The Thrower Music Collection - Year 42

 October 1st is only a few days away, and anyone who has been following me for any amount of time knows the significance of that day.  It is the day, in 1982, that I got my first LP recording which kicked off a significant music collection that I have now.  In 42 years, you can do a lot with any interest, and the progress of my collection is very significant.   Let us first deal with the stats, and then I will reflect on specifics. 

As of October 1, my total music collection sits at approximately 3219 items, including 1869 CDs, 1145 LP records, and 207 DVDs.   This is up from 3187 total at this time last year.  The net increase then is 32 total new items, which includes 29 new CDs and 3 new LP records.  The CDs this year focused on some very significant items - one was the 16-disc Hal Kemp set that was recently released, which essentially has all of his recordings between the years 1926 and 1941.  Also, we got some vintage rarities, including a complete collection of pioneer bandleader Ford Dabney's material released by our good friends at Archeophone Records, a collection of early Carl Fenton material under his actual name Gus Henschen which dates from the early 1920s, and some newer stuff I have been after for a while, including Gypsy guitarist Angelo DeBarre and accordionist Ludovic Baer, and of vintage Italian bandleader Renato Carosone (2 discs there).  The acquisitions also included 4 discs of a legendary Philadelphia Mummer's Parade band called the Ferko String Band, and that was pioneering territory for me personally.  For those not familiar with what this is, the Mummer's Parade is practically a Philadelphia variation on the Mardi Gras theme, and one thing it features are these huge music ensembles of "string bands" - they include the typical brass instrumentation one associates with marching bands, but also feature concertinas, accordions, and banjos and ukeleles.  Like many of these traditional forms of music, during the age of the dance bands it became incorporated into the repertoire, in particular via the late bandleader Art Mooney, whose 1948 hit record of "I'm Looking Over a Four Leaf Clover" capitalized on this sound.  In many instances, it is similar in a number of ways to some of the Czech and Bohemian polka ensembles that are in Texas particularly (the Shiner Hobos come to mind here), and in that context Mooney was filling a similar niche that Lawrence Welk did with the introduction of polkas to dance band music programs. The Ferkos have been around in some form for over 100 years, so their inclusion in my collection adds continual legacy.  In 2026, I will be working on my first comprehensive history of American dance bands, and plan on showing how the style of things like Mummer's Parade bands were incorporated into the catalogs of arrangements of bands like Art Mooney's, and it will be a history unlike any published in many years.  I have the collection now to work from, so it excites me to finally get into that here in a little over 18 months. 

