Category: Life and Living

Sharing Our Travels, Part 1: New England and Canada‘s Maritime Provinces

Posted on by Pete Schloss

 

Our post-retirement travels began in May 2015. For those first 3 years we focused most of our journeys on destinations in the United States and Canada with our 17’ Casita travel trailer in tow. We had set as our “mission” to visit at least 49 States and 8 of Canada’s Provinces. As it turned out, we exceeded the goal with time to spare.

I chronicled those wanderings in an earlier iteration of my website. Unfortunately, in upgrading my site those earlier 2015 -2018 blog posts are no longer available online. However, I did preserve much of the content and photographs in 12”x12” hardback “coffee table” books that I created for our children, grandchildren, and then surviving parents.

I am aware that many of you have vicariously enjoyed accompanying us on our journeys. It occurred to me that I might share with you portions of the books that I created. Currently there are five volumes which have over 1000 pages of narrative and photographs. Some of the content consists of my personal musings and “philosophies“. The PDF files for each volume are huge and make for a very difficult download. However, by focusing upon segments of our travels and eliminate most of my ruminations the files become much more manageable.

Part 1 consists of content from our 6 week trip through New England and Canada’s Maritime Provinces in 2016.

Part 2 will consist of content from travels in the American Southwest and Pacific Coast from 2017 and 2018.

Part 3 will consist of content from our 12 week journey through Alaska, Western Canada and the Yukon Territory.

Below is the link to Part 1. You may view online or download the file. The link will expire on March 31st. I hope that this provides you with some relief from the stresses of our current political climate and pandemic. Please note that the first 9 pages will be the same in each Part.
 
Peace Everyone. Pete

 

Link: New England and Canada’s Maritime Provinces

 

Gary Kretchmer, 1946 – 2020

Posted on by Pete Schloss

Gary Kretchmer was both a friend and a mentor. He closed his eyes for the last time on December 29, 2020. I have not yet read his obituary, but I am certain that when it is written it will, like so many others, celebrate the accomplishments of his life. What I hope is included is tribute to the impact that Gary will continue to have in the lives of thousands of men, women, and children for years to come.

Gary was a Mediator’s Mediator. He was adept at working as a Mediator for separated and divorced couples. His experience extended years before I learned that ”Mediation” was not “Meditation” misspelled. Over the 25 years of my Mediation practice I considered it a busy year if I worked with 300 couples. In his position as Director of the Mediation Program for Johnson County Kansas Court Services Gary likely worked with over 1,000 couples a year… often 4 couples in a single day, sometimes more. Day after workday he waded into the toxicity of couples in conflict, couples hurt, scared, couples cast into the role of litigants unable to effectively continue as parents. Gary was gifted at bringing peace to these Mothers and Fathers, moreover he salvaged “childhood” for tens of thousands of children caught in the vice of their parents’ conflict. Gary showed that there was light at the end of their tunnel

I first met Gary in the mid-1990’s, attending one of his trainings. I was immediately drawn to his calm and almost apostolic approach to communication in conflict. In that first encounter with Gary I learned that a Mediator could rarely make a misstep so long as the contributions were kept in the form of questions rather than statements. The Mediator acted as an interpreter between two people who found themselves either speaking over one another or speaking different “parenting languages”. Gary taught that the role of the Mediator was to provide a safe space for couples to craft their own resolutions. The Mediator teaches skills that empower folks to navigate their future. The Mediator is not a judge who makes decisions for them. As Gary would reflect, this is the difference between a Mediator (with a capital “M”) and a mediator. Gary was a deeply spiritual man who pursued his craft not so much as an occupation but as a calling. Much of whatever skill I developed came from lessons that I learned from him.

Beyond his work Gary was a consummate peacemaker and family man. He and his wife Sheryl were often guests at spiritual celebrations of other faith traditions. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist… to Gary, God was God, regardless of the form of worship. Gary and Sheryl enjoyed an annual Christmas Eve tradition of lunch at Andre’s Restaurant in Kansas City that began in 1984 when they first began dating.

