politics

Regime Change: The Art of the Deal Meets The Art of War

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

I am sure somewhere in the annals of military history there are wars that were just “quick excursion.” The Franco/Prussian War of 1870 was quick and decisive as a European war can be but it lasted almost a year. A quick excursion sounds more like a raid, capturing Osama Bin Laden: In and out before anybody knows you were in. 

It is hard to believe that an air campaign bombing Iran with missiles, drones and smart bombs is a quick excursion. It is also hard to  argue with the Trump Administration’s reasons for bombing Iran. Most people can agree that Iran’s religious leaders, for almost 50 years, have exhibited a national religious psychosis that has kept the country in an 8th Century frame of mind. Instead of bombing them back into the Stone Age are we trying to push them into the A/I age?

It also would be delusional to believe that if the current Iranian regime was to have nukes they would behave rational with them; or any other weapon of mass destruction, considering they don’t play nice with the weapons that they already have. 

In many ways it makes sense that a regime change is in order. But we tried that already in Iran after World War II. The group we overthrew in the 1950s over threw our group in the late 1970s and now we are trying to overthrow them–again. Are we locked in some sort of irrational Twilight Zone circular reality that comes around like Haley’s Comet.

There is one point I would say is completely off the rails. This is the idea that it will be a short war. History indicates that we might be in for a longer haul, depending on objectives. And as crazy as it sounds it maybe over based sooner if we go by one man’s feelings. The rational for bombing, or going to war with Iran may seem logical. Practical? What is not rational or logical is to think a war can be won in two or three weeks simply by dropping bombs from above–or one man’s feelings.

Most wars have been irrational in terms of means or ends or both together. This is because choices for war are influenced by emotions, ideologies, domestic politics, and the tyranny of history, as well as by the more rational pursuit of material and strategic interests. Decisions for war have been almost invariably made by a handful of rulers and their advisors and entourages, and this is as true of democracies as authoritarian regimes.–Michael Mann, a Distinguished Research Professor of Sociology Emeritus at the University of California, Los Angeles, writes in  Yale University Press 

The Israelis have had a series of short duration wars with their Arab neighbors. In 1948 they dispatched their Arab foes in less than a year. Then in 1967 they fought a Seven Days War and then a twenty-day Yom Kippur War in 1973. In all of those wars Israel came out on top. I am not a historian by trade or a military history by practice; but, those engagements were called “wars.” I would call them battles in a continuous war starting with the UN carving out a hunk of Palestine and thus creating the state of Israel in 1947. 

On a side note, when Western Powers have gotten involved militarily in the Mideast, it has not turned out well. The French and British found out during the Suez Crisis in 1956. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser had nationalized the Suez Canal and closed the Straight of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba. The Anglo/Franco force, along with the Israelis tried to regain control the Suez Canal, and at the same time topple Nasser. They left within a year. According to Britannica “Nasser emerged from the Suez Crisis a victor and a hero for the cause of Arab and Egyptian nationalism….(and) Britain and France, less fortunate, lost most of their influence in the Middle East as a result of the episode.”

In 1982 President Ronald Reagan had the bright idea of sending the Marines into the region. His thinking was they could stabilize the fighting that always seems to be going on in Lebanon. Lebanon is not a Central American “banana republic” or Grenada. American troops in the Mideast tend to attract more attention, particularly those with bombs and guns. We left after terrorist blew up the Marine’s barracks killing 241.

I am not going to argue the logic one way or the other on the UN decision to create Israel. It seemed like a good one after WWII and still is a good one. The geopolitical/ religious change in Palestine just hasn’t worked out like the 1940s planners thought.

So if we look at the Mideast starting in1947 there has been some sort of conflict going on for nearly 80 years. We have to look back to Europe circa 1330 to The Hundred Year’s War to find that kind of stamina (or blunt trauma stupidity) to sustain a war of that length. England and France fought a for a century in war that resulted in France chucking the Brits out of Continental Europe. (* see link below for a more comprehensive list of long-lasting wars)

“There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

In 1568 there was an Eighty Year’s War or the Dutch Revolt. And some how in the same time frame Europe managed to roll in a Thirty Year’s, both ending in 1648. I am not sure what those wars settled but knowing just a tad of European history I would say it didn’t settle anything. 

A student who paid attention in their middle school US History class might recall the French and Indian War being fought in North America in 1756. In Europe it was known the Seven Year’s War. 

And, in April of 1861 President Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers to serve three month enlistments after Confederate forces bombed Fort Sumter. That three month enlistment was a pipe dream.  Before long Lincoln was calling for 300,000 volunteers to serve three-year enlistments. Eventually Lincoln initiated a draft; and that still did not cover the entire war effort. 

But those wars were fought without strategic air bombardment. Let’s jump to World War II, the ultimate regime change war. It was a war that looked like it would be over within a year. In fact there was an eight month period in Europe called the “Phony War” where Germany, France and Britain just sat there looking at each other–I dare you. No. I double dare you.

Finally, Hitler took up the dare and blitzed France. In a month they went through France as if it was a wedge of Brie cheese. They chased the British once again off the continent leaving the Wehrmacht to sit at the English Channel looking across at the White Cliffs of Dover. Hitler turned the war over to the Luftwaffe. Its commander Hermann Goering, thought he could bomb his way into England. The German army continued to lookacross the channel. They had no way of getting “boots on the ground” in England. 

When the Luftwaffe gave up the British just kept calm and carried on. Hitler, however, turned his attention to the East. Before long he got snowed-in in Russia where his lightening warfare froze up and lost its thunder against the Red Army and the Russian winter.  

Meanwhile, the US Army Air Corps was batting around a theory with British Bomber Command that the war could be won by simply bombing Germany around the clock, and hence into submission. By destroying the military industrial complex Germany could be brought to its knees—and possibly a regime change could be had. An arial theory that appears to still be a work in progress and may never be proven.

Without a doubt the the British and American air forces’s Combined Bomber Offensive played a significant role in Germany’s defeat, but it was two ground offensives Overlord (D-Day) on the Western Front and Russia’s Operation Bagration in Byelorussian (Belorussia) on the Eastern Front in June and August of 1944 that brought Germany to its knees. From there it was a race to Berlin and a regime change. 

In the Pacific the Japanese Empire rolled up the Dutch the British and the Americans like a wet blanket in the early weeks of 1942. Within months they upended the control of just about the entire Pacific Ocean from the shores of Australia to India and the Himalayas and north to parts of the Aleutian Islands in the Bering Sea. Only after four bloody years of ground troops “island hopping” across the Pacific and two atomic bombs was there a regime change in Japan.

And did we not learn anything in Vietnam. After nine years, despite virtual air superiority over most of Vietnam, and some nifty named air campaigns like Rolling Thunder and Linebacker, and the belief that a country could be pushed back into the Stone Age with strategic areal bombardment, the US Air Force, Naval Aviation and more than 500,000 ground troops could not secure victory or a regime change. The best deal hoped for was hollowed out “Peace with Honor.”

A significant lesson concerned the ethical and political challenges associated with bombing campaigns, especially their impact on civilian populations and infrastructure. These issues prompted a reassessment of air campaign strategies to balance military objectives with humanitarian considerations. The war also demonstrated that air operations alone could not achieve decisive victory without effective integration with ground and naval forces.–armistia.com

I am not saying the Trump administration will not be successful in bombing Iran. At this point most of us have an only a vague idea of what success would be–in the short term or long term. We also need to be leery about first round successes. If military history bears us out it is a good chance this war will not end in few weeks or months. Which leads me to ask: What are 2,500 Marines going to do? If there is any consistency in military history, we might as well settle in for the long haul; and wait for a negotiated deal: “Peace with honor” has already been taken.” 

* https://247wallst.com/special-report/2023/04/30/these-are-20-longest-wars-in-history/

When Real Estate Moguls goes to War

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

One of the key concepts about Hitler’s Nazi philosophy was Lebensraum–living space.

