Art is 80

  • Today? Carl Sandburg and Harry Golden. Yes, It is Interesting.

    September 26th, 2025

    I admit to choosing most of the books I read randomly. That will explain how I just finished reading Harry Golden’s biography of Carl Sandburg, called appropriately Carl Sandburg.

    When I think of Harry Golden (something I do every twenty years or so), I think of him as the editor of  The Carolina Israelite, a newspaper I have never read, or the author of Only in America, and You’re Entitle, two books I have never read. I think of a curmudgeon, although I have no idea if he was curmudgeonly at all, and a man smoking a cigar, although I had no idea if he smoked anything at all (it turns out he did smore or xhew on cigars). I did know he wrote from the perspective of a Jew living in North Carolina, fairly unusual at the time, but I did not know he was raised in New York City, was a stockbroker indicted for embezzling client funds, and that he served four years in prison after being convicted before being pardoned by President Nixon.

    When I look up Golden in Wikipedia, I see he wrote about 30 books on a variety of topics, largely on the promise of America, Jews’ place in America, and the problem of segregation in the south.

    What these three topics have in common is that they are all about this country, and about the uniqueness of this country. So maybe it isn’t surprising that Golden wrote a book about Carl Sandberg. What may be more surprising is that Golden and Sandberg were close friends. And that Sandburg wrote the preface to at least one of Golden’s books.

    Carl Sandburg is not at all about Harry Golden. It is not at all about Jews in America. It is only about Carl Sandburg, a writer, historian, biographer, poet, and musician whom Golden portrays as being as American as anyone coukd possibly be.

    Sandburg grew up in Galesburg IL, had a fairly typical smallish town Midwest childhood, I guess, but left home at a young age and became a hobo (to be distinguished from a vagrant, a tramp, or a bum), riding the rails across the country, stopping here and there for the odd job. He became a socialist, a champion of the “lower” classes, enrolled in college but did not graduate, and started on a peripatetic career, earning keep as a journalist, but writing and occasionally publishing poetry as the years went by. He gained recognition, especially through his Chicago poems, began to be in demand to speak and recite his poetry, and he always brought with him a guitar or banjo, and played and sang American folk music. Then, he capped his career by writing a massive 6 volume biography of Abraham Lincoln, The Prairie Years and The War Years. Interestingly, he collected material about Lincoln throughout his adult life, but when he started writing Lincoln’s biography, he thought he would write a book for children. But gmhe got carried away.

    Golden’s book itself is not a standard biography as much as a collection of anecdotes, some short, somewhat long, all interesting, which when woven together present a good picture of Sandburg. It is a very evocative picture and makes for an interesting book to read. It is like you are looking at the many notes of a biographer before he puts them into standard narrative form. And when he describes how Sandburg put together his Lincoln volumes, you see some similarity of process.

    I wouldn’t call this book a hagiagraphy, although the book does not concentrate on Sandburg’s shortcomings, whatever they might be. After all, they were good friends, and Sandburg was very much still alive.

    But what is most interesting, perhaps, is the picture of a changing America, and the idea that Sandburg was a symbol of it. Perhaps THE symbol of it. And central to American culture of his time. Destined to be in the pantheon of great American writers from then on.

    Carl Sandburg died in 1967 at the age of 89. How many of today’s younger generation ever run into his work?

    (Gotta run. No time to proof..)

  • The Days Between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur Are a Time for Inner Reflection, So……

    September 25th, 2025

    I have a large number of old friends with whom I stay in contact. One good friend whom I have known since we were three, and friends from elementary school, Sunday school, middle school, high school, college, law school and beyond. These are all my old friends. I also have a lot of friends that I have made since I have been in Washington, and some of them are good friends, but I don’t consider them old friends.

    On Friday, I am going to lunch with about a dozen friends with whom I practiced law at my first firm (of three) in Washington. They do not get classified as “old” friends, even though I have known some of them over 50 years and all of them over 35 years.

    This coming October 13 will be the 55th anniversary of my arrival in Washington. I still have friends that I met during the first few weeks after I unpacked. But I just don’t consider them old friends. Long-time friends, yes. But not old friends.

    Why is that the case? I think it is because they are all friends from this phase of my life. The Washington phase. The others were from past lives.

    It is natural to think about this during the high holidays. This is not only because I tend to hear from people from all phases of my life during this period. It is also because when I attend services at a synagogue to which we have belonged for about 40 years, I tend to see a lot of people that I have known for decades. This includes a lot of people that I wouldn’t really classify as “friends”, but people I have known casually for years and years as well as many who are clearly my friends.

    Many of these people I see on a regular basis. But some I have not seen since last year’s High Holidays, and others I haven’t seen, or don’t remember having seen, for several years.

    What is remarkable about this is that, for the most part, these people look much older than the last time I saw them. Sometimes much older. And it both surprises me and shocks me.

    But today is Thursday. My morning breakfast group meets on Zoom. We range in age from our late 60s to our 90s, with one member over 100. I see this group every week. We have not aged nearly as much as those I only see on Rosh Hashanah.

    I then go to my list of approximately 600 Facebook friends. I started with Facebook about 15 years ago, I think. I count 45 of my 600 Facebook friends as no longer alive. Yes, time does march on.

    I haven’t mentioned my relatives. I was surrounded by them growing up in St. Louis, many of them much older than I was. Some in the generation of my great-grandparents. I see them all clearly.

    I have three first cousins remaining in St. Louis (Donna, Bob, and Rich), and one first cousin once removed, with whom I have remained in contact. Three other first cousins elsewhere, one in Oregon (Andy), one in Kansas (Albert), one in Arkansas (Jon). I am older than all of them. In fact, to my knowledge, only two close relatives older than me remain alive, two first cousins of my mother’s. One, five years older, my cousin Natalie in Sacramento, I spoke with on a phone call about a year ago. Her sister Judy in Miami, ten years older, I have not had any contact with for a decade. No one else from my childhood, except for classmates, remain.

    I have been very lucky all of these years to have made and kept so many friends, and to have remained in contact with, or met later in life, so many relatives. And to have known so many who are no longer here.

    I can recreate within me them all. It was Whitman, was it not, who said something like “I have worlds within me”?

    Well, I will do him one better. I have family and friends within me. Societies. Civilizations. They are all there, quietly biding their time. But now and then appearing. Making me who I am.

  • Hillel, Shammai, and You Know Who

    September 23rd, 2025

    I have to say that I just don’t understand why Rosh Hashanah is celebrated for two days. I know the history,  and how difficult it often was to determine when the New Moon appeared and therefore when the holiday should be celebrated, and I know the rabbis of old determined to keep it a two day holiday even after the calendar became certain. But that is all I know. I don’t know why that decision was made (i.e., was it unanimous or more of a 5-4 decision), but I do know that, if you follow the Torah, one day is all you get.

    Of course, I wonder about a lot those rabbis agreed upon. The best example is taking the Torah prohibition of boiling a young goat in his mother’s milk, and deciding that means you can’t eat chicken with cheese. I just don’t understand it.

    There are those, of course, who say that their reasoning does not matter, it’s a matter of community agreement. You want to be part of the community? You abide by the rules of the community.

    I understand this perspective. I just don’t agree with it. I think the tent should be bigger than that. (I could expand this discussion to cover my view of American politics, but won’t.)

    That takes me to Rabbi Alexander’s sermon yesterday, or at least to one part of it. In olden days, there were two rabbis whom the Talmud always poses as against each other on ponts of doctrine and practice: Shammai (always the loser) and Hillel (always the winner). A good teaching tool, if nothing else.

    Rabbi Alexander gave an example (as a lead-in to his sermon, which had a different major point) of three different non-Jewish individuals who first turned to Shammai to seek his aid in converting to Judaism, and whom after being rejected, turned to Hillel who converted them on the spot. Of course, since then, the rabbis have made it more and more difficult to convert to Judaism. I think this is largely because they don’t want to convert people who will eat chicken with cheese or celebrate Rosh Hashanah for only one day. I have long disagreed with this restrictiveness, and now that I can point to Hillel on my side, I must wonder why, in this case only (and without attribution, of course), Shammai apparently won.

    Okay, let’s move from the mundane to the even more mundane.

    Donald Trump has gone full bananas. After telling 65, 000 people in Arizona, “I hate my opponent, and I don’t want the best for them”, today he told members of the United Nations that their countries are “going to hell” and told NATO members that they should shoot down errant Russian planes. He then met with President Zelensky and then spun around six times and, while still dizzy, issued an X that said that Russia was a paper tiger, Ukraine should get back all their lost territory “and maybe a little more”, and that the US was going to turn over weaponry to NATO with no strings attached. All I can say to that is, I wonder what he will say tomorrow. Probably just the opposite.

