Word of the week - this one's funny, but true. plandemic.

And to think, people claim KJB preachers don't have a sense of humor.  Hailing from New York, he was going on with his sermon - talking about what people are up against, and then covid comes along and locks down healthy people, locks them away from their livelihoods.  The man wasn't trying to be a comedian.

On another blog was an interesting post, about wills, trusts...in short: shoe-leather. But there was something else i noticed,

and that took me back some 30 years - when us boomers were working.  At some training seminar,  the instructor asked us to raise our hand if we had any children - don't know if you can even ask that question these days.  Anyway, most of is were in our 30s and 40s; half, if that, raised their hands.  The boomer-blog post has, at this time, ten commentors and four of the individuals have no children, most of them, apparently are married; words like "husband" and "wife."  Didn't see that confusing "partner" - what does that mean anyway?  Playing house, and expecting people to equate that "arrangement" with the real deal?  Married, but intimidated by shack-up/weirdo personal-politics?  Gaag.

Anyway, will check back later to see if there's more comments.  And will check back to another very thought provoking boomer-blog post - that concerns the widening of the have's verses the have-not's; at this time, only a few posts.  Thought both blogs would have bu-ku comments by now.  They were both posted on Friday - guess with spring, people are doing yard work and such.  Yep.

Anyway, one of the no-kids commentors had retired from a nice job, and owns two houses - and i don't think she is alone in that nice situation...you know, a lifetime of diligence, of making smart decisions, that sort of thing (never mind, that particular form of common grace, bestowed by our Lord).  She said that home #2, in the sunny south, was made possible through an inheritance - sorta sounds like an in-law, the couple had inherited from the husband's aunt.  

The making plans article was focused on just that - making plans...instead of just letting family scramble with about no information.  Another one of the commentors mentioned that over one out of three boomers have made no arrangements; needful to say, that's likely because over 1/3 of boomers have less than 10k in savings.  And 10 thousand isn't much at all.

Internet jargon of the day: teaser-link. That's when you're reading someone's blog-post and,

when you come to the comments, you read them too.  Well, what's especially a treat is when the commenter's name is highlighted.  And you're thinking: oh yay, another interesting blog to read - it's not like you come across interesting blogs every day...lucky, if you happen upon one every few weeks.  

Anyway, the comment resonated - whether you agreed with it or not.  So, in anticipation, you click the link - only to find a blogger page, with only the person's name.  But no blog - not even a link-list.

Bummer :/

Whining again (no surprise) because the pretty dagon-hatted leaders are saying NO! to

validating Adam and Steve being hitched.  Well guess what.  That same "church" which doesn't exactly encourage its congregation to study their Bibles (oh, big red flag right there) will not honor the marriage of Ronald and Shirley either, because one of the individuals had gone through a divorce some years back.  Yea, there is the annulment process - and what a proce$$ indeed.  It's not just the initial $500-some involved, it's the paperwork, and alot of stirring up old memories which (extended) family members may not care to recall.  And after all that - and some more money thrown in (to add to the pretty hat collection?) - there's no guarantee the annulment will go through.  Which raises another key question:  if, after a year or two - or three - the process does go through, where does that put the (now an adult) child of the previous marriage?  If the marriage is annulled, then the child conceived during that marriage ... isn't having grown up in a broken home damage enough?

Go back a mere fifty years, and only the wealthy could get annulments; the process was longer, with even less of a guarantee that it would go through.  So alot of couples just stayed together, or moved on ... or moved in a "companion."  

At the church i go to, there was a Mennonite man who had also attended - he goes to another church now, because he can no longer drive to ours.  But anyway, Mennonites don't have annulments.  They believe one spouse for life, and the only people who can remarry are widows and widowers.  That protestant sect is not alone in their no-annulments no-exceptions policy.  By the way, the same no-exceptions sects are also very works-oriented - ya know, if you chew green bubble-gum and drink orange soda on Sundays, you're so worldly and probably not even saved; and frankly, like the Catholics, you really don't know, from one minute to the next, where you will spend eternity.  Kinda new-agey in a way, where you end up, it'sbasically up to Captain You.