Lebensraum was a geopolitical concept the Nazis used “to justify military domination of Central and Eastern Europe and then the USSR.” According to World History Encyclopedia, by taking lands in Eastern Europe, Germany “would gain vast new space and resources and ensure economic prosperity and autonomy for Germanic peoples.” Hitler simply annexed Austria, he took over Czechoslovakia and then invaded Poland before rolling onto Russia.

That concept of “living space” gets swept up under the rug when discussing Hitler’s attempt at a Thousand Year Reich. To sit back and call World War II one man’s redevelopment dream would be making light of the War and its subsequent atrocities. But I would say that if we looked back in time a large percentage of wars were fought over land; or were just out right land grabs, like Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine. Sure Russia does have some ancient civil claims to the land–but those claims would probably not stand up in court.

Modern day current events are never as simple as political pundits make them out to be. Take Trump’s reasons for bombing Iran. Prima facie the bombing of Iran and the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei looks like justifiable homicide to Israel and the West. Iran, since the Islamic Revolution has been sticking it to the West, particularly “The Great Satin,” America. Starting in 1979 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s Islamic revolutionaries captured the US embassy in Tehran, which eventually led the toppling of the Carter Administration. Since then Iran has been funding terrorism and developing long range missiles with nuclear capabilities which makes sense for a regime change. It would be an understatement to say that diplomatic relations between the two countries have not been good. In fact some would say that some sort of quasi war has been going on for the better part of 46 years.

Iran, or as history once knew them as Persia, has tangled with some mighty empires in its past. They were one of the original players in the Middle East that included Egyptians, Summaries, Assyrians and Babylonians. They took on the Greeks, Alexander the Great, and the Romans in their day. And now a 250 year old upstart–the United States. However, the United States is not ruled by your ancient or even modern run-of-the-day leader.

Enter the real estate mogul and golf course developer Donald J. Trump. If Donald Trump knows one thing, it is a land deal when he sees one. And the number one rule in real estate is location, location, location. Location trumps all other needs. In some case in order to redevelop land it needs to be condemned. According to US Law Explained, “Condemnation is the legal process used by the government to either take private property for public use under eminent domain or to declare a property unsafe and uninhabitable due to severe code violations.” Gaza falls into all of those parameters. Those living in the condemned area do have Constitutional rights. But since Gaza is not under US jurisdiction Palestinians will have to file their complaints elsewhere.

The first phases of redevelopment have already taken place. Israel has already condemned Gaza, they have already demolition a good portion of the buildings and they have relocated the people. Trump enters into the deal and manages to get the first phase of peace agreement in place, his Board of Peace–a de facto planning council. But any good redevelopment needs money, investors and as long as Hamas and Hezbollah are in the area nobody wants to put any money into the pot.

But before any real redevelopment and any major investing can take place, Iran and its proxies need to be knocked out of the equation. Hence, the bombing of Iran and Israeli bombing of Gaza and Lebanon–the forceful eviction of squatters and other undesirables is a prerequisite.

What makes the whole bombing war contraversial is the Trump administration has not given us a real definative reason for its intentions. Sure Iran needs to be punched around–a good thrashing is in order. However, all the of the reason the Trump Administration is giving for kicking Iran’s ass are excellent reasons that nobody can really argue with. But those reasons are side show reasons. Trump’s real interest are he wants to redevelop Gaza. That area: Gaza, Lebanon and Iran are sitting on the new Silk Road. The Interchange that links Europe to the Far East.

Various routes of the Silk Road (PublicDomain)

At the New Delhi G20 Summit in 2023 the India, Middle East European Corridor (IMEC) was created. According to the Indian Express the IMEC was created “to stimulate economic development through enhanced connectivity and economic integration between Asia, the Arabian Gulf, and Europe.” This would be a modern day Silk Road.

According to Ancient Origins Unraveling the Mysteries of the Past, “The Silk Road is arguably the most famous long-distance trade route in the ancient world. This trade route connected Europe in the West with China in the East, and allowed the exchange of goods, technology, and ideas between the two civilizations.”

Depending on the route taken a variety of factors had to be dealt with along the Silk Road. The 4,000 mile route from China to Europe was a monumental task in itself. Merchants had to deal with environmental conditions, disease, political instability and bandits. As Ancient Origins states: “Although merchants could make huge profits if they succeeded in bringing their goods to their destination, it was not without risks, as certain stretches of this route were extremely dangerous.”

The re-invention of a modern day Silk Road requires that certain bandits are removed and political stability along the IMEC are dealt with before and redevelopment takes place. This global trade route requires some geopolitical redevelopment.

GOP wants TSA style voter PreCheck

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment
Booze was proof of citizenship in Caleb Bingham, “The County Election,” 1854, Reynolda House Museum of American Art.

When I was in college many years ago I took a class on State and Local Government. One thing that I clearly remember was what the professor said about voting rights. He said that when it came to expanding suffrage it was the federal government that took the lead. Today, I am not so sure.

The House of Representatives just passed the SAVE America Act or its official moniker: The Safeguard America Voter Eligibility Act. USA Today writes that “The legislation would require people to provide proof of citizenship “in person” when registering to vote in federal elections, and adds an additional requirement that voters show an approved form of photo identification to cast their ballot. It also places new rules on mail-in voting, requiring Americans to send in a copy of their ID when both requesting and submitting their ballot.”

Before long we will be carrying some sort of portmanteau with all of our various IDs, Usernames and Passwords. But I suspect voting will turn out much like applying for, and being approved, for a TSA PreCheck Pass. For less than $90 you can skip the lines and renew every five years for just under $60. Is this where we are heading with voting?

It is all about manipulating the vote. I would not be surprised if the SAVE Act were to morph into a law that “allows” Americans access to the polling place but in order to actually cast a ballot the voter will be charged a fee for individual ballots for federal, state and local elections; much like how Medicare drug plans categorize medications into tiers, with lower tiers generally having lower copayments. To vote in local elections would cost X dollars and in State X2 dollars and Federal elections would be the top tier. It would be The FEAR Act: Funding Elections Against Reprobates. Those not paying can wait in the back of the line with the riffraff and vote at the DMV.

By making voting a user fee and a funding mechanism it would take it out of the realm of the Twenty-fourth Amendment “The right of a citizen of United States to vote…shall not be denied or abridged by the United States by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.” It is now a funding mechanism for those who can afford to vote.

Let’s face it, there have always been some sort of voting restrictions or requirements going all the way back to Colonial times. Even after the Revolutionary War, which was basically fought over the lack of representation in Parliament over who gets to tax Americans, had requirements. Even the newly independent Americans were faced with voter requirements. The most obvious requirement was being a property owning white male. This requirement hit the propertyless poor, white men, women and anybody of color–even the propertyless veteran of Valley Forge who fought to found this country could be disenfranchised.

The republican logic of the times believed that in order for a citizen to vote he, and I use the word “he,” had to have an economic interest in the community at large. Those lacking economic independence, even if they fought for independence, were believed to be easily manipulated and could not be trusted to vote–for whatever reason.

There is some truth to manipulating the weak-minded voter on Election Day. George Washington lost his first run at the Virginia House of Burgesses because his liquor wagon ran dry. Washington was swamped losing the election by 231 votes. He garnered only 40 votes. According to classiccitynews.com “Washington avoided the same mistake during his second run, spending nearly the entire campaign budget on 28 gallons of rum, 50 gallons of rum punch, 34 gallons of wine, 46 gallons of beer, and two gallons of cider royal served to 391 voters — nearly a half-gallon per voter.” A good time in the old town was had by all as Washington floated his way into the House of Burgesses.