    In the meantime, the government will “shut down” on October 1. The Congressional Republicans emulated the Texas Democrats of this summer, and left town, to return too late to halt the shut down.

    In case you forgot, the Republicans had proposed a 6 or 7 week extension on their terms, and refused to talk to Democrats about certain of those terms the Democrats want to modify. After they left, Democratic leadership asked for a meeting with Trump, which was scheduled. Today, after spinning around six more times, Trump decided not to meet. Who will be blamed for the shut down? And what will Trump try to do during the shut down?

    At any rate, whether or not I understand it, it is still Rosh Hashanah. So, celebrate if you wish. But if you are like me, don’t despair. I hear more holidays are on their way.

  • “I Can’t Stand My Opponents”

    September 23rd, 2025

    That says it all, doesn’t it. Donald Trump at the memorial service for Charlie Kirk.

    Today is Rosh Hashanah, the first day of a new year. On this day, you want to embrace optimism. But it is hard to do that, when the world feels like it is Rosh Hashanah, 1914, the last summer before World War I when the wheels were inevitably turning and no one knew it, or Rosh Hashanah, 1939, two weeks after Germany’s initial invasion of Poland when the full scope of the war in Europe was still unknown, or Rosh Hashanah 1973, when plans were afoot for a very different Yom Kippur. There are so many places today, on Rosh Hashanah 2025, where things are already going wrong, and when a small brush fire anywhere could quickly envelope us all.

    Of all the prophetic voices to be heard over these High Holidays, it is that as adapted by Leonard Cohen that might affect us most: “Who by fire, who by water?…..”

    Or maybe it is gentile Kurt Vonnegut (he had a Jewishwife), whose prospect of ice-nine in Cat’s Cradle chills us all. Once thing begin to calcify (as the freezing temperature of water is raised to over 100 degrees), everything stops. Time stops. Everything is finished. It is all over. It can not be reversed. It may not be the book God seals on Yom Kippur, but it’s a book  Vonnegut has written, a book whose story just stops. The book is sealed. Doomsday is here, but no onecwill know it.

    Arthur, you are being too pessimistic!! Especially on a day such as today, a day when we are to atone for our past mistakes, so that we can get on with a better, more meaningful life. 

    Whoever just said that to me is right, and I will do my best. But it won’t be easy, will it?

    So, I ask for forgiveness for all of my shortcomings, including the contents of this post. And I hope we all can join together in rebuking statements like “I can’t stand my opponent”  so that we move on to a 5786 that is much better than 5785 was. No ice-nine, and in fact, no ICE.

    L’shana tova to all.

  • Sport, Food, and the Elephant in the Pasture.

    September 22nd, 2025

    We can start with the Nats: Even if you are in last place, you can still come up with some remarkable baseball.  On Saturday, Daylen Liles hits an inside the park home run to win the game in the 11th inning. And yesterday, Jacob Young makes two amazing catches in center field. For one (believe it or not), even he cannot reach the ball, but he can kick it before it hits the ground, and he kicks it ….. into his glove. And then, in the bottom of the 9th, he leaps over the wall to grab what would otherwise be a home run.

    We can move to the restaurant: We had dinner last night with friends at Bistro Aracosia on MacArthur Blvd. If you are up on your trivia, you might know that Aracosia is the name given during the time of Alexander the Great to a portion of Northern Afghanistan. If you knew this, you might guess that this was an Afghan restaurant. And you would be correct. It is also an excellent restaurant, one of the best, and my Chicken Labuan proves it once again. For some old Washingtonians, the restaurant is still Listrani’s. For those, here is a secret. Listrani’s is alive and well. In McLean. And, oh, yes, so is Aracosia – another branch of the one in DC.

    If all of this is in McLean, why live in DC? What do we have that they don’t have? Yes, you guessed the answer. We have the National Guard.

    Okay, let’s go next to the National Guard. Why do we (still) have members of the Guard strolling DC, spending their time talking on the phone to their spouses? They are forbidden to assist in law enforcement. So what is their job? It seems like their biggest job is picking up trash. In fact, that may be their only job. And it is a helpful one. It keeps the city cleaner and it gives them experience in bending, so that – when they are called out to do it – they will feel able to pick the tomato crop with the best of them.

    Finally, for today, the Charlie Kirk memorial ceremony, which I did not watch. I am going to look at what some of the speakers said, and I am not worried about the religious references, I don’t think, at this type of event. It seems like Erika Kirk did herself proud. Unexpectedly so, when she said she forgave her husband’s killer.

    On the other hand, Donald (“I hate my opponents”) Trump disgraced himself once again.

    My current vision? Donald is arrested, dressed in a white shirt, too long tie, and a suit jacket. He is not wearing trousers. Just white boxer shorts. He is forced to kneel and put his head in the stakes in the town square, his arms tied behind his back, a target tattooed on his forehead. Each of the 349 million Americans (or at least all those 3 years old or older) slowly walk by him and throw a ripe tomato at his face. Each time he is hit, he has to say, “I love my opponents.”

    When the final American has thrown the final tomato, he is set out to pasture and allowed live out his final days in solitude.

    What is your vision? And can you get mine out of your mind?

  • Let Me Count the Ways….

    September 21st, 2025

    I want to make sure I understand what has transpired in the last 24 hours that is new. Tell me if I am wrong about any of this.

    1. Funding for all non-time sensitive,  non-essential governmental functions expires on September 30. The Republicans want to kick the can down th road until November 21. The Democrats are willing to kick the can if they can obtain some lessening of the legislated reductions to health care coverage over that period of time. The Republicans refuse to even talk to the Democrats about this, and the Republican leadership has shut down Congress until the currently funded period has ended and the government has shut down. Each side will blame the other, but it is the GOP which sent everyone home.
    2. The president wants Congressional approval to order the death of presumed “narco-terrorists”, wherever in the world they may be, without having to involve anyone else, demonstrate any proof at any level, or provide any due process whatsoever.
    3. The Pentagon wants to have journalists sign a pledge not to report any news not approved by the Pentagon for reportage, on fear of losing their credentials.
    4. Anyone coming into this country on an H-1B work visa will be admitted only if their employer pays a fee of $100,000, maybe annually.
    5. The US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia has been forced to resign because he has not found sufficient basis to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James for mortgage fraud. Meanwhile, the government case against Fed Governor Lisa Cook on mortgage fraud charges seems to have fallen apart.
    6. The president has attacked his attorney general Pam Bondi on not moving fast enough in going after his perceived enemies.
    7. It has been reported that the administration shut down a bribery investigation against Border Tsar Tom Homan, and kept the existence of the investigation secret. Homan, it is said, kept a $50,000 cash payment made so that the payor would get special access and favors.
    8. Trump pledges to take back Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, whether or not Afghanistan approves.
    9. The National Parks confirmed that all references relating to climate change, Japanese internment, and slavery are being removed.

    This is all within the past 24 hours.

    We ignored everything yesterday by having lunch at the Kountry Korner in Thurmont MD, visiting Ft. Ritchie in Cascade MD, and wandering through the Antique Mall in Emmitsburg MD.

    Ft. Ritchie, located just south of the PA line west of Emmitsburg was a Maryland National Guard training site, taken over by the US military in 1942. It served as a prisoner of war holding site, and as the training site for bilingual and multilingual American military personnel to learn, among other things, how to translate for and interrogate prisoners, both from Europe and the Pacific. A lot has been written about the Ritchie Boys, and a museum dedicated to them was opened about 18 months ago.

    The site now includes as well an art studio, a restaurant, a bakery shop, a wellness studio, and former barracks now converted into residential units. The military had closed the facility in 1998. It is well worth a visit.

  • A 10 year old, a 41 year old, a 22 year old and a 79 year old (a message from an 82 year old)

    September 20th, 2025

    Last night, Joan, my ten year old granddaughter, paid me a big compliment. She told me that she really liked talking with me……because my conversation was so random. I responded: “Thanks. That is really nice. Do you have any idea how many sea lions live off the coast of San Diego?”

    In this era when it is always difficult to read through the morning newspapers, I had a particularly hard time yesterday morning with the Washington Post’s front page.

    Let me quote: “Sulma Martinez had just left the dentist’s office with her 14 year old twin daughters when an unmarked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement vehicle pulled up behind her and flashed its blue lights. The officers asked for her papers.

    “Martinez, a 35 year old originally from Honduras, had a work permit, a pending asylum claim and a pathway to a visa for crime victims. But none of that mattered, she said the officers told her.

    “They gave her a choice: she could head to a hotel and be deported with her daughters, or she could contest her removal and try to stay in the United States. If she chose the latter, she’d be arrested an the twins would be sent to a shelter for child immigrants.”

