Today’s high (and current) temperature reached 96°F, the first 90+ degree day of the year. And the first widespread power outage of the year hit us about an hour ago. Fortunately, our whole-house generator kicked in when the electricity went out. But this is ridiculous, especially given that tomorrow it’s supposed to hit 100°.
So here we go. The first hot day, the first power failure. Is this what we have in store this summer? It’s going to be a long, hot one, I fear.
To be sure I understood today’s question, I Googled “sustainable lifestyle.” According to Wikipedia, “Sustainable living describes a lifestyle that attempts to reduce the use of Earth’s natural resources by an individual or society. Its practitioners often attempt to reduce their ecological footprint by altering their home designs and methods of transportation, energy consumption, and diet.”
Alrighty, then. I’d say that yes, there are things I try to practice daily to live a more sustainable lifestyle. In no particular order:
Do the steps I’ve noted above have, in and of themselves, any notable positive effect on our environment or contribute to a sustainable lifestyle? I don’t know. But I guess they do make me feel that in some small way, I’m doing my part.
The United States Supreme Court, sometimes referred to as The Trump Court because Donald Trump appointed three of the nine justices, giving the court a six-to-three conservative “super majority,” just announced it decisions on three cases, all of which have a far-reaching impact upon the American society. And all of which were determined by a six-to-three vote in which the six conservative justices supported far-right conservative and religious positions.
Affirmative Action
This 6-3 SCOTUS conservative majority decision finds that colleges and universities can no longer take race into consideration as a specific basis for granting admission, a landmark decision overturning long-standing precedent that has benefited Black and Latino students in higher education.
LGBTQ+ Rights
This 6-3 SCOTUS conservative majority decision ruled in favor of an evangelical Christian graphic artist from Colorado who does not want to create wedding websites for same-sex couples, despite the state’s protective anti-discrimination law. The case, though framed as clash between free speech and gay rights, was the latest in a series of decisions in favor of religious people and groups, notably conservative Christians.
College Loan Forgiveness
This 6-3 SCOTUS conservative majority decision struck down President Joe Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt, halting relief for the more than 40 million Americans who would have had some of their college debt erased.
The current Supreme Court has been out-of-step with public opinion in some of its highest-profile rulings, including on abortion and environmental protection. But that is not necessarily the case with the Affirmative Action ruling. This ruling appears to align with public opinion. Most Americans oppose the consideration of race or ethnicity in college admissions, surveys have found. Of course, keep in mind that “most Americans” are white.
But the other two just announced decisions are much more ideologically oriented, a nod to conservative Christian beliefs over the views of the majority of Americans.
Some people may opt to not vote because they don’t like either candidate that the two major political party have nominated for POTUS. Or they may opt to vote for a third-party candidate who has no chance of winning as a way to protest the two major party nominees.
(Full disclosure, I once voted for a third-party candidate. In 1980, I voted for third-party candidate, John Anderson, when I just couldn’t bring myself to vote for Republican candidate Ronald Reagan or Democratic candidate, Jimmy Carter. Anderson got only 6.6% of the popular vote and no electoral votes and Ronald Reagan easily won the presidency.)
But from a long-term perspective, given that SCOTUS justices serve a life term that will outlast by potentially decades the political candidate who appointed them, voting in each presidential election has significant consequences — not just in the short-term, but way into the future.
Di (aka Pensitivity101) hosts Fibbing Friday, a silly little exercise where we are to write a post with our answers to the ten questions below. But as the title suggests, truth is not an option. The idea is to fib a little, a lot, tell whoppers, be inventive, silly, or even outrageous, in our responses. For this week’s Fibbing Friday, Di has given us a list of real words but is seeking new meanings.
1. Hircine — Viagra for women.
2. Roorback — A breed of dog found only in Rhodesia that has large bumps across its back.
3. Antithalian — A person who hates everything about Italy.
4. Novercal — Someone who always fast forwards through all commercials on TV shows taped with a DVR.
5. Accismus — Accidental mucous buildup
6. Mundivagant — Being extravagantly mundane.
7. Prefestinate — A person who is prone to procrastination.
8. Apiculate — To always yield to others.
9. Sloomy — A snowy, gloomy day.
10. Ramulose — An incompetent shepherd.
Wouldn’t you like to expose your newer readers to some of your earlier posts that they might never have seen? Or remind your long term followers of posts that they might not remember? Each Friday I will publish a post I wrote on this exact date in a previous year.
How about you? Why don’t you reach back into your own archives and highlight a post that you wrote on this very date in a previous year? You can repost your Flashback Friday post on your blog and pingback to this post. Or you can just write a comment below with a link to the post you selected.
If you’ve been blogging for less than a year, go ahead and choose a post that you previously published on this day (30th) of any month within the past year and link to that post in a comment.
This was originally posted on June 30, 2017.
Danny was sitting at the dining room table doing his homework. “Mom, can I have a snack?” he called out to his mother, who was fixing dinner in the kitchen.
“Danny, I gave you some milk and cookies when you got home from school. Your father will be home soon and we’ll be having dinner in a little while,” Danny’s mother answered.
Danny loved snacks. Dinners not so much. The main dish, usually chicken, steak, meatloaf, or fish, was tolerable. But then she’d pile onto his plate things he didn’t like: broccoli, asparagus, brussel sprouts, cauliflower. Yuck.
Why couldn’t she let him have cookies or Pop-Tarts or a Snickers bar or a pile of M&Ms on the side? Why force him to confront those yucky veggies that he had trouble chewing and swallowing because they tasted awful?
“Because they’re healthy and they’re good for you,” she’d answer when he asked why she made him eat those things rather than giving him snacks as side dishes. Danny never really understood why she always said that. Who cares, he thought, if food is “good for you” if it doesn’t taste good?
“When I grow up, I’m going eat nothing but snacks,” Danny announced, a tone of defiance in his voice.
“Okay, I tell you what,” his mother said. “Let’s make a deal. I’ll let you have a snack now, but then you can’t have dessert after dinner.”
Danny’s six-year-old mind started churning. “What’s for dessert?”
“I cut up some fruit,” she said, “and I’ll put a dollop of whipped cream on top just for you.”
“Okay, fine,” Danny said, returning to his homework.
At about that time, Danny’s father walked into the front door of their apartment. He walked over to his son and ruffled his hair. Then he called out to his wife, “Honey, can I have a snack?”
This post is in response to today’s Daily Prompt: Snack.
This, That, and the Other 