We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
It's no wonder that fish is so expensive. What does "fresh" mean? Usually that it was flash frozen, then thawed out. Nobody wants days-old fish. Almost all fish at the fish market was flash-frozen. It's not as if some local fishing boat goes out for a day and delivers fish to your fish market.
If never frozen (say, 5 days just on ice), quality deteriorates quickly. If you want fresh (same day) fish you had best go fishing yourself.
Recently, I was sent by my company to a class to learn how to improve my negotiation skills. I'm actually pretty good at negotiation. In the class (of 8 people) I scored 3rd highest - which I thought was "very good" but was told "those who do best are the ones who do the worst and learn the most." So maybe I wasn't as successful as I thought. In fact, I learned afterwards I'm more 'sales' than 'negotiator'. Useful skills in leading up to a negotiation, but sales can derail a negotiation (as I learned to my surprise).
I will never again confuse sales with negotiation. Which I have always done. I did not see them as fully separate skill sets - until now.
I always felt negotiation is a part of the sale. I learned the hard way it's not. Basically, negotiation is about firmness, employing the proper behaviors as called for within the context of the discussion, and doing what is appropriate.
Generally I don't care about this stuff...but at a lunch recently some coworkers spent a good portion of the time talking about Harry and Meghan. I simply stated I don't generally pay attention to the details of this stuff, all humans are flawed and hero-worship isn't something I go for, generally speaking.
That said, I am a huge Anglophile, which may seem odd as I'm of Irish/German descent. Of course, the Saxe-Coburgs, or Windsors as they care to be known as now, are German, so maybe it's that part that has my pay any bit of attention. Standing in front of paintings and statues of William of Orange or Cromwell (as I have many times on my visits) leave me a bit cold, but I can appreciate the history they represent. Even Churchill, whose relationship with the Irish is tenuous at best, is one of the few politicians I look up to.
Being an Anglophile doesn't mean I'm a royal-watcher or a fan of the monarchy. I've often joked they are the wealthiest welfare family on the planet. This is a bit of a stretch, of course. The family does generate quite a bit of income on their own, with their holdings, and as a result of tourism and fandom. It would be a significant impact to the UK economy to see the end of the monarchy. That said, even today children grow up dreaming of being kings, queens, princes and princesses. As a child, I remember talking of being an astronaut, a fireman, a policeman, etc. So royalty, as a child's dream, is certainly not as awful as one may think.
It has become a casual consensus that exercise, or at least daily vigorous movement, enhances one's immune response.
Anecdotally, it looks likely. But the catch is that it's the most fit people who do an hour or so most days, so is it causality? Statistically, fitter people are best prepared to deal with the attacks of nature: better disease-resistance, better healing, etc.
People with physical jobs do not need to think about it, but most of us do. In a way, daily exercise is an attempt to recreate a bit of what humans were built to do.
I feel that exercise (The Maggie's Fitness for Life program, especially) has the main goal of maintaining functionality and vigor for as long as possible. Sure, looking good matters too, in life. Nutrition for weight, exercise for strength.
Eves of holy days are "fast" days for Roman Catholics, maybe for other Orthodox rites too. "Fasting" means no meat - but, conveniently, fish do not count as meat.
The question came up in a dinner conversation. I love Youtube.
How to fix a leaky faucet? How the Spanish Armada failed? How to back a boat into a slip with a strong current? How to make a good pasta fagiole? Sure, it can be a time-waster but it's a great resource.
Here's the story. They should have made more money from it.
About 5 years ago there was a Political QQQ posted. Today I'll post another by the same person.
"How can an act done under compulsion have any moral element in it, seeing that what is moral is the free act of an intelligent being?" ~Auberon Herbert
I recently was in a heated debate with someone who called volunteerism a "Republican guilt complex", stating that government directed welfare was better and anything done voluntarily would never live up to overall needs as effectively.
I disagreed. I believe compelling people to do something doesn't make them good. Furthermore, it opens the door to corruption, destruction, and destitution. Politicians view the money collected as 'theirs' and they will do as they please with it. But you get to feel good. You 'did' something, right?
The US government keeps telling people what a "healthy diet" is. For years, they wanted 11 servings of carbs daily. Now they want "fruits and vegetables." Why?
Looks deserted, but the cafes of Lourmarin are packed for late supper and drinks, and the piazza is full of kids playing games in the dark in front of the ice-cream shop.
Good last-minute Christmas idea: a hike, bike, or otherwise, tour around the villages and vineyards of Luberon. You might decide to move there, like Camus.
Not all Baroque is cheery, but lots of it is. Not lots of catchy tunes or riffs, so a lot of it sounds like inventive ornamentation. Filigree. Must be great fun to play, if you can.
Mrs. BD and I have been attending a Baroque Chamber Concerto series (Handel, Vivaldi, Bach) at Lincoln Center this month. It helps me greatly to watch the musicians to see who is doing what. With only a handful of musicians at a time, that's easy to see. A few violins and violas, a bass, a harpsichord, rarely a harp, and sometimes bassoon ad/or oboe. Occasional horns too.
In a large space it's hard to hear the harpsichord but it's mostly a continuo. Pianny was a great invention. Big noise. Chamber music was/is meant for small spaces.
A few facts (I am not well-educated musically, and am tone deaf with zero musical talent):
- The famous baroque composers wrote tons of secular music. That was mainly for courts. Lots of the chamber music was written for pedagogical purposes. Through his entire career, Bach complained about the quality of musicians. They seemed to approximate the scores.
At the heart of Bach's pursuit of chamber music in Cöthen was the rare genre of unaccompanied solo works in sonata and suite genres beginning with the violin and cello works, BWV 1001-1012, followed primarily in Leipzig with the duo sonatas for violin, flute, and viola da gamba, as well as 24 transcriptions of 14 of these works for different instruments and the perfection of the solo pieces. During much of this time Bach also composed works for lute or lute harpsichord while focusing on the flute in Leipzig. The music was intended for varied purposes: to teach composition to family members, students, and friends; to develop a repertory to reflect emerging genres and tastes, and to meet the needs of a growing general public to experience music first-hand.
Opening the black box of 
