The major petroleum companies have held drilling rights and privileges to off-shore and on the continent regions with proven oil resources. As I wrote last night, some of those resources will be costly to bring to the well head. But, what is most bothersome, and which most Americans know or admit nothing about is that the petroleum companies have absolutely no interest in opening up new and known oil fields on which they already have drilling and production rights.
Think about the dramatic rise in end product prices. Then, think about the profits the companies are already reaping from what they purchase and what they, themselves produce. Now, think about the vast billions of already known resources over which those companies already hold the rights to produce, and think about what it is worth to them to not drill and produce more end product. Now, think about why those self-same damned petroleum companies might be agitating for more and more drilling rights over known resources where drilling rights are restricted by laws which were enacted back in the 1970s when oil by the barrel cost what? $10-15.00 per bbl compared with today's per bbl cost of ________? Now, do you get it?
I believe we need to stop this damned jabber-walling and complaining merely about the obscene profits those companies are enjoying and stop allowing them to adhere to the ludicrous claims that they are pumping (pun intended) those windfall profits back into production etc ... for which they get significant tax deductions ... and just think about what they are sitting on and what more they want to sit on.
If people in would just figure that out, and accept the obvious, we would stop bowing to the petroleum gods, we would rise and insist that the windfall profit protections guaranteed by our government and laws be stopped, we would continue to insist that our legally protected regions continue to be off-limits, and we would demand that those companies begin producing the resources they already have legitimate access to.
More, if people in this country would just stop allowing the petroleum industry and the federal government to allow the finger-pointing at OPEC, the Saudis, Venezuala, and others and demand that our government stop protecting the corporations which really control our fuel availability and costs, we just might be able to work ourselves out of the mess the government has gotten us into.
Your thoughts?
Friday, June 20, 2008
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Reading a blog regarding "Jesus for President," I was reminded of several thoughts I've had over the years about "things and concepts religious."
During my graduate school years at the University of Missouri, I recall writing a paper entitled "Jesus Christ as a Community Organizer." Much more recently, I've been known to write that if Jesus Christ was alive in these times, acting and speaking as he allegedly did in his young adulthood, he would be labeled by many in the United States of America as a left wing zealot, a communist. He would have been condemned for those socialist beliefs by the very church and its various conservative denominations and sects which tout their christianity (small "c" intentional) in strident, intrusive and blatantly biased terms.
Having been raised as a Methodist, I am very much aware as to why I attended any event in that church during my adolescance: The MYF group was where most of the girls I liked attended, and our basketball team (YMCA league) was excellent.
I was a boy scout in two troops - one sponsored by a Baptist Church and the other by the Unitarian Church. My grandfather was a Unitarian and my grandmother (guardian) was a Methodist-neither was particularly active in churches, and religion was only one aspect of the scouting movement back in the 1950s.
I minored in history in undergraduate school, and took several courses in religion for the minor. My view of contemporary, conservative Christianity is that the religion denies its roots which did not originate with the Old Testament but predate those stories. More, today's conservative Christianity ignores the origin(s) of the fundamental beliefs which emerged from several different cultures and societies long before Christ was born and lived.
Finally, I am appalled about the warring by humans in the name of religions, which leads me to believe merely that God was a great idea, but we humans have so bastardized the beliefs as to render the idea unrealistic and hypicritical. As Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has stated, it is the fundamentalists in the world who pose the greatest threat to humankind. Today's expressions of fundamentalism both in the United States and in the Middle East are testament to Kennedy's comment, in my opinion.
I write this not knowing if anyone will read it, and whoever reads this is invited to visit my blog and share thoughts there.
Respectfully,Samcvt
During my graduate school years at the University of Missouri, I recall writing a paper entitled "Jesus Christ as a Community Organizer." Much more recently, I've been known to write that if Jesus Christ was alive in these times, acting and speaking as he allegedly did in his young adulthood, he would be labeled by many in the United States of America as a left wing zealot, a communist. He would have been condemned for those socialist beliefs by the very church and its various conservative denominations and sects which tout their christianity (small "c" intentional) in strident, intrusive and blatantly biased terms.
Having been raised as a Methodist, I am very much aware as to why I attended any event in that church during my adolescance: The MYF group was where most of the girls I liked attended, and our basketball team (YMCA league) was excellent.
I was a boy scout in two troops - one sponsored by a Baptist Church and the other by the Unitarian Church. My grandfather was a Unitarian and my grandmother (guardian) was a Methodist-neither was particularly active in churches, and religion was only one aspect of the scouting movement back in the 1950s.
