A LIST OF ACTIONS FOR JANUARY 20TH (BLACK THURSDAY):
1. Wear a black arm band to signify your sorrow over the election
2. Wear an orange armband the color of the democracy movement in Ukraine) to symbolize your commitment to the democratic principles
3. Visit http://www.sorryeverybody.com and post a picture of yourself saying sorry to the rest of the world for sending the bum back to the white house
4. Visit http://www.apologizeaccepted.com to get much needed boost from the rest of yhe world
5. Visit http://www.costofwar.com to see the insanity, second by second, ticking away….
6. Wear a purple triangle to show your sorrow to your gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered or other friends for letting them down
7. Send a thank you note to Michael Moore for bearing the brunt of the right wing’s attack machine — MMFlint@aol.com
8. Stage a walk out at your school
9. Call in sick to work
10. Write a letter to the editor
11. Call and complain to a Fox News advertiser
12. Gather at your local war memorial and hold a candle light vigil for all those in danger in Iraq and for our sorrow at the election results
13. Call the press about it
14. Call your elected representatives and demand they do something to address the voting problems NOW
15. Honor January 20th as “Not One Damn Dime Day” to disappoint major
corporations for their role in the election crisis by not spending one damn dime on their stuff
16. Go to DC and participate in the national protest
17. Go to Crawford, TX and protest
18. Forward this email to EVERYONE (including conservatives) that you know
19. Add any action you can think of to this list
20. Get Up
21. DO SOMETHING JANUARY 20TH
“There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.” – John Stuart Mill, Essay on Liberty

Port City Shoes left a comment here worrying about losing much needed money if they closed on NODD Day. Here’s what I think might work:
How about if you offer a 20% discount coupon for anyone who stops in on January 20th and DOESN’T BUY ANYTHING.
Make the discount good for a week or a month, or whatever works for you. Put a red, white, and blue sign in the window and say “come in today, January 20, and get a 20%-off discount coupon — good for two weeks — as long as you DON’T buy anything today.”
It means that you’ll have to keep the store open to give out the discount coupons. It also will probably mean that people will come in and ask what it’s all about, and you’ll have to admit to your politics. It might also mean that people will stop in who might not otherwise.

There’s so much I want to blog about,including to remind everyone about not buying anything on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20. But mom is keeping me distracted from any logical thoughts.
However, please check out the current Truthout article here, which includes these two of my favorite Bush Administration Scandals:
The Medicare Money Scandal
THE SCANDAL: Thomas Scully, Medicare’s former administrator, supposedly threatened to fire chief Medicare actuary Richard Foster to prevent him from disclosing the true cost of the 2003 Medicare bill.
THE PROBLEM: Congress voted on the bill believing it would cost $400 billion over 10 years. The program is more likely to cost $550 billion.
THE OUTCOME: Scully denies threatening to fire Foster, as Foster has charged, but admits telling Foster to withhold the higher estimate from Congress. In September 2004, the Government Accountability Office recommended Scully return half his salary from 2003. Inevitably, Scully is now a lobbyist for drug companies helped by the bill.
The Bogus Medicare “Video News Release”
THE SCANDAL: To promote its Medicare bill, the Bush administration produced imitation news-report videos touting the legislation. About 40 television stations aired the videos. More recently, similar videos promoting the administration’s education policy have come to light.
THE PROBLEM: The administration broke two laws: One forbidding the use of federal money for propaganda, and another forbidding the unauthorized use of federal funds.
THE OUTCOME: In May 2004, the GAO concluded the administration acted illegally, but the agency lacks enforcement power.
Don’t blame me. I didn’t vote for him.
ADDENDUM:
AARRGHH. Just to add to the Bushies’ penchant for successful progaganda against us masses, the following via the Center for Media and Democracy:
Topics: public relations | democracy
Source: Washington Post, January 14, 2005
“White House allies are launching a market-research project to figure out how to sell” privatizing Social Security, while “Republican marketing and public-relations gurus are building teams of consultants,” reports the Washington Post. The effort, led by Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman, “will use Bush’s campaign-honed techniques of mass repetition, never deviating from the script and using the politics of fear to build support.” Groups including Progress for America, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Republican Jewish Coalition are also advocating for privatization. Progress for America’s TV ads, which include images of Franklin D. Roosevelt, have been protested by FDR’s family. His grandson wrote, “My grandfather would surely oppose the ideas now being promoted by this administration and your organization.”