    [See article: Deportations Drive a New Wave of Family Breakups, Sep 19, WAPO]

    I then looked at another front page article, this one about the aftermath of the death of Charlie Kirk. I quote just one paragraph:

    “Vice President JD Vance urged supporters to drum those ‘celebrating Charlie’s murder’ out of their jobs and said the administration may strip tax-free status from two prominent foundations he accused of underwriting an article’ about Kirk. The State Department embarked on a global effort to identify foreign citizens ‘praising, rationalizing, or making light of” Kirk’s death and put them on a list to prevent them from ever receiving US visas. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed a sweeping crackdown on ‘hate speech’”

    [See article: Push to Police Speech Breaks with GOP’s Typical Rhetoric, Sep 19, WAPO]

    Of course, there are so many things that I am upset about that they all can’t be listed here, and they certainly wouldn’t all fit on the front page of the Post. Just this morning, I saw VP JD’s comment on the strikes on the Venezuelan boats in the Caribbean. He said: “I wouldn’t go fishing right now.” Or his other comment on the military strikes on the boats when it was suggested to him that this was a war crime: “I don’t give a shit what you call it.”

    I don’t know whether these boats are carrying drugs to the United States or not. Perhaps the president and vice president have irrefutable evidence that they are, but obviously there are other ways to top boats than blowing them up and killing all on board. Even Israel, when it goes against flotillas on their way to Gaza, does not resort to this extreme.

    And who are the men on the boats? Are they all drug runners? Do they all even know what their cargo is? So many questions could be asked, not even including the ultimate question of whether or not the United States has the legal right to attack boats on the high seas.

    So I have asked this before, and I will ask it again: Was the life of Charlie Kirk more valuable and more worth mourning than the life of the Venezuelans who were killed in these military attacks? If someone answers “yes”, shame on them.

    I can put the same question a different way. Is it more tragic that Charlie Kirk’s children are without their father than that the children of these Venezuelans are without their fathers? If someone answers “yes”, shame on them.

    And let me multiply the question. There have been at least 15 Venezuelans killed so far. Does that make the actions of Mr. Trump 15 times as bad as the action of Mr. Robinson? If not, why not? Both Robinson and Trump believe they are fighting against evil. Both took action and took lives without any due process. Yes, one is president and one is a troubled 22 year old. But our president appears to have once been a troubled 22 year old, and now he is a troubled 79 year old. A 79 year old not with a classic Mauser rifle, but with the American military at his disposal. How big of a difference is there, really? Really. Think about it.

  • That Was the Day That Was.

    September 19th, 2025

    I had a busy day yesterday. I had two meetings in connection with the Haberman Institute for Jewish Studies – a lunch meeting with a young rabbi whom we hope can help us reach a younger audience, and an afternoon meeting with a major donor (and board member) to talk about ways he might be able to connect us with people he knows who might be able to help us. I took extensive notes and part of my tomorrow will be trying to understand at least half of what I wrote down.

    I also found out that my friend who sent me a message yesterday that he had fallen, broken his leg and having surgery, wrote me again today saying that he was hacked. I guess that could have meant that someone broke his leg while trying to hack him to death, and that he hadn’t fallen at all. But I assumed he meant that he had neither fallen or broken his leg. If you wonder what he and his wife were doing while all of his friends were feeling empathy (that emotion that Charlie Kirk didn’t approve of) for his condition, it turns out that they were (are) spending a week in Paris. And no, not the Paris in Texas. (By the way, it turns out that there are 10 cities in the United States called Paris. How many have you been to? As for me, I think the answer is zero.)

    Mayor Bowser of DC, DC Attornet General Schwab, and City Council Chair Mendelson were called before a House committee to answer questions about the District today. I got to hear a good deal of it driving to my first meeting (40 minutes) and from my first to my second (35 minutes), and frankly I did not know if I should laugh or cry. The witnesses didn’t really have any time to answer any questions. The reasons were simple. As for the Republicans, all they wanted to do was to yell at the witnesses and make sure that they couldn’t get any answers on the record. As for the Democrats, they had nothing to ask, and they just wanted to use their time to talk about how great Washington is and how hard Trump appears to be trying to destroy it. It was all pretty embarrassing and I dare anybody to air the hearing for a group of middle school kids and tell them this is how the government runs. Everything wasn’t bad. I am not familiar with Cong. Shontel Brown from Cleveland OH, but she gave a super explanation of every way Trump is destroying America. She was the winner. The loser, not surprisingly, was an Arizona Congressman who was the first questioner and who simply yelled at the top of his voice for his five minutes about how dangerous Washington was until Mr. Trump came to town. He did berate the AG for the terrible statistics that came out of his office, giving Schwab the chance to say that he was quoting statistics frim the US Attorney’s, not the DC AG office. As Rosanadanana would have said…..”Nevermind”. (I saw on the news last night that a large number of surge arrests are leading to immediate dismissal, and that the US Attorney’s office is short 70 lawyers.)

    Actually, this Congressman might have been the biggest loser, but there were others. One was Nancy Mace, who asked Bowser a series of questions such as “What does DC Code Section 12-9303(a)(vi) say?” “Oh, you don’t know? You are the mayor of the city and you have no idea what the laws say?” And then she asked her questions like: “What is a woman?” Bowser’s answer to that was “I am a woman. Are you?” I thought that was pretty good. And then there was a third Republican whose name I didn’t get who kept talking about how dangerous DC was and how its murder rate was greater than a dozen or so foreign cities he listed. “Do you know”, he said, that if DC were a country of its own, the murder rate would make it the 5th most dangerous country in the world and that the State Department would issue a travel warning advising Americans not to go there?” Unfortunately, Council Chair Mendelson didn’t respond by saying that if DC were a country, it would have restrictions on the gun ownership that leads to 80% of DC’s violent crime.

    All this made Michigan Congresswoman Talib apoplectic, as she yelled at her Republican counterparts for talking down DC in a ridiculous manner and scaring Americans from visiting, while each of the worked and most lived in the capital and were able to walk around with their families, enjoy the sites, eat at the restaurants and not worry about anything. How, she asked, could they make such ridiculous statement that, by their own lifestyles, they knew were untrue. This led to a retort by one of the Republicans and then they got into a shouting match. No, then they got into a SHOUTING MATCH!!!

    At any rate, it was one big mess of a hearing, although perhaps the District got some sort of a commitment that the House would look at the $1 billion of DC taxpayer money (some of which was my money) that Congress forced out of DC’s budget this year and which certainly impacts DC’s efforts to hold down crime.

    The Washington Post, several days ago, had an interesting article which showed the results of surveys as to the effect of the federal surge on things like pedestrian traffic, restaurant business, and so forth. Generally, it showed that DC’s economy has been hurt all around (in spite of President Trump’s unsubstantiated claims to the contrary).

    Meanwhile, I need a new plumber. But that’s a long story.

  • Oyez, Oyez, May the Court Come to Order

    September 18th, 2025

    The Supreme Court better get its act together. And soon. It is the only entity able to save American freedoms. And so far, it has given no indication that it wants to do so.

    Unless the Court changes its direction (and I have no thought that it will), here is what we might be facing in Congressional elections in 2026: (1) Gerrymandered Congressional districts designed to ensure that minority groups have minimal ability to secure representation in Congress, (2) additional ID requirements for voting difficult for some to obtain, (3) polls being located far from Democratic voting neighborhoods, far from public transportation, and not open hours convenient for people who work for a living, (4) drastic restrictions on, or abolition of, mail-in voting and early voting, (5) limitations on provisional voting, (6) selective challenges to voting rolls, (7) threats directed at certain campaign workers and poll workers, (8) challenges to vote counting methods and practices, (9) limits on distribution of selective campaign materials, (10) pressure on media whi h support non-MAGA candidates, (11) false accusations brought against Democratic candidates, and more.

    In other words, our elections will not be free or fair, and will be aggressively attacked by Trump as his roadies. It will be virtually impossible for anyone not MAGA affiliated to run, much less to win.

    The pro-gerrymandering campaign is in full swing. So is the campaign against centrist or liberal (or even centrist right) media. Trump’s ridiculous litigation against the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, and the threats against the broadcast licenses of CBS and ABC. We now hear that the tax exempt status of non-MAGA not-for-profits may be attacked. And that Tik-Tok will now be run by Trump allies.

    If you think, without strong reaction from the Supreme Court, the 2026 elections will be like previous elections, guess what? You will be wrong.

    I am interested if the reaction to Kimmel’s firing will be forgotten in a few days, if NBC will now fire Jimmy Fallon, or if there will be sufficient pressure on ABC to reverse what they did. It could any which way.