I minored in history in undergraduate school, and took several courses in religion for the minor. My view of contemporary, conservative Christianity is that the religion denies its roots which did not originate with the Old Testament but predate those stories. More, today's conservative Christianity ignores the origin(s) of the fundamental beliefs which emerged from several different cultures and societies long before Christ was born and lived.
Finally, I am appalled about the warring by humans in the name of religions, which leads me to believe merely that God was a great idea, but we humans have so bastardized the beliefs as to render the idea unrealistic and hypicritical. As Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has stated, it is the fundamentalists in the world who pose the greatest threat to humankind. Today's expressions of fundamentalism both in the United States and in the Middle East are testament to Kennedy's comment, in my opinion.
I write this not knowing if anyone will read it, and whoever reads this is invited to visit my blog and share thoughts there.
Respectfully,Samcvt
Friday, May 2, 2008
Growing Up Again
One of my life's persistent and periodic questions has been, "OK Sam, what'n ell are you going to do now that you're growing up again?" At this point in my life, I'm putting truth to power: I'm once again "failing competently at retirement."
About three weeks ago, I was offered and accepted a full time position as a program manager for a company which recruits, obtains subsidized training for and moves participants who are low income and over 55 years of age into unsubsidized employment for which they've recently been trained. Some of those folks are training in occupations they've always wanted to work in and some are merely upgrading and obtaining skills needed for occupations they've worked in at sometime in their past. I'm supervising five community-based offices and their staff on the eastern region of Vermont from Canada to the Massachusetts border.
Guess this "new" failure means one cannot "go back in time," but can go forward in time.
Feels good {;?)
About three weeks ago, I was offered and accepted a full time position as a program manager for a company which recruits, obtains subsidized training for and moves participants who are low income and over 55 years of age into unsubsidized employment for which they've recently been trained. Some of those folks are training in occupations they've always wanted to work in and some are merely upgrading and obtaining skills needed for occupations they've worked in at sometime in their past. I'm supervising five community-based offices and their staff on the eastern region of Vermont from Canada to the Massachusetts border.
Guess this "new" failure means one cannot "go back in time," but can go forward in time.
Feels good {;?)
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Thinking about Spring 2008
Well, its Springtime in Vermont and snow is predicted for the higher elevations and our Northeast Kingdom. Here, on the West Coast of New England, the ice has left Malletts Bay, and I've seen a couple of sailboats out plying the 40 degree waters of Lake Champlain.
Quetzal is still on her cradle at the boat yard, waiting for the docks, moorings and slips to be returned to the water. The batteries are on the charger in the garage. As time permits, I'm toting goods, resources and the usual items which a cruising sailboat needs for the summer - like sails, cushions, cooking and sleeping stuff and life jackets. Thinking of rigging the back stay as an amateur radio antenna, so I can operate while lying in one or another of the abundant coves during the overnight trips.
Saw a 36 foot craft for sail in Fort Lauderdale and, for a few minutes, fantasized about selling Quetzal (25 foot Catalina), flying to Florida, picking up what looks like a sweet, well kept S2, and bringing her to Lake Champlain via the inland waterway to NYC, up the Hudson River, through the Champlain Canal and into Lake Champlain. But then realized I have just begun another adventure working full time for a company that recruits, places for training, and facilitates job finding for +55year old folks wanting to return to the workplace or find a new occupation. Guess the board wouldn't appreciate my taking off to be frivolous.
May's adventures as alternatives to raking, etc., have been planned and committed to -a white-water rafting weekend on Maine's Kennebec, and a scuba diving venture on Memorial Day weekend at York, Maine and Nubble Point. Both ventures will involve some colder water than I usually enjoy, but its a time for me to move on and continue along this life's sometimes crooked and twisting paths. Looking forward to 2009, there's a February Bahamian catamaran live-aboard trip scheduled by the local dive shop that looks interesting.
The bicycles are tuned and have been rolling along this Spring. Bicycling and the health club continue to make the aches and pains remind me of the muscle mass losses experienced over the past couple of years. I've been told by grinning 20+ year old folks at the club that those aches and pains are "the good kind" which reminds me that our culture has changed somewhat with the concept of "good" having been re-defined.
