Too Pooped to Pope And Picking A New Pontiff

Here's another entry in my list of odd things that I’ve experienced in my lifetime – seeing a Pope resign. This hasn’t happened in about 600 years. Being raised in a strict Catholic family but having lapsed years ago, I still have respect for the role of The Pope. It must be a tough job being infallible. Pope Benedict XVI did make the right decision in this case, something that Pope John Paul II also should have done. Seeing John Paul II’s health deteriorate while The Church continued to cart him out was pathetic. (It made me wonder who was really running The Church during that time.)  Finally, we have a Pope who is smart enough and has enough respect for the office that he can say he is too pooped to pope.

And of all the burning, critical questions as to what will happen to him after he leaves the office, at least we have the answer that he will no longer wear his beloved red shoes, changing to a pair of simple brown loafers.

There are questions whether Pope Benedict’s inability to handle the rigors of the office is the only reason he is leaving. Talks of sex scandals in The Church have exploded. If Pope Benedict is unable to deal with the demands of addressing this issue, it is right for him to move aside in the hopes that someone will step up and handle the issue once and for all.

The conclave will soon begin to select a new Pope. Again, it’s a boys club that will make the choice. It is tragic that the Catholic Church continues to demean the role of women in The Church and in the world. Is it too much to ask to get a new Pope who will make some radical changes, like women for priests and allowing priests to marry? I am not holding my breath on this issue. The Church seems to think that God, Jesus, and likely the Holy Spirit is a male and that no female could ever be good enough to have a leadership tole in The Church. Maybe if The Church was more open minded about women, we wouldn’t have a clergy peppered with so many sexual deviants.

All that said, I do believe that the majority of The Church’s clergy are good people, as is many of The Church’s members. Sadly, though, The Church has been slow to throw the bad apples out. Whoever becomes the new Pontiff needs to bring The Church into the 21st century in more ways than one. The last Pope to attempt to re-energize the Church was Pope John XXXIII in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Sadly, The Church seems to have gone backwards at a rapid pace in the last decade, and The Church needs a Pope who is willing to stop that trend and make a more contemporary Church. The question now is, are there enough Cardinals willing to elect someone who is up to that task?




All Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Crazy Drivers: Close Encounters of The Vehicular Kind & Driving While Stupid

This past week, I’ve almost been hit many times by other drivers who made serious driving errors. Here’s a short recap of what’s happened just in the last 5 days:

1.A male driver – with what looked like his wife and kids in the car – nearly hit me head on as he tried to enter an “exit only” drive as I was exiting. The drive is clearly marked as an exit only and the roadway from where he turned is marked “no turn” to prevent drivers from even attempting to go in the exit. To avoid hitting me, he had to run his car up on a cement median.

2.While I was driving through a 4 lane intersection (on a green light), a man in the car in front of me slammed on his brakes in the middle of the intersection -  in  the lane heading straight -  so he could make a left turn. (The actual left turn lane was stopped by a red left turn light.)

3.A woman attempted to make a left turn in front of me thinking that she could make it, but rather than continue the turn, she stopped mid-turn and I was forced to slam on my brakes to avoid t-boning her car. Then she tried to reverse back into her lane, almost hitting the vehicle behind her.

4.A car made a right turn from the left turn lane, almost causing me, and another car, to hit them.


It’s bad enough having to worry about people driving drunk/under the influence or distracted from phones and/or texting, it seems there is a new thing to worry about: people driving while stupid (DWS). Who knows, driving while stupid could be part distracted driving and drunk driving and any combination thereof. I suspect that there are enough drivers out there who are sober and have both hands on the wheel who are just making stupid mistakes that they deserve their own special category of bad driver.

How can you avoid someone who is driving while stupid? You can’t. People will continue to make stupid driving mistakes. The best solution: drive defensively. Keep your own eyes on the road, keep your distance from other cars, and watch your speed limit. By all means, pay close attention when approaching intersections, even when you have a green light or the right of way. You know what YOU'RE going to do, but there’s always the chance that someone who is driving while stupid will make a move into your space. If you’re fortunate, you’ll have enough time to react and avoid an accident.

Don’t be the one to get caught drive while stupid. Mind the rules of the road, keep your eyes on the road and hands on the wheel, and be mindful of other drivers around you or your space. If you’re not on your toes, it could cost you injury - or your life!




All Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Jury Duty in US District Court – An Interesting Experience

(on right) Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse, Cleveland Ohio

I recently had the privilege of being selected for jury duty for the United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio in Cleveland. It was a very interesting experience. Everyone should have the chance to be called for jury duty, if anything to see firsthand how the American system of justice works in reality – and not how it works on a television show.


A few months ago, it was with a slight sense of dread as I opened a piece of mail from the US District Court in Cleveland. It was just a simple survey to verify my qualifications as a potential juror but I knew exactly what it meant – I would soon be called for jury duty. The survey merely attempts to flush out those situations that would likely exclude people – disabilities, military duty, advanced age, etc. I didn’t fit in any of those categories so I knew it was just a matter of time before I was called.