    And, of course, Trump can “fire” late night hosts, he can certainly fire newscasters, and close down entire networks.

    We ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Yes, the Court better get their act together. And so better the Democrats.

  • Kash Patel and Tyler Robinson and Grandson Izzy.

    September 17th, 2025

    I always miss the good stuff. I watched quite a bit of the hearing yesterday when FBI Director Kash Patel was testifying before the Senate Government Oversight Committee. But I didn’t see it all, and naturally, I missed all the fireworks when Patel was being questioned by (or was it berated by): Adam Schiff and Corey Booker. I did not get to hear Patel inform Schiff that he was “the biggest fraud to ever sit in the United States Senate”, and a “political buffoon at best.” Or to hear him tell Booker that “you are an embarrassment to the division of this country”. (No, I am not sure what that means, but I am sure it isn’t a compliment.) And, yes, I know that the two Senators were not throwing praise at Patel. So much for civil discourse.

    Patel is still the same smooth talker he was at his confirmation hearing. He came loaded with some pretty impressive arrest statistics, assuming they are accurate, and if you listened just to him, there were no politics under his leadership, and morale was as high as it could get. The Republicans on the committee only asked him the softball questions he knew were coming, interspersing their questions with diatribes against radical left wing Democrats and especially the crime ridden Biden family. As to the Democrats’ questions, either Patel disagreed with the premise of the question, couldn’t answer a question because it was connected to an ongoing investigation or involved a personnel matter, decided to answer a different question altogether, or just plain couldn’t remember.

    Tyler Robinson’s name was raised a couple of times, not only as the killer of Charlie Kirk, but as a bona fide radical leftist,  undoubtedly qualified to be a spokesman for the Democratic Party.

    Robinson’s name was mentioned more on the snippet of the Newsmax show I watched last night. I watched it purposely because I wanted to see how he was being portrayed by the right.

    It was as bad as I feared, and considering that most Newsmax viewers see no other sides to most issues, they would have no reason not to believe the description they heard:

    Robinson was a nice young man, ruined like so many others by the evil leftists on the dark web. And not only was he tricked into adopting leftist thinking, he began to take the sides of the LGBT community and worse than that, the trans community. The trans community causes so many problems, destroying our societal values, and the Democrats know that and are just spreading lies when they say otherwise. I only lasted about 2 minutes on Newsmax.

    Something on a more positive note? Next week may be Rosh Hashanah, but I am told that my four-year old grandson Izzy is looking forward to Hanukkah because he likes it after dinner when the children have to find the mozzarella.

  • Kurt Vonnegut and the War in Gaza

    September 16th, 2025

    I have been reading through Armageddon in Retrospect, a book containing twelve pieces by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., which were unpublished during his lifetime. They are mainly satirical pieces about the folly of war, and sadly, the all too often folly of life.

    Vonnegut, a member of a prominent Indianapolis family, did not appear to write about Israel, although he lived until 2007. He was not Jewish by religion but would fit right into the Jewish world by his attitude towards things and he was married to a prominent Jewish writer, Jill Krementz, for 30 years.

    Of course, he wrote about World War II in Slaughterhouse Five, and elsewhere, based on his experience in that war as a German POW, who by chance survived the Allied firebombing of Dresden in 1945, shortly before the war ended in Europe.

    In Armageddon, compiled and edited by his son, you can read the letter Vonnegut sent to his parents from France after he was evacuated from Germany, and while he was waiting for a berth on a naval ship to come home. His letter, proving that fact and fiction can be much too close to each other, displays what will become one of his hallmarks, his more than skeptical attitude towards war.

    I don’t think that it was Vonnegut who coined the thought, “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”, but he could have. To him, the destruction of Dresden was inexcusably cruel and unnecessary, destroying a beautiful, and civilian, city of culture, and murdering tens of thousands of Germans caught in a war, but not fighting the war, and just trying to maintain their lives. As a witness to this destruction and to its aftermath, he was appalled.

    What would he have thought of Gaza, where the Israeli ground offensive is apparently beginning today?

    What would he have said about the loss of life and property, and about the cruelty being shown survivors? What would he have said about the possibility that this exercise will even begin to achieve two of its goals – the release of hostages and destruction of Hamas? You can imagine what he would have made of Netanyahu’s comment that Israel would have to become a Sparta. Remind me – how did things turn out for Sparta?

    I know a large number of Israelis. Some live there. Some live here. All are horrified by the actions of their government and are shocked that even though they live in a “democracy”, it turns out they are powerless. And that they are so deeply tarred internationally, as individuals and as a community, by actions they abhor.

    The United States has, over my adult lifetime, caused more than enough wrong-headed damage to other parts of the world. It has also spent dollars and energy trying to stabilize lands far and near, and for this, it is rightly praised. A mixed bag.

    But we are now having our own existential crisis connected to our own imperfect form of democracy. We are in a period of great instability, our basic, constitutional freedoms imperiled. We sit by while wars are waged around the world, and we spend what little energy we seem to have bombing little Venezuelan boats on the high seas. What kind of superpower does that?

    In the meantime, free speech is threatened by the apparently random killing of Charlie Kirk by a random young man.

    I have a question for Mr. Trump. Was the life of Charlie Kirk more precious than the life of any one of the 14 Venezuelans whose deaths you ordered on those little boats on the high seas? Depending on how you answer that question, Mr. President, I will have several more.

    I await your response.

  • As We Approach the High Holidays

    September 15th, 2025

    I am far from expert on religious details, but here is my take.

    We are now approaching the High Holidays, Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, and the general idea is that we atone for our sins and hope for a fresh start. A more folksy thought (I know this is not the adjective normally used) is that there is a Book of Life, and that God, after examing your sins and your repenting, determines who shall live and who shall die. The Book of Life is closed when the sun goes down on Yom Kippur.

    The period over which one should begin to examine his life and start to atone, in preparation for the ultimate decision to make at Yom Kippur, does not begin on Rosh Hashana, however. It starts earlier. Last Saturday night, we attended an inspiring Slichot service at Adas Israel that begins a four day spiritual preparation period. Before that, their are seven weekly readings at Shabbat services which are to console Jews for the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians and putvthem in a contemplative mood, and before that, the commemoration of Tisha B’Av, the memorial to the day of destruction itself.

    If you go to the Haberman site (Habermaninstitute.org), and look under Program Recordings, you will find a talk by Rabbi Lauren Tuchman that ties the introspection needed for Yom Kippur into the full time period beginning with Tisha B’Av. I really recommend her presentation if you have a spare 90 minutes.

    At the Yom Kippur services, there are several long recitation of sins. As a congregation, these sins are recited aloud, and forgiveness is prayed for/asked for.

    These recitations usually bore me in large part because, in my humble opinion, almost none of them personally relate to me. I really don’t think I did those things, so why should I beat my chest over them?

    But I miss the point. These recitations of sins are not meant only to be individual. They are also meant to be communal. You are praying for forgiveness of sins committed by you, by other Jews, and by the Jewish community as a whole.

    Now, in most years, I will acknowledge this, but not find it particularly meaningful.  But this is not most years.

    Jews like to kvell about Jewish accomplishments. You know what I mean. Einstein was Jewish. So was Freud. Maybe even Columbus. And Nobel Prizes? Jews, who are about 0.2% of the world’s population, have won over 20% of all Nobel Prizes!

    But this year, we also have to think about Netanyahu, and Smotrich, and Ben Gvir. We have to think about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. We have to think about Stephen Miller. We can not rest on our communal laurels when we also have more than our share of communal shame.

    So maybe this High Holiday period should be a little different than most. Maybe it has to be.

  • Time For a Diversion

    September 14th, 2025

    You may know that I have collected books for a long time. Maybe “collected” is too mild of a word. A better word might be “amassed”. I don’t think “hoarded” is a good word because I am pretty discriminatory in what I purchase.

    The books have to have one of three qualities. They have to be signed by the author, be old or rare, or be of particular interest to me.

    It started decades ago when I used to walk during a lunch break from my office to Second Story Books at Dupont Circle. They always have a few hundred books outside that they sell for $ to $5, and I liked rummaging through them. I always figured that these books were at their last hurrah. If no one bought them, they were to be trashed or recycled. Now and then, I would see a book that the author had signed, and those copies, I thought, should be rescued. So I bought them and took them home. Sometimes, I read them. Mostly, I didn’t.

    They really began piling up, and that’s when I decided that I should try selling them. I set up a separate bank account and eventually decided that the proceeds of the book sales should go to pay for the education of grandchildren. So far, funds have been used (upon request) for preschool and summer camp.

