Listen, we’ve generally thrown in the towel on lampooning Donald Trump’s increasingly unhinged Twitter feed.
This is a President who sits in his bed until – by some accounts – nearly 11 a.m., tweeting out egregious nonsense while watching Fox News and maybe eating egg McMuffins. That’s meant to be a cartoonish characterization, but as you’re probably aware, it might be closer to the truth than any of us care to imagine.
In any event, usually the tweets revolve around obstructing an active FBI investigation, making up nicknames for whoever has irritated him on Capitol Hill, and demanding Jeff Sessions investigate his political rivals. Over the holiday weekend he threw in a little Oprah and some NASCAR just to spice things up.
Well on Thursday morning, he wants to talk about arming teachers so they can have shootouts with rogue students and other would-be school shooters and our recent attempts to restrain ourselves from commenting on his tweets notwithstanding, we just had to jump on this one.
This of course comes on the heels of the town hall-style meeting he had on Wednesday with students. You can read all about that boondoggle by simply Googling it, but suffice to say his idea to turn the nation’s teachers into a heavily-armed gang of vigilantes didn’t get great reviews. Here’s what he said:
At a “listening session” with survivors of school shootings and victims’ families, President Donald Trump said he wants to arm 20% of teachers — he says it’s worked for pilots and airplane safety. ? pic.twitter.com/TiSMls9Ag4
— HuffPost (@HuffPost) February 22, 2018
So that’s one of those ideas that sounds good in theory but is probably absurd for all manner of reasons, not the least of which is that it sets the stage for the SWAT team to end up in shootouts with gun-wielding teachers who could easily be mistaken for the shooter in the heat of the moment.
Additionally, it sets up a scenario where a school shooting turns into a school shootout, before law enforcement even arrives on the scene.
Anyway, Trump took to Twitter on Thursday morning to “explain” his plan as follows:
Got that? Trump never said “give teachers guns.”
What he said was “give adept teachers concealed guns” which is of course the exact same sentence only with two adjectives thrown in there.
The idea, according to Trump, is that these highly-trained teachers would “be able to immediately fire back” at “savage sickos” with “bad intentions.”
It’s not entirely clear what other kinds of intentions “savage sickos” have other than “bad ones” but Trump seems to be suggesting there are other possibilities there.
Also note the reference to the purported cost savings he imagines we can achieve by arming teachers as opposed to hiring guards.
The bottom line here is this: if you want to put guards at schools, fine. Do that.
But giving Ms. Johnson the 8th grade biology teacher a 12 Gauge Mossberg and instructing her to fire at will in the event of a crisis is probably not the best route to go.
Coming soon to a school near you, Naked Gun-style shootouts:
A loaded gun in a high school classroom. What could go wrong?
“Lugers for Lunch Ladies” to replace National Institute for Mental Health.
All this talk reminds me of an old, All In the Family episode. Archie went on TV as a citizen commenting on current events/problems. In those days plane hijackings were a prevalent problem. Archie’s solution? Give all the passengers a gun. The audience found this hilarious and patently absurd, yet, today, we have the NRA, members of congress, and our president parroting the same, and still, idiotic solutions.
Add this piece of info – regarding airline pilots carrying guns …
Incidents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Flight_Deck_Officer)
On March 24, 2008, a US Airways FFDO’s gun went off on Flight 1536 from Denver to Charlotte, North Carolina. No one was injured and the aircraft landed safely.[3] According to the FFDO, the gun fired while he was trying to stow it. The bullet went through the side of the cockpit and tore a small hole in the exterior of the plane. The plane was pulled from service for repairs.[4]
On January 13, 2011, a JetBlue FFDO’s bag carrying his gun was accidentally picked up by a passenger flying to West Palm Beach, Florida. When the passenger realized the bag wasn’t hers, she notified a flight attendant. The FFDO’s firearm was appropriately locked and secured and could not have been accessed or fired even if found.[5]
In June 2015, a United Airlines FFDO threw live ammunition in the trash, then flushed it down a toilet on an international flight from Houston to Munich.[6]
… and those are just the ones we know about.
“a lot of people have said” that they did not know about pilots carrying guns… can’t you just hear those words out of his mouth?
