#103 / Our National Degeneracy

  

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Steve Schmidt is a former Republican Party political operative and was the co-founder of the Lincoln Project. Nowadays, Schmidt writes a Substack blog, which he titles, "The Warning." 

On March 16th, Schmidt's blog posting was focused on Pete Hegseth, pictured above. Schmidt says Hegseth's appointment as the head of our Defense Department (which Hegseth calls our "War Department") is a proof of our "national degeneracy." The link I just provided should take you to Schmidt's March 16th blog posting, in which he makes that claim. Here's another link, which will take you to a video of Schmidt discussing Hegseth, and specificallty Hegseth's efforts to strip Senator Mark Kelley of his armed forces pension.

I absolutely agree with Schmidt that Hegseth should never have been appointed to head the Defense Department, and that he has proven inadequate to the job - and that he is not only an embarrassment but is actually a danger to the nation. Hegseth should be removed from his post - and removed forthwith. I do not believe, however, that the fact of Hegseth's appointment indicates our "national degeneracy." The "nation" includes all of us, and and all we do. When we start believing that the "nation" is degenerate, we start thinking, even without realizing it, that we are not really capable of doing the right thing, and of governing ourselves in a way that we can be proud of. 

In fact, though, we are capable of doing the right thing - changing what's wrong, and doing the right things, instead of doing the wrong things. I want our social and political commentators to encourage us to do that - to make the changes we need to make. Calling out our own, supposed, "national degeneracy" is not my idea of the best way of inspiring the kinds of actions we need to take. As I have pointed out in one of my earlier blog postings, selecting Donald Trump as our president was a terrible mistake. One consequence of that mistake has been the appointment of Pete Hegseth. 

I think we need to understand what's happened without stigmatizing our entire nation and stipulating to our "national degeneracy." Let me, in other words, endorse something that Robert Reich said in a March 19, 2026, column that ran in The Guardian: "Dear allies of America, please don’t confuse our president with us."

Instead of identifying a supposed "national degeneracy," let's correct our mistake(s)! Let's not suggest to ourselves, by the labels we use, that we have lost the capacity to do that! We haven't!

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/our-national-degeneracy

#102 / They Say Ev’ry Man Must Fall

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

They say ev’ry man needs protection
They say ev’ry man must fall
Yet I swear I see my reflection
Some place so high above this wall

Bob Dylan, "I Shall Be Released" 

As I have revealed in my blog postings, on more than one occasion, I have compiled a set of "Last Day Songs." I often listen to them as I walk around town. "I Shall Be Released," by Bob Dylan, is one of those songs, and the lyrics I have set out, just above, are my favorite part of the song. 

If you click the link to the "I Shall Be Released" title, you will be able to listen to Dylan sing the song. The complete lyrics are below. 

In addition, as a kind of "bonus," I am providing a link, right here, that will take you to a video with Dylan and The Band singing, "I Shall Be Released" during The Band's "Last Waltz" performance in San Francisco, on Thanksgiving in 1976. I didn't take the video, but I was there at the performance, and as I am recalling it, "I Shall Be Released" was the song that summed up and ended The Band's final concert. 

What I like about those lyrics that I feature at the top of this blog posting is their rather unassuming, but confident, statement of faith. It speaks for me, too!

oooOOOooo

I Shall Be Released

They say ev’rything can be replaced
Yet ev’ry distance is not near
So I remember ev’ry face
Of ev’ry man who put me here
I see my light come shining
From the west unto the east
Any day now, any day now
I shall be released

They say ev’ry man needs protection
They say ev’ry man must fall
Yet I swear I see my reflection
Some place so high above this wall
I see my light come shining
From the west unto the east
Any day now, any day now
I shall be released

Standing next to me in this lonely crowd
Is a man who swears he’s not to blame
All day long I hear him shout so loud
Crying out that he was framed
I see my light come shining
From the west unto the east
Any day now, any day now
I shall be released

Copyright ©1967, 1970 by Dwarf Music; renewed 1995 by Dwarf Music

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.jerrysguitarbar.com/guitar-video-lessons/individual-songs/bob-dylan-i-shall-be-released/

# 101 / A Disturbingly Demonstrative Dog

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I live on a short, one-block long street. I also go for a lot of walks. This means that I frequently find myself walking by the dog pictured above. Coming or going, and no matter what side of the street I'm walking on, if that dog is outside (which the dog usually is), the dog will immediately and vociferously begin barking at full volume as I pass by, jumping around and lunging at the fence, making me think that the dog would like to tear my throat out. Luckily, that fence shown in the picture is pretty strong, and pretty high. I am not really in any significant danger.