Sure enough, less than a month later came the notice that I was selected to serve. Every night, beginning on a set date, I was to call the court and hear a recording stating whether my jury group was to report or not. As the term of service is one month or one trial, I had to clear my schedule for a 30 day period…a bit of a hassle as I’d already made plans for the time before the Thanksgiving holiday.

The first night I called, I was informed the trial to which I had been assigned had been moved – so I was able to change my schedule back. Within about a week, the trial date was moved again. But that date stuck, and I reported for duty on the date and time required,

The US District Court in Cleveland is located in downtown Cleveland next to the Tower City complex, and the enclosed walkway from Tower City makes it easy to get to the courthouse. The Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse is only about 10 years old and the design is contemporary and serene, yet conveys serious business.


Jurors were directed to the very large jury assembly room and were asked to complete a questionnaire. (While some jurors seemed to think that sitting in the back of this large room would mean they would likely not be in the first group selected,  this makes no difference.) Having served on a jury for my hometown once before, I knew that the questions asked on the survey were not random but related to the case in some way. Of course, each question was answered honestly.

And then…the waiting. While jurors were asked to report by 7:30, we weren’t moved to the courtroom until about 3 hours later. The names of potential jurors were called and assigned a juror number, and the group moved to the hallway outside the courtroom, which was several stories up. (The view of the Cleveland skyline and the Terminal Tower can’t be beat!) We were lined up according to the number we were assigned (I had a very low number so I thought I would surely be seated as a juror) and we were led into the courtroom and seated according to the number assigned. Some jurors numbering in the 30s-40s were breathing a sigh of relief thinking they wouldn’t be seated as a juror (they were wrong).

The process of voir dire begins, which is the process where prospective jurors are questioned about their backgrounds, potential biases, and in some cases the answers on the questionnaire, before being selected to sit on the jury. The phrase voir dire is derived from Latin and French and means "that which is true"; but I say it means “very boring.” When I served on a city jury, voir dire was quick and took only about 15 minutes, but as this case was in a Federal court, the process is far more time consuming and the questioning far more detailed. In this particular case, potential jurors are first asked questions as a group, and then asked questions individually (yet still in a group setting), verifying some basic information, such as name, occupation, etc.  The process stretched for hours as some jurors (in this case, at least 30 jurors) were called to the bench to be asked specific questions based on how the potential juror answered the questionnaire. While the judge, the prosecutor and/or defense attorney asks the potential juror questions, a “white noise” –  like the static heard over an old analog TV with no signal – is heard, which masks what is said at the bench to others in the courtroom (and vice versa). At first it was not an unpleasant sound, but after this went off and on for hours, it became rather annoying. (By the way, the next day my ears were ringing loudly for hours…was it a rebound from all that white noise?)

I was called up to the bench and asked several questions and answered them honestly. Jurors are not told whether they are being selected or disqualified until the attorneys have screened each juror for which they had specific issues with the questionnaire.

Hours later – it was close to 5PM now – the jurors were selected. After going through aver 40 jurors, the court finally picked twelve jurors and a few alternates. I was not selected, and while they don’t explain why, I suspect that due to the nature of the case and some of my answers relating to the questionnaire (which was completed before we were told the charges against the defendant) likely disqualified me. Some of the potential jurors who thought they had high enough numbers that they would not get selected got quite the surprise when they were picked.

The judge in this case was Chief Judge Solomon Oliver, Jr., and he did a great job in conducting the entire process. He seemed very sensitive to the fact that the process took quite a bit of time and the potential jurors were an impatient lot.

I don’t know the outcome of the case – it may still be going on as the case was projected to run 4-6 days. I believe that the process, while time consuming, did its best to get a fair and impartial jury.

Even though it was a bit of an inconvenience, I would be happy to do it again, including being seated on the jury. It’s part of the American legal system that everyone should experience  - better as a juror than as a defendant!.



All Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Social Security is NOT “Entitlement”

Nothing gets me more agitated than when someone in the media or in Congress refers to Social Security as an entitlement program, as if retiring Americans expect a pay out for doing nothing. As we near the “fiscal cliff” and our government representatives work to keep us from going over the edge, the focus is turning to raising taxes and cutting “entitlements” and Social Security always comes up on that list.

What the media and Congress fails to remember is that Social Security is a program to which Americans pay in while they work. I’ve paid in to social security for over 30 years – many of those years I paid up to the maximum – and I wasn’t given a choice whether I wanted the government to take my hard earned money. Make no mistake, I never expected that Social Security would be my only retirement investment; I’ve built up a 401k account for most of my years worked. But, I never looked at Social Security as something I was entitled to for doing nothing; I looked at it as a promise that the government made to me as it took thousands upon thousands of dollars out of my paycheck each and every year for decades. I don’t look at social security as a charity program: I looked at it as an investment into my future and to the stability of all Americans who worked hard all their lives and don’t want to be destitute in their retirement years.

Is it the fault of Americans who paid in to the program in good faith that the government either mismanaged the money or didn’t make the proper adjustments over the years to keep the program fully funded? No. I wonder to where all this money has gone to over the years and would love to see an full accounting of how all the money is spent or invested.