LP records had a little less growth, as I am actually trying to move away from LPs as simply I believe I have all of those I am looking for.  I only acquired three of those this year, one being the 1957 coveted recording of the combined bands of Les Brown and Vic Schoen in creating Suite for Two Bands.  Making dance band productions which appealed more to the serious side of music is nothing new, as it dates back to at least Paul Whiteman in the 1920s introducing Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue Grofe's Grand Canyon Suite.  It continued into the 1940s, when many bandleaders (notably Freddy Martin) introduced composers such as Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Rachmaninov to a whole new audience in danceable arrangements.  Then came Woody Herman in 1946 with Stravinsky's Ebony Concerto, as well as leaders such as Duke Ellington and Stan Kenton embarking on ambitious projects of original compositions which took the dance band from the ballroom to the concert hall.  The Brown/Schoen collaboration in 1956 represents an apex of this, and it showcased the fact that rather than this great music being just for ballrooms and jukeboxes, it also had a place in more sophisticated cultural settings.  To this regard, it also dovetails jazz, which likewise saw a similar evolution over the years from being the music of dance halls and brothels in New Orleans to being a serious music that was played in venues such as Carnegie Hall.  And, it also means that the music merits serious scholarly inquiry as not only a cultural phenomenon, but also as a viable art form in itself.   The other two LPs I acquired this past year included two albums in the New World Anthology series, these focusing on rare territory bands of the 1920s and 1930s.   The New World set for many years was something one could only find in public libraries, but with the evolution of recording technology as well as the availability of platforms such as Amazon and Ebay, they are now available to interested collectors like myself.  Many libraries have jettisoned many of their vinyl collections, and a lot of them found their way onto Ebay and Amazon "storefronts" at very good prices.  It is almost redundant now to go to the thrift stores, flea markets, and junk shops to scour through boxes and boxes of records to look for that rare one, but in a way that is sad too because it was in places like that where my own collection started.  Other collectors (with good reason) often look down on acquiring records from thrift shops, citing the inferior condition as many are often badly stored, have scratches and nicks, and even mold/mildew damage on some records.  However, I am not as dismissive of those venues, as if one is open to checking them out it is highly possible that a rare gem can be uncovered, something that legendary collectors such as the late Joe Bussard and Greg Drust understood well.  I also don't just collect records due to the technical stuff - original serial numbers, certain labels, and all that are interesting, and if you find those hang onto them.  I collect out of simple love of the music itself.   If a collector is only collecting for pecuniary objectives and has no real love of the music, then that person to me is not a true collector - that person is simply a treasure hunter and slightly above the grave robbers that desecrated royal tombs in ages past.  Love of the music though is something different, and the best collectors have always had that passion for the music they collect, seeing it both as aesthetically pleasing as well as historically significant.  That means often our collections will have a lot of the more popular stuff - like Glenn Miller's "In the Mood" or Artie Shaw's "Begin the Beguine" - because we love the sound.  The rarer stuff though is a treat, not for the value that a pristine piece of vinyl or shellac will bring, but rather because it documents recorded history.  Have a passion for what you collect, regardless of what it is.  Don't just do it for economic advantage because "it might be worth something."  It already is worth something - it is quality music you love and it also represents a gold mine of important history, which is worth more than any money that could be offered for it.  

So, let me reflect some on where I am at with the collection as it enters its 43rd year.  I had some close calls these past couple of years due to economic challenges that almost caused me to lose my home and everything in it.  But, God has been good, and I am positive about the future of things.  Also, in the process of finishing up my Ph.D. (which I did in September and also have just received my official diploma yesterday from when I am writing this), I haven't been as focused as much on my collection as I once was.  There is another reason for this.  Basically, there is little else to collect at this point.  A true collector always continues looking for things as they come available, so no one ever stops collecting if they have a passion for the craft.  However, with "bucket list" items there may come a point where you will have almost everything you have been looking for, and then the focus shifts to just keeping an eye out for something that you may really be looking for.  That is where I am at now.  Although this past year has been somewhat fruitful in regard to collecting, it is not at the level of acquisition it was in previous years, but that is a good thing.  It means a goal has been reached.  In all honesty, I am not really looking to collecting much else in 2024-2025, so it may be a slow year as little new material has been released.  So, we are entering a new phase.

Given I have now finished my doctoral degree and have successfully earned it, my dissertation work on a totally different topic is completed and published, so I am catching up on other research interests. At this point in time, I am writing an article for an academic journal and I also have two other book projects I will be prioritizing through most of 2025.  However, one thing I have always wanted to do is a history of dance bands, and I already have several books in my library in that regard.  I have never really included books as part of the music collection, as they belong in my reference library, but I am in the process of acquiring several to facilitate a future book project of my own.  Many of the books I am planning to purchase over the course of the next year are big band biographies - Artie Shaw's book The Trouble with Cinderella is one of them, as well as Desi Arnaz's rare biography simply titled A Book.  As a historian, there are two major essentials for doing research - the availability of primary source material as well as an original approach to the topic being researched.  I am acquiring the first, and as for the second, there is something that has bugged me for some time.  Often, the terms "big band," "swing band," and "dance band" are utilized to label this great music, and other writers also lump it in with jazz and pop music.  However, I have found those terms as lacking inclusivity of what the genre really entails, as many of these orchestras were not technically big bands, many also did not play exclusively "swing" music, and not all of their arrangements were made for the dance hall either.  And, while many of them did include notable jazz legends (notably Duke Ellington) or pop icons (Desi Arnaz, Rudy Vallee), the music cannot be categorized as either, because in many ways it is both but also a unique musical tradition in itself.  So, my contention is coming up with a new term for this music that would be more inclusive of the entire genre, and that is what my research will be focused on.  No doubt I will probably get some opposition and controversy over my take from all sides, but that is a risk one takes when venturing into new territory.  My major thing over the years though is making my collection work for me, and I have wondered how to do that.  After all, there are literally thousands of dollars invested in it, and I need to make it profit on some level.  There are some pieces in my collection I have purchased for as little as a quarter, but I also have large sets I have paid hundreds of dollars for too. While it does satisfy my own musical tastes, it also needs to be utilized in a way that educates others as well as preserving its rich legacy. So, that is where we plan to go in year 43.

