That may surprise you. Today we take personal hygiene to be a standard in the developed world, not only healthy, but also a state which gracious people routinely adopt.

It hasn’t always been so. As close back as 100-200 years ago, cleansing yourself on a regular basis might mean a semi-annual or monthly bath. Royalty of the days of old thought that the long-hanging germs on your body fought off disease, and kept you healthy. Hence, few baths.

From the year 1075, one monk living in Cluny, wrote: “As to our baths, there is not much that we can say, for we only bathe twice a year, before Christmas and before Easter.” As late as 1771, another account records that baths “are hardly ever taken in winter. Spring and summer are the most suitable seasons.” Was it prejudice showing when a guy in the 19th century wrote: “The only water the Irish use is holy water.”

A few recent stories have been reported which might open your eyes.

Just this week, researchers investigated what mothers did when their baby’s pacifier fell to the floor. Many washed it off before returning to the babe. But other mothers sucked on the pacifier themselves before inserting in the baby’s mouth. Guess what: children of mothers who cleaned the dropped pacifier in their own mouths were healthier, having received their mother’s immunity to some diseases by this process.

Then from Smithsonian magazine, in an article called “The Secret of Dirt,” came a story of scientists investigating a town in Finland and another in Russia, a few hundred miles apart, with similar geography. What they were seeking is an answer of why though the two towns are genetically similar, the rate of Type 1 diabetes in youth in Finland is six times that of the town in Russia. (The Finns are seven times richer than their neighbors in Russia.)

The initial findings seem to indicate that the difference in the two areas is dirt. The scientist wonders “If the kids in Finland and in the United States and in other developed nations as well, are too clean for their own good.”

The study also found that kids with older siblings have lower rates of hay fever and eczema, perhaps because the siblings brought home colds, flus and other germs.

Other researchers have asked if the lack of dirt may play a role in the autoimmune system and for allergies.

Another story within the last year studied families with animals, primary dogs, in their homes, as compared to homes without animals. Lo and behold, children in homes with dogs seem to have a better immune system and less incidents of allergies than homes where there were no animals. The assumption and continuing study seems to indicate that dogs bring in germs, which get passed to children, hence gaining them eventually a wider immunity to routine problems.

Who ever thought that having Spot in your house was all that healthy?

Dirt got some attention as beneficial earlier. Writing in 1841, one social observer said: “The popular maxim that ‘dirt is healthy,’ has probably arises from the fact that playing in the open air is very beneficial to the health of children, who thus get dirt on their persons and clothes. But it is the fresh air and exercise, and not the dirt, which promotes the health.”

“Wash your hands” may still be a mother’s instruction. But some of that dirt may be healthier than your think.

The incident itself may be of major or minor importance. The significant element is what happens after someone gets into the public eye. That often tells us more than the incident itself about the people involved.

All too often, people in trouble lash out, publicly, and more often, privately.

Many times they seek to virtually deny the incident. Often they blame others. There’s also the response of an attempt to justify their position.

Yet it is seldom that those in trouble and in the public eye come straight out and admit that they are wrong. That is rare indeed.

Perhaps it’s that no one of us wants to admit to mistakes. Yet in retrospect, all making mistakes should know within themselves that they were wrong. And they should respect that in the long run, honesty and telling the truth are always a better and more reasonable road to choose.

I say all this after hearing of an arrest of a celebrity in Atlanta last week. I was pleased and surprised at the manner that the celebrity addressed the incident.

The celebrity involved in the incident in Atlanta was Reese Witherspoon. Now understand, I don’t know Reese Witherspoon from a sack of salt. I vaguely know that she is an actress or songstress, and someone in the public light. I’ve heard of her, but could not specifically tell you what she does.

(The Internet tells that she is 37, was born in New Orleans, became a model at age 7, and attended Stanford University studying English literature. Once in movies, her first big role was in Sweet Home Alabama (2002), and she later played June Carter Cash in the movie, Walk the Line. She has two children, and her present husband is her second.)

Apparently Ms. Witherspoon was in Atlanta last week (and may still be) filming a movie. She and her husband were on Peachtree Road when a policemen pulled over their car, which was being driven erratically. Her husband, a person identified as James Toth, was driving. This happened at 12:40 a.m. on a Friday night.

In the course of checking the sobriety of Mr. Toth, apparently Ms. Witherspoon was disrespectful with the policeman, who issued her several warnings for her to remain in the car and stay out of the policeman’s attention to her husband. When she repeatedly interrupted the officer, Laura Jean Reese Witherspoon was eventually charged with disorderly conduct. Mr. Toth was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol.

So much for those facts. What happened next got our complete attention.