I wish more Senior Citizens were web savvy and learned how to get their info from here instead of the mainstream Conservatively-influenced media.

Sooner or later, we’ll all be eligible for Social Security. I’m lucky, because even though I’m retired and my Social Security check is pretty low, I also have a pension. But there are plenty of Americans out there who, when they retire, will not be able to survive without their meager Social Security checks. These are the same people who would not make enough money during their lifetimes to earmark part of their paychecks each week to go into “private” retirement accounts. Bush’s “crisis” is all hype and propaganda, another way for him to help the already financially comfortable and screw the rest of us.
George Bush and Republican leaders have made phasing out Social Security through privatization and massive benefit cuts their top priority for 2005. Members of Congress are choosing sides over the next couple of weeks.
We need to make sure they choose correctly now—before a massive election-style campaign by George Bush and the Wall Street interests gets to them including what might be a $100 million TV ad campaign.
MoveOn.Org is trying to gather 200,000 signatures to present to lawmakers when they return after the inauguration. Go here to sign the petition:
Social Security is a complicated issue, but the basics are really pretty simple:
° Social Security provides monthly benefits to some 44 million Americans who are retired, disabled or the survivor of a deceased parent. It provides most of the income for older Americans–some 64 percent of their support. It has lifted generations of seniors out of poverty.
° Social Security is not in crisis. That is an outright lie perpetrated in order to create the urgency for radical changes. Under conservative forecasts, the long-term challenges in Social Security do not manifest themselves until 2042. Even then Social Security has 70 percent of needed funds. That shortfall is smaller than the amount needed in 1983, the last time we overhauled Social Security. George Bush’s Social Security crisis-talk is an effort to create a specter of doom — just like the weapons of mass destruction claim in Iraq.
° Phasing out Social Security and replacing it with privatized accounts means one thing: massive cuts in monthly benefits for everybody. Social Security privatization requires diverting taxes used to pay current benefits into privatized accounts invested in risky stocks. Without that money Social Security benefits will inevitably be cut — some proposals even cut benefits of current retirees. These benefit cuts are inevitable, since diverting Social Security money into privatized accounts means less money to pay current and future benefits.
° Every serious privatization proposal raises the Social Security retirement age to 70. That might be fine if you’re a Washington special interest lobbyist but it is incredibly unfair to blue-collar Americans with tough, physical jobs, or for African Americans and Latinos with lower life expectancies.
° Privatization means gambling with your retirement security. There is probably an appropriate place for a little stock market risk in retirement planning — but it isn’t Social Security. Privatization exposes your entire retirement portfolio to stock market risks — and the risk that you’ll outlive any of your savings at retirement. You can’t outlive your Social Security benefit.
° So who does benefit? Wall Street. Giant financial services firms have been salivating for decades over the prospect of taking over Social Security. Wall Street would make billions of dollars in profit by managing the privatized accounts — money that would come directly from your benefits.
° Action is urgently needed today. President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress are joining forces with the financial services industry for a major campaign to convince the public there is a major crisis and pressure members of Congress to vote for privatization. Action is needed now before it is too late.
Please sign MoveOn’s petition to protect Social Security.
To repeat what I posted here that I got from an Op Ed piece in the NY Times:
The administration expects us to believe that drastic change is needed, and needed right away, because of the looming cost of paying for the baby boomers’ retirement.
The administration expects us not to notice, however, that the supposed solution would do nothing to reduce that cost. Even with the most favorable assumptions, the benefits of privatization wouldn’t kick in until most of the baby boomers were long gone. For the next 45 years, privatization would cost much more money than it saved.
Advocates of privatization almost always pretend that all we have to do is borrow a bit of money up front, and then the system will become self-sustaining. The Wehner memo talks of borrowing $1 trillion to $2 trillion “to cover transition costs.” Similar numbers have been widely reported in the news media.
