Lawn Care

 LAWN CARE

One of the more insidious and nonsensical practices we have as modern Americans is the lawn.  A lawn is defined as an area covered solely by grass that is mowed regularly, seeded when necessary, deweeded,  and fertilized endlessly.  It is the modern suburban dream yard which accompanies the modern suburban dream home.  Unfortunately, the modern suburban yardscape of mowed grass is not limited to suburbia but accompanies all buildings everywhere - -  rural or urban, village or city, home or business.    

The manufactured yard, and they are of manufacture origin, is the worst possible environment for any living creature.  If one were to have some vegetation other than grass, except for an occasional tree, in one's yard the whole neighborhood would be up in arms that you are decreasing the value of their dream homes; the city would come by with a notice to abate; and the demise of non-grass flora would be instantaneously demanded.

The modern American yard is the most visible symbol of our current imbecility.  There is nothing to recommend a grassy expanse in front of, behind, or beside your house. I suppose, in one's wildest imagination, one can state that a grass yard makes it more difficult for an unwanted person to sneak up on you unawares.  Other than this, it is difficult to imagine many purposes for a yard.  One can have outdoor activities in a yard such as badminton or croquet granted; but in those instances a grassy patch actually has a purpose.  Otherwise there are parks with grass and golf courses both of which could be visited when a grass craving has occurred. 

Simply having a grassy area between your house and the street has no function whatsoever other than to cause the homeowner, or renter as the case may be,  work and expense.  It takes time and effort to properly maintain an acceptable grassy area and it requires the expense of a lawnmower, presumably a riding and zero-turn mower which not only costs a great deal of money to purchase but requires regular maintenance.  This all seems to be rather superfluous and unneeded.

If one lives in a "nice" neighborhood with well-tended yards, one only sees a person in those yards for the purpose of maintaining them.  The person you might see in a yard will be mowing the yard, weeding the yard, fertilizing the yard, or edging the sidewalk (another currently useless appendage to the property).  One doesn't sit or lay in the yard for fear of chiggers or some other organism that will cause discomfort.  One simply visits the yard to maintain it.  So the question becomes, what it really always has been, why have a yard?

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Green Hornet

 THE GREEN HORNET

Since announcing the arrival of Batman and Robin, the crime fighting duo par excellence, to Mingo, it is only appropriate that we follow that announcement up with the news that an invitation has been made to The Green Hornet and Kato to join them in their endless efforts to save us from evildoers.

The City is in advanced negotiations with the team as this is written.  We have assured this crime fighting duo that there is space to locate The Black Beauty next to the Batmobile in a safe and isolated, non-public, non-identifiable space with sufficient cover from an ever growing number of curiosity seekers.

There will need to be some negotiations between the two crime fighting duos with regard to geographical areas of interest.  It would not do to have them both cruising the same streets at night looking for crime.  It would seem a better policy that they divide their areas of patrol; although there may be times when Batman and Robin could use the superpowers of the Green Hornet and Kato.  A few superpowers as backup can always come in handy when dealing with a particular rowdy group.

There will need be some housing arrangements made, but once again, this announcement is not for the purpose of gawkers or curiosity seekers flooding the area to get a sight of either of our soon-to-be, in resident, crime fighters. It is enough to know that Jasper County will be even safer than it already is.  Mingo will have to amend its 28E agreement with the county though.  It would seem to me that maybe the county should now be paying Mingo for protection rather than the other way round.    

One possible solution would be for the local law enforcement to patrol in the daylight hours and our superheroes to patrol at night. Since our resident crime fighters will not limit their activities to just MIngo, but to other parts of Jasper County, as well as Polk County, I might add, it would seem appropriate that we consider our new residents as income producers by their mere presence; or, at least, the cost should be a wash for daylight assistance from the Sheriff and superhero assistance in Jasper County in the dark.  Seems fair to me.  But regardless, it should be a win-win for all.

Richard E H Phelps II

MIngo 

Book Vigilantes

 BOOK VIGILANTES

We have an incidence of book vigilantes in a neighboring community - - Pella.  For those not familiar, Pella is in Iowa southeast of Des Moines inhabited mostly by descendents of Dutch immigrants.  These were protestant immigrants who found themselves at odds with Catholic members of Dutch society and decided to immigrate in the name of religious freedom which so many religious sects did. 

A new group has formed and become active in Pella and surrounding environs who I shall name "The Book Vigilantes".  The members of this group are mobilizing to ensure that certain books are not contained on the shelves of local libraries.  Unfortunately, the members of this new sect, for I will call it a sect, are not easily distinguishable from the remainder of the population.  This needs to be remedied.