Afterward Ms. Witherspoon issued a statement, saying: “I clearly had one drink too many and I am deeply embarrassed about the things I said. It was definitely a scary situation and I was frightened for my husband, but that is no excuse. I was disrespectful to the officer who was just doing his job. I have nothing but respect for the police and I’m very sorry for my behavior.”

Wow! Reese Witherspoon had the good sense to admit her mistake up front, recognizing that the policeman was merely doing his job.

You don’t see such statements every day.

I don’t know if Ms. Witherspoon has good sense, or a good lawyer, or what. But I know when we see something different, and a celebrity admitting a public mistake is just that. Hurrah for her!

I’ll follow Reese Witherspoon’s career in a new light.

If a person in one party comes up with an idea, that means automatically those in the opposing party are against it for no reason other than it was promulgated by the individual in the other party. That’s craziness. That’s dumb. That’s downright silly. And it certainly isn’t good for our nation.

Both Democrats and Republicans are capable of putting forth good ideas. We just don’t see enough of them, and certainly don’t see them endorsed when they are first birthed by a member of the opposing party.

It wasn’t always like that. Oh, certainly, from the beginning of our nation, people on opposing sides have had different ideas, different approaches to government, and different ways to get good legislation enacted. We recognize that the people in the two parties come at government from far-dissimilar positions, and automatically, would find the approach to governing different from one another.

Yet the two parties seem unable to come together for the most basic causes. It’s a wonder that they can agree on what time to start debate each day. (A recent brouhaha about the time for the President to address Congress is evident.)

I have an argument as to the reason behind all this bickering, backbiting, squabbling and infighting. The cause may surprise you.

It’s the jet airplane.

Back before the jet, members of Congress were in Washington most weekends. It was not unusual for the various members to meet one another socially, even across party lines. Being better acquainted with one another, they even sometimes became friends with members of the opposing party.

When our nation was first founded, our governing officials had to remain in Washington for the duration of the Congress. After all, transportation was not so developed that they could easily travel.

When the railroad was developed, it allowed some senators and Congressmen from areas near Washington a little more room to travel to their home states from time to time. But the bulk of the Congress in bygone days seldom ventured back to their home states except for long breaks in Congress.

That’s not the case today. The arrival of the jet airplane, whisking distant members of Congress to their home, even if on the West Coast, is virtually the standard today. It’s to the point that many Congress members leave their home state on Monday night or Tuesday morning, remain in Washington through the Thursday session of Congress, then zip home. A few do not even maintain normal living arrangements in Washington, but sleep on their office couches, before returning to their wives and children in their home states.

Back before the jet, members of Congress were in Washington most weekends. It was not unusual for the various members to meet one another socially, even across party lines. Being better acquainted with one another, they even sometimes became friends with members of the opposing party. That is seldom the situation today. And, we maintain, that’s part of the problem of the heavy partisanship we find today.

So we say to our members of Congress: stay in Washington over the weekends. We know you must campaign and raise money all the time, but you can telephone just as easy from Washington as you can at home. There’s no reason to cause you more wear and tear with running back and forth from Washington to your hometown so often.

Stay in the District, get to know your cohorts better, take it easy, stop the bickering and enjoy life more. You’ll be doing you, us and the nation a service.

Both Sen. David Shafer and Rep. Tom Kirby are behind proposals to eliminate Georgia’s income tax. You may remember both neighboring Florida and Tennessee have no state income tax. Neither does Texas. These two legislators maintain that Georgia having a state income tax is bad for us in competing against these nearby states for new businesses.

The only problem is that when politicians remove one tax, they always look for a way to replace the revenue that the tax brought in. The state income tax revenue brings in a whopping $7.6 billion annually to the state treasury (2011). In fact, it’s about half of the entire state budget! That’s a lot of money to replace with another tax.

We can see the legislators’ reasoning in wanting Georgia to compete on an even basis with other states to attract newcomers, primarily retirees. What we can’t understand is the manner that these two guys propose to replace this revenue for the state.

Evidently both legislators either never took, or else failed miserably, a course in economics. Add that they also have missed the outcome of what has been happening for the last several years, the economic slowdown. What puzzles us is why they propose replacing the lost income tax revenue with a sales tax.

Of all taxes, sales tax is the one you can surely count on to fall off dramatically in hard times. You need look no farther than the Gwinnett County sales tax returns for the last several years to see this. After all, in economic hard times, people stop buying more goods. Indeed, sales fall off in almost every category, resulting in tax collections nosediving.

