Gasp! War with China?


Could it happen? Some think so. Even as soon as TWO YEARS from now … in 2025!

OK … yes. It’s a disturbing thought. And I don’t mean to make light of such a possibility, but …

Putting aside for the moment the actual foreboding of such an occurrence, let’s take a more humorous look.

(If possible.)

Should the U.S. and China actually go to fisticuffs (slang for armed warfare), what would happen when the citizenry of this country needed to buy …

  • Clothing or shoes
  • A new computer or TV
  • Trashcan, bedding, power tool,  kitchen cookware
  • Sunglasses, cell phone, backpack, clock
  • Wood chipper, air fryer, jigsaw puzzle
  • Dog or cat toy
  • Other numerous items …

O.M.G.! The shelves would be empty!

And what happens if your car battery goes dead? Or you need new windshield wipers?

And what will you do if your druggist no longer has a container for your heart pills? Or you need to replace your hearing aids or eyeglasses?

In other words … can you imagine a world in which the supplier of nearly everything we buy or own suddenly became our enemy? Would we … COULD we survive?

Your tongue-in-cheek comments are invited.

ADDENDUM: This post, although referencing a possible/potential event, was NOT meant to be taken seriously (Note the “Category” I used). It was written more as sarcasm in that practically everything we use in our daily lives is “Made in China.” From the responses thus far, it seems I failed in getting that point across.

Image by Nina Garman from Pixabay

Do You Tip?

In today’s local newspaper, an article related to tipping reminded me that I had planned to write a post on the topic. However, I sidelined it as the Ukraine War seemed much more pressing. Now that most of my readers have had an opportunity to share their thoughts on this unfortunate situation, I’m going to move on to something more mundane. (Certainly you’re welcome to say more on the Ukraine War if you’re so moved. 🙂)




As I ask in the post title … do you tip? I daresay most of us do. But what are your reasons for doing so?

  • Do you sincerely want to show appreciation for a “job well done”?
  • Or are you doing so because of a certain sense of obligation?
  • Or perhaps there’s even a flickering of guilt if you simply say “Thank You” and walk away?

No matter which response you choose, according to this article, more and more of us are being “encouraged” to add a gratuity via the “digital tip jar.” That is, if you pay with your credit card or phone, the touch screen that appears for your approval ALSO includes suggested tip amounts.

The article further points out a noticeable increase in the number of business owners who have shifted the costs of compensating workers directly to customers. In fact, it states that … Customers are overwhelmed by the number of places where they now have the option to tip and feel pressure about whether to add a gratuity and for how much. 

While many folk are accustomed to tipping waiters, bartenders and other service workers, some feel a bit uncomfortable tipping a barista or a cashier. And tipping for “take out” (the article suggests 10%) has become a bit problematic as well.

How do YOU feel about tipping? Do you think it’s become out of control? Are you less likely to leave a tip simply because it’s become “expected”? Do you feel more comfortable tipping for some services over others? What do you feel is an acceptable amount, percentage-wise?

Personally, I think it all depends on each person’s personal preference … and perhaps their pocketbook … as to whether they want to leave a gratuity.

(And I definitely do not think a person should be made to feel “guilty” if the “No Tip” option is selected on the digital tip jar!)

The Ukrainian War

Steve Schmidt, in his daily posting on, wrote a moving commentary on the war in Ukraine. Since some of you may not be registered to read his entry, I’m reposting it here.

The world stands at a dangerous hour, but it didn’t seem like it in Santa Monica, where the sky was blue and the weather was perfect. There were no missile strikes from Russian forces to worry about and no freezing temperatures.

The war in Ukraine seems like old news in America judging by its lack of attention. It seems far away, and not particularly relevant. The president doesn’t talk about the stakes very often. It seems that much of the American news media has drifted past the story, and moved on from the cheers and platitudes proffered to President Zelenskyy during his historic speech in front of the United States Congress. 

The war in Ukraine is an illegal war. It is a war of criminal aggression by a larger and more powerful nation, Russia, against a smaller nation, Ukraine. The Russian army has committed countless war crimes and acts of brutality against peaceful people as they raped, murdered, tortured, and pilfered. The Russians have emptied their prisons and drafted hundreds of thousands of young men to fight in Putin’s war of conquest against a European nation in the third decade of the 21st century. That it is occurring in the twilight of the long lifespans of the men and women who landed on the beaches, and survived the camps during human civilization’s greatest crisis, is both poignant and chilling. 