Thank you for allowing me to share a very large passion - my love of vintage music - and we will see how Year 43 goes now.  Have a good remainder of your week, and will see you next time. 

This Week's Reflections

 I am back this week with a lot going on in my mind.  I want to begin with an experience from yesterday, and then I have some pontificating to do on a couple of issues.

My ex-wife's cat has been very sick lately - he stopped eating and is dropping weight at an alarming rate.  To see what was wrong with him, my ex called a pet food company and asked about it, and they gave her a voucher for a free first office visit to one of the big corporate vet services, Banfield Animal Hospitals.  However, due to corporate head games and technicalities, the nearest and most immediate time she could get the cat in was yesterday at 11 AM in Leesburg, VA (about 50 miles from where I live).  She asked me to ride along with her to help with transporting the poor cat, and due to some factors in traveling, we ended up being 36 minutes late.  The individuals at that particular Banfield refused to see him, despite the fact we had him in the office. So, I basically told them off - my ex's cat was inherited from her deceased sister four years ago, and he is 17 years old, and being I watch him often for her he is like my own and I love the little guy.  This led to a scathing Yelp review for that particular Banfield location, and I plan on inflicting some more publicity damage upon them later as they deserve every bit of it.  Dealing with this has led me to make a few observations about the situation of medical care in general that I feel are needed.

For anyone who has read my material for some time and also knows me personally, I have no love for Corporate America.  I have worked in it, dealt with it with my own personal business, and have also seen some of the effects it has had on society, which are not good.  Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as a matter of fact, is actually taking on one particular issue the Corporate America is culpable of, and that is the junk that is put into our food.  Mass-production of food for a buck has led to a lot of cut corners as well as the risk of unhealthy additives in our food supplies by greedy corporate oligarchs who only care about the bottom line and not about the welfare of the consumers they market to.  This of course had its roots in the Industrial Revolution, but it also was a problem in other industries with the rise of "robber baron" oligarchs at the end of the 19th century such as J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and others.  It became such a problem at the beginning of the 20th century that President Teddy Roosevelt sought to rain them in with anti-trust legislation, and he was to a degree successful.  To be honest, I really wish Roosevelt could have finished the job, and then we would not have what I term an "oligarchy of monopolies" in which someone is trying to gobble up every small business, as well as even stable corporations which are not attempting to monopolize markets, just to enrich themselves with inferior quality of product and also unacceptable working conditions for the employees who serve them.   Up to the time that industrialization took over a lot of business sectors, the idea of monopolizing a particular industry was not really a thing - of course there were successful businesses that made their founders and leaders wealthy, and no one would dispute someone pursuing a fortune at all; that is not what this is about.  The fundamental problem is what is called "crony capitalism," where a small group of elitist oligarchs representing certain industries try to swallow up and destroy anyone else in those fields. They do so through buying off politicians who in turn implement onerous regulations to prevent people from starting businesses (this also includes the whole "eminent domain" scams that flout themselves as "laws") by making start-up efforts so rigorous and impossible that it drains the resources of a potential business owner and makes them give up in despair.  When the "big guys" win, they corner the market then and flood it with product that is often inferior in quality yet profitable because it can be mass-produced.  The dedicated craftsmanship of the small proprietor then is diminished, and mass-produced garbage designed to either deteriorate quickly or pose health risks to the consumer that buys them floods the markets, and the greedy oligarchs in charge count on the inferior quality to make the consumer spend more money at their establishments for more junk.  That is what has transpired in American society.  Many of those same megalomaniacal oligarchs (three that come to mind are George Soros, Bill Gates, and Klaus Schwab) then set their sights on trying to gain control of society.  They finance subversive movements, buy off politicians, and then hold "forums" to implement their utopian (or more accurately, dystopian) visions for the world, including Schwab's famous "You vill eet zee bugz and live in zee pods and you vill be HAPPY!!" mentality.  Aldous Huxley wrote of this as a fictional scenario years ago in Brave New World, and it seems like we are seeing it come to pass in real time.  I even read a year ago that the secularist authorities being bankrolled by these oligarchs have banned Huxley's and Orwell's book 1984 in Britain and elsewhere - they understand that if the right people read those, their cover is blown.  It is this backdrop, as well as the personal experience with my ex's cat, that I want to address now in regard to certain industries.

