Generation Jones

 

This week, I was starting my day like I usually do, reading The Bleat, the blog of James Lileks of The Minneapolis Star-Tribune. By the way, you really should too.

Me and Lileks share a couple of things. First, he enjoys the pop culture of the past and present. He has one child (a girl, while I have a boy). He was born on August 9th, a year before I was born.

Other than that, not much. He was born and raised in Fargo, North Dakota.  He has worked in "the media" all his adult life. He can also write like the dickens.

This week, he revealed that we have something else in common: we both are members of Generation Jones, a subgroup of the famous Baby Boomers you've heard so much about.  It is the generation born from 1955 to 1964.

Lileks says, "I learned today that I am not a Boomer. Never felt like one, but I figured I was doomed to be lumped in with them. It always seemed a rather large demographic, gathering up people with disparate culture references. The Summer of Love, the anti-war movement, the folkie movement when they were earnest tweens, black-and-white TV, and so on."

He notes that we (fellow members of Generation Jones) have been expected to romanticize Boomer nostalgia. Woodstock. JFK.  The New York Jets winning Super Bowl III.  You know the drill. 

Instead, he says we "were blissfully unaware through the 60s, which meant we had our anchors in overculture, not counterculture. We woke up in the craptacular 70s. We had money - well, some - and freedom in the 80s, which had their own set of anxieties the Boomers in the media saw through their lens."

Isn't that a great description of the years from 1970 to 1979? "The Craptacular '70s"? It was a time we watched super duper naked women on the movie screens but insisted on electing a Sunday School teacher as President of The United States because he said he would never lie to us. Of course, he never said anything about a recession, gas shortages, or Iranian hostages, but we got all three by the decade's end. 

I think the biggest difference between Generation Jones and The Baby Boomers is that Generation Jones is more pragmatic than the Boomers or the generations that followed: X, Millennial, and Z.  Generation Jones saw the landmines the Boomers stepped on and tried to avoid them. 

We would never ever go to San Francisco with flowers in our hair. We would go with mousse.

We saw what "free love" did.  It caused divorces and unhappiness with a lot of diseases only some of which penicillin could cure. 

We saw that having long hair might turn off an employer, so we cut our hair to make us look like big boys when we went to the office.  Of course, the Generation Jones Ladies had their hair piled on top of their heads and wore dresses that had shoulder pads like a linebacker.

Another thing, all of Generation Jones never knew what life was like before TV.   And we consumed TV like we did our instant snacks.

We talk about the good old days of television like "Gilligan's Island,"  which was about seven people on "a three-hour tour" (sing along with me) that was shipwrecked on a desert island.   They had enough wood to build huts on the island, but not enough to fix the dang boat.

We've even invented a parlor game:  Ginger or Mary Anne?  For the record, I'm Team Mary Anne all the way.

However, everything Generation Jones touched did not turn into gold.  We had a brief flirtation with something called "Disco," which was primarily a genre about dancing the night away. 

You either loved Disco, or you hated Disco.  I'm pretty much in the hated Disco column. In my old age, I will admit that "Stayin' Alive" is a good song as is "I Will Survive."  I refuse to count "September" by Earth, Wind, And Fire as a disco song because it is way too good.

There's an article about Generation Jones which says Bob Dylan was the generational poet of The Boomers and Bruce Springsteen was the generational poet of Generation Jones.  

Now before all of my fellow Generation Jones members get up in arms:  I like Bruce Springsteen,  he is an incredible performer, and tramps like us, baby, we were born to run.

However, I was a junior at Wheeler High School   (School motto:  Aren't You Glad You Don't Go To Sprayberry") when Springsteen was on the cover of Newsweek and Time (in the same week), and it didn't register a blip on the Wildcat scale of important things. (Number One:  Whose house got rolled last week?)

But other than that, this article rings true to me, and if you were born between 1955 and 1964, it will ring true to you too. https://medium.com/atta-girl/why-people-born-1955-1964-arent-baby-boomers-6afdebc5c3ba
 

By the way, why did the Howells carry all that money with them?