It was the highest form of praise that over the years Gary would repeatedly encourage me with the words, “Pete, you are doing God’s work”. In my last training I was honored to be a co-presenter with three other gifted Mediators, Hugh O’Donnell, Dawn Kuhlman, and of course Gary Kretchmer.

Although our paths rarely crossed after our respective retirements, I feel a personal loss at his passing. The Mediation community in Metropolitan Kansas City not to mention tens of thousands of men, women, and children have much to be thankful for due to this good man.

I am certain that Gary will Rest In Peace since he lived his entire life, in Peace.

Peace Everyone. Pete

Friends and “Unfriends“

Posted on by Pete Schloss

 

This past week a number of events seem to converge into a single message for me. Early in the week I hosted a video chat with a group of old friends. We came to learn that every one of our families have been touched by COVID-19. Fortunately with no fatalities. My daughter (a nurse) continues her recovery from the struggles of a COVID infection that occurred nearly a month ago. A younger (very athletic) friend had gone silent after indicating that he had become infected. I learned that he had landed in the ICU, struggling for his every breath. He very nearly fell over “the edge“. Thankfully, he is now on the road to recovery and has been transferred to a regular ward. One of his observations was the extreme stress carried upon the shoulders of the hospital staff. The hospital is over capacity with no end in sight.

Also this week I received communications from folks who persistently deny that COVID-19 is real. People who maintain a belief in some grand international conspiracy. I had enough, and on my Facebook account I “unfriended“ them. In my pique I shared these things with my Facebook community without identifying those who had been “unfriended“. I also added, “…did I miss anybody?“. My daughters applauded my actions, understanding how very reluctant I have been over the years to exercise the “unfriend” button. A couple of people took umbrage with my post and asked that they be “unfriended“ as well. Still others found sadness in these personal interactions. For reasons I will explain, I am not one of them.

I originally resisted joining Facebook. However, I found that I could learn more of the day-to-day events in my children and grandchildren’s lives through Facebook than I could in a telephone call or a discussion over coffee. I joined. Soon I had a fairly large Facebook community that showed interest in our family and our travels. In turn I have enjoyed glimpses into the lives of my friends as shared on FB.

Many of my dearest friendships predate Facebook. Many friends do not participate in Social Media. I do not measure friendship by one’s presence or absence in my Facebook community. Facebook is merely a convenient forum for sharing.

I received some private expressions of regret from others at what had transpired between “friends”. I have come to believe that while social media provides a convenient forum for social exchange there is a darker side. We have come to take too seriously being a “friend“ or an “unfriend“ on social media.

Friends often have disparate views in matters of politics, religion, and socioeconomics that do not threaten friendship. However, in the realm of social media those distinctions, especially when extreme, may rendered it inappropriate for there to be participation in one another’s social media communities. We choose who we invite to Thanksgiving dinner. We choose who attends graduations, weddings, and birthday celebrations. We choose who is on our Holiday card list. Most of the time no offense is taken by those who are omitted.

Friendships may be a reflection of our work, our neighborhoods, where we worship, together with when and where we went to school. Social media does not and should not determine our relationships. I merely invite you to consider your own view of Social Media friendship and “unfriendship“.

Peace to Everyone. Please stay Safe, Happy, and most of all Healthy in this Holiday Season. Pete

PS. Speaking of Holiday Cards: Disaster has again befalling me in my best efforts to send out cards! After handwriting and addressing over 500 cards… even including a $10 bill in each one to make up for the past years’ omissions, I placed the cards in the oven. I had thought it would be a harmless way to sterilize them and avoid any risk of virus transmission.

Unfortunately, I became distracted by doing the laundry, washing the dishes, scrubbing the floors and washing the windows. In my neglect the cards and their contents perished.
Oh well, perhaps better luck next year. Pete

Partisanship Put on Hold

Posted on by Pete Schloss

I have put my “partisanship” on hold long enough to write this piece. Please pause yours before reading…

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution provides in part:

“… and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, Judges of the Supreme Court…”

In 2016 Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell refused to allow the hearings required to provide President Barack Obama the “advice and consent“ of the Senate with regard to his nomination of Merrick Garland to replace the deceased Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Garland received bipartisan Senate approval in 1997 and since then has been a sitting Judge on the United States Court of Appeals. The justification given by McConnell was that the appointment occurred in an election year and the voters deserved the right to determine who as President would make the nomination. The nomination occurred on March 16th of the election year.

