I forgot to mention that we currently live in Dallas, TX. We are in a great area about a mile from a gorgeous city lake that is surrounded by art deco architecture and turn-of-the-century mansions. We got our 1600 square foot brick, 3 bedroom, 2 bath, 2 car attached garage home on a city lot for well under $100K, although it's worth much more now. There is a lot of crime here, but we have not been personally affected ever. We keep 2 big dogs out back, lock the doors, lights on out front at night, car doors locked and keep an eye on things around our street. Maybe we've just gotten lucky. Our problem with Dallas is that it's a city in transition, and areas like that are not always the friendliest places to live. There are a lot of very old original owners on our street, and they are nervous about rising property taxes and utilities and the new families that keep moving in as the old folks begin to move into assisted living or die. When you combine nervousness with way too much free time there is the potential for a not so nice little old lady to become a real pain in your butt. We have 2 on this street that have made things so uncomfortable for quite a few people over very petty things. They have done things like trying to organize block parties and only invite the white people. There is a lesbian couple on our street, and they're just horrible to them. We love the mix, but I'm afraid the tensions won't improve until the bored little old ladies are dead and gone. A little elbow room would do us well.... Also, the schools here stink. Texas public schools are the worst in the nation, they regularly ignore federal laws and the agency designated to enforce the law when complaints are filed is corrupt and useless. We have found a way around the schools, but eventually we will leave Dallas. The city is not doing anything to protect the middle class from rising property taxes as the mcmansion tear-down crowd slowly takes over this part of the city, so even after we own our home in a few more years, we will be paying a huge amount each month in taxes each month.

Vee, the way I've usually heard anti-American used is by non-Americans: "I hope this doesn't appear anti-American, but..." and then they proceed to bombard the listener (an American most likely) with all the failings and evils of Americans. It's similar to the way Great Britain used to be blamed for everything. Then there is a segment of the American population (think Left or liberal) who feel they must blame the U.S. for all the ills in the world, from the most recent back to before the U.S. even existed. It seems to be some sort of compensatory effort to assuage their guilt for being over-privileged. Hollywood-types are especially noisy about doing this. It's a bit rich that those who once screamed loudest in protest of Big Brother are now the ones who think Big Brother is not doing enough. Carolyn summed it up. Yes I did forget that group, Carolyn, and at least ten other really absurd ones such as the Fashion Police and the Standards-of-Beauty Police: all Americans must have perfect teeth and any hair that sprouts anywhere on the body below the chin (on men) or the nape of the neck (on women) must be gotten rid of. My conclusion is people aren't happy unless they can find fault with or blame somebody else. I'm a cynical old bag, I suppose. :-(

Thanks, Pat...and everyone else, for that matter. A few decades ago my dad built the wooden shell of that feeder. My wife and I then picked out various stones we liked on many walks. I glued them to the sides of the shell and used colored caulking for mortar. Needs a new base and roof though (again). tj

" Making your own face mask? Some fabrics work better than others, study finds " This study, non peer reviewed and non published that's touted all over NBC is, sorry, looking at the issue in the wrong way. They studied how various materials can filter out the virus, which is tiny teeny, 03 micron. Sounds like this means that they're trying to prevent incoming viruses from infecting the person who wears the mask. However, one primary mode of transmission is through face-to-face interaction. Fact is that in normal interaction, speaking, coughing, sneezing, the virus is ensconced in droplets --- these droplets are way, way bigger than what Segal tested. Therefore, 1. The point is to look at how to prevent EMITTING these virus carrying droplets, that is, the wearer prevents transmitting his/her infection to others. And this is where face covers are extremely efficient: They block the spit droplets from leaving the mouth of an infected person. 2. So, any meaningful tests of protective mouth covers needs to test such droplets. 3. Yes, there is evidence that such droplets that are emitted by talking, sneezing, coughing can become aerosolized, ie become tiny, the size of what Segal tested. However, again, this can be prevented by emitting droplets in the first place. Super frustrating to see some anesthesiologist's unpublished, non-peer reviewed "study" be all over the Internet.