 

 

Tweet

 "Elon is trying to control how people think. That is our job” ~ Mika Brzezinski

The big news in The Twitter World is that Money-Bags Elon Musk wants to buy Twitter. Of course, it has all of the Twitter a-buzz because Musk says he believes in absolute free speech, and you know, we can't have that around here.

Why does Musk want to buy Twitter? He said, “My strong, intuitive sense is that having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important to the future of civilization." That sounds a whole lot better than "because I want it." 

If you haven't been keeping up, over the past 15 years or so, "Social Media" has become, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, "a really freaking big deal."  While there are many different social media sites on the internet, the most important ones are Facebook and Twitter.

Facebook is the nicer of the two, believe it or not.  You see the name and photographs of your "friends,"  and you can post pictures of your supper for all your friends to admire so they can become jealous of you because you're eating something good and they are eating the same old crap.

Twitter was intended to capture comments throughout the day and is not interested in any of your daily meals.  On Twitter, you can follow anyone else who has a Twitter account and interact with them. For example, I sent a "tweet" ( the Twitter term for a comment) to Jimmy Fallon, and he answered me back and now get this, tagged Colin Quinn in his tweet to me, and then Colin Quinn tweeted back to the both of us.  It made my year.

However, Twitter has some problems. One is that you don't have to use your actual name on Twitter, and you can have as many accounts as you can tweet.  This allows people to say some harsh and nasty things to various people.  It also plays a part in the "Twitter mobs," in which Twitter acts as a forum to punish people.

As an example, there's a Presbyterian campus minister by the name of Sammy Rhodes who became Twitter famous for funny little tweets which, for the most part, were rephrasing of bits from stand-up comedians.  Somehow, Patton Oswalt became involved and called Rhodes a "thieving hack."  This caused Rhodes to leave Twitter for a while.  He's back now but doesn't seem quite as funny.

There are many other examples, but all have something in common: their meanness.  The level of vitriol that is unleashed daily on Twitter is simply a wonder to behold.

The past couple of years has not been good for the Social Media Giants.  Politicians have become involved and insist that Facebook and Twitter manage "disinformation" in their sites.  So Facebook and Twitter have tweaked their algorithms to ensure their "platforms" do not disseminate any incorrect information. The fact that the algorithms are Democrats shouldn't bother you at all.

All of us on Facebook remember the little square box that would appear if you mentioned "Covid-19"  in your post. But, heaven forbid if you posted, "This horse paste is real good, Yum! Yum! It got rid of my Covid".  Your post would have been tagged as misinformation.

Twitter took it a little further, of course. They began "shadow-banning" (blocking Tweets without the person's knowledge) conservatives. They also removed the link of a New York Post story about Hunter Biden, which they said contained "Russian disinformation" that just happened to fall in the middle of the 2020 Presidential campaign.

Well, it turns out, the story didn't contain "Russian Disinformation," but it simply made the algorithms uncomfortable.

A few weeks ago, Twitter banished the Satirical Evangelical site "The Babylon Bee" because it posted a story that awarded transgender government official Rachel Levine "Man of the Year," calling it "hateful speech."

Out of nowhere, Musk comes riding in, stating that Twitter's capricious and arbitrary standards are wrong. He said, “Twitter should match the laws of the country" He added, “If it’s a gray area, I would say let the tweet exist.” 

That made the heads of a lot of Blue Check Twitter people explode.  Max Boot, a Washington Post columnist, said, "I am frightened by the impact on society and politics if Elon Musk acquires Twitter. He seems to believe that on social media, anything goes. For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less."

I don't know how more content moderation would help democracy survive, but I don't work for The Washington Post.

All of this is about one word: control.  Who gets to control the most influential social media platform?  A better question is, what richy rich kid gets to control the most influential social media platform?

Twitter could have avoided all this by banning bots, using a little more discretion on what they ding for violations, and giving people an edit button for their tweets. In other words, use a little common sense. You can't ban The Babylon Bee and keep The Onion. It is inconsistent and hypocritical

For now, I will sit back and watch the circus. It is worth the price of admission to see the wrinkle in Mika's worried brow.

 

Slap Shot

 

 

First, I must apologize for being the zillioneth person to discuss the Will Smith-Chris Rock thing.  I know just about everybody is sick of it, but you got to admit it is not every day you see one millionaire smack another millionaire and then have a total and complete meltdown on live TV.