The GOP backed SAVE bill incorporates some of the same logic Washington used but with a twist of lemon–the mail-in ballot. Trump believes he lost the 2020 election due to mail-in ballots. There is a lot of truth in this. According to MIT’s Election Lab study on How We Voted in 2020: A Topical Look at the Survey of the Performance of American Elections states that “Looking at 2020 (election), the partisan difference in voting by mail increased substantially. The proportion of Democrats voting by mail more than doubled, while the proportion of Republicans using vote-by-mail increased by “only” 50 percent compared to 2016. In total, 60 percent of Democrats cast their ballots by mail in 2020, compared to only 32 percent of Republicans.”

This does not explain Trump’s 2024 victory but here is the bitter lemon in the cocktail. MIT’s Election Lab study says that voting by mail, which includes dropping votes off at drop boxes had steadily increased since 1996. Standing in line and expecting a gill of rum for doing your civic duty has dropped from 89 percent to 60 percent in 2016. “The fraction of voters casting ballots by mail more than doubled from 2016 to 46 percent. “Meanwhile, the share of voters casting ballots on Election Day declined by half, from 60 percent to 28 percent.” Granted, the Covid pandemic had states scrambling to set up safe voting procedures. Drop-off and mail-in ballots provided voters with safe access to voting without the crowds. However, it appears that voters like the idea of early voting using drop-off boxes and mail-in ballots.

The other twist is that Trump, constitutionally, is not allowed to run again per the Twenty-second Amendment. Without Trump’s rum wagon pulling up on Election Day maybe GOP Congressional representatives feel the need to legally control the voting process. Voting by either drop-off or by mail is like the forward pass in pro football. In 1933 the NFL changed the rules that a passer had to be “five yards behind the line of scrimmage before he can pass the ball…” to allowing “the passer to pass the ball from any point behind the line of scrimmage.” In three years, 1936, the NFL had its first 1,000 yard passer when Green Bay Quarterback Arnie Herber threw for 1,239 yards.  In 1967 Joe Namath became the first QB to throw for 4,000 yards and in 1984 Dan Marino threw for 5,000 yards. Simply put, mail-in voting, like the forward pass is a game changer. Since Marino threw for 5,000 yards that number has been eclipsed ten or more times.

I am not sure where this act of saving our elections from ourselves fits into the timeline of our county’s democratic principles. Voting rights can be easily fit into historical narrative and are often associated to important events in our history. The most obvious is the Fifteenth Amendment giving freed slaves the right to vote. Then there was the Twenty-sixth Amendment ratified in 1971 which allowed 18 year-olds the right to vote. This amendment came out of the Vietnam War. If a young man or woman was old enough to die for their country they surely should be old enough to vote much like their forefather in the Continental Army. The Twenty-fourth says the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex. I am surprised Congress has not taken up some sort of restrictions on trans gender people from voting. Maybe in the near future besides proving we are citizens we will need medical proof of our sex. Selfies do not count.

I really think the GOPers in Congress are not reading the writing on the wall–adapting to the forward pass or mail-in or drop box to voting. They need to scrap Trump’s revenge plays trying assuaging the “Big Man’s” ego and start looking downfield at the changing times. Putting more obstacles in the way of voting flew away with Jim Crow.

From a Purged Female Pharaoh to an Erased Font for its Wokeness

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

I really had to laugh the other day when I read that Secretary of State Marco Rubio rolled back the State Department’s use of Calibri as the department’s font. First, the Biden Administration changed fonts from New Times Roman, a font with serifs, to  Calibri, a sans serif font type.

According to DW.com “The US Secretary of State says the Calibri font, introduced under Joe Biden, is wasteful, confusing and degrades the department’s correspondence. The move is part of Trump’s bid to undo Biden’s pro-diversity policies.” I think Rubio is saying in a round-about-way that the pen, with the right style of font, is greater than the sword.

Let’s take the Declaration of Independence, one of our first historical documents issued before we were even a country, as an example. Thomas Jefferson is given credit for writing the Declaration of Independence but the task of actually putting the words to parchment using quill and ink was Timothy Matlack, the assistant to the Secretary of the Second Continental Congress. According to the National Archives Matlack “transcribe(d) the document using a patrician style called English round hand or Copperplate.

“Matlack’s handwritten document lends a sense of elegance, authority, and—most important—anonymity to the Declaration of Independence. The purpose of the document is to justify American independence and raise support for an independent United States, both within the colonies and abroad.”

Standardization and formality have long been hallmarks of official documentation, such as legal or government papers. For this reason, the mastery of fine handwriting became a profession itself, and the craftsmen who expertly transcribed texts for hire were called “penman.” The mark of “good” penmanship was its artful appearance. Fine letter formation instilled trust and so carried an importance equal to what the words actually said. –prologue.blogs.archives.gov

Timothy Matlack is the scribe whose impeccable handwriting adorns the official, signed parchment on display in the National Archives Rotunda.
Charles Willson Peale, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Rubio also proves, in a round-about-way that a font like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Or in this case what is confusing and degrading. Now, using Rubio’s reasoning, the Biden administration switched to Calibri because the State Department thought it was easier for people with vision problems to read.

But here is the real problem with the current administration’s switch back to New Times Roman. The recommendations to shift fonts came from the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. Their decision was based on studies that Calibri was a cleaner font to read than New Times Roman.

Poor Calibri, erased by guilt from association, caught in the world of woke. Somehow the Trump State Department views Calibri as a woke font because it might be easier to read. However, readability had nothing to with Rubio’s change of fonts. Herein-lies the kicker. Anything with the Office of Diversity and Inclusion label sewed onto a government study, in this case the Calibir Font, is going to be sent to the Woke Second Hand Store found in the section of nonrenewable concepts of inclusion.

The definition of legibility is this: how easily individual characters or symbols can be distinguished from one another, how easy they are to recognize. If a font is legible, you can effortlessly distinguish between similarly shaped symbols even in small text sizes…Readability refers to the ease with which a reader can understand a written text. The definition in this context focuses on how easily the reader can scan or “glide” through lines of text without distraction or difficulty (ease of reading).—typttype.com

I personally don’t care what font the State Department uses. The State Department can hand write their correspondence using crayons from the classic 64 Crayola box. (I don’t think you would find them using “Colors of World Skin Tone” 24 color box set.) What I am getting tired of, and to paraphrase Trump’s “Russia, Russia, Russia” is “Biden, Biden, Biden” with an occasional Obama thrown in there. I would have been satisfied with we want a font with serifs and be done with it.

I think it really has more to do with purging “anything” to do with Obama and Biden. Just google Obama and Biden policies reversed by Trump. It is a long list ranging from environmental climate change initiatives dealing with clean air and greenhouse gases to fuel economy standards and federal minimum wage. Oddly we have not heard anything about the Administration’s victory over Trump’s war on water pressure. Ending this war is never included in the eight or so touted wars this Administration has ended.

But wiping out a predecessor’s legacy is nothing new. If we could travel back in time on Mr. Peabody’s Way Back Machine to Hatshepsut’s rule (c. 1479–1458 BCE) in Egypt, we would find the systematic eliminations of anything to do with her rule as pharaoh.. According to worldhstoryedu.com, “The motivations for erasing Hatshepsut’s legacy are complex and likely rooted in political, religious, and cultural considerations. First, her ascent to power was unconventional, as she took on the full role of pharaoh while a male heir, Thutmose III, was available, albeit a child at the time.”

Additionally, “Some historians have also suggested that Hatshepsut’s erasure may have been part of a broader ideological movement to purify Egyptian history. The pharaohs who followed Thutmose III, particularly during the reign of Amenhotep II, took further steps to restore a strict adherence to traditional roles and practices.”

Seated statue of Hatshepsut Metropolitan Museum of Art, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

It is interesting to note that according to worldhistory.org, ‘Women in ancient Egypt were regarded as the equals of men in every aspect save that of occupation. The man was the head of the household and nation, but women ran the home and contributed to the stability of that nation as artisans, brewers, doctors, musicians, scribes, and many other jobs, sometimes even those involving authority over men.”

