MY FRONT PORCH, MY SERENITY

My view of Grey Street North from my favorite front porch vantage point.

Lucy waiting for me to join her on our front porch easy chair.

Is it just me, or have front porches become a thing of the past?

Being of the old school and appreciative of the best things in life that do not cost a cent, my front porch is what helps keep me sane.  It is a solice and a place to relax on the lazy, hazy days of summer and a comforter when the rigors of life threaten to get the best of me.  A front porch, for me, can be a place where life stands still for as long as you sit there enjoying the nature of your surroundings, mind wandering aimlessly -- reflecting one minute and projecting the next.

Whenever possible I take time to have my morning coffee on that blessed outdoor shelter that surrounds half of my house.   Same with lunch at noon.  There's also nothing like a glass of wine on the porch as the sun goes down in the small town quiet of the evening hours, with Lucy girl snuggled into my side on an old recliner that has survived four years exposed to outside elements. Generally, in most cases, we end up having a catnap.  It is not unusual for me to wait out thunder storms too, hypnotized by the beat of rain hitting overhead porch eves and the driveway pavement below.

More often that not as I gaze across a large expanse of green grass and shadows created by the warm sun filtering through a dense canopy of overhead foliage teased by a gentle breeze, my mind drifts back to my childhood in Dresden, ON, in the 1940s when alternate evenings were spent on our front porch on Sydenham Street and at my Aunt Hattie Sharpe's on nearby Hughes Street with cousins Jim and Norma.  Neighbors out for a stroll, would stop by for a chat -- Mrs. Ruttle, Mrs. French, Mrs. Henderson, Mrs. Hughson, Mrs. Henderson, Andrew and Dorothy Rigsby with daughter Margaret, Mrs. Tassie, Mrs. Craven, Mae Sharpe and the Tedford family (to name but a few).  More often than not, a treat of some kind would enter the equation before the night was over.

It goes without saying that porches are a bridge to my past and there is something comforting about that.

With the exception of an odd cursory wave exchanged with a passerby who happens to glance our way, Lucy and I sit alone these days.  I see a lot of cars, but rarely anyone I recognize.  It is like we have Grey Street North all to ourselves.  People are otherwise occupied doing what, I really do not know...Busy, busy, I guess! Porches, if in fact they do exist, are stoic and unused reminders of days when livin' was easy -- and more social.

But do you know what?...I really do not care.  I'll continue to enjoy my little bit of Heaven in peaceful solitude on my front porch.  This, after all, may be as good as it gets -- and it may not last that much longer.  I'm never that busy!

BEWARE OF THE TICK...

The Grey Bruce Health Unit has published its mid-season Tick Surveillance Map showing the distribution of Blacklegged ticks throughout Grey Bruce. Based on data from ticks submitted from humans and participating veterinary clinics, the map illustrates the widespread distribution of Blacklegged ticks throughout Grey Bruce. Blacklegged ticks are the known carrier of Lyme disease in Ontario, so this post could be of wide-spread signicance.

Of the 112 ticks submitted to the Grey Bruce Health Unit for identification, 55 (49.1%) were identified as Blacklegged. At the time of this report, none of these ticks had been found to be positive for the bacterium that causes Lyme disease and no human cases of Lyme disease had been reported. However, the widespread distribution of Blacklegged ticks means there exists a significant risk of exposure to Lyme disease in Grey Bruce. Note too that the absence of ticks at specific locations on the map does not necessarily mean they are truly absent there. Ticks may not have been submitted for identification from those sites.

The best way to protect against Lyme disease is to prevent tick bites.
• Wear light coloured, long-sleeved shirts and pants to spot ticks more easily.
• Tuck your shirt into your pants and pull your socks over your pant legs.
• Use bug spray containing DEET or Icaridin on your skin and clothing (always follow the directions on the label).
• Walk on cleared paths or walkways.
• Following outdoor activity, do a full-body check for ticks on yourself and your children.

If you find an attached tick, remove it with tweezers immediately. Removing it within 24-36 hours can help prevent infection.

PROMOTING EXCELLENCE IN CANADIAN JOURNALISM

Jennifer Bieman, journalism's Greg Clark award winner.