 

However, since I am a member of the Amalgamated Bloggers Union Local 77, I am compelled to comment even though:

1. It didn't involve me.
2. It doesn't affect me.
3. Nothing I say will change anyone's opinion about the event.
   

To give a quick recap, Will Smith was a nominee for best actor and had a primo seat at the front of the theatre.  Chris Rock was a presenter for the Best Documentary category.

Chris Rock was doing his Chris Rock bit and pointed out that Jada Pickett Smith (Will's wife) will star in "G.I Jane II".

Oh no, he didn't.

Pickett-Smith keeps her hair cut short because she has a condition called Alopecia which causes people to lose their hair.  Up until last Sunday night, I didn't know she had Alopecia.  I didn't know she had short hair.

Will Smith laughed. Moments later, however, he got up out of his seat, walked onto the stage, slapped Chris Rock, turned around and walked in a huff back to his seat. When Rock protested that it was just a "G.I. Jane" joke, the full psychosis exploded and Smith screamed, "Keep my wife's name out of your (word used only on premium cable and "Yellowstone") mouth".

My opinion.

It amazes me how thin-skinned some people can be. Do I think people with Alopecia should be made fun of?  It depends on your definition of "making fun."   There is something known as good-natured joshing or teasing.  Rock was smiling and laughing as he told the joke and prefaced it by saying, "You know I love you". 

 

There are some women that can rock the bald look.  Beautiful people tend to be beautiful no matter their hair style. 

If Pickett-Smith had cancer and lost her hair due to chemotherapy, I would agree with the people who thought Rock's joke was mean.  But she doesn't have cancer and people treat Alopecia by different methods.  Some wear wigs. Some cut their hair short. 

I don't tease anybody for any condition if I know about it.  We really don't know if Rock knew about Pickett-Smith's Alopecia. You can't expect a comedian to know the medical conditions of his audience.

I've read a lot of articles about "what all this meant".  There's been a lot of sociology, psychology, and political science added to this event. Unfortunately, a lot of it was hogwash.

 

I don't know if it has anything to do with the Smith's (cough) unconventional marriage.  I don't know if it has to do with race, religion, or the fact Smith is seen as a MAJOR MOTION PICTURE STAR, while Rock is still seen as a stand-up comedian, which is just one step up in the entertainment business ladder from  a radio morning zoo-crew host.

 

What is bad about all of this is that it destroys the carefully constructed image of Will Smith.  He was an actor that appealed to everyone of all ages.  While I wouldn't consider myself a fan, I've enjoyed every movie I've seen of his, and really that's all you can ask of an actor. 

But, looking back on it, I never entirely bought the whole Will Smith package. He was hip, and he was a nice guy. He was the street, and he was the boardroom.  It seemed that he was playing on both sides of the street.

As far as The Oscars are concerned, it was just freaky that they didn't escort Smith out of the auditorium.   Just like Smith, they doubled down on their error after Smith gave his speech apologizing to everyone but Rock for his behavior by giving Smith a standing ovation.

 

The person that should have received a standing ovation was Rock, who carried on with his job after the slap.  I would have curled up in a ball.

 

Smith is a person that needs to control his emotions. (Duh)  He needs to seek professional help and not a publicist. 

 

On the bright side, it is not the worst thing an actor has ever done during a show. That distinction is held by John Wilkes Booth and you know how that turned out. 

The Flim-Flam Gals

 

 I have come to this conclusion. People aren't very smart.

My kin would say people have a lot of "book smarts" but they lack common sense. Or as my dad would say, "Horse sense".

I say this based upon watching a couple of TV shows.  You can't say I haven't done my research.

We've been watching the Hulu series "The Dropout," which is about this smarty pants blonde that whoo-dooed a bunch of corporations along with some wealthy and powerful men.

Her pitch: she has a vision. The vision: give her a  bunch of money.  Her plan:  become very rich and appear on magazine covers.  How:  you see here, we have this machine that will diagnose all sorts of maladies with, now watch closely, with one drop of blood.

That sounds sort of far-fetched, even if we live in the days of miracles and wonder.  But hey, twenty-five years ago, we were still taking photographs with a camera and schlepping the film to the drug store for development like a loser.

