Sunday, August 12, 2018

The Stream of History, TV at Eight in the Morning, and Five Interesting Bits and Pieces

First Thing in the Morning

Each morning when I wake up I flip on my bedroom TV to see if anything “big” happened overnight. 

Not me, but the picture is pretty appropriate anyway

Yesterday morning, both CNN and MSNBC, on this anniversary of the white supremacy demonstration in Charlottesville a year ago, were featuring panels discussing the manner in which the President manages to be a racist without specifically openly being one. 

They discussed his comments that “there were good people on both sides” in those demonstrations (Since when are any white supremacists “good people”?) and his attacks on NFL football players, Lebron James, CNN anchor Don Lemon, his stated preference for immigrants from places like Norway rather than the Central American immigrants seeking asylum at our southern border and his referring to certain African nations as “s_ _ t hole” countries.  (Do you see a pattern here?  Something that would appeal to a white supremacist, perhaps?) A former White House aide, who had worked on “the Apprentice” TV series and recalled the President’s use of the “n” word in those days was also included in both of these channels’ programming.  My conclusion:  If it walks like a duck, smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, one may conclude that it’s a duck.

I then switched to Fox News where a panel was seriously involved in interviewing an ex-NYC police officer who was producing evidence to prove that the Mueller investigation is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide the Democratic Party’s “collusion” with Russia.   This was clearly another Fox attempt to discredit the Mueller investigation which, in my opinion, is going to produce enough evidence to guarantee the impeachment, conviction and exile of Donald Trump, unless he resigns first, as did Richard Nixon. 

At that point, I shut off the TV, got up, and added this to the blog posting you are now reading.
Jack Lippman

The Stream of HistorySo Pertinent Today !

(A Tale of Two Johnsons)

History is like a stream running by, with eddies and currents, sometimes fast-moving, even churning, and other times slowly meandering with barely noticeable motion.  

The “Founding Fathers” sidestepped the issue of slavery when they established our country.  When this evasion could no longer be maintained, and all compromises had been exhausted, our bloody Civil War took place.  In the eyes of most at the time, in both the North and the South, the war was fought to preserve the Union, and not to end slavery.  The seceding States maintained that their “States’ Rights” permitted them to secede and of course, the Federal government disagreed.  The “rights,” of course, in which the seceding States so strongly believed that they were willing to shed blood for them, included their citizens’ right to own slaves.  They feared that the nation was sliding down a slippery slope leading to the abolition of slavery (which had already happened in most Western nations) but rather than come out and say that, they insisted that that the War was about “States’ Rights.” 

The Republican administration, after the Civil War was over, embarked on two courses.  First was reuniting the nation.  Second was dealing with the newly freed slaves.  The Republican Party was split among those who prioritized reuniting the nation and those who believed that guaranteeing the ex-slaves their newly found freedom was more important.  This latter group were known as Radical Republicans, led by Charles Sumner and later, by Thaddeus Stevens.  Today we would call them “civil rights advocates.”  Crucial to determining who would win out in this struggle was the unsuccessful attempt to impeach Andrew Johnson, who had succeeded the assassinated Abraham Lincoln in the White House.

Lincoln had been a fence-sitter between both sides, but many feel he would have ultimately sided with the Radical Republicans. Johnson was a Democrat whom Lincoln selected to be his Vice-Presidential running mate as a sign of unity between the parties and was most unlikely to side with the Radical Republicans. 

Andrew Johnson
Basically, the impeachment was based on Johnson’s supposedly unconstitutional attempts to fire his Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton.  Stanton stood with the Radical Republicans in regard to the freed slaves, advocating an extended military government of the South.  Johnson stood with the rest of the Republicans and the Democratic remnant in Congress, both of these groups being more intent on reunification of the nation than on dealing with slavery, and willing to offer amnesty to the former secessionists on a relatively generous basis.    With the failure of Johnson’s impeachment in the Senate by one vote, which was probably bought, the course was set for the fate of the ex-slaves over the next century.  Bringing equality to them would take a back seat.