Here’s some updates on that program
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/2015/12/14/federal-flight-deck-officer-training
Here’s an overview of when and how it all began — The Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations (CAPA) is a trade association comprised of over 30,000 professional airline pilots. CAPA’s mission is to address safety, security, legislative and regulatory issues affecting the professional flight deck crew member on matters of common interest to the individual member unions.
https://www.capapilots.org/legislative-issues/ffdo-program/
2013 Obama cuts the budget:
https://www.cnn.com/2012/02/13/us/budget-cuts-armed-pilots/index.html
and then this from Washington Times: Opinion/analysis piece
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/2/tracy-price-arm-pilots-to-restoring-safety-in-airl/
Gee, I wonder what trump has done since he took office … oh hell, that was a dumb question! He does not read anything and is completely unaware of all the above information. Anyone with a brain knows to not let trump make any decisions regarding our current gun violence in schools. omg. Even his dumbshit Jr. DNA thinks nothing should be changed regarding age and types of guns. He would really like to take an AR15 for his next elephant hunt! btw, I think it is well documented that the elephant has a better brain than any of the trumps. In recent months trump has slashed the mental health budget but today he wants to reopen mental institutions. He also now thinks it would be a good idea to raise the age requirement to 21 to purchase AR15’s – it is already 21 for revolvers/pistols. Why can’t they stop selling AR15’s altogether? They say those are allowed at 18 because they fall into the long gun, rifle group, used for hunting. Hunting what?
VOTE THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE.
“…..airline pilots now, a lot of them carry guns……things have really changed. People aren’t attacking the way they would routinely attack.”
Ummm, Mr. President, the last attack on a US airliner cabin was 9/11/01, after which we increased (instituted actual) airport screening and fortified the cabin doors. Prior to that, last US passenger airline that was hijacked on US soil was in 1987 (not counting the disgruntled Fed Ex employee who tried to hijack a cargo plane from them in 1994).
So, tell me more about those “routine” attacks!?!?
There’s also no reason to think that the presence of a gun on an airplane has had any impact on deterring further 9/11 style attacks. However, we do know that the 9/11 hijackers’ plan stopped being effective before the attack was even completed. Once the passengers on the 4th plan got wind of the plan, they put up a fight and crashed the plane into a field.
I would imagine that if someone attempted to hijack a plane with a boxcutter now, the passengers would collectively stomp them into a paste well before the pilot could arrive with their handgun. It would also be ridiculous for a pilot to leave their secured cabin to confront a hijacker and potentially place hundreds, or thousands, of people’s lives at risk by allowing access to the cabin.
Just to interject that the pilots are not allowed to leave the cockpit with the gun – the gun is allowed only to defend the intrusion of the cockpit. The gun must be inside a locked transport case going into and out of the cockpit. No exceptions.
There are so many situations that a gun in a classroom could go very wrong that the insanity of these chickensh*t lawmakers (laugh), NRA, Liar in Chief and gun nuts is sicking. Even if we stop all assault weapon sales today there are still thousands if not tens of thousands plus 300 million more other guns still running around this shoot first and ask questions later, stand your ground, some police can kill people of color and get away with it country of ours.
30,000+ men, women, girls, boys, young and old are killed by guns EVERY year. If Apple killed 100 people a years because of a phone that blows up what would happen? What about all the other amendments besides the second that pertain to your life, liberty and pursuit of a happy life.
This is totally fu*king stupid. Yet, we do nothing as pols take bloody bribes from groups that could give a sh*t about who suffers, fu*king six year old’s for christ’s sake. Two people have been shot with a gun since I started this post and one WILL die. Come on, stand up and fight with these kids.
I learned tonight on Larry O’Donnell show two great things: 1) the bank that carries the NRA name and logo on a credit card has withdrawn their contract with NRA due to customer complaints, 2) that two national car rental companies that offer discounts to NRA card/memberships have canceled agreements with NRA due to customer complaints. As O’Donnell said “these kids are moving mountains”.
It may be worth a quick look to see how many states already allow teachers to carry concealed weapons.
You know, before just shutting the whole question down just because the idiot in the White House speaks or because it doesn’t fit a certain agenda.
This is from a piece I just wrote:
“I was on the exercise bike at the gym and watching some pundit or other interviews two librarians(!), asking them their opinion of arming teachers. I’m paraphrasing here, but this was their response as they tsk-tsked the suggestion.