But that’s just the borrowing over the next decade. Privatization would cost an additional $3 trillion in its second decade, $5 trillion in the decade after that and another $5 trillion in the decade after that. By the time privatization started to save money, if it ever did, the federal government would have run up around $15 trillion in extra debt.
Don’t let Bush succeed in overwhelming us, yet again, with his drivel and dung.

I’m overwhelmed these days with how half of my fellow Americans are so willing to accept and proliferate factoids as facts, how they are publicly forcing the confusion of faith and science. Having a president who does just that, of course, somehow legitimizes the stupidity of doing that.
I thinking specifically of something that’s quoted at Salon.com in a disturbing piece on The New Monkey Trial. (You have to be a member to read the whole article, or you can watch a commercial first and then read it for free.)
The lengthy feature article begins with:
It was an ordinary springtime school board meeting in the bedroom community of Dover, Pa. The high school needed new biology textbooks, and the science department had recommended Kenneth Miller and Joseph Levine’s “Biology.” “It was a fantastic text,” said Carol “Casey” Brown, 57, a self-described Goldwater Republican and the board’s senior member. “It just followed our curriculum so beautifully.”
But Bill Buckingham, a new board member who’d recently become chair of the curriculum committee, had an objection. “Biology,” he said, was “laced with Darwinism.” He wanted a book that balanced theories of evolution with Christian creationism, and he was willing to turn his town into a cultural battlefield to get it.
“This country wasn’t founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution,” Buckingham, a stocky, gray-haired man who wears a red, white and blue crucifix pin on his lapel, said at the meeting. “This country was founded on Christianity, and our students should be taught as much.”
WHHOOOAA! Stop right there, Mr. Bill Buckingham!! That’s a factoid. That’s not a fact. Do your research. Oh, wait. Research. That’s like science — investigation, analysis, hypothesis… You’d rather just not be bothered with the facts because you know what you believe. Oh my, what would our Founding Fathers say to that!
Well, whether you want to believe them or not, these are the facts about the origins of our country and our system of democracy, and they had very little to do with the fundamental tenets of Christianity:
1. Let’s begin with our Library of Congress exhibit on “Religion and the Founding of the American Republic,” which states:
Although they were victims of religious persecution in Europe, the Puritans supported the Old World theory that sanctioned it, the need for uniformity of religion in the state. Once in control in New England, they sought to break “the very neck of Schism and vile opinions.” The “business” of the first settlers, a Puritan minister recalled in 1681, “was not Toleration, but [they] were professed enemies of it.” Puritans expelled dissenters from their colonies, a fate that in 1636 befell Roger Williams and in 1638 Anne Hutchinson, America’s first major female religious leader. Those who defied the Puritans by persistently returning to their jurisdictions risked capital punishment, a penalty imposed on four Quakers between 1659 and 1661.
In other words, those early righteous Christian settlers became the kind of persecutors they were running away from. Sort of what the Christian fundamentalists are have become these days, it seems to me.
2. And then, we all know what those righteous Puritans did to those poor old women — the community healers, helpers, herbalists, wise women. Rather then taking a scientific approach to investigating what was going on, those faithful Puritans decided that these women must be witches, right? Just some more persecutions by True Believers of those who wouldn’t conform to their particular faith-based boxes. But that’s another long and horrible story that too few fundamentalists really understand and/or want to believe.
3. And let’s not forget what our Christian Cavalry did to the Lakota Indians at Wounded Knee (How about having young kids learn those bloody facts when they study American history? Or are you afraid that knowing the facts would that shake their Christian beliefs?)
Read about the Massacre here:
By August of 1890, the U.S. government was fearful that the Ghost Dance was actually a war dance and, in time, the dancers would turn to rioting. By November, the War Department sent troops to occupy the Lakota camps at Pine Ridge and Rosebud, convinced that the dancers were preparing to do battle against the government. In reality, the Indians were bracing themselves to defend their rights to continue performing the sacred ceremonies. In reaction to the military encampment, the Lakotas planned various strategies to avoid confrontation with the soldiers, but the military was under orders to isolate Ghost Dance leaders from their devotees.
But because of the stupidity and ignorance of the American Cavalry:
With only their bare hands to fight back, the Indians tried to defend themselves, but the incident deteriorated further into bloody chaos, and the 350 unarmed Indians were outmatched and outnumbered by the nearly 500 U.S. soldiers.
Well, Mr. Buckingham, you might ask how to we know that’s true. And I say to you, Mr. Buckingham, that historical research is like scientific research, and the information quoted is from research done at Bowling Green University, if you want to check that out. Wounded Knee. Abu Ghraib. Ah, the righteousness of the American military! We are what we believe, aren’t we, Mr. Buckingham?
3. Now let’s get to the real meat of the matter: Our “Christian” Founding Fathers and how they came up with the idea of a participatory Democracy. (Is your school system teaching these facts?) Now, pay close attention to the following, Mr. Buckhingham. This is REALLY important:
Some people today assert that the United States government came from Christian foundations. They argue that our political system represents a Christian ideal form of government and that Jefferson, Madison, et al, had simply expressed Christian values while framing the Constitution. If this proved true, then we should have a wealth of evidence to support it, yet just the opposite proves the case.
Although, indeed, many of America’s colonial statesmen practiced Christianity, our most influential Founding Fathers broke away from traditional religious thinking. The ideas of the Great Enlightenment that began in Europe had begun to sever the chains of monarchical theocracy. These heretical European ideas spread throughout early America. Instead of relying on faith, people began to use reason and science as their guide. The humanistic philosophical writers of the Enlightenment, such as Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire, had greatly influenced our Founding Fathers and Isaac Newton’s mechanical and mathematical foundations served as a grounding post for their scientific reasoning.
A few Christian fundamentalists attempt to convince us to return to the Christianity of early America, yet according to the historian, Robert T. Handy, “No more than 10 percent– probably less– of Americans in 1800 were members of congregations.”
The Founding Fathers, also, rarely practiced Christian orthodoxy. Although they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion. Most of them believed in deism and attended Freemasonry lodges. According to John J. Robinson, “Freemasonry had been a powerful force for religious freedom.” Freemasons took seriously the principle that men should worship according to their own conscious. Masonry welcomed anyone from any religion or non-religion, as long as they believed in a Supreme Being. Washington, Franklin, Hancock, Hamilton, Lafayette, and many others accepted Freemasonry.
The Constitution reflects our founders views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, “the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated declarations of Christian piety.”
Also included on the site linked to above are quotes from various Founding Fathers distancing themselves from the restrictions of faith-based government, such as this quote from James Madison:
Called the father of the Constitution, Madison had no conventional sense of Christianity. In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments:
“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”
“What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.”
4. And, finally, Mr. Buckingham, did you know that the Founding Fathers met with the leaders of the Iroquois Six Nations so that they could pick their brains about how their proven “participatory democracy” was set up and practiced?
On June 11, 1776 while the question of independence was being debated, the visiting Iroquois chiefs were formally invited into the meeting hall of the Continental Congress. There a speech was delivered, in which they were addressed as “Brothers” and told of the delegates’ wish that the “friendship” between them would “continue as long as the sun shall shine” and the “waters run.” The speech also expressed the hope that the new Americans and the Iroquois act “as one people, and have but one heart.”[18] After this speech, an Onondaga chief requested permission to give Hancock an Indian name. The Congress graciously consented, and so the president was renamed “Karanduawn, or the Great Tree.” With the Iroquois chiefs inside the halls of Congress on the eve of American Independence, the impact of Iroquois ideas on the founders is unmistakable. History is indebted to Charles Thomson, an adopted Delaware, whose knowledge of and respect for American Indians is reflected in the attention that he gave to this ceremony in the records of the Continental Congress.[19]
So, Mr. Buckingham, if you want to refine your school’s curricula, how about starting with revising the American history course so that your students learn the truth about their country’s history and the intentions of our Founding Fathers to avoid just the kind of misinformed pressure that you’re putting on your school district to teach the faith-based Creationism as if it were a proven fact.