The next two Presidents, Ulysses S. Grant (1868-1876) and Rutherford B. Hayes (1876-1880) gradually brought the seceding States back into the Union and also attempted the Reconstruction of the South, half-heartedly trying to bring the ex-slaves into the mainstream of American society.  These were turbulent times hallmarked by political corruption, bloody racial violence and deals between the political parties which ignored the underlying purpose of the Civil War, once you got beyond the surface of the “States’ Rights” argument to its core, that of ending slavery.  By the end of Rutherford B. Hayes’ presidency in 1880, “Reconstruction” was over.  The States of the Confederacy, now readmitted to the Union, were dominated by the same former slave-owning upper classes there who, whether they were Republicans or Democrats, cared little about the welfare of the ex-slaves. 

States got away with passing local legislation which hampered equality for the ex-slaves despite the passage of the 14th and 15th Amendments (banning slavery and providing equal protection under the law for all).  Radical Republicans got nowhere with their efforts.  Although the Federal government did fight Southern terrorist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, these remained powerful until well into the 20th century. “Jim Crow” laws segregating schools, transportation and almost everything else in the South were passed and found to be constitutional by a compliant and politicized Supreme Court, and only were challenged when the 1964 Civil Rights Law was passed during the administration of Lyndon Johnson.  Another 54 years have passed since then and many Americans still remain anchored or becalmed somewhere far upstream from today in the stream of history in which today’s events are flowing by us. 

Lyndon Johnson

The Radical Republicans of the 1860’s and 1870’s parallel the left wing of today’s Democratic Party.  Were he still alive, Republican Charles Sumner would probably campaign for Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Lopez.  The remaining “regular” Republicans and the Democrats during the last three decades of the 19th century more or less paralleled today’s Republican Party, having a pro-business orientation and downplaying social issues, including the plight of the former slaves.  Only since the advent of Franklin Delano Roosevelt has a progressive Democratic Party evolved, one that is willing to attempt to swim with the current in the stream of history.  It took a near-fatal economic depression to get America to start to do that by throwing the rascals out during the 1930s and1940s.  But now the rascals are back, and they are busily trying to row upstream against the current.

Five Items of Interest

 Check them out.


1. Sexy Theatre Question 

If you were to go to see a production where the leading female character is played by a male actor, and that female role requires that she impersonate a male, who temporarily impersonates a female for purposes of the plot, what would you be witnessing?  (answer at end of this posting.)

(a) a mildly pornographic film
(b) a nude drama in a basement theatre in Manhattan's East Village
(c) something by William Shakespeare
(d) the annual show at the Fire Island (N,Y) Drama Festival

 2. Bada Book, Bada Bing

In the preceding posting, the demeaning of men in advertisements was discussed. This is most prevalent in television commercials such as the current one which advertises a middle-level hotel chain.  The owner or CEO of the company, a tall, dumb looking gentleman, simplifies everything his staff brings up by saying all one has to do is say “Badda book, badda bing.” 

That expression originated in the one of the Godfather movies where shooting someone up close to get rid of them quickly, “bada bing,” was used.  To make the point that a gunshot was involved, sometimes “bada boom” is added by those using this expression. (It also appeared in the Soprano TV series as the name of Tony Soprano’s strip joint, “Badda Bing.”) 

Obviously, the CEO in the aforementioned commercial is totally unaware of all of this and corrupts the expression to “Badda book, badda bing,” perhaps alluding to the fact that hotels are in the business of “booking” rooms and displaying total ignorance of the actual expression.  In any event, I am still waiting to see a TV commercial where this kind of stupidity is attributed to a female.

3. The Willfully Thick

Some of Kathleen Parker’s Washington Post columns are reproduced a few days later in many newspapers.  I read them in the Palm Beach Post.  On August 9, they published a Parker column dealing with the President which originally appeared on July 27 in the Washington Post.  Oddly, I have been unable to locate it on the various websites, including that of the Washington Post, where her columns are usually accessible.  Nevertheless, here are the concluding words of that column as it appeared in the Palm Beach Post where our country’s growing frustration with the Trump immovable base is aptly described thusly,

“It isn’t possible to use logic with the illogical; it’s futile to explain the obvious to the willfully thick.”
Great!  Couldn’t have said it better myself.  Don’t bother arguing with these idiots. Just register and vote, and make sure you get a few other to do the same.