You might think I would be prepared, by now, for these auditory assaults. I should be, but I am almost always surprised and unnerved by the dog's clamor to get free and kill me - which is the way I think of this dog's full-volume barking assaults. That worst case scenario is what comes into my mind, every time. 

Or, at least, that was true until several weeks ago. 

Several weeks ago, instead of pretending not to be bothered and quickly walking on by, I actually stopped, and turned to face this demonstrative dog. I expected to see evidences of blood lust in the dog's face, because, as noted, that is definitely how I have interpreted the meaning behind that high-velocity barking with which I am always assaulted. 

But wait! When I stopped (the dog didn't stop barking and jumping around as if it would like to break free and attack me), I noticed that the dog's tail was wagging, too. I hadn't ever noticed that before!

Could it be that the dog was just starved for attention, and was trying to get some from me?

I have started entertaining that idea upon my subsequent forays, up and down my block, which I am hoping might help me lower my heart rate and sense of imminent peril every time I am subjected to one of those incredibly high-volume barking attacks, which I have just described. 

As I have thought about it, it has also struck me that human beings have been known to engage in tactics similar to those utilized by this irritatingly demonstrative dog. A lot of times, I have observed people who engage in verbally assaultive behavior, in print, or even in real life, usually expressing their reaction to some sort of disagreement with me, or with somebody else, near by, and I have found that they are not really interested in killing me, and eating my heart and liver (though that is, sometimes, my immediate impression, based on the way they are acting). People, like this demonstrative dog, are sometimes just trying to get some attention. They may even be friendly, underneath all the clamor.

No excuse for the bad manners, in either case - dog or human - but it is helpful to keep in mind that even vociferous and ugly verbal attacks do not, necessarily, and always, indicate that those engaging in such attacks really want to see you dead in order to feast on your carcass. 

With dogs and humans, that's a good lesson to remember.

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

Gary A. Patton, personal photo

#100 / Space Program Idealism Is Not Enough

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

As the nation's Artemis Program was coming to a milestone moment, Ross Douthat, columnist for The New York Times, was telling us that "The Idealism Of The Space Program Isn't Enough." Click the link to read Douthat's argument. No paywall will prevent you - at least, that's what I am assured!

In short, Douthat is saying that "ambition suffices to get us to space, but self-interest is what will keep us going." That boldface emphasis has been added by me. That's the main message that Douthat is delivering in his column. It's great to demonstrate that America (or human beings) can "conquer space," with glory going to all involved, but the bottom line question will always be this: "What's in it for us?"

That question, "what's in it for us?" means "what's in it for us, in terms of money and wealth," and let's be clear that the "us" may not mean "everybody." Currently, as Douthat accurately notes, no justification has been advanced by anyone (including the fabulous Elon Musk) demonstrating that our exploration of space is "exactly close to generating cash flow." And that's the quest we're on, according to Douthat: "The 21st-century space race is less of a race toward physical destinations and more a quest for commercial discoveries."

Douthat's column, which appeared in the paper on Thursday, April 9th, made me think about a book I am currently reading. Maybe you've heard of it: Palo Alto: A History of California, Capitalism, And The World. The book attracted me because, as the title makes clear, it's about my old home town. From First Grade through Stanford Law School, Palo Alto was my home. Malcolm Harris, the author of the book, grew up in Palo Alto, too, as I did, but he was born in Santa Cruz, which is where I have lived for the last fifty-five years (significantly longer than Harris has been alive, by the way). 

At any rate, Harris' book makes a very good case that California, beginning with the Gold Rush, has been all about wealth, about "cash flow," about making money. The way he tells the story, Palo Alto and Leland Stanford were right at the heart of the money quest that has defined the state - and, actually, the nation, if not "the world," entire. 

I'll probably write again about Palo Alto (the book) - but probably not until I am done with it (it's 712 pages long). Still, I can already recommend it. The quest for wealth has led to happiness for some, but has destroyed much that should have, it's clear, been valued far more than money. Current observations of what's happening in Santa Cruz (no book yet written about that) leads me to think that the observations of hometown boy Harris are particularly timely in the place I now call home. 

