Cat’s Pajamas

All of a sudden Patchtricia suddenly jumped up to the top spot of the step thingy and proclaimed, “I was watching an old TV show where one character said to the other, ‘That’s the cat’s pajamas’.” With her fur rising on her back, she continued, “What on earth is ‘the cat’s pajamas? We don’t wear pajamas we have perfectly good fur coats we wear all the time, which are nice and clean as we keep them nice. I just don’t understand.”

Lamont opened an eye, peering with a bit of distain towards his little sister and said, “Pajamas, are clothes that the furless beings wear at night when they go to bed and sleep, at least some or perhaps most of them. They lack our nice clean fur coats and you never see them licking themselves or each other to keep them clean, instead they use machines called washers and dryers at great expense to themselves to keep the pajamas and the other clothes they wear clean. Humans are very limited and have to do things like that to keep up with the dignity we cats naturally have. Understand?”

“Not really,” injected Pawline, “you have given us a description of pajamas but why would the TV character say that phrase, ‘the cat’s pajamas’? That makes no sense to me, though it sounds as though he approved of what he described as the cat’s pajamas.”

Getting up and ascending to the step thingy with Patch, Lamont assumed his lecturing position sitting regally and staring down upon his sisters. “Dear sisters,” he began, “This term, ‘cat’s pajamas’ is a bit out of date in human speech today, but it is an euphemism human’s make about something that is nice and they especially like."

Continuing his lecture Lamont said, “The term ‘cat’s pajamas’ comes from the 1700’s, a term coined by an English tailor E.B. Katz. This Katz, not to be confused with a real cat, was well known for the excellence of his silk pajamas he made for people of wealth who could afford to wear such things at night to cover their furless bodies. More recently in the 1920’s the era of the movie you watched portrayed a person by the name of Thomas A. Dorgan use the word ‘cat’ to describe the flappers; scantily clad lasses of the jazz era of the ‘roaring twenties’. The word ‘cat’ then was combined with pajamas, which were just beginning to be worn more popularly among the masses of the furless beings. Thus, ‘cat’s pajamas’ was a term used to describe something very desirable and the best. There you have it. And, if you think about it, it is a bit of a compliment to we cat’s who, of course, are quite desirable and the best of creatures.

In the mood of enlightening his siblings, Lamont added, “This is also reflected in another 1920’s saying, ‘cool cat’ and ‘hep cat’ referring to those who kept up with the latest fashion trends. We cats, of course, are above such need of accouterments to keep ourselves fashionable, being excellently clothed at all times we our luxurious fur coats.”

“Oh, that’s nice,” replied the Paw and Patch who had become somewhat bored with Lamont’s lecture and were busily grooming each other licking each other fur coats.

Why Is Obamacare Complicated

This is the title of a blog by Paul Krugman recently and his answer seems dead on to me. It is because of the insurance companies.

Obamacare, or more properly, the Affordable Health Care, is a Frankinsteinian monster of a bunch of stuff put together because the insurance company lobbies were and are so powerful, wanting things a particular way.

Contrast the Affordable Health Care plan to Social Security or Medicare, neither of which is very complicated. If we had a health plan like those two it would be a single payer program, like the other major countries have.

Now a single player program was doomed because of insurance company powers. A sensible person might conclude that if we had a single payer program run by the government, all those folk who worked in the insurance industry in health care would then have become government workers, minus of course, the bloated salaries of their CEO’s.

Then comes the software boondoggle, which, though unrelated to the concept, gives talking points to the opponents of the Affordable Health Care Plan.

Gandhi’s Rules for Changing the World

The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world's problems. --Mahatma Gandhi

It is easy for us to bring up all the evil’s that exist in the world and how callous we seem to have become in dealing with these issues. More so, most of us just throw up our hands saying, “What can we do about it. Or, as I mentioned in the last article, how do we go about feeding, caring, nurturing those in need including ourselves.

One role model we could easily follow is that of Mahatmas Gandhi to gave us 10 rules for changing the world according to Henrik Edberg in his positivity blog.

He proceeds these favorite rules with these quotes:

“You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.”

“The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problem.”

“If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide.”

First, change yourself. Consider the world you want to see and then modify your behavior to make your part of the world more like that. It is easy to find enemies and to blame others. But we have the ability to see problems and solve them. Baby steps.

Second, you are in control. Part of what I liked about Albert Ellis’ psychological outlook was that no has the power to hurt you unless you give them permission to do so. Gandhi saw that as well. We give into to other’s negative views of ourselves rather than accept insults. Some things are indeed hurtful, but you can choose your reactions to that negativity.

Third, forgive and let it go. Again his quotes: The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.”

“An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.”

Psychologists also call this “stuck scripts. We can replay old hurts in our minds over and over again, but it does do any good, in fact, it does the opposite. It is hard to do but it is possible. If somebody really gets your goat, pray for them on a regular basis. This heals from two directions.

Fourth, without action you aren’t going anywhere. As a preacher I get a bit tired of the old adage, that Gandhi used as well, “An ounce of practice is worth more than tons of preaching.” Preaching is doing something, it is the attempt to help other change and encourage the folk to have happier more fulfilling lives. But practice is the proof of the pudding, as they way.

Fifth, take care of this moment. Gandhi gets existential here which is a good idea. Be in the present, dwelling in the past is unproductive except for lessons learned and proposing endless future scenarios doesn’t get anything done. Planning is good but doing it right now is productive.

Sixth, everyone is human. It is amazing how we demonize each other. Everyone has their fault and everyone has their gifts to give for the common good. That is one reason why I like group process and trust it more. We provide balance for each other.

Seventh, persist. Quitting is not a possibility in life. You can’t stop the world and get off, it won’t work. Gandhi was amazing in his persistence of non-violent process, more amazing is all those folk who were just as persistent as he in gaining their countries freedom but just keeping at it.

Eighth, see the good in people and help them. Effective argument is agreeing with folk as much as possible. If you do, then will be more open to your viewpoints as well. Praise goes a long way.

Ninth, be congruent, be authentic, be truth to yourself. The great questions everyone needs to ask themselves for a productive life are: who am I? where am I going? And, Is it important. When we continually focus on these key concepts our lives are filled with harmony.

Tenth, continue to grow and evolve. Some folk seem to find it possible just to plod through life. Boring! Learn something every day, or why not learn 10 or 100 things every day. Use it or lose it as the saying goes.

Can we change the world? Of course, in fact, it is impossible not to change the world. But like Gandhi we have it within us with assist from others to make the world much better.

Matthew 25 is a well-known scripture, here is part of it from The Message translation by Eugene Peterson:

^34-36 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Enter, you who are blessed by my Father! Take what’s coming to you in this kingdom. It’s been ready for you since the world’s foundation. And here’s why:

I was hungry and you fed me,
I was thirsty and you gave me a drink,
I was homeless and you gave me a room,
I was shivering and you gave me clothes,
I was sick and you stopped to visit,
I was in prison and you came to me.’

^37-40 “Then those ‘sheep’ are going to say, ‘Master, what are you talking about? When did we ever see you hungry and feed you, thirsty and give you a drink? And when did we ever see you sick or in prison and come to you?’ Then the King will say, ‘I’m telling the solemn truth: Whenever you did one of these things to someone overlooked or ignored, that was me—you did it to me.’

The story goes on with folk complaining about when they didn’t take care of Jesus and Jesus responds in kind; when we didn’t help your neighbors in need.

It is a well-known story but how well do we follow its teachings? How well does the government, the servants of the people as Jesus was servants to people do?

One way of answering this is by examining a recent report from the Center on Budget and Policies and the TANF benefits distribution.  

The report tells us that this year once again our cast assistance to the nation’s poorest families with children fell again; 20% less than they were in 1996. Now that is now true for all states in our country only 99% (sarcasm dripping in the background.) (Connecticut and Maryland were the exceptions.)

The function of TANF is to provide a safety net for some of our poor families. Between 1970 to 1996 the benefits dropped more than 40% in two thirds of our states. The report tells us that as of July 1^st of this year every states benefits for a family of three with no other cash income were 50% below the poverty line as measured by the Department of Health and Human services. Even when we add SNAP benefits (food stamps) it still leaves them below the poverty line.

Below is a view of how this looks state by state:

Here is another chart showing how family fall below the poverty line.

There are many more charts and a great deal more information from the site mentioned at the beginning of this article. It is worthy checking out.

So, when Jesus asks us the same questions he asked of folk in Matthew’s gospel how do you think we and our government stack up? I’m afraid we are more goat like than sheep like.

I think Jesus was serious in telling this parable and we should take it seriously as well.