The Russian army has been bloodied and humiliated by the Ukrainian army, but they have not been defeated. The Russian army is gathering, expanding and attacking. It is indifferent to human life and suffering. 

The question at hand is this: how can that Russian army be destroyed in Ukraine before it advances into the next country? This is the fundamental question, and the most important issue facing the world right now. Should the battle lines expand beyond Ukraine, and converge with one or two other conflicts, the world could be at the edge of a third world war where nine countries have nuclear weapons. It means the doomsday clock would stand at one second to midnight. 

Wars are dynamic, and unfolding events until they end. Often, they become most savage at the end when one side is on the edge of annihilation. They are unpredictable, and can spread easily. There is a bitter irony about the political calculus in war which is that the greater the casualty count, the more impossible it becomes to stop fighting because the preceding sacrifices require more to honor the previously killed and complete the mission.

The Russians lost more than 20 million people in the Second World War. The Red Army used machine gun squads behind its assault forces to keep them inspired. There was no choice, and no path forward, but through.

This is where things stand for the Russian army and Vladimir Putin right now. They are all in because Putin can’t survive without victory, and peace can’t come while Putin is in power. It’s life and death. 

It’s unfortunate, but Steve is correct when he writes, “The war in Ukraine seems like old news in America.” The events there which, at one time, grabbed our attention, became one of media’s primary talking points, and propagated multiple editorial follow-ups … have all but become second-hand news.

There are apparently ongoing talks related to actions the U.S. and other countries could take to increase Ukraine’s fighting advantage, but as such matters go, action lags behind multiple “high-level” discussions/decisions.

IMO, one of Steve’s most sobering remarks is as follows: “Should the battle lines expand beyond Ukraine, and converge with one or two other conflicts, the world could be at the edge of a third world war where nine countries have nuclear weapons.”

Let’s Think About This


In a recent column, Steve Schmidt pointed out some of President Biden’s accomplishments:

  • He defeated Donald Trump.
  • He restored sanity and stability to the Oval Office.
  • He has shown skilled leadership during the Russian war in Ukraine.
  • His legislation has been “one of the 10 most significant domestic policy achievement of the last 80 years.”

He then went on to say …

[S]ome have declared that it is unthinkable that there could be any Democrat who could conceivably win a national election aside from President Biden, or that the choices are limited to the extremely capable Governor of California Gavin Newsom, the Secretary of Transportation and Fox News tormenter Pete Buttigieg or the Vice President Kamala Harris.

This latter entry really stirred my thinking. Are Democrats so bound by “tradition” that they will automatically re-elect Biden should he run again? And what if he doesn’t throw his hat in the ring? Does the only “natural” choice become Vice-President Kamala Harris? Or does Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, have a running chance? And while I feel his prospects are remote, as Steve suggests, Pete Buttigieg could even add his name to the list again.

I guess what I’m wondering is why must we only choose from the folks “the media” suggests?

In my opinion, what I think we really need is a comparatively unknown DEMOCRAT to emerge from the shadows, step into the limelight, and thoroughly rattle the establishment. (Similar to what took place a few years back on the other side of the fence — but of course in this case, someone with morals and ethics and experience.)

Naturally, the question then becomes … who IS this person? Is there anyone … ANYONE … within the Democratic Party who has the ability to truly shake things up as the “former guy” was able to do within the Republican party?

I would like to think so. But at this point, I’m not sure who it would be. Do YOU have any ideas?


I know this doesn’t affect many/most of my readers, but the “Greater Idaho” issue here in Oregon is growing and becoming more and more front and center. Most analysts say it doesn’t have a chance in the long run/big picture, but the supporters refuse to let it go … and now a Republican state senator has put the issue before the Oregon legislature.

In any event, the map below shows what it would look like …


Notice the lighter “Oregon” sections within the colored “Idaho” boundaries. One can’t help but imagine the outlandish border lines of the two states were this proposal to be approved … which, in the end, Congress must do before any official alterations can be made.

The desired changes are related to … what else? Politics. As a Greater Idaho spokesperson said: “Eastern Oregon is culturally, politically, economically much more similar to Idaho than it is to western Oregon.” In other words, more of the Republican mindset.

Thankfully, the county I live in voted AGAINST this change so we won’t be included if the change ever comes to pass.