BLOODY CODGERS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS ORNERY
OR
CODGERS ARE OFTEN BLOODY ORNERY
OR
ORNERY CODGERS ARE USUALLY BLOODY MEAN
Meditations: Chapter XII, Verses Leviticus – Levi’s Jeans

Verse 1: Good Old Words
Don’t pay too much attention to the titles for this part of the current Meditations series. Nostalgia has overtaken me as there is a yearning to hear glorious words that have some how fallen out of style.
There are new words today by the dozens that often use the language of computerese. There is nanosecond and lip synching and sound bites. But those words have no staying power. When the next generation of computer devotees comes along, they will be forgotten and replaced by another set of largely meaningless words and phrases.
Bloody, as used here, is simply an intensive. It has nothing to do with blood on the floor or on someone’s face or clothing. The Brits and the Irish used to use bloody frequently. When a Tommy, a British Army enlisted man, is denied a furlough, he may well refer to the “bloody British Army.” It might be expected that the Underground bombings in London would be an occasion for Brits to mumble something about the “bloody Moslems.”
The word according to English dictionaries dates to 1661. It is defined as an “intensive” which may, in some cases, have vulgar overtones.
My father, a thorough-going Irishman, used to delight in adjusting the tappets on his Studebaker automobiles. When the tappets were out of adjustment, loud clicking noises would come from the engine. The original Ezra would say, “Man, we have got to fix those bloody tappets.” Nothing vulgar. Simply an intensive as it applied to tappets.
But alas, Ezra became an angel in 1958. It has now become difficult to assuage my nostalgia for vibrant English such as the use of the term “bloody.”
The modern definition of “codger” says that term is used to describe a “mildly eccentric person who is usually an elderly fellow.” That is a crabbed definition. In the first place, “codger” always referred to a male person. He might be eccentric as Mr. Merriam Webster says, but most often he would be a good natured man who laughed and joked. My mother, Lillie, always used that term appropriately. If a man of Lillie’s vintage was mean or eccentric, she would use a term other than codger. On the other hand, Harry, my mother’s favorite brother, was called an old codger by Lillie sometime after he reached age 50. And so it is that my definition of codger is a more generous one than the dictionary definition. But one way or another, it would be nice to hear codger or old codger once again.
Ornery, according to the dictionary, is only 185 years old. That is hard to believe as it seems to me to come from the 17th Century. The modern definition is “having an irritable disposition.” Cantankerous is a synonym for ornery.
An ornery mule is one who bites and kicks. An ornery man is one who cheats and may not take care of his family. Politicians were often described in days past as ornery – so nothing has changed. There may be occasions where ornery could be used affectionately as in a father saying – in jest – “I have three ornery sons.” But as a general rule, ornery used to be used to describe a cantankerous man or a person with an irritable disposition. So Mr. Merriam Webster is close to right on ornery. But that is no help when no one says ornery any more.
As was said in my first paragraph, nostalgia has overtaken me. It would be a pleasure to hear a preacher or a politician or a TV commentator such as Bob Schieffer utter the words bloody, codgers and ornery. If they would do that, they would have my business forever. If the Archbishop of Canterbury would utter those old English words publicly, it might even have some kind of effect on my view of the Anglican Church – but in all likelihood, probably nothing would change.
Verse 2: Bombings, Angels and Virgins for Martyrs
In recent weeks, London’s Underground and a double-decker bus have suffered bombings with attendant deaths. The resort city of Taba in Egypt’s Sinai, popular with Israelis and Egyptians alike, experienced a horrific bombing. The explosions in Iraq have become so routine that they usually go unmentioned unless there is the loss of American lives. In many respects, bombings in Baghdad have become a way of life.
After the London bombing, an Arab man was interviewed. From what he said, he was a well educated man who put credence into Islamic concepts of life and death.
He said that from the moment of our births, we are all waiting to die. Some die young and some die older. To a large extent, it is a matter of chance as to when our lives end. He then said that for a worthy cause, advancing the day of death would be a favorable development. He then said that if the death meant a blow to the Christian occupation, as in Iraq, advancing the day of death would be more than worthwhile. This man was not a terrorist or anyone’s “dead ender.”