    At any rate, I keep going from book store to library sale, etc., and, truth is, I buy more than I sell, although I pay, on average, about $4 a book, and I sell books for an average of about $30 each.

    But some books sell for much more, in the hundreds or even thousands (I usually regret selling these after they have left the house). Of course, finding a book worth, say, over $100 doesn’t happen every week for all sorts of reasons. But, the past two weeks have been different. I have paid a total of $36 for the following valuable signed copies (all in excellent condition):

    (1) Keeping At It by Paul Volcker

    (2) Hit Refresh by Satya Nadella (president of Microsoft – I did not know that)

    (3) Working by Robert Caro

    (4) The Sense of Reality by Isaiah Berlin

    (5) Why Orwell Matters by Christopher Hitchens

    (6)  Conflict by David Petraeous

    (7) When the Center Held by Donald Rumsfeld

    Maybe this doesn’t interest you, but it fascinates me. Just like it fascinates me that I can look at a bookcase in our family room and see 7 books signed by Clinton, 5 signed by Nixon, 10 signed by Carter, and one each by each of the Bushes, Lyndon Johnson and Donald Trump.

    And, in the same book case, Lech Walesa, Ehud Barak, Margaret Thatcher, and Nicholas Sarkozy, among others. I just find it all fun.

  • Is Free Speech Too Free?

    September 13th, 2025

    When the governor of Utah said yesterday that the killing of Charlie Kirk would probably be a watershed in American history, my eyes rolled. But I have been thinking about it, and maybe they rolled too soon.

    First, while we don’t know a lot about Tyler Robinson yet, we do know some things: he is not an illegal alien, not an immigrant, not Black or brown or Asian or Jewish or any other type of American minority, not gay, not trans, not loaded down by a criminal history, not poor, not from a broken family.  We know he was white, straight, a Mormon, and from Utah. And, oh yes, he was not a Democrat.

    Many of these same characteristics can be found in those who attacked the Democratic politicians in Michigan, those who attacked President Trump, and others.

    If larger numbers of people begin to see that our dangers from those who are not White and straight is no greater than those who are, this could indeed be a watershed moment. So the question is: how do we get the word out in an impactful way?

    Next, people on all sides of the political spectrum seem to believe that what I will call “hate language” contributed to an atmosphere that made this event possible. Among the people raising this concern, of course, are individuals who regularly expouse hate speech. Of course, they would disagree with me (or at least claim to disagree with me).

    Two of these people are Donald Trump and Charlie Kirk himself. Their outrageous comments are readily available online.

    But defining hate speech is very complicated. Finding the boundary between fact and opinion is hard enough. And can the transmission of facts even constitute hate speech?

    And what about opinion?”I hate Nazis!” That is an opinion. It’s an expression of hate. Is it hate speech?

    Can speech, which a speaker does not believe to be hate speech, in fact be hate speech? And where does the right of free speech run into roadblocks trying to navigate around any of this?

    Take Kirk’s statement about Martin Luther King, Jr. Kirk thought King an “awful person”, and said that the country should never have enacted the Civil Rights Law of 1964. Do either of these statements rise to the level of hate speech? What about his statements naming certain female and Black women, whom he said got their jobs unfairly. Is that hate speech?

    Or is “hate speech” the wrong standard? Some people say that we just need “civil dialogue”. And those people are forced to continue with “and I know it when I hear it.”

    Take calling Democrats “Marxists, Communists and radical leftists”, for example. It is not fact. It is so unfactual that it is hardly legitimate opinion. It is not civil dialogue. But it is free speech.

    People like Charlie Kirk and Donald Trump are not going to stop using these terms, are they? So who will stop? Those who hardly usecl these terms at all.

    Without rules or standards, and with a Constitution that protects free speech, we have few tools at our disposal. Like with so much else, leadership has to start at the top, and our leadership is comprised of bottom feeders.

    Perhaps the media could help. But all the media could do is call out and spread the speech we want to suppress.

    Maybe comics, entertainers, other public officials? School teachers? Parents?

    How do you civilize speech with Donald Trump in the White House? You can’t. You can only talk about how important it is to do it.

    That seems to be all.

  • It Isn’t Just a Dead End, It’s a Deadly End

    September 12th, 2025

    I don’t know much at this point about the young man who shot and killed Charlie Kirk. But I have heard that a family member recognized him from one of the photos released by the police, and convinced him to turn himself in. Hold that thought for a moment.

    The more we learn about Charlie Kirk, we learn two things. First, that he was charismatic and influential among young people  at levels we can hardly imagine. And second (and I think we will find out this more and more as time goes by), we learn that Charlie Kirk’s political philosophy was abhorrent and his language, if anything, worse. This obviously is not to excuse the murder, but it does need to be brought into the mix.

    Bur, let’s go back to the family members who convinced Robinson to turn himself in. This was a very courageous step. Turning in a member of your own tribe, your own family.

    Okay, now an imperfect analogy.

    So many Jews, American, Israeli and otherwise, are repulsed by some of the actions taken by Benjamin Netanyahu, his government, and his military. What is our obligation to call them out? And how should that be done?

    Over the past few days, Netanyahu has announced that there will be no chance for a Palestinian State, that the Israeli settlements in the West Bank will expand, that the City of Gaza will be leveled, and that a building in the independent country of Qatar would be attacked. And that is just over the past few days.

    We all understand the fear and, yes, hatred of many, or most, Israelis directed against their neighbors, not only as a result of October 7, but as the result of over 75 years of hostility. We can also understand how the Arabs living next to Israel have hate towards Israel and Israelis after almost 60 years of Israeli occupation, and now because of Israeli actions in both Gaza and the West Bank.

    But what will these mutual hatreds accomplish? As I have suggested before, Netanyahu is modeling himself after Americans of two or more centuries ago who eliminated American Indians, both by numbers and from positions of power or influence. The Americans were successful, and Netanyahu is betting that he will be as well. And that, over time, his methods will be overlooked or forgotten. Vladimir Putin, by the way, is making the same gamble.

    But Netanyahu may be wrong. He may not succeed. His methods may not be forgotten. They may boomerang, as in many ways they already are.

    Remember the Biblical prophets. Who railed against perceived shortcomings in Israeli and Judean societies over 2000 years ago. They did not keep quiet. Of course, whether they did any good is another question.

    Compounding the problem, of course, is tendency of many to equate the positions of Netantmtahu and his coalition with those of all Israelis and, consequently, of all Jews worldwide. This happens more often than people might equate Putin with all Russians, for example, and it is obviously a concern.

    But isn’t it more likely that being Jewish and Israeli will be more conflated if few Jews speak out? And of course, to the disadvantage of Jews everywhere, I believe, Netanyahu and, yes, the Israel lobby, want Jews to identify with Israel, complicating the matter further.

    And of course, there is one other thing. Netanyahu might be right. There might be no chance for peace in Israel unless Israel expands from the river to the sea, as the Likud party platform has always encouraged, no matter what the cost. And that continued conflict for the land will just continue to take lives on both sides, for generations to come. And that it needs to stop with one final series of actions right now.

    Do you see why I am continually confused about the Middle East?

    Let’s get back to Charlie Kirk.

  • Charlie Kirk

    September 11th, 2025

    I knew nothing about Charlie Kirk. I knew the name. I knew he was a Trump supporter. That is all I knew.

    I didn’t know what his individual priorities or beliefs were. I still don’t. I didn’t know he had a podcast with millions of listeners. I didn’t know that much of his emphasis was on college and university students, or how popular he was on campuses. I did not know how much he spoke on campuses, and what large and excited crowds he drew. Now, I know more.

    But I have an obvious question. Why would someone want to kill Charlie Kirk?

    He was not a political official. He was one of hundreds, maybe thousands, of activists with political positions that he espoused. I don’t think he himself personally was a target of hatred. Rather, he seems to have been a personally well liked individual.

    This was not an accidental shooting. It was not unplanned. It was not a question of passion taking control of an individual. As far as we know, the shooting was not the result a personal grudge, although of course this is possible. It was very targeted and not a mass shooting. It could have been much worse.

    So what does this remind me of? It reminds me of the case of Leopold and Loeb.

    You may remember them. Two privileged young friends, undergraduates at the University of Chicago, who in 1924 murdered 14 year old Bobby Franks, the cousin of one of them. They did not hate Bobby Franks. They pitied him, because he was a less perfect person than the two of them.

    In fact, Leopold and Loeb thought a lot of themselves and their presumed superior strengths and talents. They were convinced that they could kill Bobby Franks and never be caught. They were going to prove their superiority by perpetrating the perfect crime. They were wrong.

    Back to Charlie Kirk. Could this simply be another example of an attempt to show the shooter’s assumed lack of vulnerability and ability to bring about the perfect crime? If so, why Charlie Kirk?

    As I understand it, Kirk was a big supporter of the Second Amendment. And the State of Utah is a state which takes the Second Amendment very seriously. I have read that Utah is a state where you can carry all sorts of weapons, open or concealed. No permit required. The weapons can be fully loaded. And not only that, but specifically, on public university campuses such as Utah Valley University, anyone 18 or older can carry visible or hidden weapons. (Private Utah universities can make their own rules; Brigham Young University, down the street, bans all guns.)

    I think the public university rule is something that Kirk would agree with. But Kirk was not so naive as to think that the spread of weapons would eliminate gun crime. In fact, he wrote or said that there would be murders by guns, but that this was a price worth paying in order to protect the Second Amendment.

    If you were a modern day Leopold or Loeb and you were looking for a prominent victim, might not you choose someone who has publicly made that sort of statement?

    We will see what this investigation comes up with. Of course, I don’t know and there are many possibilities. But I wonder if the shooter was simply someone who had a point to make. That he could do this. The next question is whether he wants to get away with it or whether he wants to get caught. There are obviously disadvantages to getting caught. But if no one knows he did it…..why even do it?

  • This, That, and the Other.

    September 10th, 2025

    David Miliband, former UK Foreign Minister, is the chairman of the International Rescue Committee. I have seen him a number of times on TV and he always speaks with passion and clarity. I am looking forward to reading his short TED book. If it lives up to my expectations, I may drop it off at the White House.

    But today, let’s not be too heavy. Have you seen the film, now showing on Netflix, The Thursday Murder Cub? If not, I think you should. Two hours of understated British humor and charm at its best.

    A former convent (or its equivalent) has been turned into the most comfortable and appealing senior living facility imaginable. Each resident’s room is luxurious, matched only by the feel of the common areas. And the folks who live there are obviously special. After all, they include Helen Mirren, Ben Kingsley, and Pierce Brosnan.

    And these three, along with a woman now in the hospice wing of the facility (a former police detective), have formed a small, elite group dedicated to solving “cold cases”, which were left unsolved by the local constabulary. Now led by Mirren (a former MI6 agent), and with the addition of Celia Imrie, a new resident with a medical background, they work to solve a 30 year old case with single-minded intent, diverted only by three contemporary killings that take place along the way.

    I liked everything about the film, but especially the acting of Mirren and Kingsley, and especially especially Kingsley, to whom any role could be assigned, and in which he would look a natural. I wonder if he will still be as good when he reaches my age; he always seems to be just about 13 months behind me.

    Before I get to Miliband’s Rescue, I need to finish Ignazio Silone’s Fontamara. Written in 1933, Fontamara tells of an Italian peasant village, its residence isolated from the rest of the world, which comes face to face with fascism at its worst.

    It is structured more or less as a series of connected short narratives, spoken by various residents of the village, which together paint a full picture. The book was widely read and praised during the years preceding, and the years of, World War II.

    Throughout all the tragedy and hopelessness of the book, there are flashes of humor which reminded me of, of all people, Shalom Aleichem. Yes, there is, I guess, quite a bit of similarity between Fontamara and Chelm.

    Like just when the argument between the rich landowner and the peasants of the village over the usage of creek water for irrigation seemed impossible to settle. When giving half of the water to the town and half to the landowner satisfied neither, someone suggested “Let’s each take 2/3”.

    Everyone was satisfied until the landowner took his 2/3. You can see that happening in Chelm, yes? Perhaps it did.

    Last night was the second Haberman Institute class, taught by Gideon Amir, devoted to changes in Judaism during the Second Temple period. I jotted down some interesting tidbits. Tonight, U. of Maryland professor Marsha Rozenblit is speaking for Haberman before a live audience in Potomac. And tomorrow, is the second of Geraldine Gudefin’s three part Haberman series on Jewish communities in Asia.

    Last night and tonight, I provide the opening words. That is one way to make sure I attend.

  • The Supremes: Stop, In the Name of Love

    September 9th, 2025

    Oops. Wrong Supremes. Those were the good ones. Sorry about that. I am mixing up the three Supremes with the nine.

    We have to wonder (because that is all, at this time, we can do) as to how history will look not only at the second Trump presidency, but how they will look at Trump’s Supremes. Because the Republican Senate under Mitch McConnell refused even to consider President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland (because the nomination should belong to the future president) and rushed through the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett (because the nomination should not belong to the future president), we have a Supreme Court with a heavy conservative bias, with twice as many Justices who lean right as opposed to those who lean left. This can be seen in a number of ways, but most clearly by their rulings (those with full opinions, and those on the Court’s “shadow docket”) since Trump was elected again last November. At least, this seems apparent to me. And to virtually everyone else.

    Nevertheless, Justice Barrett says that I, and all of you, just don’t understand how the members of the Court approach the law. The members of the Court, she says, do not rule in accordance with their political leanings, but simply on what the law is.  S⅕e says the Constitution is doing fine. There is certainly no constitutional crisis.

    We have to respond to her, don’t we? We need to say to her: “With due respect regarding this statement (to the extent that respect is due), we must tell you that you are obviously wrong, and are either being ingenuous, or believe that we have no ability to think for ourselves, or you yourself are being deluded (or are delusional).” Simple as that.

    Otherwise, why are so many cases 6-3 in favorite of government positions (or, maybe, 5-4, when the conservative voting against the government knows that their vote won’t swing the decision the other way)? Why are the three liberal justices left to their own devices, the most powerful being writing stinging dissents?

    Of course, I don’t think that Justice Barrett’s position came out of nowhere. I think that the conservative members of the Court have been fooling themselves, and fooling too many of us, for a long time, by claiming that “originalism’, a legal philosophy emphasizing that decisions should be based on the meaning of the original text as seen by the composers of that original text (okay, that is my briefest of descriptions) was the theory on which the Court should base its conclusions, and – more importantly – was the theory on which they, the conservative justices, would base their own decisions.

    Hogwash, balderdash and you know what else. The easiest example of the use of the term “originalist” relates to the Second Amendment, which the conservatives of the Court has given an absolutist interpretation, in spite of the more moderate treatment it had been given for the 200 years preceding the Court’s decision in the Heller case in 2008. The Court majority decided that the original interpretation of the Second Amendment would not have limited the right of citizens to have firearms to those citizens who participate in, or might participate in, a militia (that is the term used in the original text), but that the right was of an individual to have a firearm outside of that. Their conclusion was that the text used the term “militia”, only because that was the right term to use in the late 18th century, and had the Constitution been written in a different century, (earlier or later) different words would be used. (Okay, the decision doesn’t say this in so many words; I am extrapolating their reasoning.)

    The four justices who voted the other way, saying that the text meant what it said (“a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state…..”), saying that an individual, as individual, did not have a right to unlimited possession of “arms”, also said that they were, in this case, originalists, relying on the original language of the text.

    What does this tell you? It tells you that, just like you can find support for anything you want to in the Bible, you can find support for anything you want to in the language of the Constitution. And no matter where you come out in a particular case, you can call yourself an originalist.

    As I have said before, the word “originalist” is meaningless in and of itself; it is simply a cover for voting as you would like.

    By the way, of course, the original case did not, I don’t think, deal with the definition of “arms”, the word used in the Second Amendment. A pistol, a rifle, an assault weapon, a tank, a land to air missile, an atomic bomb? Where does the words “arms” stop? Should it be used to include only those weapons the founders knew of at the time the Amendment was written? Or should it be modified to include weapons developed later? And, if the latter is the better answer, when does a weapon get so lethal that the Second Amendment does not protect it? Or does that ever happen? And in this case, which group – those conservatives who take a broad definition, or those liberals who would narrow the scope of the amendment – could more legitimately lay claim to deciding its position on an originalist basis?

    Going back to the original question as to how history will look at this Court, I will assume it will be very, very critical.

    It will criticize its partisan bent. It will criticize its kow-towing to the president and its breaking with its own precedents with regard to the limits of executive power. It will criticize its constant willingness to intervene in cases before they would reach the Court in normal order. They will criticize its continual issuance of shadow docket decisions without any written opinions. And, all of these criticisms will come before any critiques of the substance of any decisions.

    As to substance, I will limit myself to one comment. I am repeating what Morgan State Professor Jason Johnson said on Ari Melber’s show last night. We have a Supreme Court that says that ICE can stop people on the street because they are speaking Spanish or look Hispanic, but a university can’t take either of those things into consideration when deciding who most needs a helping hand to be admitted to college.

    Johnson says this is a constitutional crisis. He may be correct. It is certainly some kind of crisis. Some kind of supreme crisis.

  • How to Help Your Son Get Ahead

    September 8th, 2025

    I know I have said this before, but I have to say it again. Bill Pulte, head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and DJT himself, have accused Fed governor Lisa Cook, California Senator Adam Schiff and Manhattan District Attorney Letitia James of fraudulently claiming two residences as their primary residences. This would presumably constitute mortgage fraud, a criminal offense. All three claims are unproven and, as of today, no charges have been brought, although Cook has, maybe, been fired from her position “for cause”.

    Pulte has stated that fraud is fraud, a crime is a crime, and if you signed two applications claiming two primary residences, you clearly don’t need to know more.

    CNN, among other news outlets, has pointed out that the same charges could be brought against two Trump cabinet members, as well as the head of the EPA. To my knowledge, neither Pulte nor Trump have commented on them.

    But last night, I saw a Reuters “exclusive” saying that another evidence of two-resident mortgage fraud had been uncovered, perpetrated by a couple who bought primary residences in both Michigan and Florida. The couple? Bill Pulte’s parents!

    It doesn’t get much better than this.

    Now you may know “Pulte” as a name connected to a very large housing development company. So you may think him eminently qualified for his position, right? Well, think again, this is the Trump administration. The original Bill Pulte was this guy’s grandfather. (My grandfather was a pediatrician. Want me to treat your kids?) Our Bill Pulte has never been in the housing business. He graduated from college and at a tender age, he started an investment operation, about which I know nothing. And today, he is only 37 years old.

    By the way, this presumably unqualified Trump toady, who has just condemned his own parents, is also head of FannieMae and FreddieMac, the result of a Trump consolidation and of Trump’s habit of giving at least 3 full time jobs to every appointee.

    And, if you look up Pulte Capital Partners, Bill Pulte is still listed as managing director.

    So what will happen to Pulte’s parents? Probably nothing, but maybe their son has learned a lesson.

    Maybe not.

    Bill Pulte’s father, by the way, is what is called a luxury home builder. He doesn’t build the Pulte subdivisions you see all over. He builds fancy houses in places like Palm Beach, where he has sold them for as much as $122,000,000. What does he do with his money? A fair amount goes to the Republican Party. This undoubtedly helps his (somewhat hapless?) son get three jobs from DJT. He is also very active in the Pulte Family Charitable Foundation. I looked around its website quickly. Seems okay. Its specialty? Looks to be DEI.

    Go figure….

  • Initials of the day: RFK and USSR.

    September 7th, 2025

    For those who don’t believe that the Washington Commanders are going to move into DC from Prince George’s County, just look at what is happening at the site of the proposed new stadium. Not London Bridge, but RFK Stadium, is coming down.

    RFK was the home of the Redskins for 35 years, and for shorter periods the home of both the Senators and the Nationals. Google it, and you will see it has had quite the history, but like us all, its days are limited, and its final years less than prime. But it gets recognition:

    This afternoon, we attended a program at the Capital Jewish Museum, co-sponsored by the Haberman Institute, featuring Vanderbilt Professor Shaul Kelner, author  of the recent acclaimed book, Cold Exodus, and U. of Maryland researcher Yelena Luckert, who was born the Soviet Union. Both were excellent. The topic was the decades-long American movement to enable Soviet Jews to leave the USSR or openly practice Judaism, basically a study in a grassroots organizational movement, focusing on methods to mobilize and define goals that are still in use today by movements with very different goals.

    These were our presenters. Quite a coincidence that they look so much like the photos behind them, I think.

    I told the audience in my brief remarks that it was too bad I hadn’t met Prof. Kelner before, because he could have interviewed me about my 1972 trip to the Soviet Union. Not that it had anything to do with the movement to free the Jews, but I did learn a lot about one Jew, the young Soviet medical student who befriended me.

    He seemed fearless and was confident that one day, he would wind up in the US. Did he? I don’t know. He wrote me after my return to Washington, but I didn’t write back to him. I was afraid that our correspondence could backfire on him, and I wanted no part of that.

    I called him fearless. That’s because he was unafraid to taunt authority at a time when he could have been kicked out of school or even jailed for just that.

    I remember telling him that, in the United States, I could often tell who was Jewish by looking at them, but that in Moscow, I could not tell.

    He told me that he could, and for the rest of the time I was with him, he played that game to the hilt.  We would walk down the street, and he would spot someone and ask them if they were Jewish. They always were, and no one minded the question. We went into a restaurant for lunch, and he asked the man who seated us the same question. He was Jewish as well. I was surprised that no one’s feathers looked at all ruffled.

    There were more such incidents, but the highlight, and that which made me most fearfull of winding up in the Gulag, is when we walked by an office building, and I  was told that it held the headquarters of Sovietische Heimland, the official Soviet Yiddish language magazine, published to convince people outside the USSR that Jews inside the USSR were, as they say in Yiddish,  hunky-dory. I told him that was interesting, and he immediately said, “Let’s go meet the editor”, and then, ” Don’t worry, we’ll be okay.”

    And we did. And we were. The editor was short, somewhat elderly, quite thin, with a pencil mustache (as I recall). He looked a little uncertain but less nervous than I was. I was introduced, to my shock, as a regular American reader of the magazine, someone who could read Yiddish, but not speak it. Whoa! (By the way, I could then – not now – understand  some basic Russian).

    I was afraid he would ask me what my favorite recent article was, and after a few minutes, I suggested we let the editor get back to work. We left the building. I took a deep breath.

  • Questions, Questions, More Questions

    September 6th, 2025

    What do Trump’s Secretaries of Transportation and Labor, and his EPA administrator,  have in common? They all have taken out mortgages on multiple properties that they called primary residences. What do Adam Schiff, Lisa Cook, and Letitia James have in common? They have all been accused by Bill Pulte of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board of mortgage fraud for the same reason. Mortgage fraud is a crime. Pulte says if you committed mortgage fraud, you will be convicted and punished, whoever you are. And, he says, if you signed two applications claiming two primary residences, you are guilty, circumstances be damned.

    Keep your eyes open. Let’s see what happens. First, we will see if Lisa Cook, who has been “fired” by Herr Trump, gets to keep her job.

    By the way, in case you missed it, there is another (legitimate) FED opening, and Trump nominated Stephen Miran, chair of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisors. The problem is that Miran does not want to (or has been told not to) abandon his current position, only to take a brief “leave of absence”. So much for FED independence, I guess. I understand. You can’t have an independent central bank in a dictatorship, even if you still call it a democracy. Just ask your favorite Turk.

    Moving on….Trump is proposing to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War, bringing ambiguity to that age-old question, “how’s the DOW doing today?”. Okay, maybe not ambiguous in print, but think radio.

    Now only Congress (60% vote in the Senate) can change the name officially, but in a dictatorship that hardly matters. Trump has already, of course, changed the name of Mt. Denali and the Gulf of Mexico, and there seems to be no limit. Why does he permit Ukraine to keep its name? What would be wrong with South Russia? And didn’t someone already suggest that Greenland (or Grønland) could become Redwhiteandblüeland? It would be easy for the Panama Canal to become the Trump Canal, and the to-be State of Canada could become, say, North North Dakota.

    Now, the Department of War was named the same day the US military demolished a Venezuelan boat, allegedly bringing drugs to the United States.

    What could be wrong with this picture? It was an act of war, and we are not at war with anybody? We killed 11 people, but don’t know who they were, or whether they were guilty individually of anything? Bringing drugs into the US, if that is what they were doing, is not a capital crime even after arrest, trial, and conviction? The boat may have been heading to Trinidad, not the U.S.? I could go on with this…..

    And then there is the Department of HHS, to be renamed the Department of SIS, Sickness and Inhumane Services. Tylenol, if taken by pregnant women, causes autism. Where have I read that before? That’s right. Nowhere. I wonder why.

    Now, I have my own suspicions. I think Fox News  causes a mental condition that I term Fatal Nonsense Creep (or FNC). If I were in charge of SIS, you can be sure that no pregnant woman in this country would be allowed to watch Fox News. This would save an entire generation of unborn children from FNC and put this country on the road to revival.

    Alright, that is enough for today. By the way, assuming there is a 2028 presidential election, do you think Vance will win reelection?

  • Once on this Island

    September 5th, 2025

    All of a sudden I got very scared. Uncontrollably anxious.

    What if my name is on the list?

    I started asking myself questions.

    Did I know anyone named Epstein? Answer: yes.

    Have I ever been on an island? Answer: yes.

    Have I ever been on an island in the Caribbean? Answer: yes.

    Have I ever been on an island where there were rich men? Answer: yes.

    Have I ever been on an island where there were pretty women? Answer: yes.

    Have some of those women been underage? Answer: yes.