Lest you think that "crony capitalism" is confined to just the industrial or tech sectors, think again.  As of the past 30 or so years, the medical field and even prisons have likewise been corporatized.  When I worked for a small diagnostic clinic in Florida 20 years ago, I was in charge of basically maintaining office files. One thing I noticed is that every area hospital my office contracted with was corporately controlled by at least 3 large entities.  And, it was after they were incorporated that way when all of a sudden a lot of controversies arose - patients being refused treatment, malpractice, and even outrageous insurance billing on the part of said hospitals.  Mortality rates of patients admitted to these corporate hospitals rose dramatically, and for some reason they were still allowed to be in business (no doubt due to their CEOs buying off local and Federal politicians to loophole regulations).  While it is bad enough that industrial sectors are being operated this way, it is almost inconceivable to think healthcare would end up like that.  And, it isn't only hospitals - nursing homes, dentistry, veterinary services, and of course the pharmaceutical field have all been impacted.  Banfield Animal Hospitals is a glaring example of this too, as I saw on full display yesterday.  Another company likewise which fits this is Aspen Dental, which itself has been the focus of a number of class actions both by former patients and disgruntled employees in recent years.  Let me tell you some ways this has happened, and there are four things to note from any corporatized medical entity:

1. Increased lack of empathy

2. Incompetent staff, or overworked competent employees

3. Outrageous charges

4. Rigid procedures (like refusing people who are 10 minutes late)

5. Unavailability of services advertised, and ungodly waiting lists

6. A lot of hoops for a potential client to jump through - it is often easier to interview for a job than it is to get an appointment with places like Banfield or Aspen.

Whether it is a corporate-run hospital, dentist practice, or vet clinic, it is still unacceptable to put profits above patients when there could be life-threatening emergencies.  And then, when a situation like the whole COVID-19 mess comes up, these corporate medical entities take full advantage to discriminate further - patients get turned away for not having a vaccine they may not feel comfortable getting, and often a corporate hospital will be getting kickbacks from their bedfellows in Big Pharma to set quotas for the number of people they jab.  That happened before, as the last mandatory vaccines also were coincidentally timed with a rise in conditions among kids like autism, ADHD, and other things.  When Big Government and Big Business start collaborating in schemes like this, it is dangerous and the average person suffers.  I also noticed during COVID-19 in particular how many small businesses were shuttered on Federal mandate while big corporations gained substantially.   It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going on, and this is not necessarily just the ramblings of tinfoil-hat conspiracy nuts either - too much doesn't add up.  And then there are corporate prisons now on top of that.  I first learned about those from reading some stuff that (now discredited) Christian speaker Kent Hovind wrote after he was released a few years back from prison after being convicted of some financial misdeeds.  It turns out that corporate-owned detention facilities are now a thing, and like any other business they run on profit quotas - the more people they incarcerate, the more money they get.  This has led to some ridiculous laws being enforced that incarcerate people for huge amounts of time for crimes inconsistent with the penalty.  We need law and order in society, that is certain.  And, there needs to be penalties for serious crimes.  However, when some greedy oligarch profits from the incarceration of others, that is a greater crime.  And, it also goes the other way which is just as heinous - people are incarcerated in these corporate prisons for violent crimes, but then there is a revolving door to keep the prisons getting fresh revenue, so violent criminals are released through legal loopholes, and their cells are filled with others, and then the whole cycle begins again. This is not benefitting society.   Another aspect of this I have read about is the fact that many of these corporate prisons are owned by entities who have stake in other industries, so they used inmates in their prisons as a sort of sanctioned slave labor.   While perhaps some incentive programs should be in place to put convicted criminals to more productive use, justifying slave labor should not be one of them.  This now leads me to how anti-trust legislation could be revised to reform these things and end the grip of corporate oligarchs over our society.