He was a rational man who seemed to have no zealotry for Islamic beliefs. From time immemorial, Moslems have disliked Christians and Jews. The Arab man was saying that any blow to the Christian occupiers of Iraq, and other Arab lands, was not only justified but in some ways desired.
Tony Blair is all tangled up in his John Bull underwear. Blair loudly contends that the Arab view amounts to no more than a “vile philosophy.” He and his Texas handler refuse to discuss the occupation of Iraq as the reason for the bombings. In so doing, they have buried their heads as far as they will go in the sand.
Before we occupied Iraq, London suffered no bombings. It is an immutable fact that for every action there is a reaction. We occupy an Arab country and the reaction is bombings in London and soon in the United States.
If the situation were reversed with an Arab army occupying Britain or the United States, both of us would resist mightily and would do everything to thwart the Arab occupiers. In English, the proper word for such action is patriotism.
Blair has invented the term “vile philosophy” in the hope that citizens of England will overlook his disastrous course of following George Bush in occupying Iraq. It seems to me that a dose of reality is in order to demonstrate that occupying an Arab country leaves Britain without a rational reason for complaining. By occupying Iraq, they asked for it.
When George Bush said, “Bring ‛em on” he probably overlooked the fact that the Arabs could indeed, respond and do so lethally. When England stops occupying Iraq, it may be that the Arab recriminations will diminish or cease. The same idea applies also to the British occupation of six countries in Northern Ireland. When the occupation stops, there will be peace with the Irish Republican Army (IRA).
Every rational person should know by now that occupying another country has consequences that are often deadly. But the American and British occupiers of Iraq wish to be blind and deaf to that immutable fact.
Verse 3: Some Thoughts and Questions about Fornication
Everyone knows that proper born-again Christians and Moslems have nothing admirable to say publicly about fornication. In some ways, it is similar to Americans condemning monster sized SUV’s – and then buying a Ford Navigator or Explorer with gas mileage averaging between 10 or 12 miles per gallon. The human race may publicly deplore fornication, but the evidence is clear that a lot of it is taking place and has always taken place.
This old codger-essayist hopes that the word fornicate does not turn you off. As a matter of fact, on page 483 of the Merriam Webster Collegiate dictionary, you will find that word has been a standard English term since 1552. So it is well established word and has its proper place in the language of the Anglo-Saxon race.
While it has a fairly modest listing in standard dictionaries, the King James Version of the Bible is found to have 40 verses referring to fornication. For example, according to Revelations, some powerful religious person – God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost or the Virgin Mary – destroyed the thriving city of Babylon because the residents there were found to be fornicating and drinking tankards of wine. So the powerful religious figure or Intelligent Designer, had it reduced to ashes. In the 18th Chapter of Revelations, Verse 3, we find:
“For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and merchants are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies” (my emphasis).
In Verse 7, there is more about Babylon’s wickedness. “How much she hath glorified herself and lived deliciously…” (my emphasis).
There you have it. Fornication leads to delicacies and worse, to deliciousness. It frightens me just to write those lines. Are we here in Short Hills waxing rich over delicious delicacies?
If the Bible uses 40 verses to warn us of delicious and delicate developments, there are some questions to be asked about fornication. It is assumed that each incident of fornication is marked in a heavenly ledger very much like a baseball box-score where each error or wild pitch is entered in the ball player’s record.
It is clear that each act of fornication will result in a black mark. That much is understood. But what if the fornicator uses some form of artificial birth control as a means of avoiding a possible pregnancy and a subsequent abortion. Does this mean two or more black marks on the heavenly box score? Most observers would vote for an error for each transgression. And, of course, if it applies, adultery is another black mark. Observers would vote for an error for each such trespass.