My suggestion is that members of "The Book Vigilantes" don masks or some other recognizable symbol to set themselves apart from the general public.  Possibly masks like the Lone Ranger's mask, a rather inconsequential mask not too overpowering.  Hoods such as the Klan might be a little too much although some of their rhetoric would seem to indicate that a hood might actually be more appropriate.

The idea is, of course, to set these "Vigilantes" apart so that I, for instance, will know one when I see one.  I think this is important.  I certainly don't want to engage in a conversation with some stranger to find out in the middle of it that he or she belongs to "The Book Vigilantes".  It's quite important that I give no indication that reading books is an enjoyable and interesting method of passing some hours; or for that matter, that I have ever read one.

It simply would not be tolerable to attempt to explain the necessity of reading to people who don't do it.  It is something they can't possibly grasp and if they don't read, which most assuredly the "The Book Vigilantes" don't, it wouldn't be worth the effort to explain its benefits.  It's not like they would be willing to sit down with King Lear and spend a couple of hours with the King and his troubles.  Simply not worth the effort.

This, of course leads to the conclusion that "The Book Vigilantes" simply need to go home and mind their own business and don't worry if one of their kids should pick up an objectionable book.  The kid won't read it anyway.  And if my kid wants to read one of the "Banned" books, I would say go for it and once you read it we will discuss it. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Getting Shot

 GETTING SHOT

There is much discussion these past few years about police brutality - - police shooting and killing citizens for one reason or another.  This often occurs after a traffic stop or some other inconsequential interaction with the local police force.  Of course, one can get shot by another civilian, but for our purpose here, we are discussing getting shot (or tased) by a police officer or some other form of law enforcement personnel.

If you look at many of these interactions, where someone ends up deceased, the deceased has not done what they have been told to do or not do.  They have been disobedient - - non-compliant.  They are normally dead because they have decided to disobey a "lawful" command by a law enforcement person.

When you draw a firearm and aim it at another person you are threatening to kill that person.  Officers are trained to draw their firearms in various circumstances - - routinely.  They will tell you it is for officer safety or of the concern for the safety of others or as policy, but in fact it is a threat to kill the person who the firearm is aimed at.  If someone points a gun at me, they are threatening to kill me.  Pretty simple really. 

Guns kill people.  That is what they are made for.  Their main purpose is not to be an article in a museum or a gun safe, but to kill people or other living creatures.  And this is what they are in fact used for - - killing people.  All over the planet people are being killed by guns; it's an established procedure.  And almost always, at least the vast majority of the incidents of death by gun, the person being killed is refusing to do what they have been told to do by the person with the gun.

It is a matter of obeying.  One must obey or get shot.  This is as true here as it is anywhere else - - obey or get shot.  It happens, if not daily, weekly here in the good old United States of America.  One sees the videos; often one can even hear the conversations.  Often cars are involved.  Someone doesn't stop or someone won't get out of the car or someone grabs for a phone.  Oops - - you're dead.  And most often, the officer was following "procedure" or "policy" and is thereby justified in killing the person killed.

Established policy or procedure is a defense to such killing - - "I was trained to shoot  a person under these circumstances hence I am justified".  Enough said.  

It's all for the good really.  We need a compliant public - - one that is in the habit of doing what it is told to do by representatives of the government. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The War on Raccoons

 A WAR ON RACCOONS

According to the Des Moines Register of 28 October 2022, our legislature is poised for a new war, a war against raccoons.  According to reports, we have been invaded by hordes of the creatures and it is time to act.  Since everyone in Iowa is expected to have a gun, it is only fitting that the people with these guns be allowed to shoot something year around and our next candidate are raccoons.   Can’t you just visualize, or hear as the case may be, gunshots ringing out in the middle of the night in the neighborhood when the local coon is raiding somebody’s garbage can.  Trash day could become hazardous.  

But an act allowing for the killing of raccoons year around serves innumerable purposes:  it of course gets rid of raccoons, it gives an outlet to all our citizens who now have guns but don’t know what to do with them, it gives the legislature something to do to earn their per diem, and it attempts to give the public the idea that our legislators are actually accomplishing something.  With these things in mind, it is a certainty that a bill will be passed allowing us humans, to kill raccoons whenever it is personally decided that one’s neighboring raccoon is no longer cute, but a pest.  All will be well in la-la land once again.