This young lady was Elizabeth Holmes, a college dropout who discovered the way to get powerful corporations with bright, well-credentialed executives to give her money was to wear tight black turtlenecks, which helped to emphasize her considerable bosoms.  (The actress who plays Holmes has considerable bosoms, but I don't know if Holmes does in real life. I also saw "Considerable Bosoms"  open for the Talking Heads)

She wears the turtlenecks when she is talking to her board, which has the likes of Henry Kissinger,  Jim Mattis, and George Schultz on it. I can guarantee you this thought was running through the minds of these august and distinguish men as she was going "blah, blah blah, one drop of blood":  She sure is built.

Goals vanish. Promises are broken. Deadlines were missed. But all Elizabeth has to do is put on her magic turtleneck and the men that stared down the Soviet Union were putty in her hands.

Her machine that was supposed to revolutionize health care never came close to working.  So she did the next best thing: obtain a device from another company and taped her company's name (Theranos) on it.

George Schultz's grandson got hired in, and soon he turns on Elizabeth because even though he almost flunked out of college, he could tell nothing worked at the company.

The Wall Street Journal gets involved and exposes Elizabeth as a fraud and (SPOILER ALERT) causes Theranos to shut down. In January of 2022, Holmes was convicted of fraud and is awaiting sentencing while living in a mansion with her Uber-rich husband.

All of the people involved were highly educated, and most of the board graduated from Ivy League Schools. So how could they fall for such a stupid scheme that is just one step above "I can tell you where you got them shoes"?

FOMO? (Fear of missing out)  Old men taken in by a pretty girl that sort of sounded like she knew what she was talking about. (Most likely)

Or is it my new theory: maybe people aren't as smart or as they (we) think they are.

Not that younger people are exempt from flim-flam artists. The other show in my research was "Inventing Anna," which is about this trailer trash girl from the Ozarks laundering drug money for an amoral couple from Chicago.

Check that. "Inventing Anna" stars Julia Garner, the aforementioned trailer trash girl from the show "Ozark," she plays a Russian who somehow convinces all of the New York party kids that she is a wealthy German heiress.  Garner does this by talking loud and shouting obscenities as she does in "Ozark," except this time she does it with a Russian accent.  Think Eva Gabor with Tourette Syndrome.

She tries to obtain loans for a fake foundation and basically sponges off her friends. Then, she gives a seminar on how to "gaslight" your friends for fame and fortune.  Even the movie falls under her spell because the reporter that exposes her feels sorry for her at the end of the series. This has something to do with the Subprime Loan Crisis of 2008. Whatever.

But again, the people she fleeced are people that should have been skeptical of a con. They went to all of the best day schools and colleges. On top of that, they were NEW YORKERS.  

They were also YOUNG and lived in THE DIGITAL AGE.  How could they fall for something like, "MAH FARTER HADDN'T WHYARED ME THUH MUNNEY YET.  WHA ARE YOU SO STOOPID?"

Maybe they think women can't be con artists.  Maybe they was so busy looking down their nose at the fly over people who fall prey to everything they didn't know they were vulnerable to the con too.

Maybe they didn't realize there's a sucker born every minute.

 

 

Freddie's Gone

I know there's a war in the Ukraine. I know gas prices are so high you have to take out a home equity line of credit. Or, if you're my age, a reverse mortgage. That's not to mention all of the other ills that plague our society.  I wish to address the most important news story in Atlanta this week.

Freddie Freeman has left The Atlanta Braves.

Not only has he left The Braves, but he also signed with The Los Angeles Dodgers, who need Freddie Freeman like Tom Brady needs another Super Bowl ring.

The saga of "Will Freddie Be Back" started after he caught the last out in the World Series when the Lord, in his great wisdom, blessed Atlanta with a championship because, let's face it, we were owed a couple.

All of his teammates said, "Pay The Man", meaning Freeman because Freeman was such a good player and such a positive example in the clubhouse. Of course, a good clubhouse is essential in baseball, but I remember the Oakland A's winning three straight World Series, and they spent all their time in the clubhouse shooting birds at each other. 