Check out this table for the last few years’ collection of both the Gwinnett SPLOST tax, and the additional E-SPLOST, both being a one cent tax on all retail sales in the county. Note how the tax has resulted in lower revenue for both the county and the school board:

Georgia State Senator David Shafer
and Representative Tom Kirby

Both Senator Shafer and Rep. Kirby portray themselves as fiscal conservatives. What a laugh! How can you call yourself a conservative when you are in effect proposing a new tax, while at the same time, eliminating a major source of the state’s income! It makes us wonder how any legislator can say they are against new taxes, yet still make this proposal.

Another consideration: these legislators are going against the grain of other legislative proposals, such as the one (Senate Resolution 415) that would prohibit any increase in the Georgia sales tax. Now that’s being fiscally conservative!

Senator Shafer and Rep. Kirby may have good intentions. It’s just that they have a blind spot as to what happens when things don’t go swimmingly. Not only that, they may not realize they’re tinkering with HALF the state income. That’s why we need to send them to the woodshed on this proposal to eliminate the state income tax and replace it with a sales tax.

Shame on you, legislators, for not recognizing the obvious. Too bad you missed or flunked the economics course, then didn’t realize what happens during a recession and don’t recognize the enormity of your bad proposal.

You may remember prior to when our government was being formed, there was a revolt against the “tea tax” that the British government sought to enforce. Yes, it was “Indians” who started that rebellion in the Boston Harbor.

An early incident in this country centered around imposing the federal excise tax on whiskey.

Here in Georgia, recently the Legislature imposed a “bed tax” on hospitals.

Finding ways to tax is always on the table, and always a risky business for the politicians. Therefore, we often get bad taxing methods. Lots of commerce goes untaxed, often with key lobbyists flexing their muscles. It gets you to thinking about the fairness of it all.

Now comes an idea to tax an industry that is not taxed, a system which could raise a lot of money, and yet it would be a tax many people would never feel. That idea is to tax stock market transactions with a small federal levy that could go a long way to getting our country out of its deficit.

Anticipated being proposed by Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa and Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, both Democrats, is to levy a tax of three basis points (0.03 or three hundredth of a percentage point) on most stock market transactions. That’s three cents on each $100 traded. It would apply to all stock market trades, except not on initial public offerings, nor on bonds, nor initial investments and withdrawals from tax-protected accounts, such as 401k savings. The revenue would be collected at the time of sale by the stock market.

How much would it raise? A whopping $35.2 BILLION a year!

The idea is being floated here, but is also being considered in Europe, where 11 countries are moving forward with similar plans That includes the key countries of Germany and France and in England, where it is called a “Robin Hood tax,” or a Tobin tax, named for James Tobin, an economist who first proposed the idea.

There will be arguments against it, as there are on any new tax. But it moves toward collecting a tax on an industry that generally is not taxed, yet is central to commerce and thrives with hordes of profits. It also can discourage day-traders and others into heavy trading.

As a comparison, buy a new car, and you’re heavily taxed. Spend $20,000 for that car, and the sales tax is $1,200 (six percent in Gwinnett.) You really pay a minimum of $21,200 for the vehicle (plus your tag fee.) Or go to any retail store, say a clothing store, and spend $400, and you end up paying $424.

But buy $10,000 in stock in the Southern Company, or General Electric, Agco, Rock-Tenn, or any shares in any company, and there is no transaction tax. Under the Harkin-DeFazio plan, your tax on buying $10,000 in stock would be $3. That sounds small. But when you add up the many stock transfers across the nation, it comes to the enormous $35.2 billion a year.

Many, many Americans, that is those not in the stock market, would never pay this tax. It “taxes the rich” in one way of thinking, though not at a very high level.

Keep listening. You should be hearing more about this new thought on taxation, both in this country, and in Europe.

In modern times, there is no precedent for a pope’s resignation. It’s been 598 years since a pope has left the church while living, the last with Pope Gregory XII in 1415 during what was known as the Great Schism.

What Pope Benedict’s resignation, really a retirement, does is to create a situation where there will soon be a reigning pope, and a “pope emeritus,” you might say. Whether Pope Benedict will have any influence with the newest pope, or whether he will even want to be on close terms with him, will be watched carefully.

Having a retired pope, in one way of thinking, is what the modern world has brought about. After all, people live longer these days. Where prior popes have assumed that they would remain as the leader of their church until death, and therefore reigning at the will of God, now this step by the 85-year old Benedict puts a new light on the length of service by a pope. As Benedict has noted, he is weary of the weight of the job, not in good health, and doesn’t have the stamina to carry on. We (as a senior our self) can understand. We can feel his thinking that another person, perhaps a younger person, would best be God’s right hand in this world.

Look at the many pressures the Catholic church faces as it moves toward election of the next pope. Today there is ever-increasing pressure for diversity in high places, even in the church, though the Catholic church apparently feels no pressure to bring the white collar to women. Yet the odds of the 117 cardinals selecting someone unlike their majority are long.