Now while we are on the subject of multiple errors, we should consider the case of Strom Thurmond, the Senator from South Carolina who lived to celebrate his 100th birthday. When Thurmond was 22, he lived in a large home that required the assistance of help from female maids who were African-Americans. Polite, educated South Carolinians referred to the maids as “Nigras.” One of the maids, a 16 year old, caught Thurmond’s eye and at his insistence, they fornicated. In more civilized climes, their liaison would be called rape. The testimony was the Thurmond forced himself on this youngster more than once. She became impregnated and gave birth to a daughter.
In a fit of noblesse oblige, Thurmond paid for the daughter to attend a black, female college. Aside from secret and rare visits to Thurmond’s office, he never acknowledged his daughter even though 100 years would have given him ample time to do that.
Now Thurmond was clearly guilty of fornication. But at the time, it was illegal to have sexual relations between races. Read white and black. Now in the heavenly ledger, Thurmond must have been given black marks for fornication. Do you think he should have received two black marks because he violated the law on race mixing, that is the law on miscegenation? And if he had used a condom, my instincts are to give him three black marks. The fact that Thurmond’s paramour was under- aged also deserves a big black mark. Did Strom believe the housemaid was a slave? If so, he deserves another black mark.
Writing about a miserable wretch like Thurmond brings us to the unfairness of life. John Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald’s bullet at the age of 46 years. Robin Cook, the former Foreign Secretary of Great Britain died yesterday in his 59th year. And Thurmond hangs around until he hits the century mark. What a cruel turn of events.
An allied subject would involve the U.S. decision to reject the Kyoto Treaty on global warming. The Chief Executive of this country has said on more than one occasion that to adopt the Kyoto Treaty would “wreck the American economy.” Global warming is no longer debatable. It is here with 103 degree readings in the Windy City of Chicago. But this administration says it is protecting the American economy by nixing the Kyoto Treaty.
That same Chief executive has loudly proclaimed his desire for this country to embrace abstinence in sexual matters. A small aside. If abstinence is such a great virtue for single people, why should it not also be a similar virtue for married people as well? That is a matter for musing on another occasion.
In practical terms, if Kyoto would have a deleterious effect on what the Chief Executive and Commander in Chief on our economy, or “wreck” it, does he not care what his abstinence policy would do to the lodging segment of our economy? My thoughts here go to motels, tourist cabins and the so called “hot sheet” hotels. They are an integral part of the American economy.
Everyone knows that there is a zero chance of our practicing abstinence. Just this week we read of a four star Army General being run off for dallying with a civilian person other then his wife from whom he was separated. There was also a report of a 79 year old Monsignor from
St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, who was accused by an irate husband in a divorce suit, of spending excessive amounts of time with the angry husband’s wife on weekends and vacations. The wife is 49 years of age. They were videotaped, according to the husband, entering a motel on Long Island. Five hours later, they left the motel wearing different clothes from the costumes they wore as they entered. This is hard for this ornery old codger to relate, but it is a pretty good bet that they may have been more than hand holding. The Monsignor has resigned saying all this publicity is making it impossible to carry on as Rector of St. Pats. The irate husband might be well advised to make his next confession in a church other than St. Pats.
The point is that if the Commander in Chief is truly worried about the American economy, he must be concerned about all of it. If we are going to wipe out the lodging industry with a policy of abstaining from relations between the same or different sexes, why should the smoke stack industries continue to proliferate and profit? The King James Version has nothing to say on this particular point.
It seems to me that if the Grand Ayatollah Chief Executive wants to take on the ancient custom of fornication, he will clearly bite off more than he can chew. With Iraq and the Social Security fiasco, that would be a disastrous and monumental trifecta.
And so endeth Chapter XII of the New Jersey Meditations. You are advised to consider the delicacies and deliciousness of fornication until the next meditation appears.
E. E. CARR
July 11, 2005
~~~
I think most American patriots forget just how long the Iraq occupation period was, and that for the vast majority of that time we were supposedly in a post-combat, “Mission Accomplished” status under which we were getting more and more entrenched in Iraq and Afghanistan for less and less defensible reasons about WMDs.  By the end we were occupiers without a cause. The citizens of these countries never “hated us for our freedom,” they hated us because we were obstructing theirs. By, you know, filling their daily lives with our soldiers. And then replacing those soldiers with missile-equipped drones.