Frankly, the Braves lolly-gaged in their contract negotiations with Freeman through last season. The owners decided to lockout the players in December, which meant the Braves and Freeman could not negotiate a new contract in the off-season.

When the lockout ended, everybody (and by everybody, I mean people in the Atlanta area on Twitter) thought the first thing that would happen would be Atlanta signing Freeman.  

Wrong.  As we say down South, you see, what had happened was, was this:  the Braves signed free agent Matt Olson to an eight-year year contract for 168 million dollars, signaling the end of Freddie Freeman's time in Atlanta.

Matt Olson is a local boy from Gwinnett County and played first base for the Oakland A's.  If you can't have Freeman, Olson is as close to Freddie as you are going to get, plus he's younger.

Freeman was a little shocked, to be sure. Then, however, he turned around and signed a six-year 162 million dollar contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers.  Adding Freeman to the Dodgers batting lineup is like adding Paul McCartney to Crosby, Stills, Nash, And Young.  The Dodgers are definitely the team to beat.

Braves fans were a little shocked, too. We thought Freddie would be like Chipper and stay a Brave forever, which is a little unrealistic.  Aaron didn't stay a Brave forever. Neither did Niekro. Neither did Murphy.  Neither did Warren Spahn. 

The Braves offered Freeman 135 million for five years.  That's not chopped liver.  Freeman wanted six years.  The Braves said bye.

It is rich that people are lamenting the loss of Freeman like they are sitting by the rivers of Babylon. The Braves will be OK. Last year, they won the World Series without a starting pitching staff and their best player.

Freeman will be fine too. After all, the Dodgers are going to win a lot, and Freeman lives in Southern California. 

It is a win-win for both sides.

It is interesting how people bring their politics into a story like this.  Liberty Media owns the Braves, and they make gobs of money (I don't know what standard of measurement a gob is, I know it is a lot).  Some people, like Jeff Schultz, think all a player needs to do is state a dollar amount, and Liberty Media will just come up with it like a magical corporate genie.

Even nameless, faceless corporations with gobs of money have budgets and hold their executives accountable to bring in a balanced budget.  That's where Alex Anthopoulos comes in at. 

On the other side, the baseball player has an opportunity to make as much money as he can while he can.  There's a small supply of people that can play major league baseball and a high demand for them.  Freeman was trying to get as much as he could from the Braves.  That didn't work out, so he went to the Dodgers.  Don't cry from him, Argentina. 

I'm with Jerry Seinfeld on this. 

"Loyalty to any one sports team is pretty hard to justify, because the players are always changing, the team can move to another city. You're actually rooting for the clothes, when you get right down to it. You know what I mean? You are standing and cheering and yelling for your clothes to beat the clothes from another city. Fans will be so in love with a player, but if he goes to another team, they boo him. This is the same human being in a different shirt; they hate him now. Boo! Different shirt! Boo!"

 

Freddie's wearing a different shirt, so Boo Freddie!  Look, I don't make up the rules.

 

P.J.

 

A few weeks ago, out of nowhere, came the news that P. J. O'Rourke died.

It is hard to describe the hole this has left because O'Rourke was not only a talented writer, he was funny, as we used to say, as all get out.

He came up through the ranks of National Lampoon magazine. It was The Onion on steroids. Everybody was fair game for that magazine. Republicans, Democrats, hippies, straights, the religious, the non-religious, everybody was goofed on and made fun of.

He kept that spirit of the fair game throughout his career, calling Jimmy Carter "goofy tooth" and likening Trump to a toddler at the top of the stairs.

He noted the most dire environmental predictions are always 15 years in the future- far enough out that it is hard to remember when the predictions don't come true.

He noted that when famous people talk about being reincarnated, they were always a prince or princess in their former life. They were never just a regular old person because these people are always special.

But P.J. was mainly about writing in an honest, humorous way. He took a big hit when he announced he would vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016. He said,  "I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises. It's the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, but she's way behind in second place. She's wrong about absolutely everything, but she's wrong within normal parameters."

Who is out there that can replace P.J. O'Rourke? 

Nobody.

The best way to remember P.J. O'Rourke is to read his books.  If you can't read his books, the following are a few quotes I've cobbled together.

 "Everybody knows how to raise children, except the people who have them."