I am always encouraged to see talented young people with solid investigative reporting and writing skills, breaking through in the field of newspaper journalism.  It augers well for an essential industry struggling to maintain credibility and profitability in an era of cheap online news, controversial social media sites and opinion writers ad nauseam.

It was interesting to learn that Jennifer Bieman, a former reporter with my old St. Thomas Times-Journal in St. Thomas, Ont., was chosen as this year's winner of the Greg Clark Award for early-career journalists. The Canadian Journalism Federation selected Jennifer for her proposal to explore how the Office of the Ontario Fire Marshall and its counterpart in Alberta, the Office of the Fire Commissioner, conduct investigations.

The Greg Clark Award, unique in Canadian journalism, offers working journalists a $5,000 stipend to spend a week gaining insight, gathering strategic information and meeting key decision makers on a specific issue or beat.  Jennifer is a graduate Lord Dorchester Secondary School in her hometown of Dorchester and also graduated from the Masters of School Arts in Journalism program at the University of Western Ontario. Previously, she worked briefly as a general assignment summer reporter at the London Free Press and news writer and editor at Sun News Network. She returned to the London Free Press earlier this month as a multi-media writer.

"Fires are an essential part of community coverage, and Jennifer Bieman provided a solid proposal that would explore an area that traditionally isn't given much attention," says Susan Harada, a jury

member and associate director of Carleton University's School of Journalism and Communication. "Bieman is right to note that coverage of fires often ends with the line, 'The Ontario Fire Marshal has been called in to investigate.' The project she proposes would provide insight into that process and a range of fire-safety issues. Her work will benefit any reporter, especially those with a regional beat."

With this opportunity, Jennifer plans to explore how these investigative agencies' findings shape legislation and how their recommendations impact fire-prevention strategies. She will also seek to understand the offices' role in emerging issues like fire prevention in First Nations communities or in homes of vulnerable populations such as low-income families, newcomers, seniors and adults with disabilities.

This award was created in memory of Greg Clark, one of Canada's celebrated journalists, a war correspondent, an avid outdoorsman, a humorist and a great reporter who excelled at storytelling.
Bieman was honoured by the CJF Awards at the Fairmont Royal York in Toronto, June 8.

Established in 1990, The Canadian Journalism Foundation promotes excellence in journalism by celebrating outstanding journalistic achievement. Signature events include an annual awards program featuring a must-attend industry gala where Canada's top newsmakers meet Canada's top news people. Through J-Talks, a popular speakers' series, the CJF facilitates dialogue among journalists, business people, academics and students about the role of the media in Canadian society and the ongoing challenges for media in the digital era. The foundation also fosters opportunities for journalism education, training and research.

The good news is that there are more Jennifer Biemans out there...The bad news is that with the closure of news rooms across Canada, it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to find jobs -- and you cannot make a living on Twitter. 

Ye cannae shove yer Granny aff a Bus

Here's a different and fun version of "Ye Canna Throw Yer Granny Off a Bus", a one-act play which will be produced soon in Bruce County as part of an elder abuse public awareness initiative.

COMING SOON...

I am currently involved in an interesting program that will fill a public awareness need within Bruce County communities. "Ye Canna Throw Yer Granny Off A Bus" is a lively play with music that tackles the tender issue of elder abuse by identifying the emotional, financial, physical, spiritual and sexual aspects of the issue.

Elder abuse is sadly under-reported today. It is estimated that only 20 per cent of instances of abuse ever get reported and once abuse occurs, it is likely to be repeated. I will be reporting periodically on the progress of this travelling production which is funded by the Government of Canada and developed under the auspices of the Bruce County Museum and Cultural Centre.

RELIGIONS, NON-BELIEVERS CAN BE MORE ACCEPTING OF OTHERS' FAITH

A new study conducted by researchers in Belgium sought to find out how open-minded atheists and agnostics were compared their religious counterparts – and the results were surprising. There exists a common stereotype that people who are highly religious are unlikely to embrace other points of view or different belief systems. However, according to the researchers’ findings, those who hold strict religious beliefs are actually more tolerant than those who aren’t religious at all.

Nearly 800 adults from the United Kingdom, Spain, and France were selected at random to participate in the study. The participants first gave their religious affiliation, then answered various questions to determine how tolerant they were of other belief systems.