“Do we really want another person with a gun in a situation where students are already being shot?”
Sorry. I’m making them sound more idiotic than they were . . . but not by much.
Their major concern was the armed teacher getting into a gunfight with the killers and students being caught in the crossfire. They thought it would only make an already bad situation worse.
I wanted to go through the screen and ask them a simple question; the same question I asked above.
“Would they object to having an armed cop engaging the shooter?”
Because, dear readers, if they – and you – answer no, then you both suffer from ignorance and willful stupidity. Come to think of it, even if you answered “yes”, I charge you with the same deficiency in reason and common sense.
Not just because the passing score for many police department shooting qualifications is 80% (one-in-five shots missing the targets) but because the police are not going to be there. This last shooting took the whole of six minutes.
Six minutes. Seventeen dead.
Do you know who was already at the scene? With zero response time, unarmed teachers.
We’re already asking teachers to take a bullet for our kids . . . can we not allow them to shoot back if they are so inclined?
I watched the high school kids protesting . . . they asked tough questions, but I didn’t hear the toughest question. The one that I ask, the one that I would be screaming if I had a kid in school . . .
“Why the fuck isn’t anyone protecting the kids in school?”
~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~
My reasoning is simple . . . we can debate the Second Amendment, gun laws, restrictions, and anything you want, but the FIRST STEP has to be to secure the schools.
I’m confident in saying that declaring the schools “gun-free zones” is not cutting it.
Ah sounds like a perfect world
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2018/02/22/welcome-to-ap-u-s-history-everyone-say-hi-to-the-tank-and-the-150-heavily-armed-men/?utm_term=.2885a8160811
“I am going to get comfortable with the new requirements for being a teacher, because I think what I do is important, and because the man with strong muscular arms and impeccable aim who would replace me thinks the Trent Affair is something you have outside your marriage with the lead singer of the Nine Inch Nails. Ha ha, dating myself there.”
I’m sorry . . . I thought we could have a reasonable discussion.
I wasn’t aware that we could resort to intellectual dishonesty and use reductio ad absurdum arguments.
That article is at the level of Fox News arguments that legalizing gay marriage would devolve into people wanting to marry they dogs in addition to ruining regular marriages and enticing kids to turn gay. Or that teaching sex education and providing contraceptives will result in teens having orgies (well, OK, that last part could be true).
I guess that’s what passes for journalistic integrity these days.
But, sure, if you think banning a rifle that “looks mean” will do the trick, go for it.
I think you are missing the point. But anyways if we ever meeting I’ll buy you a sandwich.
(Notice: light humor ahead)
Well, let me see if I missed the point. The article uses and imagined and purposefully exaggerated school environment to justly ridicule idiotic tweets by our current idiot president, and in the process discount the idea schools might benefit from an active security presence.
It may also make fun of people with guns as not being very smart and being more concerned with having bulging muscles than a sharp intellect.
By the way, I’m not sure if that last statement is also a slam against gay men since the gay men I know who frequent my gym (three; there may be more, but I’ve not met them yet) all sport impressive muscles that dwarf anything I might ever achieve even if I could suddenly shoot to six feet tall and 250 lbs. But, let’s assume it’s just targeting straight men who are into fitness and also happen to have the hand-eye coordination and training to shoot straight and hit a desired target.
Now, the article does all this while making no actual contribution to the discussion.
I am in full agreement with anyone who wants to slam Trump for all sorts of things; the man is, as I said, an idiot.
That said, no one has yet to give me a good reason why that’s a bad idea. The best argument, if you can call it that, I’ve heard against letting teachers carry guns (if they want) is that having another shooter in the mix might make things worse.
(Notice, sarcasm ahead, you know, like in the article)
Now, perhaps you agree and are a fan of the officers who waited outside instead of charging into the school. They probably saved some lives, right?
(End of sarcasm)
Oh, in case you’re wondering, I’m adding the tags because I don’t use smilies and I no longer trust people’s abilities to interpret what I say.
Per the Secret Service report on school shootings, quick engagement of the perpetrator is of paramount importance in minimizing casualties:
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/preventingattacksreport.pdf
The whole report is worth reading.