And as an afterthought related to my opposition to the direct popular election of the President, if indeed 40% of our electorate think illogically and are willfully thick, the Founding Fathers were wise is restricting their ability to elect a President on a popular basis back in 1789.  Our democracy wasn’t any more ready for direct election of Presidents then that it is today.

 4. How to Tell You’re Getting Old

Recently, I was driving along 41th Street in Miami Beach with my daughter and some of her friends.  I pointed out that the neighborhood was becoming noticeably Jewish with several “Glatt Kosher” butcher shops and a number of “Hasidim” strolling along the sidewalks.  I then pointed at the street sign which read “41st Street – Arthur Godfrey Road” and pointed out how ironic this was because Godfrey, a TV personality during the forties and fifties, was known to be an anti-Semite.  A nearby Bal Harbour hotel, the Kenilworth, from which he frequently broadcast, and of which he ultimately became a part-owner, openly rejected Jewish guests.  Some say that Godfrey changed this when he took over the place, but his reputation, deserved or not, still carries that stigma.  

The point I am making is that when I explained all of this, the four younger adults in the car all replied that they had never heard of Arthur Godfrey.  I understand where they were coming from because I most likely have never heard of a lot of entertainers today whose names are household words to those who have never heard of Arthur Godfrey.

 5. Investors:  Dumb or Smart?

One of the non-issues brought up in the Florida Democratic primary race for that party’s gubernatorial nomination is what is touted to be the nation’s biggest shopping mall being built on land west of Miami bordering on the Everglades.  Ignoring its political implications, if any, I seriously question the sanity of the developers and investors who are involved in such a project in an age when existing malls are filled with vacancies (according to the Wall Street Journal, this year’s mall vacancy rate just hit 8.6%, the highest since 2012), as major retail chains are downsizing and as more and more purchases are being made on the internet.  Could it be that investors in the mall expect to lose their shirts in this crazy project, and eagerly anticipate their being able to somehow use those losses to counter the profits made by other investments, thereby reducing their overall tax liability?

Answer to theatrical question asked above:  You’d be at a performance of William Shakespeare’s “As You Like It.”

Many readers of this blog are alerted by Email every time a new posting appears.  If you wish to be added to that Email list, just let me know by sending me an email at

Contact me by email at   YOU ALSO CAN SEND ME YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THIS BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR COMMENTS AT THAT ADDRESS.  (Comments can also be made by clicking on the "Post a Comment" link at the blog's end, though few followers of the blog have done that lately.)


HOW TO VIEW OLDER POSTINGS.                                                
To view older postings on this blog, just click on the appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” midway down the column off to the right or scroll down until you see the “Older Posts” notation at the very bottom of this posting.  The “Search Box” in the right side of the posting also may be helpful in locating a posting topic for which you are looking.

To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for that matter, whom you think might be interested in it, just click on the envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below, enabling you to send them an Email providing a link directly to this posting.  You might also want to let me know their Email address so that they may be alerted to future postings.

Jack Lippman 

Sunday, August 5, 2018

The Real Story of the Trump Tower Meeting, Redefining Truth including a Fairy Tale and finally, a Current Events Poem

Redefining “Truth” - Part 1

Okay … It is clear that the Mueller investigation has found evidence, some resulting in unenforceable indictments of Russians, of Russian interference in our 2016 election process.  Some is clearly in the area of criminal activity, an example of which is the hacking (a crime) of the Democratic National Committee’s computers and that of Democratic leadership which produced embarassing information about Democrats, thus secured illegally, which was then passed along to websites and distributed via social media.

But beyond such obvious criminal acts (which undoubtedly continue), we enter the fuzzy area where the Russians were feeding disinformation into American online media intended to foment and nourish animosity between Americans, their objective being to put the democratic process in the United States into disarray.  They have succeeded.

Russia's Internet Research Agency, the souurce of the disinformation
fed to American social media, is headquarted in this Saint Petersburg building.
Some of this material such as accusations of pedophilia and various conspiracy theories involving both the extreme left and the extreme right was and continues to be totally false.  Other such material has some sort of a basis in fact, which enhances its believability, despite the bulk of its content being fallacious.  Picked up by American websites and social media, however, these ideas are passed on and embellished and are legally protected by the freedom of speech guaranteed to Americans by our First Amendment. This why it is so difficult to pin down Russian involvement in these activities.  To see some actual postings of Russian origin which appeared on Facebook, as reported by the Washington Post, try  CLICKING HERE.  