According to the researchers, the findings illustrated that religious believers “seem to better perceive and integrate diverging perspectives.” At the same time, these respondents were quick to acknowledge that they were probably biased because of their deeply-held faith.

Atheists and agnostics, on the other hand, consistently denied being biased against other religious beliefs. However, their answers showed otherwise – this group displayed markedly higher rates of “subtle intolerance” than did the religious group.

After the study was released, criticism began to mount concerning the motives behind it. For starters, the research was conducted at a major Catholic university, spurring claims that the results were predetermined by the powers that be. After all, critics insist, it’s in their interest to paint secular people as close-minded. Claims of the Catholic university pushing a religious agenda were compounded by the confusing nature of some of the questions posed by researchers. Skeptics contend that the questions were meant to intentionally mislead participants into giving “intolerant” answers.

The study fundamentally challenges the negative stereotype of religious folks as “bigoted zealots” convinced that their path is the right one.

Despite these assertions, no overwhelming evidence has emerged to confirm that the study was biased. So, for the sake of argument, let’s assume the results are entirely accurate. What does this mean going forward?

For one, the findings fundamentally challenge the negative stereotype of religious folks as “bigoted zealots” who are convinced their path is the right one. If you ask the average person walking down the street: “who is more likely to be close-minded toward outside ideas?” chances are they’ll choose a highly religious person over someone who doesn’t ascribe to any particular set of beliefs.

But according to the study, atheists are not exempt from believing their worldview to be the only correct one. In fact, if the findings are accurate, they are even more guilty than religious people of assuming a “my way or the highway” approach.

In addition to measuring tolerance, this study also touches on a larger issue: which religion is the right one? It’s a question that humankind has been struggling with since time immemorial. Is there one all-powerful God? Or perhaps many different gods? Is it possible that religion is simply a human construct and there is no right answer?

We may never know. However, the study’s findings go to show that there is room for everyone to become more accepting of other belief systems.

TIME FOR SOBER REALISM ON U.S.-RUSSIA RELATIONS

It is a scary thought but do you realize that the United States and Russia possess nearly 14,000 nuclear weapons between them — more than 90 percent of the world’s nuclear arsenal — and keep almost 2,000 on hair-trigger alert? It goes without saying then, that the extreme danger of nuclear war can be reduced only through cooperation between the two countries.  And we in Canada can only sit with crossed fingers and ultimate faith in an upholding of "the American way".

Currently, the era of cyber warfare has arrived without any of the agreed-upon rules that govern traditional wars or, for that matter, nuclear deterrence. There is now a rising threat of hackers breaching not only emails and elections but also power grids, strategic warning systems and command-and-control centers. For years, there has been discussion of the need to establish clear rules of the road for cyber warfare. Now, reports of escalating interference make it imperative that cyber weapons, like conventional, chemical or nuclear arms, be controlled by treaty. Again, however, this cannot happen without a more constructive U.S.-Russia relationship.

Given these significant threats, the escalation of tensions with Russia, rather than de-escalation, serves neither the American interest nor national security. This moment calls for diplomacy and dialogue, not moral posturing and triumphalism.

Needless to say, rebuilding a working détente with Russia will not be easy. It will take skill and persistence. Russian President Vladimir Putin heads an authoritarian government that tramples basic rights. U.S. President Trump has demonstrated that he has neither the temperament nor the advisers to sustain a coherent policy initiative. But the nations come to negotiations with the governments they have, not the ones that many wish they had. There is simply no other choice.

For Democrats, whose understandable desire to resist Trump has helped fuel the anti-Russia fixation, there is also another reality to consider. Focusing on Trump’s ties to Russia alone will not win the critical 2018 midterm elections, and it will not win meaningful victories on issues such as health care, climate change and inequality. Moreover, cold wars are lousy for progressivism. They strengthen pro-war parties and fatten defense budgets while depleting funds that could be put to better use rebuilding infrastructure and expanding social programs. They empower the worst forces in both parties and, importantly, close off space for dissent. This is as true in the United States as it is in Russia.