Law enforcement response procedures changed in the aftermath of Columbine and now it’s advised to confront the shooter as quickly as possible. This also applies to potential victims if sheltering in place is not feasible (i.e. if you’re confronted by the shooter). One suggested method is to use improvised weapons like pencils and staplers. I’m not making this up.
(Note: more sarcasm ahead)
I mentioned a stupid thing I heard, but I heard another on the podcast “Left, Right, and Center”, this time by an editor of The Nation.
“What kind of message are we sending our kids when they have to walk through metal detectors and past armed guards?”
Oh, I don’t know . . . I’m thinking “relax; you’re entering a safe zone”.
Certainly as a parent – if I were a parent – I would feel more at ease about my kids. Then again, not being a parent, perhaps parents have different priorities when it comes to their kids.
(end of sarcasm)
I’m always impressed with the police presence at national events like New Year’s Eve in Times Square and demonstrations at the National Mall.
I wouldn’t even consider going there weren’t for the security. Perhaps I’m naive or just different from other people, but seeing a cop on patrol or providing security does the opposite of making me anxious about my safety. Again, perhaps it’s just me. (darn, a bit of sarcasm slipped in there without a proper trigger warning; sorry)
Side note: it’ll be interesting when bad guys start dressing like cops (already happening in some places of the world and mentioned in some terrorist training manuals). Also, when drones will first be used to deliver explosives and whatnot.
Just curious, did I miss anything? I mean, I didn’t even mention how callous I found the article, but that was probably not the intention of the writer; it’s just my opinion and not relevant to exploring “the point”.
If I did miss some nuanced interpretation, feel free to enlighten me. Contrary to what people may think, I love being proved wrong and in the process learn a thing or two.
As for the sandwich, I much prefer honest intellectual discussions; you know, the ones where my views are not marginalized and I’m dismissed as someone without merit. I also prefer online discussions since I’m short and I stutter, and people have a tendency of making fun of others who are not like them. Come to think of it, I don’t fare much better online either. Perhaps I’m just not likable.
It was funny. Your going to need a sense of humor to fall back on in the next few years with the spray tanned, misogynistic racist in charge. The thing your missing is treating a symptom without treating the underlying condition generally makes a condition worse. So far more the more guns idea has turned us into the United States of Afghanistan. Time to try something new. Too bad about the sandwich. We aren’t talking Jersey Mikes crap here, I appreciate good food. There is a country store just down the road from the Manly estate that makes awesome sandwiches.
Ah, an actual response.
First, don’t worry; I live for humor. It’s what gets me through most days.
Second, agreed. But, why not do both? Treat the symptom AND the underlying condition. Sure, blame one side for not wanting to fix the condition (there’s a longer and more complicated argument there) but address the symptom now.
The silly thing is that it’s already been adopted in many places. I know a teacher who worked for years in an inner-city school. Never had an incident, but they did have metal detectors and an armed presence. And, Utah, for instance, had allowed teachers to carry in schools for years.
Anyway, it seems each side’s first response to anything the other side proposes is an immediate “the other side wants this, so we’re not going to do it”.
As for the sandwich, it sounds like an opportunity missed. Isn’t that life, though?
Sorry, you are still missing the point, doing something, instead of doing something useful is a waste of time. How does Kevin put it? “all I bring is 25 years of mistakes”. Yeah, I am a data guy. A very long time ago I found out the housing bubble from https://piggington.com/ with the pledge of bring the data. Now if you could bring actual data to your argument maybe it would be worth something. But all I get is a “gut feel” which is often wrong. Now we know what works from Australia, give up the assault weapons. Was it perfect, of course not what is? But yeah compared to a shoot-arama not that bad. BTW: the whole “inner city” thing is a ruse, you should know that because guns can cover 20 miles pretty easily…. Your use of it shows a lack of knowledge.
Ah, we’re back to dismissal, complete with claims to authorithy and the assumption I too am not a data guy AND purposefully changing what I said.
I fell for the old ruse, the switch and bait.
But, you know what? It actually makes me feel good about myself because it does tell me you’re not as informed as you think you are. Next time you’re at a hospital, tell them they’re doing it wrong, that triage is a waste of time. Tell them you’re a financial guy and know stuff. Give them a link, and everything.