Of the 117 cardinals, 53 percent of them are from Europe. Charge that off against only 24 percent of Catholics worshipers are from Europe, and you get an indication of perhaps one way the pope’s election might go.

Then, too, consider where the Catholic church is strongest today: in Latin America and the Caribbean. There are 483 million Catholics in this region, which amounts to 41 percent of all Catholics. People in these countries feel that they are rightfully in line for someone from their lands to be head of their church. But there are only 19 Latin American cardinals, which gives an indication of the steep steps it would be for a Latin cardinal to ascend to St. Peters in Rome.

Africa, too, is a growing region for the Catholic church, now home to 177 million people. Yet there are only 11 African cardinals. Again, steep odds.

Another consideration in both Latin America and Africa is that the Catholic church faces strong competition from evangelical and Pentecostal influences. If the cardinals do not select a pope with diversity from either of these areas, it could lead to a weakening Catholic church in Africa and Latin America.

The pope’s resignation, therefore, is fraught with opportunity and problems. The entire world is watching. And so is a living pope, something most unusual.

One thing for certain: forget sheer logic, which is too simplistic a way for the voters of Georgia to act. After all, no matter what political race you consider, it’s not the reasonable logic about any of the candidates in the races that determines the winner. It’s always politics that enters the picture, as it probably should, in selecting the person to represent any geography in any election.

How about State Senator Jason Carter, age 37?

Yet especially in races for the U.S. Senate, instead of thinking politically, it would always be best for the citizens of the state to think strategically. After all, the office of senator is for a six year term, and during those six years, a senator begins to build seniority. By the time the senator is in his or her second term, they should be pretty far up the totem poll of ranking senators, especially in their own party. Get a person of their party to be president, or be in the majority party in the Senate, and they begin to build a power base within their chosen committee assignments.

That’s why it’s regretful to hear of U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss saying that he won’t seek a third term in the Senate. Should he have won a third term, he would be well up in seniority, compared to Georgia sending a newcomer junior senator to the Capitol. That would have translated into a Georgian having much more power in the Senate.

So how should Georgians be thinking about their next senator? In one word, strategically. Send someone to be in the Senate who has good staying power, and over the years, can build seniority to become an even more influential senator.

That means, in effect, Georgia should elect someone who is relatively young to that post. That person needs to have the credentials to get elected politically, but also have the intelligence and background to do a good job once there.

Though Georgians from all walks of life could fill that slot, among the potential candidates are the 14 Georgians who now serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. While seniority in the House doesn’t count in the Senate, at least a congressman would know the ways of Washington, which should give a leg up in serving.

Look at the list of the current Georgia congressmen. Four of the 14 are under the age of 46. Based on age alone, any of these four gentlemen would be primed to serve.

District: Congressman, Age

1. Jack Kingston, 57
2. Sanford Bishop, 66
3. Lynn Westmoreland, 62
4. Hank Johnson, 58
5. John Lewis, 72
6. Tom Price, 58
7. Rob Woodall, 41
8. Austin Scott, 43
9. Doug Collins, 46
10. Paul Broun, 66
11. Phil Gingrey, 70
12. John Barrow, 57
13. David Scott, 66
14. Tom Graves, 43

What Georgia should not do is to send an elderly representative (or anyone else) to the Senate for a caretaking term. They would never gain enough seniority to be effective.

So, Rob Woodall (age 42 on February 11), Austin Scott, Doug Collins and Tom Graves: strategically, they are our best choices among representatives. And if other relatively younger Georgians would consider the election, they would be in a strategic position to benefit the state for years.

On Christmas Day, I spent about three hours just leaning back in a chair, and very deliberately going through the cards that friends had sent along. Many of them include messages, long and short, shedding more light on their activities.

Some come only in card form. But even that is a delight, since the years are adding up for all of us, and just hearing from old friends, and knowing that they are here, always cheers us. Of course, the flip side is that in a few days after Christmas we will get returned two or three cards from distant friends we sent cards to, who have either moved and we need to change their address, or they have “moved on,” and we need to eliminate them from our list. The second part saddens you.

Yes, some write long, long letters. Today these might even arrive via e-mail, being quickly sent, and saving our friends postage. If you send out a lot of cards, that postage can add up while Internet communications works well!

Going through the comments and letters in the arriving cards, you learn all sorts of items. Some people now are also grandparents, and of course and as it should be, they like to tell about the accomplishments of both their children, or their grand (and some great) children.

That aspect makes us proud: the accomplishment of our friends’ children. Many of them are really sharp kids (or so their grandparents say), doing so much, and seeming to really enjoy themselves. We are proud, even those we don’t know them closely or at all.