Now, on September 26, 2020, Mitch McConnell commits to press forward with all due haste to provide the Senate’s advice and consent to President Donald Trump‘s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to replace deceased Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg on the Court. Judge Barrett received bipartisan Senate approval in 2017 and since then has been a sitting Judge on the United States Court of Appeals. This nomination comes within weeks of the upcoming presidential election. Senator McConnell‘s justification for this about face is that both the Presidency and Senate are in the hands of the same political party.

Without question, in 2016 and 2020 a sitting president nominated a qualified jurist to become a Justice of the United States Supreme Court. The Constitutional requirements were in place on each occasion for the Senate to undertake its duty to give “advice and consent“.

Senator McConnell‘s conduct in 2016 was nothing but transparent hypocrisy. There is nothing in the United States Constitution to support the position that he took as Senate majority leader. It is unnecessary for him to advance any justification for granting Senate hearings in 2020. He is merely trying to “put lipstick on a pig” of his own creation.

Voices raised in righteous indignation are justified. However, calls to obstruct the 2020 nomination process or (worse yet) take action such as “packing the court“ (the appointment of additional Justices solely for the purpose of swinging the courts ideology) are the pursuit of a wrong in furtherance of a prior wrong.

There is nothing in the United States Constitution that qualifies the appointment of a jurist based upon his or her ideology or religion. Article 6 provides in part that all officials:

“…shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

Like it or not, Amy Coney Barrett deserves hearings to confirm or deny her appointment to the United States Supreme Court. That is what the United States Constitution provides.

The denial of hearings in 2016 was inconsistent with Senator Mitch McConnell‘s oath to support the United States Constitution. Therein lies one wrong that for those on the left demands justice in the form of another wrong, obstruction of the appointment process. The legitimate remedy in 2020 is McConnell’s defeat at the polls.

You may now restore your partisanship. Peace Everyone. Pete

Justice, Black and Blue

Posted on by Pete Schloss

Most of my life is an open book not only on social media but on my website and among my friends and acquaintances. I suspect that my “politics“ are well-known.

What is less well known is that for 25 years I was the prosecuting attorney for two municipalities in metropolitan Kansas City. I worked closely with scores of officers in those police departments. Those officers were dedicated, hard-working, fair minded, and held the interests of their communities paramount in the performance of their duties. Every day they put their lives on the line and embraced the commitment to “serve and protect”. They also enforced the law… not something popular with those who break the law.

Early in my legal career I also was a Public Defender. For years I also had a private criminal defense practice. There was disparity in the way that people of color were commonly approached by law enforcement. In the 1980s there was a well know euphemism in the County Prosecuting Attorneys office that “NNR“ was probable cause for a law enforcement stop. “NNR“ stood for Nxxxx North of the River. ”North of the River“ was the predominately white area of Metropolitan Kansas City Missouri. My parents never had to caution me about random law-enforcement contacts. Sadly, that is a common conversation in families of color. Happily, attitudes are changing. Attitudes need to change more and perhaps the tragedies of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, among too many others, are getting the notice and action that they deserve outside of minority communities.

Perfect? Hardly. Police, like each of us, are human beings. The code of silence hurts good officers and the rest of us.

Over the years I encountered a (very) few who were not suited to wear the badge. They were usually weeded out by the command staff.

What makes headline news is not the good police officers or the peaceful protesters. What makes headlines is the “bad cop” and the rioters/looters all of whom have an agenda that is separate and apart from any argument for public service or social/racial justice.

I am a believer in social justice, racial justice, and that “Black Lives Matter”. Those beliefs are not exclusive to the support of good police officers and good law enforcement. Indeed, I find the beliefs wholly consistent.

When somebody says “Blue Lives Matter”, I say yes they do. When somebody says “Black Lives Matter“ I am just as enthusiastic. What I do not agree with is the use of one of those statements as a reply or response to the other. Embrace one statement and/or the other but not one in reply to the other.

Peace Everyone. Pete