Once Russian misinformation has infiltrated American media, it is further transmitted by Americans who have become the unwitting tools of Russian Intelligence.  Our intelligence agencies have been able to figure out what is going on, have reported on 
it, but not to the satisfaction of the many, including the President of the United States, who have been seduced into believing in this kind of misinformation and whose behavior is motivated by it.  How else could the President be sufficiently misguided to say the neo-nazis marching in Charlottesville included "some good people"?  Wherever he picked up that notion, there could have been Russian input somewhere behind it.  

And as for the President's recent exhortation before the VFW (a group which does not include draft-dodgers, of which our President is the "Dodger-in-Chief"): "Don't believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news ... What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening," this is just a more pointed and more vulgar expansion of Trump’s categorizing anything with which he disagrees as “fake news.”   He is redefining “truth” as being what he wants the public to believe.  Autocrats who do not believe in democracy always do that.  And they always attack the press.  

Those Americans who are unwilling to denounce such autocratic arrogance are contemptible.  Most are Republicans.  And they are living in a fairy tale world.   So here’s a bedtime fairy tale for them. (For it is truly bedtime for the Republican Party as we have known it.)

Redefining “Truth” - Part 2

(A translation of Hans Christian Andersen’ “Keiserens Nye Klaeder” by Jean Hersholt.)

Many years ago there was an Emperor so exceedingly fond of new clothes that he spent all his money on being well dressed. He cared nothing about reviewing his soldiers, going to the theatre, or going for a ride in his carriage, except to show off his new clothes. He had a coat for every hour of the day, and instead of saying, as one might, about any other ruler, "The King's in council," here they always said. "The Emperor's in his dressing room."

In the great city where he lived, life was always gay. Every day many strangers came to town, and among them one day came two swindlers. They let it be known they were weavers, and they said they could weave the most magnificent fabrics imaginable. Not only were their colors and patterns uncommonly fine, but clothes made of this cloth had a wonderful way of becoming invisible to anyone who was unfit for his office, or who was unusually stupid.

"Those would be just the clothes for me," thought the Emperor. "If I wore them I would be able to discover which men in my empire are unfit for their posts. And I could tell the wise men from the fools. Yes, I certainly must get some of the stuff woven for me right away." He paid the two swindlers a large sum of money to start work at once.

They set up two looms and pretended to weave, though there was nothing on the looms. All the finest silk and the purest old thread which they demanded went into their traveling bags, while they worked the empty looms far into the night.

"I'd like to know how those weavers are getting on with the cloth," the Emperor thought, but he felt slightly uncomfortable when he remembered that those who were unfit for their position would not be able to see the fabric. It couldn't have been that he doubted himself, yet he thought he'd rather send someone else to see how things were going. The whole town knew about the cloth's peculiar power, and all were impatient to find out how stupid their neighbors were.

"I'll send my honest old minister to the weavers," the Emperor decided. "He'll be the best one to tell me how the material looks, for he's a sensible man and no one does his duty better."

So the honest old minister went to the room where the two swindlers sat working away at their empty looms.

"Heaven help me," he thought as his eyes flew wide open, "I can't see anything at all". But he did not say so.

Both the swindlers begged him to be so kind as to come near to approve the excellent pattern, the beautiful colors. They pointed to the empty looms, and the poor old minister stared as hard as he dared. He couldn't see anything, because there was nothing to see. "Heaven have mercy," he thought. "Can it be that I'm a fool? I'd have never guessed it, and not a soul must know. Am I unfit to be the minister? It would never do to let on that I can't see the cloth."

"Don't hesitate to tell us what you think of it," said one of the weavers.

"Oh, it's beautiful -it's enchanting." The old minister peered through his spectacles. "Such a pattern, what colors!" I'll be sure to tell the Emperor how delighted I am with it."

"We're pleased to hear that," the swindlers said. They proceeded to name all the colors and to explain the intricate pattern. The old minister paid the closest attention, so that he could tell it all to the Emperor. And so he did.

The swindlers at once asked for more money, more silk and gold thread, to get on with the weaving. But it all went into their pockets. Not a thread went into the looms, though they worked at their weaving as hard as ever.