Now, I for one, who have been living in Iowa most of his life, have been living peaceably and quietly with racoons the entire time except for  one winter when a war over dog food ended in a victory for the raccoons - -  by the end of the winter they could get into my garage to get the remaining dog food but I couldn’t.  This defeat at the paws of the coons did not cause me to wish them dead.  After the initial annoyance, I had to congratulate them on their ingenuity, perseverance, and intelligence - - some of the same qualities for which we congratulate our star athletes.

So, if we are to have a vote on whether to kill raccoons all year or no, I will have to vote no.  An occasional annoyance does not warrant the death sentence.

Richard E H Phelps ii

Mingo

Nonsense

 NONSENSE

Americans have the right, long established and revered, in believing in nonsense.  In fact, it's constitutionally mandated that nonsense be held inviolate.  One is ostracized most vigorously when suggesting this.  The fact that a particular street needs resurfacing because of the increasing number of pot holes is not nonsense; to believe that the failure to do so will result in an economic debacle is nonsense however so many people may believe it.

I have suggested in the past that one follow our elected representatives on twitter for the full flavor of nonsensical pronouncements.  It would appear, although I have no proof, that our elected representatives have either a person specially hired to write nonsense  continually, all day long, or that someone has created an algorithm to do it for them for  the tweets purporting to come from them are regular and continuous.

These pronouncements haven't come to the point of suggesting the moon is made of cheese, but we are getting close.  Randy Feenstra and Joni Ernst both have twitterdomitis and continually have nonsense published under their names.  Now, this can be the result of only two things:  one, they are truly ignorant; or two, they have no shame.  Whichever the case, it reflects really poorly on the electorate - - those of us who vote.  It would seem to me, that if in fact we are "the greatest nation the earth has ever seen", as stated by Randy Feenstra, having people in power who spout nonsense, and not just once in a while but continuously, might lead to dubious results.

One of the quickest ways to determine if something that someone is saying is nonsense, is to ask them how they came to this particular opinion.   They will either not have an answer to the question or if so, it will be an unrelated matter (more nonsense) that is so illogical that it doesn't even bear a response.  As a most famous conservative once said about the pronouncements of  a locally notorious divine, "It's neither true nor false, it is nonsense".

So when someone makes a statement to you in a casual conversation which is clearly nonsense, the response must be that "What you are saying is neither true nor false, it's nonsense!"

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Can't Say

  CAN'T SAY

We want a lot less talk here in this country.  Scrolling through the  channels on satellite TV, you can see the outrage and obviously so.  It's these Americans of Arabic descent that feel they have the right to their own opinion of the situation in Israel and Gaza and, of all things, say as much.

Now, from what little I know of the situation, and it isn't much, the attack by Hamas has succeeded in achieving the only thing that it could possibly have accomplished - - an immediate and terrible response by Israel which is resulting in thousands of deaths of Hamas but mostly noncombatants.  Their own deaths and those of other Palestinians cannot possibly be the end goal.  

We must assume, and I know this may be difficult for some, that the people making the decisions for Hamas have the same level of intelligence as the rest of us.  They simply didn't just one day decide to commit societal suicide.  There has to be a bigger plan.  Even Hamas doesn't decide one day to slaughter a bunch of people just for grins.

What this leads to is our belief that we really need to be careful what we say: that here in the US of A,  we will punish all those who voice support for the Palastinians.  Anyone with any sense of history at all should see just how tenuous is our belief in free speech.  We have the right to voice our opinion as long as it is the officially approved opinion.  I am not advocating for Hamas nor the Palastinians; but more importantly I am not advocating for either.  What I observe is the always present undercurrent of intolerance which this country has always had and periodically surfaces when given the opportunity.

The situation in the Near East is extremely complicated; we, among others, have tried to solve it now for several generations without success.  Wiping out Hamas will not solve it and all those who have given it some thought realize this.  The people in Washington, in our government, understand this even if our public does not.  Simply razing Gaza will only make things worse.  Why do you suppose Hamas decided to do this now?  Could it be that it was because Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and others were prepared to finally accept Israel as a permanent fixture?  

The only thing apparent in all this is that thousands of people are dead and more thousands will be dead and for us sitting in our homes at night watching it, it is horrible and should never have happened; and these viewers are correct about one thing - - it should not have happened, but dismissing people from jobs or school or otherwise punishing people for their opinion is not a solution.  No one is advocating mass murder, but simply to react one way or the other is not productive; it doesn't make it go away.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo