or leaks.
• One must wait until evening to see how splendid the day has been.
• Many folks want to serve God, but only as advisors
• Quit griping about your school; if it was perfect, they wouldn’t let you attend
• God promises a safe landing, not a calm passage.
• You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage him.
  

Pet Insurance

The following letter to the editor appeared in the 1/31/08 edition of the Winston-Salem Journal:

Pet Insurance
I laughed reading “Taking Care” (Jan. 22) about companies offering pet insurance. Something is wrong when pets are insured but some people aren’t.

I don’t have health coverage, and my husband’s company doesn’t allow him to claim me as his legal spouse. We are a gay couple, married in 2005 in Toronto, where I am from. Canada respects our marriage, and we would have free coverage there, but we live here because we want to be with our new granddaughter and we like our jobs.

Pet insurance in Canada would be no problem because Canadians have health care; pet care is just a natural extension (notice the biggest pet-insurance provider in the story is Canadian). That’s unlike here, where children are denied the basics and adults have died because of no private insurance or because private companies have refused to pay.

There’s good here in the United States, but offering pet insurance when millions of citizens go without — well, you be the judge.

I could not set this go by without a response, so I emailed the following letter to the editor (I was limited to 200 words or less. so I did it in 199 words)

Even though pets are legally considered property, the writer of the “Pet Insurance” letter of 31 January implies it’s wrong to insure them while there are people without health insurance. He apparently thinks it’s okay for him to insure his property, such as his vehicle, while it’s wrong for others to insure their property, such as their pets.

The writer, who is from Canada, which offers "free" health care, laments not having health insurance since moving here. Most people have a choice in respect to health insurance; they may choose to buy it, work for an employer that offers it, or live in a place that gives it to them. For those unable to take advantage of either of these choices, free health care is available through public and private agencies.

The writer says people here are dying due to a lack of health insurance or from denial of coverage. While this may be true in some cases, it’s also true that people are dying in Canada while waiting for an appointment to receive free health care, which is why so many Canadians come here to receive immediate health care, even though they have to pay for it.

Dogs and Plants

Dog ownership demands responsibility. Once you claim ownership of a dog, you are responsible for its welfare. If you own a dog you must provide for it (fresh water, healthy food, proper shelter, proper health care, and proper training), protect it (from harming or being harmed by objects, animals, or people), and show it affection (just as with humans, dogs are social animals, they like being around other dogs and people and feeling needed). Dogs first behave as their species is genetically wired to behave, then they behave as their breed has been bred to behave, then they behave as they have individually genetically been wired to behave, and then they behave as they have learned from life or have been trained to behave by humans.

I have a dog. I got him when he was 2 months old and I have had him for 12 years. We are together almost 24 hours a day; we have only been apart for 6 days in 12 years. He is a dog. I know he is a dog; he knows he is a dog. I do not consider him a child and he does not consider me a dog. I let him be a dog and do what a dog does as much as possible. He goes on long walks in different places every day so he can sniff, track, mark, and act as a dog. I do not dress him in clothes, feed him human food, or attribute human attributes to him; I treat him as a dog. He considers me the leader of his pack, looks to me for nourishment, protection, affection and, in return, he protects me and returns affection. It is symbolic relationship that has existed between humans and dogs for eons.

Dogs know we are not dogs, and yet they still want to be around us and they accept us as their superiors. Once a dog accepts a human as the alpha leader, it willingly works for the leader, and will accept anything from the leader, even if it cruel and inhumane behavior.

There are those who enjoy dogs and accept the responsibilities that come with dog ownership. Most dog owner take better care of their dogs than some people do of their children. You read about children being found dead or dying after being left alone in enclosed, hot vehicles during the summer, but rarely do you hear of the same happening to dog. Dog owners insure their dogs are safe at all times; the same cannot always be said about the parents of children.

Some dog owners have psychological problems that cause them to view dogs as the children they have not had as yet, never had, had but who seldom visit, or had but died. They dress them, feed them human food, attribute human characteristics to them, treat them as children, and claim to know what they are thinking. These people are not dangerous, but their behavior is cruel to dogs in that it deprives them of their ability to be dogs.

There are also those who view the attachment dogs have with humans as a way for them to rule over something in their lives. They are losers who have not developed the basics of humanity, so they think they can use dogs for their sadistic enjoyment. Thankfully, these people are in the minority, but there are still too many of them.