I'm wondering if I'm the only person who is getting either bored or tired of the same-old, same-old politicking which has gone on far too long with more to come. Several months ago, it occurred to me that the talking heads on the "news" channels, are the folks who focus on trivia, thus fabricating what passes for worthy news, and continuing to justify their incessant chattering about minutia to keep their ratings alive. How many times and ways can Americans hear "change" and still not understand that the change theme, to be believable, needs substance to be included in what we hear from the candidates. They continue to refer critics to their web sites, and I wonder just how many citizens really care enough about the issues besetting the nation to actually "visit" candidate's web pages and wade through the contents. But, what seems overdone and boring today is leading us to experience a full-blown political convention like the ones of earlier times - and that is something that has been missing from the body politics for decades. I'm looking forward to the conventions in August, but believe the Republicans' will be relatively boring simply because their candidate was chosen months ago.
And now, its time to end this...the sun is beckoning ... and I've got to drive up to open up the St. Albans Bay camp for the summer. Sure hope the new tiles we laid on the kitchen and bathroom floors didn't buckle over the winter.
Think 70 degree temps
Quetzal is still on her cradle at the boat yard, waiting for the docks, moorings and slips to be returned to the water. The batteries are on the charger in the garage. As time permits, I'm toting goods, resources and the usual items which a cruising sailboat needs for the summer - like sails, cushions, cooking and sleeping stuff and life jackets. Thinking of rigging the back stay as an amateur radio antenna, so I can operate while lying in one or another of the abundant coves during the overnight trips.
Saw a 36 foot craft for sail in Fort Lauderdale and, for a few minutes, fantasized about selling Quetzal (25 foot Catalina), flying to Florida, picking up what looks like a sweet, well kept S2, and bringing her to Lake Champlain via the inland waterway to NYC, up the Hudson River, through the Champlain Canal and into Lake Champlain. But then realized I have just begun another adventure working full time for a company that recruits, places for training, and facilitates job finding for +55year old folks wanting to return to the workplace or find a new occupation. Guess the board wouldn't appreciate my taking off to be frivolous.
May's adventures as alternatives to raking, etc., have been planned and committed to -a white-water rafting weekend on Maine's Kennebec, and a scuba diving venture on Memorial Day weekend at York, Maine and Nubble Point. Both ventures will involve some colder water than I usually enjoy, but its a time for me to move on and continue along this life's sometimes crooked and twisting paths. Looking forward to 2009, there's a February Bahamian catamaran live-aboard trip scheduled by the local dive shop that looks interesting.
The bicycles are tuned and have been rolling along this Spring. Bicycling and the health club continue to make the aches and pains remind me of the muscle mass losses experienced over the past couple of years. I've been told by grinning 20+ year old folks at the club that those aches and pains are "the good kind" which reminds me that our culture has changed somewhat with the concept of "good" having been re-defined.
I'm wondering if I'm the only person who is getting either bored or tired of the same-old, same-old politicking which has gone on far too long with more to come. Several months ago, it occurred to me that the talking heads on the "news" channels, are the folks who focus on trivia, thus fabricating what passes for worthy news, and continuing to justify their incessant chattering about minutia to keep their ratings alive. How many times and ways can Americans hear "change" and still not understand that the change theme, to be believable, needs substance to be included in what we hear from the candidates. They continue to refer critics to their web sites, and I wonder just how many citizens really care enough about the issues besetting the nation to actually "visit" candidate's web pages and wade through the contents. But, what seems overdone and boring today is leading us to experience a full-blown political convention like the ones of earlier times - and that is something that has been missing from the body politics for decades. I'm looking forward to the conventions in August, but believe the Republicans' will be relatively boring simply because their candidate was chosen months ago.
And now, its time to end this...the sun is beckoning ... and I've got to drive up to open up the St. Albans Bay camp for the summer. Sure hope the new tiles we laid on the kitchen and bathroom floors didn't buckle over the winter.
Think 70 degree temps
Monday, March 17, 2008
History of Religion-Colonies & Founders' Beliefs
In yesterday's (03-16-2008) Burlington (Vermont) Free Press, a local minister's article appeared on the editorial page wondering if our founders could/would have been elected were they running for office today. I've incorporated the editorial into this note:
My Turn: Could the Founding Fathers get elected?
Published: Sunday, March 16, 2008
By Gary Kowalski It's happened before: God is getting mixed up in presidential politics and spiritual correctness is en vogue. Candidates have been as
One wonders, would the Founding Fathers pass the religious litmus test now required for public office? How would our first four presidents -- George Washington, or John Adams, or Thomas Jefferson, or James Madison -- measure up?