Godda set sail for work.

Last winter (before the stores closed down) had no trouble finding a purse. Of course, the one i wanted, and bought,

was one of the more expensive ones.  Uhm, yeah, wanted one that would hold up for the next 15 years or so.  Oh, come to think of it, might not be around long enough for it to need replaced.  And yeah, the pocketbook was what you'd expect an old lady to carry around.  Funny that it took me less than fifteen minutes to spot it, buy it, and go my way.   Guess old bags need handbags, but not coats or sweaters that actually keep a body warm - or regular blouses that are fit to wear to the office.

The last blouse purchased in a better department store was over 10 years ago.  It was white and all cotton - it was also about $80, but was grateful to have found it.  Over these last few years, all's you see are t-shirts that, maybe, reach 3 inches (if that) below the waist.  And before the scoffers would write this post off as just some old broad (who needs to get off th' eff off th' effing planet)... sorry, repros (not sorry one bit) back in young slender days, detested immodest JUNK!!! fashion with a flaming passion - would get so irate.  Ya know, just looking for regular clothing.  

Back in the 80s, the fashion was "bigtops."  They were ugly things - and they didn't go well with skirts ... of course they didn't go well with skirts.  Back then, and even decades prior, feminine clothing for everyday wear was systematically (diabolically) being phased out.

Am old enough to remember the mid 60s.  Even then, the clothing available for old women was too skimpy, and so only MOCKED old women's bodies - for no better reason than ... that's what wickeds in high (and low) places do - very willingly obey their demonic handlers.  Proof?  Check out the early chapters of Psalms - and plenty of other books in the Bible.  The Lord said it, go mock Him - yeah, and good (long-term) luck with that :/

Anyway, the last decade (old) women's storebought clothing was nice, was the 1950s.  The dresses were long and full enough to be lovely, but practical enough for women to get things done - sweeping, gardening, laundry.  Those dresses were not only old-friendly, but added much grace to women who ... uhm, liked a bit overmuch the cookies and pies they made in their kitchens.

It's still winter. The woman's coat looked warm enough - that is, as long as she

remained standing.  The pencil cut, like most coats, don't have enough (plastic) fabric to allow the wearer - male or female - to sit on a parkbench, and his or her legs still remain sheltered from the wind.  People do wait for busses or taxis - or just want to sit for a minute and check their email.  Comes down to this:  the reprobates who market what-barely-passes-for clothing don't think (of course they don't) the people who buy the wares are worth an extra two or three yards of (real) fabric.  This is exactly why such a coat - that actually keeps ya warm - were not available at even better department stores or through better catalogs back in November.

Same goes with sweaters - what a cruel joke! (Reprobates be reprobates.)  They're all short.  And if you see a longer one, it's a wwaaayyy overpriced pencil.  Had my eye on one that actually extended to the hips, and it was made of real cashmere.  Thinking, wow - better grab this one up.  Then i saw the light...coming straight  through the tissuey thin cashmere.  Don't recall whether or not the sweater had pockets - alot of em dont... ya know, we're not worth the extra fabric.

Fifty years ago, just when the spoiled hippie donkeys started braying

about things they knew NOTHING about, most Americans - even lower income Americans - enjoyed hassle-free heat.  Feeling chilly?  Just turn up the dial, a notch or two - no worrie$.  The only people who lugged logs (and endlessly swept up after them) lived out in the boonies.  

But nnoooo, the gaia-groupies, thinking they knew better than their fathers and grandfathers - many whom, by the way, died early through WORKING very hard, to provide their wives and kids, warm, safe, hassle-free heat - started in with their gaia sermons.   Ya know, how fossil-fuels are bbaaadd for the environment.  Funny (not) how fuel costs steadily increased in the early 70s, and in the 80s and 90s, stores were selling lots of floor-space-hogging - if not dangerous - space-heaters, and those pig-in-a-poke polyester throw-blankets-with-sleeves.  