I don’t even know how to respond to the 20 mile comment. Perhaps if it was written in metric.
Oh, darn, that’s also snarky and dismissive.
I tell you what; how about I suggest something in a serious vein before I stop wasting my time. I suggest you ignore me, dismiss me as an uninformed dolt. I’m an idiot nobody who doesn’t really give a shit about most things. My only redeeming qualities are that I’m not orange and I don’t do a comb-over.
Instead, talk, actually talk, as in words from one person to another, to people on the ground. Cops, not chiefs. Teachers, not superintendents or school administrators. That’s plural, as in more than one of each. Talk to retired older cops, talk to older teachers. Then, repeat with young teachers. Don’t be dismissive; actually listen as if you cared. Fake it, if you have to.
Read the Secret Service report I linked; lots of data in there. Study past mass shootings, look at statistics (you know, you being a data guy and all). Not blurbs.
Say, you know what is available that makes for interesting reading and is informative as all heck?
I challenged my readers with this. Read the material in the following link (all of it), and then put down on paper (with a pen or pencil), what you propose we should do – both short term and long term – to “keep this from happening again”.
Now, few people actually click on links; I understand. It takes effort to study stuff. Best stick to cliff notes. Heck, we’re the premier cliff-notes society, aren’t we? I believe some cliff notes even have a few numbers.
But, challenge yourself; read the volumes of data, facts (there are numbers, too, which should make you happy). I’ll only add one link (otherwise this will go in moderation and FSM knows if it will ever come out again), but you can navigate from motives, to weapons, to timeline, to aftermath, and all sorts of stuff. It’s actually an impressive effort.
http://www.acolumbinesite.com/
I was going to recommend a few portions that are must-reads, but I can trust that you being a data guy will want to absorb *all* the information.
And now, I really must go. Unlike Murphy, I have no need to continuously make people aware of my presence. I got sucked in once, then got sucked in twice. I’m done.
Oh, don’t forget the pencil and paper bit. The world awaits your easy solution to the problem.
Ok, you don’t have any data, studies, or anything else of consequence to actually back up your position. Maybe something from a peer reviewed journal would be nice. Got it.
And I did mention a solution, the Australian one. Here is an example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2704353/
BTW: the sandwich offer still stands.
I did read the link. I doubt you read the ones I posted.
Now, tell me how you would institute a Australia style ban here in the US. Not just if we should. Could we.
It may be informative for you to get the opinion of law enforcement officers and people in the armed forces (the reserves and actual army) should the government call for a ban of weapons and confiscation of weapons. See how many would comply. And that’s if it could pass constitutional muster.
Then, tell me we should change the Second Amendment. See above.
Hey, here’s another link you won’t click on.
http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf
The 2017 PEW research survey shows similar distributions.
Here’s the summary:
https://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-findings-on-officers-thoughts/
You know, it’s not difficult speaking with actual police officers. Or soldiers.
Sure, you get different opinions, but look for trends.
Look, I know what kind of world I would want to live on. I’m arguing and working for that world to be a reality. But, it’s not a reality now.
Never did I mention NOT working toward that reality, but it frustrates me when people fail to acknowledge the current reality. Worse, it frustrates me when facts about that reality is distorted by partisanship.
I really must stop now. I’m unsubscribing from the comments. And, frankly, I don’t think I would enjoy the sandwich.
Umm, yeah. Not into opinion surveys, not hard data. Cops and soldiers yeah, we know each other well. But since you are leaving I can always admit I could be wrong, I could be right. Let road rise with you…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPj-8_wOZcA
quote you:
“(End of sarcasm)
Oh, in case you’re wondering, I’m adding the tags because I don’t use smilies and I no longer trust people’s abilities to interpret what I say.”
READ THIS – perhaps it is actually your inability to say it 🙂
Very possible. I don’t discount the possibility I have no ability at all. It certainly would explain as few things.
But, I learned to first assume others are at fault. It seems the acceptable social norm.
When the first airplane was hijacked, ie D. B. Cooper episode, Screening airline passengers was instituted. It could have been the same with the first school mass shooting. Screening does exist in some, read inner city, schools. Regardless of ANY objections screening all who enter a school should simply be the standard.