During the bitterly contested election of 1800, the Gazette of the United States intoned that voters faced a single question: "Shall I continue in allegiance to God and a Religious President; Or impiously declare for Jefferson and No God!!!" Many considered Thomas Jefferson a heathen, and clergy in New England warned their flocks the man from Monticello would confiscate their Bibles if elected. Instead, Jefferson wrote his own version of the New Testament, scrapping the miracles. But despite that, the author of the Declaration of Independence and engineer of the Louisiana Purchase was an outstanding president.
Job performance has little to do with private devotion, anyway. George Washington indicated that he was willing to hire "Mohometans, Jews, or Christians of any Sect, or they may be Atheists" on his Mount Vernon estate so long as they were able workers. He himself attended church only sporadically and avoided Sundays when he knew communion would be served. His diaries never mentioned Christ nor any spiritual reflections that occurred to him when he did sit through a sermon. His mind was on other things: defeating the British army, presiding successfully over the Constitutional Convention and, by limiting his presidency to two terms, assuring a peaceful transfer of power in the world's first democracy.
Unlike Washington, John Adams attended worship almost every week, along with Abigail, who said she preferred "liberal good sense from the pulpit." But far from receiving divine guidance for the nation, Adams cautioned that the framers of the Constitution "never had interviews with the gods or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven." Putting God's name in the document -- or other theological assertions -- could only stir up trouble, for America even then was a land of diverse faiths.
The Constitution in Article Six specifically prohibits religious tests for public office. During ratification, some Virginians wanted the clause re-worded: "no other religious test shall ever be required than a belief in the one only true God, who is the rewarder of the good, and the punisher of evil." But this change was rejected. James Madison wisely defended Article Six as welcoming people of every persuasion into the field of public service: "The door of the Federal Government is open to men of every description, whether native or adoptive, whether young or old, and without regard to poverty or wealth, or to any particular profession of religious faith."
If tested for orthodoxy, the Father of the Constitution might never have been allowed into the White House. Madison's own creed, according to the rather shocked testimony of Rev. William Meade, bishop of Virginia's Episcopal Church, "was not strictly regulated by the Bible."
Had spiritual correctness been required, would any of these founders have been elected president? Citizens have every right to take their religion into the polling booth, of course. But a look back at history should remind Americans not to demand any narrow definitions of godliness in the leaders they select.
Gary Kowalski of Burlington, senior minister of the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Burlington, is the author of "Revolutionary Spirits: The Enlightened Faith of Americas Founding Fathers "(BlueBridge, 2008).
+++++++++++++++++++
A few days ago, while driving back to Vermont from Troy, NY, accompanied by one of the region's public radio stations, I listened to a Christian scholar describe the basis for our founder's insistence on and ambivalence about our "freedom of religion" phrasing in the Constitution.
I hadn't known that early colonists, escaping the religious and political tyranny(ies) of Europe to settle in North America, manifested literally no acceptance of religious freedom. In fact, in many of the early colonies, accusations and punishment by death, in the name of one religion or another were rampant. By the time the founders gathered to consider the meaning of independance for the nation they intended to form, religious freedom, per se, in North American was all but absent - a situation which had existed from the 1600s to 1776. Perhaps if I had read and learned more about my ancestry and family history during residence in Plimuth Plantation and, later, as founders of Salem, Massachusetts, I would have known about colonial intolerance for those who believed differently.
In fact, the founders we hold in reverence today, represented several disparate views about the importance and meaning of religion, and notes from that period indicate several heated discussions might have occurred before the freedom of religion clause was drafted and accepted.
My point with these references is to challenge those who read these notes and who espouse their genuine belief that our nation was founded based on Protestant religious principles to do some real research and learning about the religions of the world, their beginnings, their influences (negative and positive), and what beliefs about religiosity were extant during the period leading up to, during and following our nation's struggle for independence and nationhood.
A couple of weeks ago, someone sent me a lengthy piece with an accompanying video which describes what true Biblical scholars have known and understood for decades about the origins of many of Christianity's beliefs. Having studied world religions as part of my history minor in college, I found the article and explanation to be both encouraging (of my belief system), enlightening, and intelligently challenging. If I can find that material, I'll forward it and/or perhaps paste it into my blog at http://samcvt.blogspot.com.
Sam Conant
Colchester, Vermont
My Turn: Could the Founding Fathers get elected?