Another group is those who view dogs as they view plants, something to keep in the backyard. A plant needs to be fed and watered to keep it alive and it is anchored in one spot its entire life. Some treat their dogs the same way, they chain it in one spot its entire life, fed and water it, and give it an occasional pet on the head. These people do not think of themselves as animal abusers but they are abusers.

Heros

Why do we have so many heroes? Everyone seems to be a hero nowadays. Sports figures are "heroes" when all they do is play a sport well, even if their personal life is a disaster. Why isn't a CEO with an impeccable personal life a hero when he or she runs a company well. Why is a drug addict a hero for recovering from a life of drug use while a person who has never used drugs is not considered a hero? What happened to the days when heroes did heroic things?

Is a police officer or fire fighter a hero for saving a life? Is a father a hero for saving his child from a burning house? Is Jessica Lynch a hero for surviving a war? (Even she says she is a survivor, not an hero.) Is a soldier a hero for rescuing Jessica? I say "No!" These are people who have a job to do. They chose to do the job and they have a duty and a responsibility to perform their job, no matter how dangerous the job may be. It is their responsibility to put their lives in danger.

If a fireman refused to go into a burning house to save a person, he or she would be subject to disciplinary action and possibly, criminal action. The same holds true for police officers and military personnel. Soldiers are not heroes for surviving the injuries of war. They deserve medical care, they may be entitled to disability pay, and they should be thanked for doing their job well, if, in fact, they did their job well. Just because one is injured does not mean he or she did his or her job well.

I support the definition of an hero as set forth by the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission. The Carnegie Medal of Honor has been issued (sometimes with a cash ward) since 1904 to civilians who knowingly risk their own lives to an extraordinary degree while saving or attempting to save the life of another person. To receive the award, the act of rescue must be one in which no full measure of responsibility exists between the rescuer and the rescued. Persons NOT eligible for awards are:

• Those whose duties in following their regular vocations require them to perform such acts are not heroes, unless the rescues are clearly beyond the line of duty. (A regular citizen can watch a person drown without trying to rescue the person and not be civilly or criminally liable, but an on duty life guard may be sued or even charged for not attempting a rescue. A regular citizen may be a hero for saving a person from drowning, but an on duty life guard who saves the person is only doing his or her job.)
• Members of the immediate family are not heroes, except in cases of outstanding heroism where the rescuer loses his or her life or is severely injured. (Parents are required to risk their lives in protection of their minor children.)
• Members of the armed services are not heroes. (They have their own award system, as do police officers and fire fighters.)
• Children cannot be heroes because the Commission considers them to be too young to comprehend the risks involved.
• Persons who caused the problem that led to a rescue being necessary cannot be heroes. (One cannot intentionally set a house on fire and then be a hero for saving people inside the house)
• People who recklessly risk their lives, even if it is to help another, cannot be heroes. (A person who jumps off the Golden Gate Bridge to save another person who has just jumped is not a hero. He or she is an idiot.)

Does a true hero, milk his or her hero status for personal gain? Senators John McCain and John Kerry were awarded military hero status over 30 years ago, and they still use it in expectation of getting more votes because of it. What about the thousands of other military heroes who came home and lived their lives in anonymity? They didn't and still don't think they deserved special status because they were just doing their duty. Why do some politician heroes think they are unique and deserve to be rewarded year after year after year? .

Couple of Beers

If you drink, be careful about only having a couple of beers. Practically every person I have dealt with who was involved in an alcohol related crime, such as drunk driving, only had a couple of beers. Drunk drivers seldom say they had a lot to drink, so it must be the two beer level that causes people to drink and drive.
Comments. None.

Next Tax Bracket

Contrary to popular belief, it is impossible to get a pay raise that will put you into a higher tax bracket so that you will take home less pay than you did before the raise. Tax brackets are progressive. Your whole pay is not subject to the higher tax bracket, only the pay that is above the minimum amount taxed by that tax bracket.

I Do What I Have to Do

Ever notice how losers use the excuse "I just do what I have to do" when they are caught doing soemthing wrong. If they had done what they had to do, such as finishing school and being a productive member of society, then they wouldn't have to do the wrong things.