Whaddabuncha hooey, the smiley faces, when the reality was - and is - of people sitting on their duffs all winter long, because huddled in a fake-fabric excuse-for-a-blanket is the only way to stay warm - because it's too expensive to turn the notch much above 60.  If i was a conspiracy theorist, i'd wonder if the sleeved-blankey purveyors were in bed with the weightloss-mongers - huddled for warmth, doesn't keep the table-tops neat or the floors swept.

Fifty years ago, yes money was tight for my parents - having 4 kids to provide for...  Anyway, their home was heated with base-board hot water, oil-powered heat - the house was always warm.   The temp was probably around 69.  Oh, and by the way, there was always meat, and plenty of it, for supper.  Mom's parents lived across the street; they also heated with oil; their thermostat was set at 73 or 74.  Neither did my grandparents have to choose between heat or eat.  

America was such a different place, when patriarchal (i.e., WORKING) men still ran things.   Back then, even among lower income residents, you didn't find yourself thirty miles down the road, and suddenly worrying, "did I lock my front door?"  

Flying her granny-panties. Some boomer broad entitled a recent blog post. Like that's some kind of revolutionary statement. Uh, no.

That's just gross - yeah, and just more foul-smelling fuel to a certain sodomite's blog title.  Granny panties? Uh-uh, that self-imposed indignity...not at this address!  A privacy fence stands between the road and my washline - yeah, no dryer...can't afford one right now, is what it is.  These days, what's revolutionary - if not seditious - is long paneled petticoats hanging to dry on that washline.  And that's not all.  Boy, were the hems dirty - was shoveling at a mound of dirt yesterday; barrow-load by load spreading it with a rake over just a ways.  Basically, doing what i can do myself, since calling in a backhoe costs money.  Money targeted on a bolt of white cotton, for new curtains; the old (white cotton) ones, to be taken down, washed, and recycled into a long paneled slip and a petticoat - there should be enough fabric for those layers.  Yep, time for a new set, the old ones to wear when working in the yard.  

"Relax, we're only playing..." Ugh, sounds real enough to me. But even so, even playing witchiepoo games...

Not smart to even (vainly) imagine chatting up with dead people.  Whatever games we play, there's desire there.  People play Monopoly, because that board-game gives the players a chance to exercise capitalistic strategy - and time to be with family and friends...who are still breathing.  Some folks will do bridge, because that's a card game which high-society people are into - and others just like that game.  

Anyway, that topic over there in boomer-land is still getting gushed about...ya know, the old, "I'd like to talk to Ghandi."  Oh gaag - never mind, would Ghandi even want to spend two seconds talking to you...you old has(never)been :)   How comes these washed-up witchiepoos never think of that, huh?  

But anyway, demons are real - and they're real slick on playacting.  In other words, that's not Cleopatra with whom you're talking (your favorite) hair styles with; uhm  what about her favorites?   Hey, come to think of it:)  bet when the foolish fancy themselves conversing war stuff with Julius Caesar or cosmology with Albert Einstein, bet that conversation is very one-sided - and very ill informed.

The gush-fest continues...basically a wholelotta name-dropping (boyhowdy) going on. Coming from,

i guess, the intellectual channel.  Anyway, did hear a thought provoking sermon last night (yep, it happens :).  Anyway - and this wasn't the first time i heard a preacher say to his  Christian audience - this isn't the 1950s.  Back then, if you ran into an acquaintance, or even someone you don't really know that well, and asked that individual if he or she was saved, he or she pretty much knew what you were talking about; he or she - if lost and preferring to remain as such - most likely had either heard the Gospel from a relative / or had just seen a tract sitting on an end table while waiting to see the dentist.  Oh wait a sec, that was in October - chances are, there will a different tract come April.  It's March, and that certain Gospel tract was sitting on a small table - alongside the umbrella stand - over at the accountant's office.  