The Emperor presently sent another trustworthy official to see how the work progressed and how soon it would be ready. The same thing happened to him that had happened to the minister. He looked and he looked, but as there was nothing to see in the looms he couldn't see anything.

"Isn't it a beautiful piece of goods?" the swindlers asked him, as they displayed and described their imaginary pattern.

"I know I'm not stupid," the man thought, "so it must be that I'm unworthy of my good office. That's strange. I mustn't let anyone find it out, though." So he praised the material he did not see. He declared he was delighted with the beautiful colors and the exquisite pattern. To the Emperor he said, "It held me spellbound."

All the town was talking of this splendid cloth, and the Emperor wanted to see it for himself while it was still in the looms. Attended by a band of chosen men, among whom were his two old trusted officials-the ones who had been to the weavers-he set out to see the two swindlers. He found them weaving with might and main, but without a thread in their looms.

"Magnificent," said the two officials already duped. "Just look, Your Majesty, what colors! What a design!" They pointed to the empty looms, each supposing that the others could see the stuff.

"What's this?" thought the Emperor. "I can't see anything. This is terrible!

Am I a fool? Am I unfit to be the Emperor? What a thing to happen to me of all people! - Oh! It's very pretty," he said. "It has my highest approval." And he nodded approbation at the empty loom. Nothing could make him say that he couldn't see anything.

His whole retinue stared and stared. One saw no more than another, but they all joined the Emperor in exclaiming, "Oh! It's very pretty," and they advised him to wear clothes made of this wonderful cloth especially for the great procession he was soon to lead. "Magnificent! Excellent! Unsurpassed!" were bandied from mouth to mouth, and everyone did his best to seem well pleased. The Emperor gave each of the swindlers a cross to wear in his buttonhole, and the title of "Sir Weaver."

Before the procession the swindlers sat up all night and burned more than six candles, to show how busy they were finishing the Emperor's new clothes. They pretended to take the cloth off the loom. They made cuts in the air with huge scissors. And at last they said, "Now the Emperor's new clothes are ready for him."

Then the Emperor himself came with his noblest noblemen, and the swindlers each raised an arm as if they were holding something. They said, "These are the trousers, here's the coat, and this is the mantle," naming each garment. "All of them are as light as a spider web. One would almost think he had nothing on, but that's what makes them so fine."

"Exactly," all the noblemen agreed, though they could see nothing, for there was nothing to see.

"If Your Imperial Majesty will condescend to take your clothes off," said the swindlers, "we will help you on with your new ones here in front of the long mirror."

The Emperor undressed, and the swindlers pretended to put his new clothes on him, one garment after another. They took him around the waist and seemed to be fastening something - that was his train-as the Emperor turned round and round before the looking glass.

"How well Your Majesty's new clothes look. Aren't they becoming!" He heard on all sides, "That pattern, so perfect! Those colors, so suitable! It is a magnificent outfit."

Then the minister of public processions announced: "Your Majesty's canopy is waiting outside."

"Well, I'm supposed to be ready," the Emperor said, and turned again for one last look in the mirror. "It is a remarkable fit, isn't it?" He seemed to regard his costume with the greatest interest.

The noblemen who were to carry his train stooped low and reached for the floor as if they were picking up his mantle. Then they pretended to lift and hold it high. They didn't dare admit they had nothing to hold.

So off went the Emperor in procession under his splendid canopy. Everyone in the streets and the windows said, "Oh, how fine are the Emperor's new clothes! Don't they fit him to perfection? And see his long train!" Nobody would confess that he couldn't see anything, for that would prove him either unfit for his position, or a fool. No costume the Emperor had worn before was ever such a complete success.

"But he hasn't got anything on," a little child said.

"Did you ever hear such innocent prattle?" said its father. And one person whispered to another what the child had said, "He hasn't anything on. A child says he hasn't anything on."

"But he hasn't got anything on!" the whole town cried out at last.

The Emperor shivered, for he suspected they were right. But he thought, "This procession has got to go on." So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn't there at all.

For those who believe in fairy tales, the noblemen holding the canopy aloft are Republicans.