So we hear of people graduating from college or becoming a doctor, or of new births or new careers and even of ailments. “Still in there after battling cancer,” one said, and we were relieved to hear of this person’s progress.

Since much of our mail comes from the senior set, we find that many of them find time to travel, to all sort of exotic places. One couple we know in England was taking an Asian cruise, only to find that all four of the ship’s engines conked out. There they were in what they call 33 degree (C) weather (about 100 degrees F) without any air conditioning. And this lasted several days, with finally one engine and then another one getting partially restarted at sea, before they slowly steamed for an unexpected port. They were given a complimentary stay at a top hotel, and provided tickets for another cruise. What an adventure!

Another couple took a cruise with their extended family around New England and to Canada, aboard a ship named for their family. It made it sound like so much fun we wished we had been with them.

Opening Christmas cards is not like talking on the phone, up close and really personal. Yet going leisurely through the cards gives us a certain pleasure. It’s a part of Christmas we always look forward to each year.

* *  *

One more holiday story: a Christmas Party invitation one person got gave the time and place, then added: “Adult admission: one festive beverage; child admission: $700.” Guess how many children showed up?

Yet there must be even members of the NRA with a conscience who are troubled by the periodic outburst of relentless massacres of innocent people with automatic weapons. Surely some of the NRA members recognize that the United States must take steps, at least beginning steps, to control the outbursts and senseless killings by deranged people who spray down the innocent with repeated bullets from uncontrolled automatic weapons.

We suspect most Americans, perhaps even three-fourths of them, would recognize and applaud sportsmen and homeowners who want to own a gun, no matter the reason. Many also share the underlining basis of ownership, the Second Amendment “right to bear arms.”

But certainly in this right to bear arms, most Americans don’t think you should be allowed to own canons, howitzers, battleships, AK-47s and automatic pistols within the scope of this law. These weapons are something that defense forces need, not individual deer hunters, or people safeguarding their home.

Yet the senseless killing in Connecticut last week of 28 people, 20 of them first graders, should bring everyone in the country to a position of questioning how our nation allows individuals to have control of these weapons. Automatic guns are, essentially, weapons of mass destruction, in that they can inflict bodily harm to so many people so fast. No doubt many of those shot in the Connecticut school would have survived had they been shot only once with a single-shot weapon. But the automatic weapons can tear into anyone’s body several times in a split second, pushing their killer powers to a higher degree.

Incidents such as our nation witnessed last week seem to be popping up far more often than in the past. Those thinking through the causes of these mass killings give more than one reason for how they come about. After all, we live in a complex society. It may take action on several fronts, over a great deal of time, to address these causes and take action to eliminate the causes.

Yet what is needed is relatively quick action, best driven by our national Congress, to take on the National Rifle Association, essentially a uniting of Democratic and Republican forces, who need to show they are fed up with the killings.

It is time to say to the NRA and others with their never-wavering agenda, simply “Enough!”

No one needs to ban all arms, or require registration across the board. What is needed is action to halt manufacturers and arms-dealers (even those in our own neighborhoods) from selling automatic weapons to anyone save the government. Put up the money to buy out these weapons from the dealers, and to halt immediately their manufacturing. Require stiff penalty, including prison, to any arms exec or dealer who violates this law. Let’s get something solid done about dealing in automatic weapons, the sooner the better, so that our nation won’t have to suffer through another mass killing.

So, hunters and those safeguarding your home, relent some! Tell Congress you want this limited action of banning the automatic weapons. And sleep better afterward, knowing your Second Amendment right to bear arms is still in effect just like the Revolutionary War soldiers had… without automatic weapons.

As for the Congress, our nation should hold each Senator’s and Representative’s feet to the fire until they move into action.

We’re fed up with mass killings. The USA needs to take on the NRA! We want the repeal of automatic weapon sales!

This casino will open under auspices of the Georgia Lottery, no matter whether the residents of Gwinnett want it or have a vote on the matter, perhaps even while the sitting governor Nathan Deal protests that he would not want a gambling casino in Georgia, and with no public body having any input in the decision except the independent Georgia Lottery Commission.

You see, the Lottery Commission will point to the passage of the Georgia Lottery constitutional amendment in 1992 as their authority for casino-style gambling. It will come as a surprise and to the astonishment of many Georgians that they were also voting for creation of a gambling arena when they passed the Lottery! But that’s the interpretation that the Georgia Lottery will cite as the authority to bring casino-style “entertainment” to Georgia via video lottery terminals.