The big corporations control many aspects of life, and most of us depend on some product they produce on a daily basis - usually there are many things we utilize.  I understand that it would be impossible to boycott or ban the products themselves because they are integral to the function of both society and the individual household.  However, the benefit of anti-trust legislation is that it decentralizes mega-corporations and limits the reach of corporate oligarchs without necessarily sacrificing things that are integral to functioning life.  I am all for, as an example, resurrecting the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, which would be a start by making things more affordable without the artificial inflation of prices as well as limiting restriction of trade and/or supply of goods and services to benefit oligarchs.  Then.combine those measures with the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which regulates pricing to prevent monopolies or negatively impact a competitive market.  This would also regulate mergers and acquisitions, allowing for a prevention of monopolies in certain industrial sectors.  The Tunney Act of 1974 would also further expand the antitrust regulations introduced by the Sherman Act, and it would impose stiff penalties on oligarchs who willingly violate it.  However, as good as those original measures were, a new antitrust act should be proposed, and two things I believe should be included in this:

1. A restriction or prohibition upon entities such as medical facilities, correctional institutions, and educational institutions from being corporately owned or operated.  These types of facilities provide important benevolent services to others and should not be utilized as a profit scheme.

a. In the case of medical facilities, they should be owned and operated by non-profit sector organizations or be private practices.

b. In the case of educational institutions, they should not be owned or operated either by big for-profit corporations nor by governments.  Instead, schools should be operated by religious organizations, private foundations, local cooperatives, and even by the military (an exception to government operation). 

c.  In the case of prisons, the old penal system of operation and management by local, state, and Federal jurisdiction is to be restored, and in doing so, no corporate interests should be allowed in prison operations or anything which is the rightful jurisdiction of the government. 

2. Much like the Sherman Antitrust Act proposed, large monopolies in a certain industry should be broken up into smaller independent entities, preferably under their former "legacy" identities.  This entails three things:

a. A prohibition upon one entity trying to buy out another to gain some sort of fiscal advantage.  Only in the case of extreme hardship for one of the parties or a perceived benefit in enhancing quality of the product should this be allowed.

b. Price regulation - no super inflated costs for profit or gain.

c. Smaller entities can be encouraged with tax incentives and other benefits to produce quality product free of the inferior and/or unhealthy aspects that characterize many corporations now.  

More ideas - the removal of the government to determine minimum wage rates, not taxing tips or other incentives for employees, and the complete eradication of the income tax - would benefit this as well, and it just means that societal and economic reform has many dimensions that interconnect with each other.  Measures like these would benefit businesses of all size and would actually incentivize economic growth.  Until we get rid of corporate oligarchs and political radicals messing in economics, none of this can become reality on a large scale.  The tax system as well would need reform too - it would be in the best interest of the US as well as other nations to eliminate taxes on income, property, and estates (just for starters) and instead only tax sales and other transactions.  This would necessarily require a decrease in the bureaucratic cabal/administrative state which overreaches and creates unnecessary spending for things that mean little to the majority of the population.  A decrease in government would necessarily lead to a decrease in taxes, as government spending would be cut significantly.  Social programs could then be the domain of nonprofits and the local governments rather than federally funded. While this may sound utopian, it really isn't - it is common-sense polity which has been in place for centuries and only recently radically done away with by globalists and corporate oligarchs (those two are often one and the same as well).  If we started using our brains to reform these areas of society, other things would fall into place naturally.  It doesn't mean a perfect society by any means, as there is always room to improve upon things, but it would be better.  We start though by curbing the megacorporations and their monopolies first, and then the political and social reform would follow. 

