If I Had Time For A Post Today, What All Would I Write About?

I'm on Bainbridge Island, outside of Seattle visiting my daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter and other family members.  J has already been here several days (while I went to LA).  My son and his wife arrive tomorrow to celebrate some birthdays.

I was on the phone today with the accountant on how to do the payroll taxes for my mom's caregiver.  There are too many things like this I'm dealing with.  But I'm not complaining, really.  I'm just glad we can afford a caregiver.  But there are other things I'd prefer to do,

like play with Z who turned 6 months last week and is sitting up and grabbing everything in reach with her active fingers.  She has two teeth partway in already.

And the birth of the British royal baby yesterday had extra meaning as I get toward the end of Bring Up The Bodies which is about Henry VIII's inability to produce sons (except for one with someone not his wife) leading to getting rid of Katherine and now Anne Boleyn is in the Tower of London.  It's truly ironic now that they changed the rules to allow a female royal equality that they had a boy.  And what is it about the fascination about this royal that costs the English people a fair amount of money, has minimal actual power, though lots of symbolic power?  I still believe that hierarchy is part of our genetic code. 

I haven't mentioned Syria.  Too, too much to think about.  We've put ourselves (the US) into this position of being the world dominant country, which gives other countries the freedom to back out of their responsibilities and defer to us to take care of any problem anywhere.  How do you deal with the displacement of millions of people and the deaths of hundreds of thousands?  If the rebels hadn't rebelled, Asad will tell you, then none of this would have happened.  But at what point in the curtailment of universal human rights, are a people justified to rebel?  Can we get to a point in world history where, when that point is reached, the rest of the world steps in and bloodlessly allows more freedom?  We act as though the world is more civilized today than in the past, but the sheer number of people suffering from hunger and war is probably greater than any time in history.  It's true that more people have swimming pools and SUV's and flat screen TVs than ever before too, but wouldn't you trade those things in for everyone having peace and enough food?  I'm afraid that a lot of people would say 'no.'  Depressing.

There's more redistricting news - court filings challenging the new plan.  But I haven't seen the documents so I don't know enough to write about, but meanwhile you can check on the Fairbanks NewsMiner editorial on the Fairbanks challenge.

There's lots more, but you get the point.