And why is it that when our government representatives talk about cutting Social Security benefits or changing the program, there is no discussion or focus on GOVERNMENT pensions for government employees? I guarantee that if government pensions were referred to as entitlements, the outrage would be even greater. I am of the opinion that any changes to Social Security must include similar changes to the government paid pensions of ALL current and former US government employees.

It’s also annoying when members of Congress use the excuse that we can’t allow the burden of funding Social Security to be passed along to our children and grandchildren. Considering that my decades of paying in to the program supported my parents and grandparents, I don’t see a problem in younger workers paying in – as I did – to support retirees. There were no government representatives who were worried about the burden that paying in to the program made on baby boomers when they entered the workforce many years ago.

I am not saying there should never be changes to the program. Clearly, workers – both for private sector and government jobs – need to take responsibility for saving for future retirement. I can also understand that the baby boomers moving into retirement age represents a strain on the program. But I find it insulting that our government representatives to refer to Social Security as “entitlement” as if retirees are getting something for doing nothing. This is far from the case. The government “borrowed” that money from workers and as far as I am concerned, they have an obligation to make good on repaying that debt. As the fiscal cliff looms, the worst economic thing that can happen is for the government to throw off the retirees who paid into the program for decades. There are real entitlement programs out there (such as lengthy unemployment benefits) that need to go first.




All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

Seeing True Colors Through Politics

The 2012 presidential election helped to show me the true colors of many people. I’m not talking about the Democratic blue and Republican red colors.  This election exposed some of the worst traits – the true colors - of some people, and many of those people were even family and friends.

I was saddened to see how many of my so called “friends” - in their attempt to support Mitt Romney - posted photos and/or links to other sites that promoted intolerance and racism. I suppose they thought that by continuing to promote their candidate by repeated low blows to the current president that somehow I would come over to their way of thinking. (I didn’t.) Many of those same “friends” forwarded bigoted emails, thinking that because they forwarded content that someone else wrote that I would never expect those bigoted thoughts to come from them. (They were mistaken.) Some forwarded emails filled with accusations about the Obama administration that simply were not fact checked beforehand (I checked.) Of course, when I would reply back giving them links to the facts to counter their claims, I’d either be ignored or sent a reply that said something like “Oh, I was just forwarding it to you as I thought you’d get a laugh.”

Who is laughing now?

What some of these “friends” fail to understand is that their barrage of negativity only worked against their candidate. Granted, the Romney campaign likely never sanctioned any of these emails or political messages that were seemingly sent by supporters on his behalf. I’ve been voting since 1973 and I’ve gone between voting Republican and Democrat many times; I tend to vote for a person rather than a party, But the increasing vitriol from my Republican “friends” that began as far back as the 2008 election has confirmed that the Republican Party ideals aren't even remotely close to mine. Sadly for them, I don’t see them getting there any time soon, at least not without the party jettisoning any Tea Party affiliation or without showing some respect for minorities, for women, or for the “47%”.

Congratulations to President Barack Obama on his re-elections. I can’t help being happy – and energized - about it. The fact that he has been given a second term tells me that we have a good chance of moving…”Forward.”




All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted
Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

My Endorsement of Barack Obama Via “Why Obama Now”

This animated video short, created by Simpsons / Family Guy animator Lucas Gray and using a speech delivered by President Obama at the Associated Press Luncheon in April of 2012, best represents one of the many reasons why I am endorsing Barack Obama for another term as President of the United States. It’s also the best explanation of the failures of the "trickle-down economics" concept that I’ve ever seen.








All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.

There Are No Mulligans in Politics (A Cautionary Tale)

Mitt Romney’s bid for the White House took a turn for the worse this week, much like a golf shot that hooks into the woods out of sight. My guess is Romney wishes that politics would have the golf equivalent of a mulligan – a “do over” – but he has learned the hard way that once words come out of one’s mouth and are either heard by others, or worse yet RECORDED by others, they are impossible to take back. One would think he should have already learned this by now, but there we go thinking again.


A video of Romney secretly recorded at a fundraiser with wealthy donors recently went public. It didn’t take long for the information to blanket the Internet, TV, and print media. In this video, Romney took the stance that the bottom 47 percent of Americans are a bunch of useless, entitled people who see themselves as victims, and that he really can’t worry about them because people like that will vote for Obama no matter what. One can argue that Romney never expected someone to record his words at a private event. If he really expected his words would never be repeated, he was being either incredibly stupid or incredibly naïve (either trait is not good for a president). Americans should be thankful that Romney’s speech was exposed as now people can really see how he feels about 47 percent of the population.

Of course, this Romney flub is fodder for the Obama campaign and related backers, and I can’t say I blame them for jumping it quickly and getting TV ads out there that use the recordings. Yes, it’s rough here in Ohio being blasted with nasty ads from all sides, but I must admit that this time, I’m enjoying them. Two of the latest ads on this issue are below – sorry, no mulligans for Mitt.







All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted

Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.