That was a lot to say today on these issues, but I wanted to just get them out there.  They have been proposed in bits and pieces by others, but a more concrete agenda/manifesto is necessary to implement these ideas.  Thank you for allowing me to share, and will see you next time. 

Challenges of Life

 As I am writing this now, I am in the midst of a personal trial.  I won't get into the details, but it is perhaps one of the most intense things I have dealt with in a while.  It leaves me at this point with a surreal feeling, and a great uncertainty, about thinking about even the next day.   Some of you have been there, so you know of those feelings.  At some point in the future, as a resolution happens and I can look back on it in retrospect, I will share more about it.  For now however, it is not something I can divulge a lot of. 

I mention that because I want to talk about a few things today.  The first is having a support structure.  I unfortunately come from a family - particularly on my mother's side - that is deficient in providing emotional support.  If you have a struggle, you are forced often to keep it to yourself lest you become the object of gossip and stupid jokes about everything.  My cousins on my mother's side are particularly notorious for this attitude, and they are not totally at fault - the older generations in our family have often been somewhat self-centered and callous about others, and the lack of empathy among them is to a degree that they would not know what to do if they were faced with a crisis of some sort.  To be honest, they would be in the same boat I found myself in, being that they would be unable to share their struggles due to the fact it would either be reduced to a joke or it would be a juicy item of gossip.  It is a scandal when someone cannot count on their family to be there for them, and when you are facing a situation practically by yourself, their absence is glaring.  My relatives are the type of people who, if you succeed, then something is wrong with you.  If you hit a struggle in life, then there is also something wrong with you.  It is a whole "damned if you do, damned if you don't" mindset they instill, and the result is a lot of emotional detachment in our family on that side of the tree. I don't remember even being hugged much by any of my family on that side of the tree - even my late grandfather would just handshake and any hugs given by female relatives were sort of obligatory and not out of real love or care.  And, as many of us grew older and went on with our lives, we never stayed in touch, we never helped each other without expecting something in return, and God forbid something bad happened!  If you ended up in that situation, you can be sure a lot of opinions would be circulating in the gossip of the family, and although you may not hear it yourself, you knew it was happening because they did the same thing to others and you have heard that.   The situation in my particular family is endemic of the increased atomization of our society - no one cares about anything but themselves, and the days when you had a close-knit community are long gone.  This, I believe, will ultimately be the downfall of our nation, and we are well into that now. Like a cancer, it has spread to other aspects of society as well.  I say it again - it is a scandal, and we have only ourselves to blame for this happening.  

In Scripture, there is a verse that talks about this too - it is one of the first Bible verses I have ever memorized, and it is Romans 12:4-5.  Essentially, it is an allegory of the Church as a body, made up of members with diverse functions. No one member has the same function as the others, and each is as important, but they also are integral to the whole body as the members working together are what makes the body function properly.  For instance, your lungs need to function by depending on the heart to both take oxygen through the circulatory system to the rest of the body and then bring carbon dioxide back to the lungs to be expelled via exhalation.  A complex brain coordinates it all, and itself is a beneficiary of the process as well, as proper blood flow keeps the brain functioning.  If one of those organs is missing or ceases to function, the body will die, and that is why every part of the body is important.  The Apostle St. Paul didn't make that analogy up on a whim - he understood that no one individual can function on their own, especially in a society that may throw a lot of adversity out.  We need each other, and the function of the Church is to bring that organic cohesion of all its members.  If I were to make this a bit more complex, in the Church there are billions of souls, and each soul functions as a cell rather than an individual body part.  As cells die, they are regenerated, and thus the body still functions.  But, one cell by itself cannot do much - it needs the cooperation of other cells to do the work it is designed to do.  Same with the Church.  Each and every person has a vocation - this does not mean every single individual has to be clergy or religious, but it does mean that even a non-Church vocation has benefit to the body as a whole.  And, each individual is uniquely created by God to do that function, and therefore no one is more valuable than the others - ALL are valuable.  That being said, let me move onto another thought in relation to this. 