Of course, the Georgia Lottery will whitewash the establishment of the casino-complex as a bold attempt to “save” the Hope Scholarship. After all, it will point out, if something isn’t done to bring in more revenue for Hope Scholars, the program will be significantly curtailed, and not be worth as much to the scholars now getting a free ride for their college tuition. This will allow their parents, the real beneficiary of the Hope Scholarship funds, to breathe a sign of relief, and in effect, be thankful that some way was found to provide the funds for their bright child’s college that they might have had to fund without the new gambling program funding Hope.

Why do we feel that the casino is coming? And when?

First, the when. We suggest that it could come as early as the first of January, before the Georgia Legislature gavels into session. That would make the establishment of the casino a fait accompli, meaning that the Legislature could do nothing about it, since it had already been passed by the independent Georgia Lottery Commission.

And why do we think so strongly that the casino is coming?

Now just think: if you were being considered as a new president of the Georgia Lottery, as was Debbie Dlugolenski Alford of Conyers mostly recently, what questions would you ask of both the other members of the Georgia Lottery, and of the person pushing for you to get the job, the governor?

Wouldn’t you want some indication of how the Lottery was going to get past its anticipated shortfall? Wouldn’t you want to know if you were going to be a “maintenance caretaker,” always desperately trying to find new sources of revenue?

Or wouldn’t you be far more willing to accept the job if you knew that there was going to be a major new source of Hope Scholarship funds through allowing new games of chance to be run through the Georgia Lottery? After all, wouldn’t such a casino contribute as much as $350 million annually, and make the job of Lottery president much easier? Wouldn’t you want to know the answers to these questions prior to accepting the presidency?

So look forward to an announcement from the Georgia Lottery soon, no matter the protests of citizens, politicians, and especially the governor. After all, Governor Deal’s hands are tied…….since the Lottery Commission is independent….even though the governor appoints this board. Don’t you know?

Granted, we lament the inanities of the campaign, the robo calls, and what appears to us the wasteful overspending… and politicians who fail to take down their yard signs quickly.

But we get by. And to you who did not support Mr. Obama for president, remember our country is resilient. After all, we survived both Franklin Roosevelt and Richard Nixon.

While it appears that little has changed on the national scene, with Mr. Obama getting four more years, and with no change in the majorities in the House and Senate, we suspect there has been more change than is initially obvious.

It’s clear to us that the Republican controlled House should be realizing now that the GOP must be a little more reasonable if they are to gain the ascendancy. Now having fought with the Democrats and President Obama for four years, the GOP gained nothing in this election. Isn’t it obvious that some compromise, on the debt ceiling, or how to deal with the budget, or military spending… might make the Republican more relevant to the people, if they should show some willingness to compromise?

So far their stone-walled approach may not have lost them control of the House, but what have they gained? Voters apparently do not like the Republican inability to sit down at the table and work toward statesmanlike results.

Others point to the inability of the Republicans to move from hard positions on many issues that would attract a wider audience… particularly the Latino vote. With this being the fastest-growing big population in the nation, the GOP’s harsher positions on what matters to Latinos does not bode Republicans well in the future.

Then there’s the female vote, where the Republicans did not do well. The ultra-conservative position on many issues must be moderated if the GOP is ever to gain in this important category.

Then of course, there is President’s Obama himself, having learned on the job for four years, taking an almost tentative approach. He needs to be stronger, come out of his shell, and forge a relationship with the House, perhaps at a Camp David summit, that will show leadership and get results.

MEANWHILE HERE IN GEORGIA, the new Republican Party maintained a tight control over the House and Senate. It’s really not much different from the Democrats of old, controlling the governorship, the Senate and House over many long years.

Labels may have changed, but the way of getting something done hasn’t changed much.

It’s certainly not healthy for the state of Georgia, in our opinion, for any party to have such a tight lock on government. What is needed, we feel strongly, is for there to be a healthy Loyal Opposition to the party in power, so that everything isn’t automatically hand-stamped. We need alternatives, but we also need to have a strong opposition party being a watchdog over the party in power.

As it is now, the most difficult job in the state is for the Democratic Party in Georgia to re-build itself so that it can be a real Loyal Opposition, instead of merely the annoyance that it is today to the GOP. Then we can see not only a two-party system, but overall better government for our state.

We got to thinking of the GI Bill, known officially as the “The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944″ when first passed, after hearing a 2006 interview by Bob Edwards with the late Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota. The senator said that because of the GI Bill, our country allowed 14 million veterans to buy homes, get education, and better themselves. The senator said something like this to Edwards: “The country made money on the GI Bill, as it gave returning veterans the ability to get more education, and to be able to earn more money, which resulted in them paying higher taxes.”

President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the G.I. Bill in 1944

Today there’s another GI Bill out there, giving similar benefits to returning servicemen who have been in the wars since 2001. And because of this bill, it will also let even more veterans of the most recent war to better themselves through home loans, education and generally improving their status.