Hatshepsut must have really ticked off Thutmose III; her purging was done so well she was forgotten to history. Egyptians had deep beliefs about the afterlife. They believed if one’s name was removed from history this would have serious ramification in the afterlife “…it is believed that whoever removed her from public knowledge did not wish her ill after death and so preserved her name in more secluded areas.” History is out there somewhere.

It wasn’t until the 19th century that archaeologists unearthed, “in the more secluded areas” her statues, monuments and other related long lost inscriptions. It was from these discoveries that archaeologists and historians were able to determine the great impact Hatshepsut had on the development of New Kingdom’s 18th Dynasty.

History is full of purges. We can look back to October 13, 1307, a Friday when King Philip IV and Pope Clement V decided to gruesomely rid themselves, and then avail themselves of the so called fortunes of the Knights of the Templar. Ironically no fortunes were found and people have been looking for buried treasure for centuries.

As for the choice of what font the State Department uses I ask: Does anybody really care?

Don’t let a Dime hold up a Dollar

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

In my younger days I worked during the summer for my Uncle Don as mason’s tender. A fancy word for a laborer. As teenager working among men I found out the different styles of foremen and bosses. Some were great yellers throwing off epitates on your job performance as fast as a dog can shake off water. A throwback to the old straw bosses overseeing a bunch of gandy dancers working on the Union Pacific Railroad.

Uncle Don was different. He was always good for the quick witty, some might say sarcastic jab aimed like a rabbit punch to the gut. He let you know right away on how well you were doing your job. At the time I didn’t particularly care for the jabs. One day I overheard him say to another laborer that he was dime holding up a dollar. Basically, whatever the laborer was doing at the time was not as important in keeping bricklayers laying bricks.

Now that we are in the midst of government shutdown, I believe we can apply the dime holding up a dollar to what is happening in our nation’s Capital. It just seems to me that we are hung up on a paltry number–$350 billion. That is not even close to the top Powerball payout of $2.04 billion in November 2022. According to Economics Insider, for 2025 the US federal “government plans to spend a total of $7 trillion.” Seven trillion in the general number scale is not a paltry number. But for the moment let’s just think about what $7 trillion does and consider all of the things that are not getting done during the shutdown anything from say cleaning toilets to training air traffic controllers.

And now let us turn our attention to what I have been able to glean out of the nonsense and obfuscation being pushed upon us from on high. The best I can determine is that the Democrats want to extend tax credits for the Affordable Care Act enacted under the Biden Administration. The GOP and Trump not so much, particularly if it has anything to do with Biden. The Congressional Budget Office says by “Permanently expand(ing) the premium tax credit structure as provided in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and later extended through calendar year 2025 in the 2022 reconciliation act—increasing the deficit by $350 billion from 2026 to 2035 and the number of people with health insurance by 3.8 million in 2035…” The CBO lost me somewhere back in 2022 with a reconciliation act, which is whole different bowl of Congressional gumbo. And it is here is things get sort fuzzy quickly. Watching Congress do its thing is not as simple as watching a Pickleball match or Scottie Scheffler lining up a putt. For the average person it becomes hard to mix and match years and money let alone what is going to happen in 10 years.

But let’s just hold things static for one second. We are talking about a country that spends $7 trillion dollars and we are going to shut the government down for a measly $350 billion because it might increase the amount of people by 3.8 million to the 40-50 million already getting coverage from “Obamacare.” There are 330 million people living in this country and we are going to shut the government down because about 15 percent of the population is getting some sort of tax break for health care. Talk about a “dime holding up a dollar.” It seems to me that we are talking about a 10 year rounding error. Even if you compare the $350 billion to the $1.8 trillion deficit it would be like trying to calculate Mercury’s gravitational impact on the Sun.

Losing the tax credit would have an immediate impact. According to CBS News, “The cost of premiums for people who buy their insurance through the ACA marketplaces could more than double, rising from an average of $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026.” Another four million people would likely drop their insurance.

It seems as if extending tax credits for healthcare to middle-to-lower income families is too high a hurdle for the government to jump. It knocks the pinions right out from under the government–the proverbial straw, the want of a nail. One really has to wonder about the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” signed into law on July 4, 2025. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-profit, non-partisan think tank based in Washington, D.C said, “The predominant feature of the tax and spending bill signed into law by President Trump on July 4 is a massive tax cut for the richest 1 percent — a total $117 billion benefit to the wealthiest people in the country in 2026 alone.” I am not sure, but I think the $350 billion healthcare tax credit is spread out over 10 years is meager compared to nearly $120 billion to millionaires and billionaires in one year.

If anything can be said about our government they sure know how to make numbers crow about something. Congress is like a murder of crows, you have no real idea what all the squawking is really about. But they are squawking nonetheless. Here is where logic breaks down.They have no problem giving 3.3 million people $117 billion tax break. It is just a toss of a stone in a game of hopscotch. But giving $350 billion to 40 or 50 million people is game of Deal or No Deal.

My Uncle was full of poignant sayings. Once there was a man sitting down on the job. When my Uncle showed up and saw him sitting he told the man he had a job as long as he was sitting down. When he stood up he was fired. Of course he didn’t fire the man but my Uncle got his point across. Maybe we should address the Congress and the President in the same manner. You have a job as long as the government is shutdown. When you open it back up you are all fired.

“Oh with your fussin’ and your fightin’,” Trump’s Tonkin Gulf Moment

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

It would be hard to find a time when we as a nation were blessed without all “your fussin’ and your fightin’.” I think the key word in this is “your.” How easy it is to get dragged into someone else’s fussin and fightin’ that then has you hip deep into their feud. If you are one with a limited amount of common sense, to often you gladly jump into the melee feet first; if you are lacking common sense, you dive in head first. This the way I see the immigration nonsense taking place in LA.

I will admit that this country’s immigration policy is out-of-whack, but hardly a Mars Attacks assault. This so-called immigration invasion in Los Angeles has stirred up a lot “fussin’ and fightin’.” Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents are rounding up day laborers at Home Depot–the low hanging fruit of snatch and grab–has gotten a lot people excited, particularly those at The White House. In fact, they got so excited they decided, not only to call out the California National Guard, but the Marines. Who better to call out then the Marines. Marines have a history of dealing with Central American insurrections that goes back to the early 1900s, the National Guard not so much. And who better to guard our streets against an immigrant insurrection of landscapers, dishwashers and a hodgepodge of day laborers then those who cleared the streets of Fallujah in 2004. This is Trump’s domestic surge to push back alien invaders from our streets. It may literally become overkill.

Listen to the radio, talkin’ ’bout the last show
Someone got excited, had to call the state militia–Creedence Clearwater Revival: Travelin’ Band

I am not condoning violence and the burning of driverless cars or surrounding federal buildings. But if there were a Richter Scale for measuring riots what is happening in LA is a 1.0: A microriot not felt, but recorded by main street news (and other bloviators). Take Detroit in 1967, that was a riot. That five-day riot was a magnitude 8.0 Riot: More than 40 people were killed, 1,100 injured (figures for injured vary), 7,200 people arrested and 2,000 buildings damaged or destroyed, its tremors were felt across the nation. Ironically, this riot started with similar early morning police raid on an after hours-bar that went amiss. A side note, the 1992 LA Riot was a 9.0 Riot.

The 1967 Detroit Riots were among the most violent and destructive riots in U.S. history. By the time the bloodshed, burning and looting ended after five days, 43 people were dead, 342 injured, nearly 1,400 buildings had been burned and some 7,000 National Guard and U.S. Army troops had been called into service.–History.com

The Paramount Riot seems like Trump’s Tonkin Gulf Resolution to escalate his deportation war. The big difference is there is no Congressional authorization, which today is a wink and a nod and a hardy “go for it!” It is a hyped up reason to bring out Title 10 U.S.C. 12406 and the military, which says “the president may call into federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws.” In other words, the Administration just put a hiring freeze in Home Depot parking lots across the nation. Some poor drywaller is going have a hard time finding locals to carry in sheetrock up to the second floor addition. Boards that can weigh from anywhere from 30 to 100 pounds depending on the size, and usually bundled in twos.

Our immigrant problem began when the first European immigrants in 1617 brought in African immigrants to pick tobacco. (Native Americans’ immigration problems started in the early 1500s.) On a more positive note, in the late 1600s William Penn actively sought out Europeans to settle in Pennsylvania. According to The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, “William Penn had proselytize among Rhine Valley dissenters and invited them to settle in his colony…Between 1727 and 1775, approximately 65,000 Germans landed in Philadelphia.” And they had to travel hundreds of miles just to get to a ship to cross the Atlantic Ocean. Benjamin Franklin wrote “that at least one-third of Pennsylvania’s white population was German.”

Immigration is a part of our natural history as a country. We cannot deport our way out of 400 years of immigration. It runs as deep in our veins as tax avoidance; both have been necessary to sustain the growth and expansion of our country. It is interesting, however, to note, that the current Administration is trying to tackle both issues at the same time with The One Big Beautiful (tax cut) Bill and rounding up 3,000 immigrants a day–but not to carry drywall. It will be interesting to see if this administration can walk and blow bubble gum at the same time.

If our country is a melting pot of culture, our immigration policies have been a recipe created over time reflecting the singular view of White Anglo Saxon beliefs of race, religion and economics at various points along our history. According to heinonline.org, “The Naturalization Act of 1790 established that foreign-born residents of the United States could apply for citizenship provided they had lived in the U.S. for two years, had remained in their current residence for one year, and were free, white, and of “good moral character.” If we went by “good moral character” for being a citizen today, we might easily lose half the currently elected and appointed members of our government, to include Supreme Court justices–they could easily be DOGE(d).

Since then we have had a twisting immigration policy that has encouraging Chinese laborers to work on the railroads to then outright excluding them in 1882 from not only becoming citizens but denying those that were here the path to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Exclusion Act was renewed every 10 years until it was finally repealed in 1952. In 1980 immigrants could now claim refugee status and could enter the immigration maze. And, In 1986 the Reagan Administration basically outsourced the control of immigration to business.

Prior to Reagan, Congress had created a niche out for businesses. According to The Congressional Quarterly Almanac, “it was illegal to enter or work in the country without proper papers, did not make it illegal for employers to hire undocumented workers.” It seems the government closed the front door but left the back door wide open to hiring immigrants no matter what their status was. In reality it is an economic problem of supply and demand in getting the cheapest labor possible.

That changed with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. It was now illegal to hire illegals “knowing that such person is unauthorized to work…without verifying his or her work status.” Employers could now be subjected to fines and jail. The new law also allowed a pathway for amnesty and legal status for undocumented aliens. Since then we have had Dream Acts that set requirements and conditions for illegal immigrants to apply for residential and permanent status. And of course there has been wall building and border openings and closings along with barbed wire across the Rio Grande. But that has not stopped businesses from hiring illegal immigrants.

A major problem with immigration is that we have had a Congresses that is too cheap to buy new underwear. But not so for foreign owned 747s. Our policies in dealing with immigration has a time-worn elastic band, it is ragged, and it is full of holes. You dare not put it in the dryer and you damn sure don’t want to hang it out on the line to dry after washing it in the sink.

“If you have a problem you can solve by throwing money at it, you don’t have a very interesting problem.”— American novelist and nonfiction writer Anne Lamott.

For the better part of 40 years Congress and various Presidents have created a very interesting political/economical problem” out of immigration. Businesses like agriculture, meat packing and construction run on cheap labor immigration provides. Employment for immigrants for decades was wide open. As a nation we have not invested the necessary money to control and accommodate business needs nor screen immigrants at the border. If we did, why are we deporting so many now? Instead, We have allowed our country to become a Walmart on Black Friday every day.

What I am sick and tired of is the political extremes on both ends of the spectrum creating all the insane fussin’ and fightin’. Without a doubt we have had a long running challenges with immigration. But now we have a president that has decided that things are out of hand. Have things drastically changed from 1980 to the present? If so, it is because immigration is part of our historical DNA. The problem today, is that this administration’s policy on immigration could be compared to a doctor using a guillotine to treat patients suffering from migraines. It is a bit radical and obvious not the best solution for the patient or his family.

Meanwhile, those of us that are in the middle looking for real solutions to immigration watch the ends never meet.

Making America Great from Sea to Shining Sea

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment
American Progress by John Gast, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The slogan “Make America Great Again” confuses me. There is so much to unpack in that four word statement. It is a wide open proclamation that seems simple but in reality is so subjective it creates more questions than it can possibly answer, starting with what is great. Can “Great” even be defined and then agreed upon.

MAGA as a slogan is a historical phenomena based on the Rashomon effect. The term Rashomon effect comes from Akira Kurosawa’s 1950 film Rashomon. The movie, according to psychologenie.com, “highlights the contradictory interpretations of the same event by different people. But because these are accompanied by facts, each of these interpretations seem completely plausible … wherein lies the confusion and dilemma.”

What makes MAGA so confusing is whose interpretation of what era of American history we agree upon is or was great. Our history is comprised not of one event but a series of events that lead up to a major event–like say, the Civil War to Reconstruction.

Understanding and interpreting history comes from three sources. The University of California, Berkley’s Department of History says that Primary Sources are “The ‘raw materials’ (or the) foundation of historical research and writing.” It is observations from sources who witnessed history as it was unfolding. Sources like newspaper articles, journals, government documents and the arts all give us information from the past.

Secondary sources are the historiography produced from primary sources. It is the books and articles “that (are) anchored in primary sources and informed secondary sources.” It is the “arguments and interpretations about the past” that emerge from the “foundations of historical evidence (i.e., primary sources).” It is a process of either challenging or supplementing “prevailing interpretations that other historians have made.”

And finally, Tertiary Sources are “Books and articles based exclusively on secondary sources – i.e., on the research of others.” Basically we are dealing with numerous interpretations (sources) and outcomes depending on the combination and permutations of historical events. Like this blog.

The (Rashomon) effect of the subjectivity of perception on recollection, by which observers of an event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it.–Wikitionary

A lot of philosophical beliefs about government and influential individuals in our history can be hashed about as causes for “making America great” starting with the Revolutionary War all the way to someone like Henry Ford and the assembly line. It could be argued that the Louisiana Purchase was an accelerant spurring a population pinned in-between the Appalachians and the Atlantic to move west into what would be a mission of Manifest Destiny, from sea to shining sea with amber waves of grain in-between. It was going west to get to the East–the Orient, and even possibly into Central America. But first Native Americans and Mexico had to be shoved out of the way.

After the War of 1812 a spirit of nationalism took hold. For the next two decades Americans began to take their beliefs west. According to William Earl Weeks, “Manifest Destiny consistently reflected three key themes: the special virtues of the American people and their institutions; their mission to redeem and remake the world in the image of America; and the American destiny under God to accomplish this sublime task.” It was a belief in the virtues of a liberty, justice, and the republican form of government. It encompassed the two “Cs”: Christianity and Capitalism, two concept developed during Colonial times that were now ready to move beyond the Appalachian Mountains–on steroids.

The westward movement in some ways was a religious crusade spawned by the Second Great Awakening. It created a religious incentive to drive west. Indeed, many settlers believed that God himself blessed the growth of the American nation. Afterall the Native Americans were considered heathens and always subject to be converted. By Christianizing the tribes, American missionaries believed they could save souls. Unlike Mountain Men and fur trappers who preceded the missionaries, Manifest Destiny was a fulfillment of God’s will to Christianize the heathen Native American tribes.