The Church these days, much like the world, is administered by people who are more bureaucrats than they are servant leaders.  A lot of talent exists out there in the world, and many untapped reservoirs of valuable resource sit in pews in the average Catholic parish every Sunday.  Many feel a void, a sense of incompleteness, because they want to do something for the Church but are limited in some way.  Many are limited by finances, others are limited by other limitations, but the worst kind of limit is the one where they are just overlooked by either the clergy or the hierarchy, both on the parish level but also on the diocesan level.  Parishes lament often a lack of resources, and they also lament the lack of involvement in parish life of many people.  Yet, sitting in those pews at Mass every Sunday are many reservoirs of untapped talent, many of whom are really seeking answers and need direction and some inspiration to do something meaningful.  Yet, when they try, what often happens is that diocesan bishops, lay leaders on the parish level, and other bureaucrats tell these talented people that somehow they are "not good enough," and for some stupid reasons such as perhaps the person has a past (don't we all?), or perhaps they have an aspect of their faith that the leadership doesn't like (for instance, a tendency towards the TLM).  Whatever asinine reason, the door is slammed shut on potential talent who could really add to the witness of the Church, and upon rejection the person feels worthless or that they are no good to no one.  Some even think God has rejected them and will even eventually renounce their faith.  This too is a huge scandal.  And, to add insult to injury, the diocesan bishop will often allow someone who is not a person of sound faith or character to rise in positions of influence, and that person then does evil things - think of the defrocked Cardinal "Uncle Teddy" McCarrick, as well as the "Rainbow Jesuit" James Martin (although the latter is supposedly an ordained priest, he scandalizes the office so I refuse to call the man "Father").  Then there are faithless bureaucrats like Cardinal Cupich in office - they do things that contradict Magisterial teaching, yet it is faithful hierarchs like Archbishop Vigano, Cardinal Burke, and Bishop Strickland that get punished for standing for the truth.  I am personally sick of this, and it is time we take back the Church for Christ to whom it belongs and get rid of these hirelings like Cupich who are doing more harm than good.   They are in it for themselves, while there are more faithful servants of Christ who get ignored and treated badly.   Enough is enough.  And, while we are at it, I think that the entire Jesuit order, which has gotten more corrupt and faithless over the past couple of centuries, should be disbanded and excommunicated.  For the few good Jesuits that do exist, such as Fr. Pacwa, allow them to be taken into a more orthodox order.  What I am proposing is somewhat radical, but I am just sick of having our Church in the hands of faithless hirelings who punish good faith while exalting crap, and the time has come for change.  May Our Lady and all the communion of saints pray for us. 

As you can tell, I am writing in a state of frustration.  I know I need to surrender my struggles to God, and I truly do, but it is not the easiest thing in the world to do.  You start feeling better, and the thing looms over you and you get hit in the face with it again.  Many reading this know the struggle, but that is where we need to pray for each other more.  In this world, which is increasingly becoming more crazy by the day, we need all the help we can get.  Therefore we need each other to pray with, to help when help is needed, and to do so in a way that is not self-serving or contemptuous.  Any rate, those are my thoughts for this busy week, and thank you all again for allowing me to share. 

Pet Peeves About Achievements

 Good morning to everyone, and coming at you from the usual place.  I was contemplating what to write this week, and some career training inspired a couple of ideas.  I want to give the story, and then a few reflections.

After achieving the monumental milestone of earning my Ph.D., it was only logical that I start looking at opportunities.  Over the past couple of days, I have completed substitute teaching training for the Department of Education in my home state of WV.  It was a rigorous process, and to be honest there are some things I questioned taking that I will get into momentarily, but I also picked up a couple of ideas too. So, let me begin by discussing one of those.  