When I taught eighth grade English back in the seventies, I taught a unit on Mythology, in which I included the “creation” stories from as many different cultures as I could identify. We compared and contrasted the stories, and, I have to admit, the kids began asking questions. They asked me if I believed in god and I told them that it was my private business whether I did our not and had nothing to do with what we were learning about in class. If they had questions about their own family’s religious beliefs, they would need to go back to their families and ministers/priests/rabbis and talk to them about it.
Education should teach kids to question, to research, to investigate, to analyze, to hypothesize, to look for evidence, to compare evidences, to confer with experts, to question, question, question. And then reach logical conclusions. That’s the way to avoid getting sucked in by Saddams and Al Qaedas, by cults and conmen. Somewhere in their learning journeys, if they decide to say “Well, there are still things I believe in that I can’t prove,” that’s fine, too. But they will understand the difference between fact and faith. And there is a big — although not incompatible — difference.
The Founders of this country understood the importance of distinguishing fact from faith. If it were possible, I’m sure they’d be spinning in their graves today, Mr. Buckingham, furious about how people like you are trying to turn their democratic hopes and ideals into drivel and dung.

There’s always something good to say about the Little Picture — toddler grandson using words like “amazing” and “pulchritudinous” in the correct context (love those Nick Jr. programs). My mom, for a few moments, forgettng who I am and then remembering that she forgot and laughing about it.
But the Big Picture continues to get more and more dismal. Others are chronicling in detail the insanity, the deceit, the immorality of the Bush administration, so I don’t have to try to do it here, except to link you to:
Molly Ivins, who carefully points out the outright lies the Bushies are spreading about the Iraq elections, the future of Social Security, the supposed increase in employment, and the health threat of perchlorate, a toxic rocket fuel ingredient, in the water etc. etc.
And she adds
Now, in addition to the regular misleading, fudging, distorting and phony statistics games, we’re getting actual covert propaganda, and dammittohell, they’re making us pay for it. A quarter of a million bucks to a right-wing commentator to talk up No Child Left Behind. Why? Distributing video “news” releases to television stations made and paid for by the government, but not identified as such. It’s not enough that Bush has the bulliest pulpit on earth, he has to sneak his message across with government propaganda? What the hell is this?
Then there’s Thom Hartmann’s historically accurate reminder that the Bushies effort to appoint Gonzales
is one of the more visible parts of a much larger campaign the Bush administration has embarked on to reverse not only 229 years of the American rule of law regarding the rights of average citizens, but nearly eight centuries of human rights that go back to an epic moment in 1215 on a meadow by the River Thames.
Proving the outright Bushy lies regarding the plan to privatize Social Security, Paul Krugman points out:
It’s the standard Bush administration tactic: invent a fake crisis to bully people into doing what you want. “For the first time in six decades,” the memo says, “the Social Security battle is one we can win.” One thing I haven’t seen pointed out, however, is the extent to which the White House expects the public and the media to believe two contradictory things.
The administration expects us to believe that drastic change is needed, and needed right away, because of the looming cost of paying for the baby boomers’ retirement.
The administration expects us not to notice, however, that the supposed solution would do nothing to reduce that cost. Even with the most favorable assumptions, the benefits of privatization wouldn’t kick in until most of the baby boomers were long gone. For the next 45 years, privatization would cost much more money than it saved.
Advocates of privatization almost always pretend that all we have to do is borrow a bit of money up front, and then the system will become self-sustaining. The Wehner memo talks of borrowing $1 trillion to $2 trillion “to cover transition costs.” Similar numbers have been widely reported in the news media.
But that’s just the borrowing over the next decade. Privatization would cost an additional $3 trillion in its second decade, $5 trillion in the decade after that and another $5 trillion in the decade after that. By the time privatization started to save money, if it ever did, the federal government would have run up around $15 trillion in extra debt.
Add to all of that the evidence coming out during the trials of the soldiers involved in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse. Stacking naked prisoners up like cheerleaders. Oh yeah! Great American sports tradition.
And, more car bombs as the people Bush tried to tell us he was liberating continue to let us know that they hate us more than they hated Saddam. Way to go, Georgie.