It appeared to be America’s sacred duty to expand across the North American continent, to reign supreme in the Western Hemisphere, and to serve as an example of the future to people everywhere. This was Manifest Destiny of the American people.–Building the Continental Empire Americas Expansion from the Revolution by William Earl Weeks

Manifest destiny touched not only on religion; it was an economic and trade crusade; it was about race and patriotism. According to Weeks, “Senator Edward Hannegan of Indiana typified (the) view when in late February 1847 he proclaimed to Congress that ‘Mexico and the United States are peopled by two distinct and utterly nonhomogeneous races. In no reasonable period could we amalgamate.'” A country that depended on slave labor to generate a national income probably did not have a deep seated problem in viewing the western inhabitants, non-Anglo Saxons, Catholics as inferior. The needs of the American expansion to the Pacific generally did not include them. These religious, economic and racial differences would end up in a war with Mexico over Texas. Mexico would lose just about all of the Southwest to include California right up to the border of the Oregon Territory as a result of the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). If this could be looked as a ledger sheet, America’s great gain was Mexico’s great loss.

The Oregon Territory was a bit different then battling non Anglo Saxon Catholics and savages. Fighting over the territory was not really an option. Territorial disputes with the former Mother Country over northern and western borders was nothing new. Handling the British bulldog was different then kicking around the Mexican Chihuahua. Britain, unlike Mexico with Texas, could see that American settlers were soon going to populate the Oregon Territory. Both countries had a vested interest in not disrupting the trade between the two countries. And besides, the United States had just engaged Mexico in one war and did not need to fight the British along the northern border at the same time.

Ironing out the Columbia River was done diplomatically. Concessions were made on both sides in modifying the belligerent cry of “Fifty-four Forty or Fight” land grab. This American claim included most of the land west of Continental Divide (current British Columbia) and as far north as the Russian territory of Alaska. Cooler diplomatic heads prevailed setting the border between British North America, Canada a country that we invade twice and at present seem to want to annex, along the 49th parallel instead of the 54th.

Then there was the desire of southerners to find more lands suitable for cotton cultivation. The anti-slavery movement in Northern states was beginning to take off. There was a deep concerned about adding any more slave states to the Union. All of this new land could alter the delicate balance of power of the federal government. Adding states to the Union at this time consisted of bringing in one slave and one free state at the same time. And no president until Abraham Lincoln would consider curbing the growth of our “peculiar institution” to just the South. Settling the boundaries of slavery in these new lands would take two compromises, The Compromise of 1820 (the Missouri Compromise) and The Compromise of 1850. Both were replaced with the idea of popular sovereignty in the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The idea was that the settlers of new territories would decide. Eventually the country decided on war.

And then there was trade, particularly with China. According to The Office of the Historian, “American trade with China began as early as 1784, relying on North American exports such as furs, sandalwood, and ginseng, but American interest in Chinese products soon outstripped the Chinese appetite for these American exports.” (It seems we have always run a trade imbalance with China.) Sixty years later the United States would sign The Treaty of Wangxia that would open up five treaty ports to US trade.

The big problem in tapping into the Far East trade was the United States did not have a suitable port on the West Coast. San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco were all in Mexico. That would change after the Mexican-American War. Under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Mexico cede 55 percent of its country to the US. America received California, Nevada, Utah along with most of Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona. It also settled the long standing feud over the southern border of Texas as the Rio Grande.

It could be argued that Manifest Destiny was a great moment in American history. A lot of the greatness however, was taking place East of the Mississippi. Internal improvements like canals were built to move produce and trade along the many rivers flowing to the Hudson and Mississippi Rivers, and the Great Lakes. Steamships began regular runs up and down the Mississippi and its tributaries. In 1826 in New Jersey John Stevens demonstrated the possibilities of steam locomotion. By the 1830s railroads like the Baltimore & Ohio (B & O) were surveying and laying track. Some Forty years later the railroads connected the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans. These were innovations that would be needed to settle and develop the West.

From a certain perspective Manifest Destiny was a time when it could be argued that America being made great. Not so much for Mexico and Native Americans. Therefore greatness may very well depend on the subjective perspective taken in determining what is great as to who benefits by greatness and the stories they tell. To the contrary, there is a good possibility that someone has been disposed, denied or defeated by just standing in the way of making something great.

From Gilded Age to Golden Age

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment
contemplative images flickr.com

In President Trump’s Inaugural Address he boldly stated, “The golden age of America begins right now.” It has a nice ring to it but when you think about it, America’s last attempt at a golden age was called the Gilded Age.

Our Gilded Age was a time that was between the Civil War and the and turn of the 20th Century. It was a time when America was unfolding itself from sea to shining sea. History.com describes it as an era where “America became more prosperous and saw unprecedented growth in industry and technology.” But it was also an era as History.com says, that “had a more sinister side: It was a period where greedy, corrupt industrialists, bankers and politicians enjoyed extraordinary wealth and opulence at the expense of the working class. In fact, it was wealthy tycoons, not politicians, who inconspicuously held the most political power during the Gilded Age.”

For a Golden Age to be golden it needs to fit the following criteria:

  • The age must have stable economic growth, trade and the creation of wealth;
  • The age must have significant advancements in the arts, literature and science that contributes to the advancement of civilization;
  • The age must be one of discovery and innovation where progress pushes the envelope of what is possible;
  • Finally, it must be an age where there are peaceful relations among citizens and other countries.

Granted very few eras in history have hit all of the above criteria in full. It could be argued that for most of the United States history the US has come close to meeting most of the criteria to some degree some of the time; and at other times completely disregarded others. But even the Gilded Age with its moments of great wealth had its moments of economic panics, followed once again with the creation of great wealth. It was a time when the captains of industry controlled entire industries creating monopolies and trusts. and full employment. But it was a time where workers barley made $500 a year.

 Like today, New York City was the center of the financial system. Between 1863 and 1913, eight banking panics occurred in the money center of Manhattan. The panics in 1884, 1890, 1899, 1901, and 1908 were confined to New York and nearby cities and states. The panics in 1873, 1893, and 1907 spread throughout the nation.–federalreservehistory.org

According to the Thomas Edison National Historical Park, “In 1879, he made an incandescent bulb that burned long enough to be practical, long enough to light a home for many hours.” Within 60 years there would be night baseball.

Louis Bachrach Studios Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress

It was a period of peace and innovation. Inventors like Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell pushed the boundaries of science. Their inventions had a great impact on raising America’s standard of living and helped push the world into an electronic age of light and communication.

Alexander Bell places the first long-distance call from New York to Chicago in 1892. There were no free minutes at that time or unlimited texting.

Gilbert H. Grosvenor Collection, Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress

With the influx of immigrants, a segregated population became more segregated with laws like the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. It was a law that restricted Chinese laborers from entering the country, among other restrictions. It also affected Chinese immigrants already in the country by making them permanent aliens. It was an act of denying them citizenship. It was also a time where women, citizens, were denied the right to vote.

And it was a time of full employment fueled by immigrants, where workers barley made $500 a year. It was also a time dangerous working and conditions for labor. One slip or injury could cause economic devastation for a family. Unions fought for survival. However most were crushed from the weight of business interests working in conjunction with the government.

  • There was the Haymarket Riot of 1886 where workers were rallying for an 8 hour day. A bomb exploded killing workers and seven policemen.
  • There was the Homestead Steel Strike of 1892 where workers battled Pinkerton Detectives brought in by Andrew Carnegie’s chief executive Henry Clay Frick to break the strike. Eventually the Pennsylvania Militia was called out and the union organization was crushed.
  • And two years later there was the Pullman Strike. Pullman manufactured railroad cars. In 1893 George Pullman laid off seventy-five percent of the work force and reduced wages for those still working. The the American Railway Union called for a nationwide strike shutting down rail travel in 27 states. Eventually, President Grover Cleveland sent in 10,000 troops to quash the strike.

The annual income of an American worker in 1890, at the height of the Gilded Age. Adjusted for inflation, that’s just under $1,500 in today’s dollars.–Investopedia

Sticking with the railroad motif, Louisiana in 1890 passed The Separate Car Act. Railroads were required to provide “equal but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers.” Additionally, according to Britannica.com, the law prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than those to which they had been assigned on the basis of their race.