We knew nothing about Congressman Gibson of Douglas before we starting looking into the many ways the GI Bill helped this country. When Congress was debating the Serviceman’s Readjustment Act in 1944, both houses passed the bill without a single negative vote. People were looking forward for its quick passage. Then the bill went to a conference committee to finalize the bill…..and the six conference members of the House deadlocked 3-3 on what the final version would look like. That’s where John Gibson comes in.

All this is reported in detail in the American Legion Magazine. Here is the link.

The abbreviated version is that Congressman Gibson was back in Douglas, Ga., it was thought, and was needed in Washington-quickly-to break the 3-3 tie among the House members, and move the bill toward passage.

But in those World War II days, communications was not easy. The Congressman could not be found. There was no answer to repeated telephone calls to his home Some said he was between Valdosta and Douglas. People all over the state were looking for him. Even two radio stations (WSB in Atlanta, WGOV in Valdosta) were broadcasting bulletins asking if anyone knew where he was to contact officials. It was so desperate that the Georgia State Patrol was stopping automobiles between Douglas and Valdosta and asking startled drivers if they were the Congressman.

Georgia Congressman John Gibson (1943)

Finally, about 11 p.m., the Congressman returned home, heard the phone ringing, and was briefed on the circumstances. Meanwhile, several people were working on different fronts to get Gibson to Washington, including higher-ups at Eastern Airlines, who had a 2:30 flight from Jacksonville, which was told to “Bring Gibson to Washington on that plane if you have to wait all night.”

It was 6:37 the next morning when the flight landed at Washington National, and Gibson could cast a vote that day to break the House deadlock and get the conference committee approval by both Houses.

President Roosevelt signed the bill into law on June 22, 1944, opening up a new opportunity to assist the veterans in the coming years. Congressman John Gibson only served six years in the House, but no vote was so essential to helping our country as his vote on the GI Bill passage in 1944.

Today we find that airlines are taking that idea and trying to improve on it. And instead of only getting in as many people as they can, the airlines also try to get as much money out of every flight that they can.

In the process, it’s sure making airplane travel no fun, at least for those of us who fly in coach. You’re interested about going to your destination, but dreading the time while flying.

Returning home from overseas recently, the airplane was loaded in a manner so that those in Coach class had first to walk through the business class seats. Now we didn’t get to see the First Class seats, but wow-oh-wow, it’s hard to see what they could offer in First Class that wasn’t already first class service for the Business Class.

The Business Class seats were configured on a 1-2-1 design across the airplane. That gave each rider an extra wide seat, with wide table to the left or right, and then about twice as much room front-to-back. In reality, there was enough room to stretch out, so that a person in business class could sleep, like in a bed. The area also all sorts of other gadgets to play with, plus getting (we hear) far better food during the flight.

Now take that same width across the plane, and we in Coach were in a 2-3-2 arrangement. So there sat seven people across in Coach, compared to four across in Business Class. You can imagine. Not only that, but the front-to-back depth of that seat wasn’t as deep, and when you sat down, it seemed like your knees were knocking against the seat in front of you, and your eyeballs were mighty close to the back of that seat. It was about the only time in my life I was wishing that I was the height of my mother (five feet) instead of my father (six feet). Boy, was it cramping!

And then I realized I would have to sit in that crowded manner for about 10 hours! Yep, we got up often to walk around.

Coming back from Europe flying westward, we know, takes longer. At one time the instrumentation showed we were bucking 110 miles per hour winds. Going over, of course, you have tailwinds, and it makes much shorter a trip.

Going eastward, we also usually leave at night, which means you are tired at the end of the day, and eventually get a little sleep on the plane. But coming back, most all the flights leave in the morning, arriving mid-afternoon, and on the plane, you are fresher and can’t sleep so easily.

Bucking the winds, plus in daylight, makes the trip seem much longer. And you’re cramped in there. Sends shudders just thinking about it.

So the question: what would it take, in dollars, to fly business class? We checked online, and found a trip for $960 (to London). Taking those same dates, the business trip cost would be $3,800. (First class, we found, would cost $10,000).

Realize that the difference in coach and business class is about $2,800, which amount

Over the years, we’ve been privileged to live overseas for 3.5 years, and to visit many countries in Europe, Asia and South and Central America. Yet this time we came back with a new understanding of life in America.

Granted, we enjoy many benefits from living in the USA; many freedoms other nationalities don’t enjoy. But let’s think in a new way. Perhaps this doesn’t apply to you. But do you realize how very quiet it is for many of us living in Gwinnett?

On any afternoon or night, sitting on a bench in our front yard, there is an eerie quiet and calmness of life in suburbia, in this particular case, in Norcross. Granted, through the trees I can barely hear the very quiet murmur of cars on Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, perhaps a half mile or more away. From time to time, perhaps every 30 minutes, an airplane might take off or land at Peachtree DeKalb Airport, relatively quietly whining over our house.