Back in the day, people who had no interest in Gospel tracts simply ignored them, or quietly put the tract in the office wastebasket.  No drama.  Decades ago, there was something called manners - even lost people (from not the best neighborhoods) knew the world - and the world's culture -  did not revolve around them.  (Run down neighborhoods were neither cool nor hip - what they were, was something to move away from - asap).  

Anyway the preacher cautioned his for-real Christ-following audience, to not assume that people are atleast partially familiar with often preached Bible phrases.  So, he said that if you ask someone if he or she is saved, he might reply, "saved from what?"  If you mentioned that Paul preached Christ's salvation from sin to the gentiles, you might hear, "Paul who?"

But it's 2021, and over at the boomer "mutual admiration society" (that comment was so on target ) they're gushing over and (not exactly) covert one-upping each other over this or that (likely reprobate) poet, novelist, actor, comedian...more like plain old buffoon (gaag) :/

Continually amazed, but not surprised. Old people, who, from years of experience, shoud know better.

It's the same old Bible-bashing going on.  And yeah, i get it.  There's (alot of) things in Scripture that ticks, even born again, people off.  (But the difference is:  saved people know the Lord is right - always right.)  Can ya spell, "flesh wars with the Spirit"?  (Paul said that somewhere in the New Testament).  While even lost people - who value their jobs more than enough to remain mum on what's normal, and what's just plain gross - might want to shout AMEN when the preacher quotes Scripture, in calling out that abomination for what it is, there is one big topic that both saved and lost get seriously sideways about.

As if tithing one's gross income isn't hard enough, what we're expected to do with what's left - after taxes and basic living expenses - is to fork over even more.  Don't recall the exact location of the New Testament verse, but it goes like this:  "work with your hands and give to those in need."

Heard that Scripture recently being preached, and yeah, a part of me silently bristled a "say what?"  Tell me i'm alone in feeling this way - Bible also says (somewhere in the Old Testament) and it goes like this, "nothing new under the sun."  So, would not be surprised if alot of the Bible-bashing is (bitter) rooted in the subject of economics - not just what's moral, and what's not.

Bought a pack of flower seeds, and it brought back - not too distant - memories.

The pack of zinnia seeds was almost $4, so this isn't off some rare flower that only grows outside a little village in Japan or Norway.  But that's not the half of it.  When i looked in the pack, there was like 10 seeds - okay, am being facetious, but comeon...  Back in the day, the little packs actually contained enough seeds, that when you opened the pack, you didn't have to strain your eyeballs, to make sure the pack actually had seeds within. 

Another memory i recall, was receiving seed catalogs in the mail.  All kinds of seeds and bulbs to anticipate over, while outside, the february snows drifted where you just shoveled.  The last gardening catalog that came in the mail, was just for equipment - no seeds, and certainly no bulbs.

Last year, went over to the gardening center and was looking at a rosebush.  It was $30.  That's a bit much, and i wanted to plant two of them.  Needless to say, that wasn't happening.

Some stats from another boomer blog, about being old, female and living alone. Bet the red-pills get their jollies.

Anyway, aside of any red-pill drama, the stats go something like this: it's almost one out of five women, aged 65 and older, who live alone; for men it's about one out of ten.  As usual, there was a bit of a women-are-just-oppressed tone about the article - ya know, like being older, female and alone is  an automatic, and very deserved, reproach.  Seriously, like what's an old broad expected to do, to fit in (gaag) with societal expectations?  First off, as for fitting in, hey, an old broad is a  human being, not a pair of (fakey-fabric) pants.

Can not help but to strongly suspect resentment going around concerning old women - widows, especially - who are not only just f.i.n.e., fine living alone, but...like it's almost a revolutionary - if not downright seditious - act (against the pro-evolutionary party)  to harbor no interest in pursuing "relationships" (i.e., fornication).  

Ew!  One comment to the article went something like this:  having a "relationship" but separate houses.  In other words, old bed buddies.  Double ew.  Sorry (not :) but if it's not a MARRIAGE then it's fake.  And if the spouses in the marriage don't put each other AHEAD of the kids - i.e., paperwork and such - then the marriage is fakey.  