 "Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power."

 "The principal feature of contemporary American liberalism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things — war and hunger and date rape — liberals testify to their own terrific goodness. More important, they promote themselves to membership in a self-selecting elite of those who care deeply about such things. People who care a lot are naturally superior to we who don’t care any more than we have to. By virtue of this superiority, the caring have a moral right to lead the nation. It’s a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don’t have to be brave, smart, strong or even lucky to join it, you just have to be liberal."

 “We acknowledge the Bible as the word of God.  And -- the one attribute that we absolutely share with our Creator -- we have a sense of humor.  Right off the bat there's Genesis 1:27: ‘God created man in his own image.’ And then I look in the mirror.”

 "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."

" This brings us to a more drastic method of getting an audience: be one. Listen patiently while other people tell you about themselves. Maybe they’ll return the favor. This is risky, however. By the time they get done talking about themselves and are ready to reciprocate, you may be dead from old age. Another danger is that that if you listen long enough you may start attending to what’s being said. You may start thinking about other people, even sympathizing with them. You may develop a true empathy for others, and this will turn you into such a human oddity that you will become a social outcast."

 "We had a choice between Democrats who couldn’t learn from the past and Republicans who couldn’t stop living in it, between Democrats who wanted to tax us to death and Republicans who preferred to have us die in a foreign war. The Democrats planned to fiddle while Rome burned. The Republicans were going to burn Rome, then fiddle."

 "The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it."

 "It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money."

"Politicians are interested in people. Not that it is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs."

 

 

The Gas Station With Nukes

 

 Like everyone else, I am perturbed about the whole Russia invading Ukraine mess.

However, unlike everyone else, I have not suddenly become an expert in what we used to call "Geo-Politics".  But I did manage to graduate with a degree in History from Kennesaw State University, and I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. 

Even with all of that, I'm just a guy with some opinions which may be wrong.  Here are my thoughts.

1) There's enough blame to go around.  From W's "I looked into his soul", the Obama-Clinton reset button, Trump's kissy-face, and whatever Biden is doing seems to have missed the mark and gave Putin the confidence to invade another country without suffering any consequences. 

2) The invasion was the end of the "Post Cold War" era.  Putin has said the collapse of The Soviet Union was the worst thing that happened in the Twentieth Century.  That is either the stupidest thing ever said or one of the evilest.

3) Russia is not the power it was during The Cold War. Instead, it has become a gas station with nukes.  People need energy and Russia has it.

4) It was a big mistake to shut down the Keystone pipeline. 

5) President Obama said this to then-candidate Gov. Mitt Romney in their second Presidential debate. "Gov. Romney, I'm glad you recognize al-Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia, not al-Qaida, you said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years."   I remember watching this thinking Kelso from "That's 70's Show" was going to pop up and say, "Ooooo, burn". Well, it looks like Romney was right.

 6) Putin is who he is-a KGB man.   He's not a guy that gained power by kissing babies at state fairs. He is brutal and ruthless.

7) Now is not the time to point out "good" qualities Putin may or may not have like Trump did the other day.  "So, Putin is now saying, “It’s independent,” a large section of Ukraine. I said, “How smart is that?” And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s strongest peace force… We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re gonna keep peace all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy… I know him very well. Very, very well."  It's like saying, "Charles Mason, a pretty good folk singer, took in runaways and gave them jobs".

8) We all thought Putin was going to stop in Eastern Ukraine. Why? I don't know. All of the smarty-pants people on radio and TV said it. Do you know who didn't say it?  Putin.

9) What now?  Sanctions. That's about it.  Americans are flat out tired of "endless wars".  On top of that, America is so divided now even a President with good rhetorical skills like Kennedy, Reagan, and Obama could not rally Americans into a war. If you haven't noticed, Biden does not have good rhetorical skills.

10) Liberals always make fun of conservatives saying "thoughts and prayers," but that's all we have.  We can pray that the tough Ukrainian people can somehow hold out and give Putin a "what for," as we say in the South.  Yet, the size of the Russian army argues against this.  

11) This is what happens when you become distracted with politics and our general lovable silliness. Reality has a way of coming up and slapping you in the face.  

12) This time, reality bites.