What the Trump Tower Meeting was All About

William Browder is an American-born British financier. He was the CEO and co-founder of Hermitage Capital Management, an investment fund that at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia.  Browder and the Russian government over the years argued about the operation of his company and major conflicts erupted between them, well documented in his 2016 book, “Red Notice.”

Things turned violent when Browder’s Russian accountant, Sergei Maganitsky, was imprisoned by the Russian government and died in prison. Browder maintains he was tortured to death and to this day, Browder lives in the United Kingdom maintaining extensive personal security against Russian threats.  (Browder is one of the individuals Vladimir Putin asked our government to provide to him in exchange for his making available the Russian agents recently indicted by our Department of Justice.)

Bill Browder, motivated by the death of Maganitsky, convinced the United States Congress to impose certain stringent economic sanctions on Russia for humanitarian reasons, such as the murder of people who disagree with the government. The Russian government (and Browder attributes this directly to Vladimir Putin) then attempted to get even by cancelling a long-established program which permitted American families to adopt Russian orphans. Of course, any distress caused by disallowing the adoptions was far less significant a bargaining chip than the severe economic damage done to Russia by what have become known as the Maganitsky sanctions.

Trump Tower Building (NYC)
When Donald Trump, Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian representatives in June, 2016 in their Trump Tower meeting, the purpose of the meeting was supposedly the adoption of Russian orphans.  This was undoubtedly true, but that issue was clearly inseparable from the Russians’ desire to have the Maganitsky sanctions removed, the adoption restrictions being a direct response to the imposition of those sanctions.

What went on at that meeting is still not clear, but from Donald Trump, Jr.’s emails, it appears that the Russians were willing to sweeten their side of any bargain to be made by adding “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee for the presidency in 2016.  Do you think it is conceivable that such “dirt,” plus the resumption of the adoption program, could be offered in exchange for a relaxation of the Maganitsky sanctions if Donald Trump ended up the Republican nominee and managed to win the presidency?  Do you think that this might also be the reason for the kind of Russian interference with our 2016 election which was directed at weakening the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and promoting that of Donald Trump?  Do you think that Donald Trump sitting in his office in Trump Tower was unaware that his son, his campaign manager and his son-in-law were participating in this meeting upstairs or downstairs from where he was at the time?   I don’t know the answers to these questions.  In all probability, Robert Mueller does.  That might be why President Trump wants Mueller’s ongoing investigation ended.


Footnote: The fact that President Trump has reverted to his "campaigning mode," striking out in all directions against anyone who contradicts or disagrees with him, seems to indicate that he is leaning heavily on the panic button.  He seems to be a man acting out of desperation as disaster gets closer and closer to him with each passing day and he begins to recognize that his "base" will not be enough to save him from impeachment, conviction and exile.  

Current Events Poem   

(Get out your guitar, ukelele, tamborine or whatever and strum along as you sing this ditty.)

When the DOJ goes to court
To nail down thieves like Manafort,
And when Michael Cohen spills the beans
About his boss’s bedroom scenes,
Mike made his girlfriends disappear
So he could proceed without fear!

Soon it will be time to begin
To hear the words of Michael Flynn,
And one thing that won’t go away,
Christopher Steele’s damn Dossier!

Then It won’t be too far a reach
To get our Congress to impeach,
And as the dirt all comes to light,
For a grand jury to indict,
And any jury that is picked
I think Is certain to convict.
The judge will offer with a smile
A choice of places for exile.

Many readers of this blog are alerted by Email every time a new posting appears.  If you wish to be added to that Email list, just let me know by sending me an email at

Contact me by email at   YOU ALSO CAN SEND ME YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THIS BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR COMMENTS AT THAT ADDRESS.  (Comments can also be made by clicking on the "Post a Comment" link at the blog's end, though few followers of the blog have done that lately.)


HOW TO VIEW OLDER POSTINGS.                                                
To view older postings on this blog, just click on the appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” midway down the column off to the right or scroll down until you see the “Older Posts” notation at the very bottom of this posting.  The “Search Box” in the right side of the posting also may be helpful in locating a posting topic for which you are looking.

To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for that matter, whom you think might be interested in it, just click on the envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below, enabling you to send them an Email providing a link directly to this posting.  You might also want to let me know their Email address so that they may be alerted to future postings.

Jack Lippman