I learned of a new quasi-mathematical concept called numeracy.  For those not familiar with the term, numeracy is defined as "the ability to understand, reason with, and apply simple numerical concepts," and further, applying those concepts in the real world to make the best possible decisions.  There is really nothing mysterious or earthshaking about this, as essentially it means being able to do daily tasks such as measuring water to boil a pan of pasta, calculating how much change you get back after purchasing a package of batteries, and knowing how to measure things to apply to daily chores.  In other words, it is just common-sense stuff that we all apply daily, and all elementary education does is help us to understand and use it.  As crazy as it sounds, I never knew this even had a name in all honesty - it is just to me a learned behavior that facilitates life's daily functions.  However, like much of academia, there are educational professionals who tend to overcomplicate things a bit with it, and let me illustrate that. 

If you have $5.00 and you buy a bag of potato chips at the local Sheetz for $1.35, basic math should tell the person that they will get $3.65 in change.  In our minds, we calculate that like this:

    $5.00

-   $1.35

=  $3.65

Not difficult, is it?   However, here is what they are trying to teach kids regarding how to do this simple calculation:

$3.65 - $0.65 = 3.00

$1.35 - $0.35 = 1.00

$0.65 + $0.35 = 1.00

3.00 + 1.00 + 1.00 = 5.00

5.00 - 1.00 = 4.00

4.00 - $0.35 = 3.65

While it leads to the same sum, the problem is this - why go through all that complication when you can teach more about helping kids with basic operations such as addition, subtraction, and decimals?  I do see the logic in it however in that deconstructing the numbers gives an idea of how calculations work, but no one does this in real life.  If you want to teach real life on this, here is how you do it - take five one-dollar bills, a five-dollar bill, and about a dollar in change.  Teach the kid how to discern which is which and then do a practice transaction with them - offer them something for a certain price, and let them count it out (use a juice box, a candy bar, a toy, etc.).  That is how they will fundamentally learn to count money.  If also you are teaching them about measurements, use the utensils you have and have the kid help you cook something - a box of macaroni and cheese, a batch of cookies, etc.   It is more fun for them and they will learn quickly.  That is how I would teach kids basic math.  Nothing complicated, it has incentives, and it is fun for them. Professional education "experts" need to stop screwing with working systems and let the kids learn in a more practical way. It would create much less confusion.  I will give numeracy education credit however - thanks be to God it is not the failed "Common Core" math technique!  Numeracy is basically literacy with numbers, and it is fundamental to development, but let's please not overcomplicate things with it. 

This leads to my main proverbial bone to pick with trying to establish career goals.  It is so interesting - and annoying - to me that despite anything you achieve and do, some jackass in a university or a corporate boardroom makes you jump through more hoops like a trained circus dog.  They tell you that you need this credential to do this or that, and you work hard to achieve earning the credential only to be told that it is not enough - you now have to do this, or that, or pay this fee or take this course, etc.  It is frankly ridiculous.  If someone has already earned an advanced degree such as a Master's or a doctorate, I think they have proven their abilities and should not be subject to more corporate and bureaucratic head games.  A lot of talented people have had to settle for far less than they are capable of because of stupid regulations, requirements, processing fees, and other crap.  There needs to be a reform in this, and capable people who possess talent and education need to be recognized and allowed to shine in what they have worked a lot to prepare for.  Until this happens, society will continue to falter.  And, if that garbage was not enough, now the political Left is trying to impose what is called DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) standards on industries which look at external attributes such as race, gender, and who you sleep with rather than the achievements and abilities required for certain positions.  If we got rid of DEI and these circus-dog hoop-jumping games, I would bet the unemployment rate in the US would drop dramatically as people would be actually working in fields they trained for instead of merely settling for a job just to pay the bills.  Maybe when President Trump is re-elected, I may write him a letter suggesting these reforms, and at some point I plan on doing a formal study on that and maybe publishing myself. America will never recover until she starts revamping the workplace a bit and getting rid of useless and wasteful requirements for jobs that people should automatically qualify for.  Any rate, that is my rant of the week. 

Thanks again for allowing me to share this week, and will see you next time.