    So there you have it. I may be guilty unless proved innocent.

    I am not trying to belittle anyone’s trauma. I am trying to focus where we are today.

    Do we think that the Trump administration will have to make more documents available together public? Yes. Will they name names? Yes. Will some of these names be the names of prominent Trump foes? Yes. Will they include the names of prominent Trump friends? Maybe, but probably not. Will they include the name Trump? Very, very unlikely.

    What will the names prove? They will probably show some, but not all, guests of Epstein. We will never know who was omitted. And why they were left out.

    And of those whose names are on the list, we may never know why they were there, what they did while they were there, or what they saw.

    I can’t say that I follow this word for word, but what I understand is that, with all the survivors who have spoken and who are now speaking, why isn’t anyone being named. We hear over and over that Maxwell induced them to come to the island, and then Epstein seduced them, or forced them to give him massages or engage in sexual activities. No one else, with one exception, that I know of has been accused of these activities or of anything else. So, if they are “on a list”, what is next?

    ChatGPT says there are 10 well known people who can be presumed to have visited the island. The only one who has been implicated with improper activity is Prince Andrew, and his accuser is dead.

    There are many ways to get more details to the public. Perhaps the DOJ files show the results of a proper series of investigative activities, but if we can’t trust the information, more investigations may have to take place.

    And if names are released, with or without accusations, the reputations of individuals will be besmirched, and they will wind up involved in endless expensive proceedings. P

    And, finally, since the DOJ records are under the control of DJT, and DJT spends all of his time discrediting Democrats and Democratic voters, we know that any records released by DOJ will have been edited and manipulated.

    I must be missing something. Maybe the Epstein survivors who met with Congressional members yesterday told them more than we know. Maybe there are reasons why that testimony has not been made public.

    On Jan Psaki’s show last night, I watched Cong. Melanie Stansbury of NM talk about the Epstein situation. And I assume what she said was accurate. She described millions of dollars floating around the world through Epstein, connected to sex trafficking and money laundering, and who knows what else. I don’t know what this means. Rich men would make money through illegal activities and pass it through Epstein accounts where it came out clean and untraceable? Epstein would take his cut and pay back the rich men for their business by providing them a steady string of 14 year olds? Is this what happened? Can somebody please help me out out?

    Trump says it is all a Democratic hoax. Democrats says it will bring down the presidency. Heartland MAGAs wonder if the teenagers on the island were the same girls who were abducted at that famous pizza parlor in DC three blocks from our house and wonder, since they can’t go to Epstein’s island any more, where they go after the Comet basement  gets too crowded. You wonder how they got to that basement in the first place, as there is no basement. I say, maybe they go the basement of the nonexistent laundry next door.

  • The Things I Did Yesterday So You Didn’t Have To.

    September 4th, 2025

    For the first time in a while, I bought a bottle of wine at Mom’s, along with some groceries. The cashier said “Can I check your ID for the wine?” I said, “Really?” She said, “It’s the rule.”

    I thought I looked over 21, but I guess she just couldn’t be sure.

    I have seen at some stores (not at Mom’s) a brand of flavored water called Liquid Death. Can someone tell me why that was the best name they could come up with?

    I understand that it started as sort of a joke. Like “let’s do something with our water that isn’t rivers and pine trees.” The founders were, I have read, part of what is called the underground music scene, and that this name fit their cultural ID. Their tag line is “Murder Your Thirst”. Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

    Of course, neither you nor anyone else has asked me. Certainly not the architects of Liquid Death.

    Have you tried it? I guess a few people have. Last year, Liquid Death sold $1.4 billion of water.

    It reminds me of a restaurant that was located in South St. Louis County during my high school years called “Wilde’s House of Poisons”. I never ate there. Maybe no one did. It only lasted about two telephone books. Maybe if they had sold Liquid Death at the House of Poison, they would still be in business.

    Today, I also came across a brand of foamy hand soap called Mrs. Meyers. I was intrigued by the bottle because it said that the scent was that of Iowa pine trees. Not knowing that Iowa pines have a particular scent, I thought that our next road trip should include the pine forests of Iowa.

    Actually, I assumed that Mrs. Meyers must live in Iowa and was just being patriotic. But, no, Mrs. Meyers seems to make her soap in Wisconsin.

    I also noted that, next year, this soap may no longer be available. It is marked as a “limited edition scent”. What does that mean? They’re running out of pine trees in Iowa? I am not sure.

    But Mrs. Meyers has about a dozen other scents available for their foamy hand soap community.  Some, I understand.  But can someone tell me what Acorn Spice hand soap would smell in your bathroom? Or, how about Rain Water scented? Or Snowdrop?

    At any rate, it was a busy day. Driving to Rockville, stopping at McDonalds for coffee, filling up the gas tank, my regular Wednesday leadership meeting for the Haberman Institute, a little sushi for lunch, stops at two groceries, a bakery, and a fish store. Setting the table for three dinner guests ( including old friends and former neighbors who tomorrow are moving into an assisted living facility) , picking up and driving the dinner guests home, watching half of the Nats game on TV, reading Thomas Mann’s novella Tristan, and a few things more. Like writing this post.

  • While Rome is Burning

    September 3rd, 2025

    I must admit that I am tired of hearing about Jeffrey Epstein. I understand the trauma which continues to affect his victims, but will be surprised if the current push to release more information will give them the closure they want and deserve. I don’t know if there was a sign-in sheet for his island visitors, or a “client list” (whatever that means), or a little black book. I take it for granted that a lot of well known people visited the island, and that there were many underage girls there. I don’t assume that their age was pointed out to those who were Epstein’s guests, or obvious to an onlooker.

    I assume Epstein and Maxwell did some terrible things. Epstein is dead (I really don’t care if he committed suicide or not). And Maxwell? I am sure she will come to no good eventually, and Trump’s treatment of her is just one more example of “Trump being Trump”.

    If there was any evidence, or if there was even any hint of evidence, that Trump participated in any illegal or even immoral activity with any underage women, I would feel very different. But I have not heard anything of Epstein’s victims accuse anyone, much less Trump, but Epstein and Maxwell of bad acts. Perhaps, at this morning’s scheduled press conference, someone will say something about someone. But I doubt it.

    To me, of all of the distractions that Trump and his sycophants throw around to keep our minds off the horrible things happening in this country, the Epstein distraction is the biggest and the most unnecessary.

    I just read Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice. I probably have read it before, but honestly don’t remember. I did see one of the films made of this short book. I knew the simple story line before I began to read.

    Death in Venice is a shocking book, I think, more so in light of the Epstein scandal. Our “hero”, Gustav von Aschenbach is a middle aged writer whose wife has died. He needs to get away and decompress and chooses to go to Venice, where he has been before. He stays in a small, upscale hotel on the Venice Lido. A wealthy Polish family with four children is also staying there. One of the children is a presumably very attractive 14 year old boy, and Aschenbach falls in love.

    For a month or more, Gustav stalks young Tadziu (or is it Wladziu?). He spends days watching him on the beach, in the hotel dining room, everywhere. He describes him in god-like terms. He never approaches him. Their eyes sometimes lock. Now and then, there might be a smile.

    This goes on a month or more, the Polish family gets ready to leave, Gustav dies sitting under an umbrella at the beach.

    That’s the story. The boy was 14. When he wrote the story, Mann was about 35.

    But it isn’t the entire story. Apparently, Mann had taken a trip similar to the one Aschenbach took. Well, not altogether similar. Mann was accompanied by his very much alive wife, and young daughter. But he did see a Tadziu. And he wrote this story based on a real person, a real experience.

    Yes, there are many differences between Mann’s story and Epstein’s. Aschenbach was not wealthy, was very shy, took no action (other than stalking), and wrote about it. Aschenbach, by the way, did not regret his feelings. He regretted not being strong enough to take any action. Aschenbach wished he was Epstein.

    It does show that Epstein’s obsession with young bodies (of any or all genders) is not limited to Epstein. Of course, we all know that. This is why the child pornography industry is so pervasive. This is why, in some societies, at some times, these activities would be looked at as normal, or at least not criminal. Thomas Mann was a happily married man, they say. One wife. Six children. But not embarrassed to write this story or publish this book.

    Jeffrey Epstein took his obsession in a different and more horrific direction. But nothing can be done now to repair the damage Epstein caused. Concentrating on all of this, I am sorry to say, is of interest (because this sort of thing is always of interest), but a distraction. Fiddling while Rome is burning.

    And Rome, indeed, is burning.

←Previous Page
1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 51
Next Page→

Blog at WordPress.com.

searching

 

Loading Comments...
 

    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Art is 80
      • Join 71 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • Art is 80
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar