Gratuitous plugs - no politics

At one time “diplomacy” was defined as discussion, persuasion and maybe even subtle coercion used to reach national goals. It required meeting and talking with people of different viewpoints and ambitions. In extremes, it was even necessary to deal with people who sought your ruin. Diplomacy was the skill of solving problems without the use of overt force. In recent years, US leaders have abandoned this traditional definition of diplomacy. Now, our top leaders revile and insult anyone who proposes to meet with people who actively oppose us and can be defined as “terrorists”. Our diplomatic skills are reduced to meeting with those who share our opinions and bombing those who don’t! But just as the decline in the value of the dollar has reduced US world economic influence, so this decline in our diplomatic skills reduces our ability to influence world events. We have lost our position of a respected leader. Our politicians now act more like loud-mouthed bullies.

I was going to continue with examples of respected past leaders who had real diplomatic skills. These leaders dealt with people who might today be called terrorists (or worse) to gain our national objectives. But why should I waste time? The blunders of our current leadership are obvious to anyone with an IQ over 85. This includes diplomacy. Instead, the rest of this epistle is a gratuitous plug for bull terriers.



In many places bull terriers get a bad rap. J’s family had bull terriers when she was a girl and they have always been an important part of our family. We currently share our life with Harvey. This photo was taken after he had a cyst removed from his neck. Harvey is a miniature white English bull terrier. He is instantly recognized by anyone who watched certain beer adverts or who shops in Target. Harvey is small in stature but he displays all the personality and character traits that make bull terriers so loved. Harvey also displays some of the other qualities that can make bull terriers so misunderstood. On the positive side, he is a loving 30-pound lap dog. He is happiest when he is cuddled up beside me watching TV. Harvey behaves just like a strong-willed child. He is precocious, disobedient and is always trying to have things his way. There is nothing in Harvey’s character to give any concern that he would hurt anyone. But, Harvey is a bull-terrier. He is built like an Abrams tank. Those 30 pounds are all solid muscle and bone. His jaws are like a clamp and his tail thrashes from side to side like a cudgel. Harvey doesn’t go around obstructions. He goes through them or shoves them aside. Harvey is like a sumo wrestler who has not learnt to control his strength. This can be a problem when he meets new people, especially young people. Small children are likely to be overwhelmed (and overturned) by his affectionate greetings. For that reason, we always keep Harvey under close control when children ask to meet him.

Harvey is the latest in a line of Bull Terriers and Pit Bulls who have shared our home. They each deserve their own entry in this blog, especially Cleopatra, a red-nosed red Pit Bull and a gentle soul. Throughout her life Cleopatra was ruled by our small Burmese cat who was only one tenth her size. Harvey, Sparky, Cleopatra, Honey and Marquis were all dogs who shared our home at different times. In their dealings with J and me, our children, the neighborhood kids and visitors, these bull terriers showed me that bad dogs are rare – even (especially?) bull terriers. When a bull terrier goes bad, the fault is almost always with the owner.

The personality and character of most bull terriers means that they are not the right dog for every family. Sensible dog lovers recognize this fact. The same statement can also be made for many other breeds – Rottweilers, German Shepherds, for example. Maybe a time is approaching when a dog license should be for a type and size of dog. Just as some people do not qualify for a firearms license, so some people should not be licensed to keep certain dogs. That may sound outrageous, but is it any more outrageous than the suggestion that diplomacy does not require we deal with those we call terrorists?