Published: Sunday, March 16, 2008
By Gary Kowalski It's happened before: God is getting mixed up in presidential politics and spiritual correctness is en vogue. Candidates have been as
One wonders, would the Founding Fathers pass the religious litmus test now required for public office? How would our first four presidents -- George Washington, or John Adams, or Thomas Jefferson, or James Madison -- measure up?
During the bitterly contested election of 1800, the Gazette of the United States intoned that voters faced a single question: "Shall I continue in allegiance to God and a Religious President; Or impiously declare for Jefferson and No God!!!" Many considered Thomas Jefferson a heathen, and clergy in New England warned their flocks the man from Monticello would confiscate their Bibles if elected. Instead, Jefferson wrote his own version of the New Testament, scrapping the miracles. But despite that, the author of the Declaration of Independence and engineer of the Louisiana Purchase was an outstanding president.
Job performance has little to do with private devotion, anyway. George Washington indicated that he was willing to hire "Mohometans, Jews, or Christians of any Sect, or they may be Atheists" on his Mount Vernon estate so long as they were able workers. He himself attended church only sporadically and avoided Sundays when he knew communion would be served. His diaries never mentioned Christ nor any spiritual reflections that occurred to him when he did sit through a sermon. His mind was on other things: defeating the British army, presiding successfully over the Constitutional Convention and, by limiting his presidency to two terms, assuring a peaceful transfer of power in the world's first democracy.
Unlike Washington, John Adams attended worship almost every week, along with Abigail, who said she preferred "liberal good sense from the pulpit." But far from receiving divine guidance for the nation, Adams cautioned that the framers of the Constitution "never had interviews with the gods or were in any degree under the inspiration of heaven." Putting God's name in the document -- or other theological assertions -- could only stir up trouble, for America even then was a land of diverse faiths.
The Constitution in Article Six specifically prohibits religious tests for public office. During ratification, some Virginians wanted the clause re-worded: "no other religious test shall ever be required than a belief in the one only true God, who is the rewarder of the good, and the punisher of evil." But this change was rejected. James Madison wisely defended Article Six as welcoming people of every persuasion into the field of public service: "The door of the Federal Government is open to men of every description, whether native or adoptive, whether young or old, and without regard to poverty or wealth, or to any particular profession of religious faith."
If tested for orthodoxy, the Father of the Constitution might never have been allowed into the White House. Madison's own creed, according to the rather shocked testimony of Rev. William Meade, bishop of Virginia's Episcopal Church, "was not strictly regulated by the Bible."
Had spiritual correctness been required, would any of these founders have been elected president? Citizens have every right to take their religion into the polling booth, of course. But a look back at history should remind Americans not to demand any narrow definitions of godliness in the leaders they select.
Gary Kowalski of Burlington, senior minister of the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Burlington, is the author of "Revolutionary Spirits: The Enlightened Faith of Americas Founding Fathers "(BlueBridge, 2008).
+++++++++++++++++++
A few days ago, while driving back to Vermont from Troy, NY, accompanied by one of the region's public radio stations, I listened to a Christian scholar describe the basis for our founder's insistence on and ambivalence about our "freedom of religion" phrasing in the Constitution.
I hadn't known that early colonists, escaping the religious and political tyranny(ies) of Europe to settle in North America, manifested literally no acceptance of religious freedom. In fact, in many of the early colonies, accusations and punishment by death, in the name of one religion or another were rampant. By the time the founders gathered to consider the meaning of independance for the nation they intended to form, religious freedom, per se, in North American was all but absent - a situation which had existed from the 1600s to 1776. Perhaps if I had read and learned more about my ancestry and family history during residence in Plimuth Plantation and, later, as founders of Salem, Massachusetts, I would have known about colonial intolerance for those who believed differently.
In fact, the founders we hold in reverence today, represented several disparate views about the importance and meaning of religion, and notes from that period indicate several heated discussions might have occurred before the freedom of religion clause was drafted and accepted.
My point with these references is to challenge those who read these notes and who espouse their genuine belief that our nation was founded based on Protestant religious principles to do some real research and learning about the religions of the world, their beginnings, their influences (negative and positive), and what beliefs about religiosity were extant during the period leading up to, during and following our nation's struggle for independence and nationhood.
A couple of weeks ago, someone sent me a lengthy piece with an accompanying video which describes what true Biblical scholars have known and understood for decades about the origins of many of Christianity's beliefs. Having studied world religions as part of my history minor in college, I found the article and explanation to be both encouraging (of my belief system), enlightening, and intelligently challenging. If I can find that material, I'll forward it and/or perhaps paste it into my blog at http://samcvt.blogspot.com.