It would be great if I could retreat somewhere into the little picture and take refuge. But I can’t even do that. As I sat here writing this, my mom walked in three times to complain that her sixty-year old sewing machine still isn’t working, even though we had it repaired and tuned up last month. Three times I went over to her apartment and re-set what she set up incorrectly. It’s not the sixty-year old machine that’s not working. It’s her almost-89 year old brain. And it would make my life so much more simple if she would just admit it and not keep insisting it’s everyone’s fault but her own.
Hey, you offspring of mine. If I get like that, shoot me. Or, like the Eskimos supposedly used to do, leave me outside in the freezing cold and let me quiety slip into eternal and peacegiving hypothermic sleep.
Hmm. Any chance someone can lock Dumbya out of the White House during some upcoming blizzard?

I taped the last hour of the People’s Choice awards because I wanted to see Michael Moore accept the best movie award for his Fareneheit 9/11. Actually, what I did was run the tape on reverse, so that I wouldn’t have to waste time watching any of the rest of it; I just stopped when I got to Martin Sheen and Moore.
But watching it all devolve, I also noticed that Mel Gibson got the award for best movie drama. It’s the fashion these days among both those who believe blindly and those who blind with belief to flaunt the flag of fundamentalism. So, for me, Gibson gets the Flimsy Fashion Award.
Moore, on the other hand, passionate and savvy at the same time, played the patriot that he is. So, for me, Moore gets the Passionate Patriot Award.
On Jay Leno the other night (you can watch the video clip here thanks to Norm Jensen), Moore talked about his current movie in progress — all about our screwed up health care system, especially our HMOs and the drug companies that just love the system the way it is.
Heh. You just have to watch the clip and listen to Moore talk about the drug companies already starting to have “Moore drills” — akin to fire drills — so that if anyone seems Moore approaching the premises, they can take the necessary precautions. I don’t know it that’s true, but it’s a great rumor to spread.

How did we find ourselves living in a bad novel? It was not ever thus. Hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels have always been with us, on both sides of the aisle. But 9/11 created an environment some liberals summarize with the acronym Iokiyar: it’s O.K. if you’re a Republican.
From Paul Krugman’s Op Ed piece, “Worse Than Fiction,” in which he explains:
The public became unwilling to believe bad things about those who claim to be defending the nation against terrorism. And the hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels of the right, empowered by the public’s credulity, have come out in unprecedented force.
Apologists for the administration would like us to forget all about the Kerik affair, but Bernard Kerik perfectly symbolizes the times we live in. Like Rudolph Giuliani and, yes, President Bush, he wasn’t a hero of 9/11, but he played one on TV. And like Mr. Giuliani, he was quick to cash in, literally, on his undeserved reputation.
Yesterday, author Gerald Pomper was interviewed on my local NPR station about his new book, Ordinary Heroes and American Democracy. Pomper’s definition of “hero” is an ordinary person doing his/her job extraordinarly well at a moment in history that positively affects that moment in history. He cites, for example, the firefighters at the 9/11 scene.
Krugman is right about the bad novel that America has become, and I agree with him that:
The principal objection to making Mr. Gonzales attorney general is that doing so will tell the world that America thinks it’s acceptable to torture people. But his confirmation will also be a statement about ethics
And on tv last night, a commerical for some violent interactive mercinary game shouts: Blow ’em up! Blow ’em up! Blow the crap out of ’em!
This is America today. But IOKIYAR

I remember once someone speculating that perhaps we are born with all the wisdom that it’s possible to have but we lose some with each passing day.
I think of this because my two-and-a-half-year-old grandson. Lex, often seems to “get it” right away.
For example, yesterday, as he and his mother were in their backyard,they saw a cardinal land on top of a bush right in front of them. They had a great view of the bird, and all of a sudden, it jerked its head in their direction. Speaking his mother’s thoughts, Lex burst into a grin and said, “It’s looking at you!” Then the bird flew away. So his mom explained that she thought he might be
afraid of them. To which Lex replied, “Cuz he doesn’t know you”.
All day long he as he walked around, Lex repeated: “The car-di-nal was looking at you!” And then he’d shake his head and put his hands out in a shrug, “but he didn’t know you.”
Lex calls dreaming “remembering.” So he’ll say, “Lex remember this book last night in sleeping.” I just think that’s so cool!