We’ve seen mass shootings at schools, churches, theaters and country western shows. Plan A: Ban assault weapons. Plan B: Give guns to teachers, preachers, ushers and musicians. One bug problem with Plan B is that guns may give the owner the illusion of safety, but the fact is that a gun owner is much more like to be injured or die in a gun related incident than a person who doesn’t own a gun. Giving guns to teachers will make schools less safe. Plan A makes a whole lot more sense.
Interesting arguments . . . by the way, Plan A didn’t faze Derrick Bird who used a shotgun and a .22 rifle, but sure, go ahead and ban assault rifles.
So, let’s look at this illusion of safety argument . . . did you know that a person driving a car is more likely to get into a car crash? That’s a fact. Also, people who drink have a higher chance of becoming alcoholics than people who don’t drink. That’s another fact. People who use knives are more prone to cut themselves than people who don’t. People who participate in sports are more prone to sports-related injuries than people who sit on their couch all day. Rock climbers have a much higher incident of falling off the face of a cliff than people who walk on sidewalks. I could do this all day, but I’m not sure how this furthers the discussion.
Also, can you provide any data to support that giving guns to teachers (actually, it’s allowing teachers to carry guns if they so choose) makes schools less safe? You can get data from the 18 states who currently allow guns on campuses and the few states who allow school personnel to have a concealed carry permit and have a gun at school without having to notify either the school or the school board.
I’m assuming you’ll find veritable bloodbaths you can cite, but maybe not.
sorry Disperser, but your second paragraph is like hearing trump throw out Hillary or Obama or Benghazzi or born in Africa or Clinton Crimes or Obummercare — anytime he (and even his diminishing support group) cannot reasonably argue a specific point – it’s his list of ‘butwhatabouts’ — sounds just like your unrelated list of drunks and cars and knives and sports and climbing. And who is that Bird fellow with his shotgun and rifle – google tells me a 2010 crime in the UK somewhere – again no connection to our issue with selling AR15’s to an 18 yr old teenager – and revolvers not allowed until age 21 – go figure — AR15 is not a hunting rifle, so what is the reasoning NRA has to include it as a long gun and sold to teenagers? If the NRA would shut the hell up and raise the age requirement to at least 21 today’s fight would end. BUT it will not be dead. Someday NRA and the republican Congress can explain why any assault gun like the AR15 should be sold to the general public!
At some other time I can argue why teachers are not in school to have a gun fight with some criminal that the ridiculous laws and law enforcers and politicians failed to control.
Well, thank you for the stimulating discussions. I actually prefer being dismissed. Saves me from considering commenting in the future.
I read your blog from time to time and will catch up with you there 🙂
Hmm . . . if that’s the level of discourse you offer, don’t rush over on my account.
But, if you do make a similar comment on my blog, I’ll endeavor to correct all the points where you are wrong. I’ll also try and educate you on the use of comparable statements when pointing out the fallacy of a given statement like, for instance, that gun owners are more likely to be injured by guns than non-owners.
Oh, I might even explain sarcasm, humor, and possibly even irony. But, like I said, don’t rush over on my account, and I’ll remember this is a place where one lurks and not comments.
Disperser – you just took a turn that does not sit well with me — and don’t play your cheesy game of talking down to me and gonna teach me something. You explain anything to me…? get over yourself. I most likely won’t be visiting your site – I only found it because H had a couple of links to you and they were semi-interesting. Now, I am over it.
Well, gosh, and here I was all beaming with the idea of you dignifying semi-interesting me with your presence.
I don’t know you, Murphy, but you don’t appear that much different than Trump; a tinge bombastic with shades of bully.
I could be wrong, of course, as I’m just going by all the comments you’ve strewn on this site and considering the general tone of your comments when someone doesn’t bow to your unassailable statements.
Regardless, rest assured I’ll stir clear of you lest I further incurr your disdain and wrath.
I just hope I find other ways to add meaning to my life.
you are fucking clueless
Totally agree with Murphy
Hey Lance, way up there, your link to youtube ‘Let the road rise with you …could be wrong…could be right…anger is an energy” — very good choice today! Anger IS an energy and it’s exhausting regardless of which side of the energy you are on — sending it or receiving it — just exhausting. I did enjoy your link!