The bottom line is that opposition to Trump cannot become the same as opposition to common sense. Common sense dictates protection of democracy by strengthening election systems to counter outside interference. It dictates an independent investigation of claims of Russian meddling in last year's presidential campaign. But it also tells Americans that they cannot address many of their most urgent challenges — from Syria and climate change to nuclear proliferation and cyber issues — without the United States and Russia finding ways to work together when it serves mutual interests. North Americans in general do not have to embrace the Russian government to work on vital interests with it. And we cannot afford a revival of Cold War passions that would discredit those seeking to de-escalate tensions. Efforts to curtail debate could be a disservice to security in the U.S.A.

As editor of the Nation, a magazine with a long history of adopting alternative views and unpopular stances, especially on matters of war and peace, acclaimed commentator Katrina vanden Heuval correctly writes that she believes it is important to challenge conventional wisdom, to foster rather than police debate and to oppose the forces that vilify those advocating and pursuing better relations. And while arguing that both the United States and Russia have serious interests in maintaining a working relationship may not be popular, it also is not radical. It is simply sober realism.

IN DEFENSE OF TODAY'S POLITICIAN...SOMEONE'S HUSBAND, WIFE, FATHER, MOTHER, SON, DAUGHTER

During my time as News Editor and Managing Editor of three Canadian daily newspapers, I had the privilege of meeting and/or interviewing four Prime Ministers -- John Diefenbaker (PC), Lester Pearson (Lib), John Turner (Lib) and Joe Clark (PC) -- two provincial premiers, Saskatchewan's Ed Blakeney (NDP) and Ontario's Bill Davis (PC); in addition to a number of federal and provincial politicians who were noted party leaders in their day (including Robert Stanfield, one time Federal PC leader; Stephen Lewis, Ont. NDP leader in the 1970s, Attorney Generals Roy McMurtry, PC Ontario and Roy Romonow, NDP Saskatchewan and Canadian Solicitor General Bob Kaplan, PC).

While in all fairness I am sure they realized that I was a media lightweight in those days, they were all extremely forthcoming, treating me with utmost respect which, of course, was appreciated and reciprocated.

Without exception and allowing for certain personality traits, I found all of the foregoing to be individuals of character and principle, with brilliant minds and deeply committed to to serving their constituencies, country and respective provinces.  I have no reason to believe that anything has changed in today's politics nor that politicians have suddenly become the idiots, liars, dummies, crooks and laughing stocks we currently read about in the news and on the Internet.

While we must always try to counter politicians’ excesses and expose them individually, just as we would in the workplace with executive indulgences, we should not let the abuse of politicians become the national sport it now appears to be. The current frenzy is for demeaning every elected representative and we need to say ‘enough’.

Deriding politicians in print (whether on paper or on the Internet) has become par for the course. It has gone way beyond the satirical cartoon or the tabloid front page, both of which have their place in an open democracy. However, we need to understand when humour is replaced by clear malice and we need to stop that malice. Too often we portray our politicians as uncaring, vicious and vindictive when they are obviously not.

Be seriously honest now...how would you feel if you read somewhere that your character or heritage was in question?  Would you want to lash out in defence at the dozens of unwarranted insults coming your way on a daily basis?  Personally, I wouldn't last five minutes under those conditions. My skin is just not that thick.

We tend to forget that those in public life are people just like us...they breath the same air, they have families, they bleed red, they have feelings, they try their best to fulfill mandates...and, being human, they make mistakes from time to time, as do we all.  They do not win office, and stay in office, by hiding their light beneath a bushel and they understand that, try as they may, it is impossible for them to be all things to all people.  Damned if they do and damned if they don't is a fact of political life.

We tend also to take isolated cases of political dishonesty and indiscretion and forever tar with the same brush.

Of course, we might all have strong views about various policies, from the carbon tax to recent media reforms and the reported outlandish compensation package for accused terrorist Omar Khadr. Certainly, if we have something constructive to contribute to an issue, by all means we should express those views if we think someone in a position to give a damn is listening. But since when have we become so critical, hateful and mean-spirited in Canada?  Why all of a sudden are those who oppose certain political views considered delusional and ignorant, prompting bitter social media attacks?

Is it the American influence or have we naturally become so skeptical that we have lost respect for all things and all people? If our party did not form a government in the last election, let's stop being poor losers, politically speaking, and accept the will of the majority in this wonderful democracy of ours. P-C, Liberal, NDP, Green -- all parties exist to serve the best interest of Canadians in general with little to choose between them or their respective leaders. Remember that when you hide behind your computer and take social media liberty to engage in one-upmanship, directing insults and distasteful language, you are demeaning some one's character and hurting feelings....and contributing to a divisional Canada where no one ever really wins.  It is simply wrong on so many levels.