The argument necessarily assumes … that social prejudices may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured to the negro except by an enforced commingling of the two races. We cannot accept this proposition. If the two races are to meet upon terms of social equality, it must be the result of natural affinities, a mutual appreciation of each other’s merits, and a voluntary consent of individuals. (From Brown’s majority opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson. In other words, don’t trip over the color line on the way out.

Original published in The American Magazine in 1905 Frances Benjamin Johnston

It is amazing how educated legal minds can interpret the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. When this law was challenged in court it made its way to the Supreme Court. In Plessy v Ferguson, the Supreme Court ruled that separate accommodations did not violate the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments. Justice Henry Billings Brown wrote for the majority. He “argued, because the amendment was intended to secure only the legal equality of African Americans and whites, not their social equality. Legal equality was adequately respected in the act because the accommodations provided for each race.” The lone dissenting vote came from John Marshall Harlan who fundamentally objected to the statute because “it interferes with the personal freedom of citizens.” The ruling gave us the concept of “separate but equal.” A dogmatic principle that hung around for another 50 plus years.

A Golden Age is a term used to describe a period in history where a culture, society, or nation experiences a period of prosperity, peace, and advancements. This era is characterized by significant achievements, significant contributions, and a collective sense of prosperity and unity. Golden ages are often marked by major advances in science, technology, art, and literature.–California Learning Resource Network

Before declaring a golden age Trump and company should look at what they are up against. They may have a hard time competing with the likes of ancient Egypt’s Fourth Dynasty. We might be going back more than 4500 years but in its golden age these pharaohs put up some impressive feats, like building pyramids. According to Pharaoh.se “the pharaohs of this dynasty only ruled for a little more than a century (and we think eight years is a long time), and yet they managed to have the three pyramids of Giza built in that time.” The pharaoh Sneferu started construction of the first pyramid and built three more, (no doubt letting the Nubians to pay for last two).

The Pyramids of Giza
Ricardo Liberato, Wikimedia Commons

His son Khufu continually improved upon his dad’s work. No pressure on Don Junior. In Trump’s first term he could not complete a wall along the Southern Border. (It was foiled when Mexico reneged on its fiduciary participation.) However Trump is proposing the Stargate Initiative. According to Forbes, this is “a $500 billion private sector deal to expand U.S. artificial intelligence infrastructure. Spearheaded by tech giants OpenAI, SoftBank, and Oracle, Stargate represents the largest AI infrastructure project in history.” Move over pyramids because the Yanks are coming! The sky’s the limit when billionaires get together. (At least three have skirted outer space.)

And then there is the Golden Age of Ukraine. If Trump plans to end Russia’s conquest of Ukraine he might want to bone up on Vladimir I or just Vladimir the Great. And no, this is not Putin but the “founding father” of Kievan Rus’. Putin might be using history to repeat Vladimir I’s medieval accomplishments. We have to harken back the 10th and 11th Century when Kievan Rus’ was Europe’s most powerful European state. A state without nuclear weapons. Vladimir I is credited with expanding Christianity to that region. Originally a pagan, much like Saul of Tarsus, he saw the light. When he converted to Christianity he oversaw the conversion of Kyiv and Novgorod to Christianity as well. For kicks he had all pagan idols thrown into the Dnieper River.

And lest not forget what was once “The Red Menace” from the East, China. Any golden age today has to take into account one of the oldest cultures in human civilization. Just look to the Tang Dynasty. Its first emperor was Gaozu (also Kao-tsu, formerly Li Yuan,-tsu (618-626 C.E.). According to ushistory.org, Gaozu “granted equal amounts of land to each adult male in return for taxes and continued the trend of local government rule…he also created a monetary system of copper coins.” Maybe Trump and Friends are onto something with Bitcoin. And he wrote a set of laws that were revised every two decades that lasted into the 14th century and the Ming dynasty. Sounds a bit like our Presidential Executive Orders, subject change but more frequently.

Emperor Gaozu was a Sui military commander who led a rebellion against his former masters, seized control of the state, and founded the Tang Dynasty
Public Domain

There is a cautionary tale here: “One of Gaozu son’s, General Li Shih-min, succeeded in eliminating all political rivals of the Tang and established firm control of the Tang dynasty over the newly reunified China. He then proceeded to murder his brothers, and forced his father (Gaozu) to abdicate the throne to him. Preferring his temple name, Tai-tsung took the throne in 626 C.E. The Golden Age of China had begun.” Nothing like a little fratricide and shoving the old man off the throne to get a golden age kicked off.

And if Trump wants to purse a Mideast policy he might want to look into the Islamic Golden Age. According Islamic History this golden age “is traditionally dated from the mid-7th century to the mid-13th century during which Muslim rulers established one of the largest empires in history.” It was period when artists, engineers, scholars, poets, philosophers, traders contributed “to agriculture, the arts, economics” mathematics and science. This was a time before OPEC, BP, Mobile, Exxon and Chevron–and Israel.

A little closer to our time the Elizabethan Age between 1558 and 1603 is referred to as a Golden Age of England. “According to Britannica, “it was a span of time characterized by relative peace and prosperity and by a flowering of artistic, literary and intellectual culture.” It was a time of Shakespeare.

With America’s stable economy and government, great universities and innovative thinkers, Trump has a lot to work with in getting a golden age cranked up. A lot of the elements needed to create a golden age are already present. They just need to be combined and conducted into a fine symphony. However, it is going to take more than handing out fries under the Golden Arches to create an age greatness.

The Phony Political War is Over

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

Now that Donald Trump has been inaugurated and all the campaign’s bombastic swagering, threats, ranting and hectoring are over, we can get down to Trump 2.0. We have endured more than two months of Biden’s phony rule. Some of have been dreading the day when he steps down, while others have been on the Capitol steps just waiting to get started in making America great(er) again, emphasis on the again.

I liken the political time we just experienced to the lull in World War II after the fall of Poland. It was obvious that France and Britain were going to square off with Germany. But, for six months before the Battle of France both sides danced around each other with clenched fists before the beat downs began.

Phony War, (1939–40) a name for the early months of World War II, marked by no major hostilities. The term was coined by journalists to derisively describe the six-month period (October 1939–March 1940) during which no land operations were undertaken by the Allies or the Germans after the German conquest of Poland in September 1939.–Britanica

Since the election, Democrats and Republicans have been like two dogs running along the fence barking at one another. Snarling over cabinet appointments, growling about who closed the peace deal between Israel and Hamas, who caused the California Fires: the real dog fight can begin now that Trump has been unleashed. This time there will be no question about who turned the dogs loose, and there will be nobody running through the neighborhood with leashes to get them back in the yard. But that is what the people voted for, the ouster of a woke, liberal dog catcher.

The Germans were never one to forget how they were not beaten in World War I. Paybacks can be a tough check to cash. The Germans forced the French to sign an armistice at the same location and in the same railway car that the ended World War I.

For the last two months squawking heads from all points on the media scale have been pontificating on the path our country will follow in the next four years. Making predictions if the economy is going to tank or soar to even greater heights under Trump’s proposed tariffs. There is speculating on the overt reach of billionaires: is Elon Musk going to be given space grants to industrialize the exosphere much like in the 1860-80s when the government gave thousands upon thousands of square miles of federal land to railroad barons for laying tracks that crisscrossed the hinterlands. Will the Pentagon become world’s largest twenty-four hour men’s only lounge? Will the government turn the US Postal Service over Jeff Bezos, where voting by mail will be a guaranteed two day delivery where you can track your vote.