Sam Conant
Colchester, Vermont
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Splainin
January 20, 2008 8:34 pm
Many folks have urged me to create a blog and, until this evening when I read the blog created by a special friend, I've avoided the urging by others. So, this is my first comment: one by which I believe the Blog's Title needs to be explained.
My former father-in-law, Emmett B. Adams, lived most of his life in Taney County, Missouri. I should probably point out that in the years I knew him, I addressed him as "Mr. Adams" and always referred to him as my, then, wife's father.
He was both a simple and a complex fellow, and someone whose memory I cherish. Emmett was a Godly Presbyterian who rarely missed a Sunday sermon. As I recall, the only times I experienced him not attending Sunday School and Church were those Sundays when he was off somewhere (Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri or somewhere else) judging either horses or fox hounds. Oh yes, the man was an avid horseman and Ozark fox hunter. Many a long night it was that I sat with his friends and him around a fire in the woods, eating beans and bacon, swapping stories and bragging about "Old Blue's" or some other hound's mouth as the scent was caught.
More about Emmett at other times. Why I am calling this blog "The Plime Blank Truth" has to do with Emmett Adams. He once wrote a small book of anecdotes and local lore by that title. I have a copy and will probably share some of that here. I use the title in honor of Emmett Adams - a man who never swore (much), and who I recall never hearing a slurring word about anyone coming from his mouth. He spoke the "Plime Blank Truth," or he figured what he wanted to say just "warn't worth sayin." So, thats the splaination about my blog's title.
I intend this blog to be a forum for thoughts (mine and others) about whatever might come to mind - patriotiic, phylosphical, political, religious and anything else. About all I ask is that readers and responders think and act kindly of one another and work at avoiding assumptive, disparing labels.
Because of my upbringing, I intend also to attempt dialectical humor from time to time. My primary male role model during the formative years was my uncle, George Frechette. From him and others along the way, somehow, I learned to appreciate, enjoy and respect the French-Canadian Quebecois culture that sits atop and underpins the values of Northern Vermont. Some of what I'll share has been published and is in my small collection of folk lore material developed during the 20th century. Some will be original reflecting some of my experiences.
Now that I've begun, I believe I'll just stop here and put some fuel in the furnace so my energy level maintains.
Many folks have urged me to create a blog and, until this evening when I read the blog created by a special friend, I've avoided the urging by others. So, this is my first comment: one by which I believe the Blog's Title needs to be explained.
My former father-in-law, Emmett B. Adams, lived most of his life in Taney County, Missouri. I should probably point out that in the years I knew him, I addressed him as "Mr. Adams" and always referred to him as my, then, wife's father.
He was both a simple and a complex fellow, and someone whose memory I cherish. Emmett was a Godly Presbyterian who rarely missed a Sunday sermon. As I recall, the only times I experienced him not attending Sunday School and Church were those Sundays when he was off somewhere (Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri or somewhere else) judging either horses or fox hounds. Oh yes, the man was an avid horseman and Ozark fox hunter. Many a long night it was that I sat with his friends and him around a fire in the woods, eating beans and bacon, swapping stories and bragging about "Old Blue's" or some other hound's mouth as the scent was caught.
More about Emmett at other times. Why I am calling this blog "The Plime Blank Truth" has to do with Emmett Adams. He once wrote a small book of anecdotes and local lore by that title. I have a copy and will probably share some of that here. I use the title in honor of Emmett Adams - a man who never swore (much), and who I recall never hearing a slurring word about anyone coming from his mouth. He spoke the "Plime Blank Truth," or he figured what he wanted to say just "warn't worth sayin." So, thats the splaination about my blog's title.
I intend this blog to be a forum for thoughts (mine and others) about whatever might come to mind - patriotiic, phylosphical, political, religious and anything else. About all I ask is that readers and responders think and act kindly of one another and work at avoiding assumptive, disparing labels.
Because of my upbringing, I intend also to attempt dialectical humor from time to time. My primary male role model during the formative years was my uncle, George Frechette. From him and others along the way, somehow, I learned to appreciate, enjoy and respect the French-Canadian Quebecois culture that sits atop and underpins the values of Northern Vermont. Some of what I'll share has been published and is in my small collection of folk lore material developed during the 20th century. Some will be original reflecting some of my experiences.
Now that I've begun, I believe I'll just stop here and put some fuel in the furnace so my energy level maintains.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