Our politicians deserve better from us than this. Collectively, they are serious, hard-working people who, unlike most of us, have been prepared to accept very serious costs to their own and their families' lifestyle for the sake of furthering the public interest as they see it. The public has a reciprocal obligation to show a measure of comprehension for the difficulty and complexity of the issues with which elected people must regularly deal. These issues touch us all, and if the penalties of public life ever become so great that first-rate people shun electoral politics, we will all be the worse for it.

Perhaps we are already starting to be the worse for it...and that is a shame!

Canada used to be better than that.

Yesterday we reported on Port Elgin resident Jane Mara Bernardi Thede (see item below) who was about to embark on her Canadian citizenship ceremony on Canada Day. The ceremony took place in Etobicoke at the Centennial Park Ski Lodge. Three Etobicoke MPs attended along the the Honourable Kristy Duncan, MP of Etobicoke North and Minister of Science Mandate Letter, who represented the Federal Government. "Everything was simple and kind of fun with the Town Crier and bagpiper dressed in period costumes. I love Canada and being a Canadian citizen is very important to make me feel more attached to Canada and the people. I never, ever, regretted coming here," commented Jane.

A CANADA DAY WITH SPECIAL MEANING FOR THIS COUPLE

Bob and Jane Thede epitomize serendipity. 
(With thanks to the Saugeen times)

Okay kids...Do you want to read another nice Canada Day story?

Well, here it is...

Sometimes, it seems as though two worlds are meant to come together and such was the case with Bob Thede of Port Elgin and Jane Mara Bernardi of Brazil.

Bob was born and raised in Bruce County as were several generations of the Thede family.  Jane was born in Brazil of Italian ancestry.  Their story, however, only begins in 2006 when Jane was traveling through Europe with her daughter. On their last night in Venice, her daughter went out with friends while mom went to the hotel dining room on her own.

With fate in the making, Bob had just arrived at the hotel that day.

Sitting alone at the table in the dining room, Jane and a "gentleman" made eye contact and, after determining that she was in fact alone, Bob made his way over her table and asked if he could join her.

"I thought he was American and he thought I was French," says Jane, "but I said yes he could join me. We talked for hours and found we actually had much in common and agreed to exchange email addresses."

The next day, Jane and her daughter continued their travels.  Jane and Bob however, continued their conversations through emails.

After returning to Brazil and having continued their electronic correspondence, Jane received an email one day from Bob asking if he could come visit her. "Oh my," she thought. "Now what do i do?" Her son advised her to say 'yes' and that, if it did not work out, she could simply end any correspondence.

One thing lead to another and the couple ended up dating for three years, back and forth between Brazil and Canada, until a decision had to be made.  After the three years of back and forth Jane, with a law degree and assistant to the Brazilian President of the Court system, decided to give up her career and follow her heart with a Canadian.

In 2009, the couple married and Jane applied for permanent residency in Canada. Unknown to many are the restrictions around receiving Canadian citizenship.  Foreign applicants must remain in the country for 1,460 days or four years consecutively. Any travel days outside of the country are then deducted from the total, which extends the qualifying time.

Therefore, because Jane traveled back to Brazil to spend time with her son and his family each year, the days deducted meant that her qualification time, even though married to a Canadian, added up to eight years.  During that time, she had to study and test in English, history and geography of Canada and prepare and submit many documents.

After the waiting period, Jane applied for her citizenship in 2016 and, after much anxiety, learned that her application had been accepted.  It was not only accepted but she was to be one of those receiving their citizenship papers on July 1st, Canada Day and on Canada Day's 150th anniversary Celebration of Confederation.  "What could possibly be better than getting my Canadian citizenship on this special day," Jane asks.

As you are reading this piece, Jane will have already received her Canadian Citizenship in a colorful ceremony at Etobicoke.

Today, incidentally, she is an active member of the Chantry Island Cham-bettes, a fundraising group of women in Saugeen Shores and, since they are both retired, she and husband Bob continue their world travels -- together.

Good for them!  

Stories like this make me feel good about life in general.  How about you?