Which is why this blogger is not interested in so much as a coffee date.  Number one:  age hasn't changed the mindset...and it's true - at the end of a gal's WORKday, guys are after one thing.   So, bedding some peewee makes no sense, and certainly is not worth spending an eternity in the Lake of Fire.  

And yeah i get it, not all old couples are sleeping together, but we live in very wicked times, where ... ew! is assumed.  No thanks, don't even want that appearance.  

Old brains are busy, making/maintaining new/er mental maps. Remembering

to hold onto the railing while navigating up or down the stairs.  While outside, keeping their (failing) eyesight for chuck-holes while rolling the wheel-barrow to that spot, where they'd left off working yesterday.  Old brains tell the body, hey einstein, you need to go sit in the shade for a few minutes - you're old enough to keel over from heart attack.  Old brains remind the arms to carefully take the box off the shelf (not just grab it any old way).  

And isn't it amazing, at the day's end, how much an old person is able to get done, on his or her own ;)  It's called, using one's noggin, and it's also called work ethic - yeah, the latter somehow not quite all there, in these quik-draw trivia-chase daze.  

Yep, there's more to brain activity than teevee game-shows.  There's books.  Books that don't prod/invalidate the reader into instantaneously absorbing the information therein.  As a matter of FACT, worthy writers expect the reader to take his or her time.  Worthy writers have put alot of research into their works, and they hope their contribution won't be forgotten - like last tuesday's teevee gameshow.  

The older mind? Weighing in on another blog post. The human mind is like a house. When new,

the occupants start moving in their possessions.  At first, it's not difficult at all to find stuff - the young newlyweds really don't have alot in their starter home.  The closet and the dresser in the couple's bedroom is room enough, and some, to store their clothing and shoes.  The modest kitchen is more than adequate to store their cookware.  The diningroom hutch doesn't have much in it, period.  The bride looks forward to filling it with english bone china, but that's not going to happen for awhile - soon there will be three, instead of two, living in their modest home.  

Ten years, and a built on room later, there's four people living in that house - number five is on the way.  Still adequate room for the family.  They are neat people, keeping what they need, donating or throwing away what they no longer use.

Another thirty years has gone by.  In that time, the house has grown by another add-on, plus the attic had been made into a play room.  The race-car set still sits on the table, and the dolls on a shelf.  Over the years, a few boxes have been brought up to that space.  While the grandkids go up sometimes, gram and gramps, not so much - even though an extra railing had been added to each if the home's three staircases.  

Another ten years has gone by.  Parked in the driveway, is an auctioneer's truck.  The couple has sold (for not much more than a song) some furniture - of REAL wood, but nobody cares about that sort of stuff anymore.  Digressing here, but with modern day month to month (weirdo) living arrangements, cheesy, cheesy plastic furniture is easy to leave behind, when the (weidro) shack-up suddenly breaks up.  

Anyway, the aged couple didn't want to part with any of it, but being of sound mind, the extra cash would help pay this year's (ever increasing) property tax - ya know, the tax they keep paying on a house that was paid off like some 25 years ago...tax money that goes to teach kids that evolution is fact, and that being a perv is okay.   Never mind, that simply making change from a purchase of $7.57 from a $20 requires the cash register to calculate the $12.43.  Btw, back in the day, Mrs. Frank over at Murphy's told us clerks to simply count up.  

The couple, being in their 70s, do things slower, but contrary to the "well meaning" noseys, they are doing fine living in and maintaining the house and the few acres surrounding it.  Sure, they hire help, and budget accordingly to have that help.  

Meanwhile the noseys continue their efforts (in person, and through media) to invade the old couple's boundaries with the usual unsolicited (and very needless) advice about how old people are this and and should or shouldn't do this and that.

It's like worldlings want us stupid.  Of course they do, they want us freaking gone - so they can squander our stuff (on ugly, stupid tats and gambling)...the stuff we oollld people worked, scrimped and $aved for, and took care of, over the years.

Time to get to work...yeah i know, an old people thing.