Fortunately, we are not at war. In fact Trump sounds very Wilsonesque in keeping America out of wars. Wilson tried for fours years in keeping the US out of World War I. Let us hope Trump’s art of the deal with Putin in Ukraine is better than Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace for Our Time” with Hitler in 1938. That peace lasted for about a year.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, proudly showing the Anglo-German Declaration commiting both countries to peace after his return from Munich on September 30, 1938.

The real question about peace for our time is how well Democrats and Republicans can get things accomplished now that the phony talk is over and the gavels are about to drop in Congress and in the courts. Are the MAGA forces going to try and blitzkrieg the Democrats? Are the Democrats going to roll over in the first 100 days of Trump 2.0 like France in 1940? Or, are the Dems going to proclaim they will never surrender.

Pardon my French but you can…

mystoryorhistoryLeave a comment

Many years ago I was taken aback when a female coworker admonished a colleague in a loud and brusk way. It seems that the colleague was getting on her for some work-related mistake. I was not privy to the conversation until the woman in question, a big ole country gal, boldly and loudly said, “If you ain’t ever made a mistake then I’ll kiss yar ass.” A creative statement that puts a lot to imagine.

You must pardon my retelling of this tale. I normally try to shy away from “fruity language.” It is not that I am against somebody cursing a blue streak. It is so many of us do it with little tact and grace. It usually is, as the above example, the closing statement to a forgone conclusion. However, I can really appreciate those who can poetically string together obscenities. They can be pearls on a necklace worn on the right occasion. And that is the point. If one wants to learn how to use profanity I would suggest a good primer is the movie The Big Lebowski. Jeff Bridges and John Goodman thread the pearls of profanity as if they were knotting The Barado Pearl Necklace. But it is not the profanity I want to address. It is the pardon, or the reason for the profanity; or the lack of contrition that brings on the profanity; or being the first to throw the proverbial stone.

 A perfect judge will read each work of wit
With the same spirit that its author writ,
Survey the whole, nor seek slight faults to find, –Alexander Pope An Essay on Criticism

The word pardon is being thrown around lately as if it was some sort of profanity. People are up in arms chucking rocks one way or the other about President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter. Republicans are losing their minds on setting free a key member of the Biden Crime Family; and Democrats are flopping around like a hooked bass on the bottom of the boat, gaffed upon ethics that only they follow. For them the worst thing that Old Joe did was telling a simple lie when he said he would not pardon his son. It’s not like he was selling cigarettes without the Surgeon General’s warning on the pack. Lying to the public is nothing new, and lately it has been elevated to a national past time. Organizations have made a living counting public lies. To paraphrase the lyrics to the theme song of the TV show Psych: I know you know I am not telling the truth. But yet here we are.

 Avoid extremes; and shun the fault of such,
Who still are pleas’d too little or too much.
At ev’ry trifle scorn to take offence,
That always shows great pride, or little sense; –Alexander Pope An Essay on Criticism

Biden did nothing wrong. Article II Section 2 of the Constitution gives Old Joe the power to pardon. It says nothing about family and relatives or the qualifications for a pardon. It simply states: “and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” I wonder if we ever have a female president the phrase and he shall would exclude a “she” and God forbid a they, it, them from pardoning somebody. Something that slipped the framers mind in 1787. Strict interpretation of the Constitution, right up to where the First Amendment delineates money is free speech.

The other thing that has the Dems going is that the pardon sets a bad precedent. The pardoning of a convicted felon, by-passing the legal system. A president doing something that “bends the law.” Come on man, the Supreme Court has taken care of that. A president can now break the law with impunity. Biden could send in Seal Team Six to bust Hunter out if he wanted too. The Glorious Era where the rule of law really matters is over. The rule of law is now just a lukewarm suggestion and only applies to those who can’t afford a well paid team of legal assassins. If anyone making under $50,000 a year was convicted of three felony tax offenses and six misdemeanor tax offenses; or 34 felony convictions on falsifying business records, they would have already been fitted with the orange jumpsuit. They would be well into the first year of their sentence. Let’s get real on governmental norms and precedents, that rocket left the solar system at warp speed when it was launched from a golden escalator in 2015.

But most by numbers judge a poet’s song;
And smooth or rough, with them is right or wrong:
In the bright Muse though thousand charms conspire,
Her voice is all these tuneful fools admire, –Alexander Pope An Essay on Criticism

The MAGA crowd on the other hand sees the pardon as a reason to set free the January 6 storm troopers. I hate to tell them but when President Elect Trump takes office he doesn’t need a reason to pardon that crowd of tourists. He claims that they have been subjected to America’s twisted legal system. I would say manipulated legal system. So don’t be surprised when he pardons the 1,000 or so people who have pleaded guilty or convicted in crashing the Capitol gates. These J-6 Patriots that were armed with hockey sticks, fire extinguishers, knuckle gloves and even a pitch fork were not looking for the District’s Pickle Ball court. And yet somehow they were ensnared in a weaponized and very corrupt legal system.

And if the means be just, the conduct true,
Applause, in spite of trivial faults, is due.
As men of breeding, sometimes men of wit,
T’ avoid great errors, must the less commit: –Alexander Pope An Essay on Criticism

But this is not the first time a president has pardon a group who could have easily been convicted of treason. Trump’s pardon would fit right in with President Andrew Johnson’s end-of-term blanket pardon of ex Confederates. According to usnews.com, “Andrew Johnson, on Christmas Day 1868, granted full pardons and amnesty to soldiers who had fought for the Confederacy against the Union in the Civil War. Critics say President Johnson was being too lenient with traitors, but Johnson argued that it was time for a massive gesture of reconciliation.”

On the other end of the gun in 1976, President Jimmy Carter pardoned 200,000 Vietnam War draft dodgers “in still another bid for reconciliation.”

According to NPR President Biden “announced he is commuting the prison sentences for nearly 1,500 people and pardoning 39 others in what the White House says was the largest act of clemency in a single day in modern presidential history.” But this in not the first time Biden has had a mass pardon. He issued a presidential proclamations pardoning thousands of people convicted for attempted marijuana possession, simple possession of marijuana and for using marijuana. Talk about rigged system. I think the Feds pulled pot laws right out of the Catholic Church’s “Bless me father” playbook: It is against the law for wanting to smoke pot; it is against the law for having (and not smoking) pot; and it is against the law for smoking pot. The problem, it was not three Hail Marys and an Our Father as penance–and you are back on the streets, as George Carlin joked about confession.

Of all the causes which conspire to blind
Man’s erring judgment, and misguide the mind,
What the weak head with strongest bias rules,
Is pride, the never-failing vice of fools. –Alexander Pope An Essay on Criticism

I am not sure if English poet and satirist, Alexander Pope, realized the conundrum he would create in the future when he wrote in 1711, “To err is human; to forgive, divine.” Back then the clergy had the power to forgive or sell an indulgence. Indulgence was based on the belief that in purgatory one could do a little time and wipe out their earthly transgressions. Then they could climb the stairs to the Pearly Gates with their Get Into Heaven Card. Forgiveness is also couched in Jesus asking a group of men who had already passed judgment on woman with questionable credentials. They were ready to exact the needed social religious punishment. With stones in hand, Jesus simply asked the men, who here has not sinned? Jesus did not ask them to pardon her. The thud of rocks hitting the ground followed.

But forgiveness is not the same as a pardon. Jesus made the stoning of Mary Magdalene personal. The men had to search their concessions in regards to their actions, not hers. A pardon is not personal. It is a government legal decision to overturn another government legal decision, for whatever reason or no reason at all. It could be argued in Biden’s case, the pardon was personal; for him but not for me. I did not have a rock in the fight.

As long as humans are around someone is going to trip over the rules; someone is going to deviate from the norm; someone is going to hop the fence and find themselves trespassing on Mr. Gilmore’s property. Hunter Biden is that someone. I know he tried to manipulate a weaponized legal system; but I don’t recall him saying, boldly and loudly: “If you ain’t ever made a mistake then I’ll kiss yar ass.”

He didn’t have to. His Daddy did, figuratively speaking that is.