But all in all, for the most part, it’s quiet even when in the yard. Then, when going to sleep inside the house, you barely hear anything at all. Sometimes, if we listen closely, we can hear it raining, or hear the wind blowing if a storm is brewing, or hear the satisfying sound of a distant train. But mostly, and nearly all the time, it’s quiet.

Now add in another element: many more Americans are living in cities than every before. And more and more people are in apartments or condos. Yet at least in some cities, in suburbia, and in the rural areas, many Americans live in individual homes. Some live in mega mansions, of course, but for the most part, the homes are modest two-or-three bedroom houses on individual lots.

Is this unusual? Yessiree, particularly compared to where most of the people of developed nations live, in cities, where the highest density and most people live close to one another in flats, apartments and condos. In our most populated areas, no matter what the continent (including the USA), a higher and higher percent live in the cities, and not in single family housing, we suggest.

Do you realize and appreciate the benefits we have in the United States by living as most people do in Gwinnett in quiet areas, and in individual homes?

There’s a certain calmness and contentment in living this way. There is privacy, and even some isolation from everyday life in such situations. Of course, there is often also grass to cut, garbage to wheel to the curb, and leaky pipes to fix, and taxes to pay… in our method of living. But isn’t it wonderful? Not enough of us really appreciate it.

All this came to our mind when hearing heavy street traffic at night in Madrid recently. There were also loud voices of people walking down a street at all hours of the night. And there was the understanding that many Spaniards, and people of other nations, who routinely live in areas sometimes not larger than our garages. One told me: “That’s why we go out to eat so much, and enjoy our parks so thoroughly.” Makes sense.

Granted, our lives in the USA have problems. But most of us never recognize how lucky we are to be living in Gwinnett County (or Salt Lake City or other great places) in the calm and quiet of our individual homes.

That old newspaper shop in Homer is to now become the Georgia Weekly Newspaper Museum, thanks to the efforts of the newspaper publishing family in Jefferson, in neighboring Jackson County. Scott and Mike Buffington are co-publishers, having followed their parents into the business and expanded the operations tremendously. They now publish six newspapers out of their office in Jefferson under the banner of MainStreet Newspapers, Inc.

The evolution to a newspaper museum began in 2011 when MainStreet bought the old building where the former Homer newspaper was once published. The Homer paper printed at the shop until 1969 when the owner died. The Commerce News continued to operate the Banks County Journal after that, but that paper was closed in 1987 when The Herald purchased the News. When The Commerce News operated the paper, however, it was printed offsite by offset printing.

Mike Buffington with old job press.

Editor Mike Buffington of The Jackson Herald is the person with a love for old letterpress machinery, such as he found at the former Banks County Journal building.

He explains: “When Commerce operated the Banks County Journal in 1970, they inherited the use of the building in Homer but only had a small office and didn’t use the equipment. The former newspaper owners, A.J. Hilton and his son, Pat, had been publishing the newspaper by the letterpress method in the building, which had all the old equipment. When Pat died, the old equipment was abandoned, even leaving ink in the fountain of the old newspaper press.”

The old building sat empty after 1987, but was maintained by the local Garrison family who owned the property. Last year, the Garrisons” and MainStreet swapped some property in the town so the old building could be remodeled, the equipment cleaned and a museum established.

Since then, Mike and his family have worked painstakingly to restore the printing equipment to working order. That didn’t come easy. “We had to clean out the junk, then scrape and dig the ink out of the presses. Much of the equipment had rusted, so we worked to restore that. And the floor was rotted in two-thirds of the building.”

A big salute to Main Street News and the Buffingtons for preserving what was once a slow but routine way of life in keeping people informed. The guy who rode his bicycle into newspapering in Homer would feel at home at the weekly newspaper museum.

The building itself was erected about 1900, specifically to house a newspaper. About that time, a “Campbell Country” press was installed, a unit which slowly prints two pages at a time by pressing the paper onto the reverse type which had been set by hand. After the newspaperman completed his run of printing two pages, he then had to flip the pages over, and restart the press to print the back sides of the paper from two new pages. Most newspapers printed in this manner were four page newspapers. Once the newspaper was printed, all the type had to be cleaned, then returned letter-by-letter to the cases prior to starting the next week’s newspaper.

We visited the Homer site the other day, as finishing touches are being completed. Later this month, the Buffingtons are inviting newspaper people across Georgia to come visit the museum. Many present-day publishers have never seen the way newspapers were once painstakingly produced by letterpress. The museum will be open to others visiting, especially school groups.