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/opinion/artemis-apollo-kennedy-musk.html

#99 / Advice From A Marine Combat Veteran

  

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Pictured is Graham Platner (born September 1, 1984). Platner is, among other things, an American oyster farmer, harbormaster, and military veteran. He is also a candidate for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in Maine, aiming to unseat incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins. I have commented on Platner before. Click this link to read that earlier blog posting. 

My comment today is on something that Platner said in an article that appeared in the Sunday, February 1, 2026, edition of The New York Times:

The day after federal immigration agents killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, a U.S. Senate candidate in Maine spoke with his supporters about resisting the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. 

Graham Platner, a Democrat and Marine combat veteran, urged them to join “watch groups,” “rapid response teams” and “intelligence collection networks” to alert citizens and potential targets to the presence of federal immigration agents in their communities. 

“Don’t just join a Signal thread and monitor it,” Mr. Platner told the audience in the coastal town of Kittery, referring to the encrypted texting app. “You’ve got to get in a room with people. You’ve got to develop relationships and trust.”

This is good advice. It is the advice I provide, too - and that I almost routinely provide in my various blog postings. If you want to be politically effective - and I urge you to understand that this ought to be your objective, if you care about democratic "self-government" - here is the formula that works: 

1. Get together in a small group with others who share your concerns, values, and objectives. 
2. Meet frequently (I suggest weekly), and ....
3. Meet in person.

Don't try to do it (all) online, by Zoom, or on Signal. 

Face to face. That is how to "develop relationships and trust." 

This formula works. I speak from personal experience. Small groups of friends helped me get elected to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors five times.

The stakes were pretty high, too, for Santa Cruz County.

Now, the stakes are even higher - and not just for Santa Cruz County. For the entire nation; for the entire world!

 

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DQAVzJ3koxS/

#98 / No Damn Pacifism For William McGurn

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

William McGurn, pictured above, is a member of The Wall Street Journal editorial board and writes the weekly "Main Street" column for The Journal each Tuesday. McGurn previously served as Chief Speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

You do remember President Bush, right? And you remember The War in Iraq, right? And you remember the connection, too, right? The War in Iraq was a war entered into based on false statements made by President Bush and his advisors, and it lasted for something like eight years, and it resulted in 150,000 to over a million deaths - all these statements coming to you by way of Wikipedia.

On Tuesday, April 7, 2026, McGurn's column was titled, "Pope Leo XIV Goes to War." McGurn's basic message was that Pope Leo XIV was way off base in his understanding of Christianity's view of war. The Pope, McGurn says, has given the impression that "pacifism is the only true Christian response to military conflict." 

Now, "pacifism" is defined by The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy as follows:

Pacifism is the theory that peaceful rather than violent or belligerent relations should govern human intercourse.... 

Please note the "should." We know that "human intercourse," historically, has not, in fact, been governed by peaceful rather that belligerent relations, so "pacifism" is not a description of what actually happens, or has happened, but is a statement about what should happen - what would be the best way to try to resolve conflicts. McGurn doesn't think the Pope should be suggesting that "pacifism" is better than "war," having probably forgotten about the Ten Commandments, and that specific Commandment (Commandment Number 5) that is commonly phrased this way: "Thou Shalt Not Kill." 

As opposed to the Ten Commandments, and the idea that peaceful means, instead of war, should govern human and national disputes, McGurn proposes the following: 

It’s up to the actors, in this case President Trump and the leadership in Iran, to judge the necessity for action and the moral content of their own decisions. Militants may not get the last word, but they do get the first. They have more knowledge of the actual conditions. And they bear responsibility for what happens (emphasis added).

Not to be too "legalistic," but McGurn's statement is absolutely contrary to what the United States Constitution says about war. It says that "war" by the United States can only properly be authorized by the Congress, that part of the United States government in which every American has a "representative." Those representatives are supposed to debate and decide about whether to seek peaceful means, or not, to resolve conflicts. 

The Pope says peaceful means should be used to settle conflicts and disputes. McGurn says the president can do whatever he wants, because that's what "leaders" do. 

One "non-peaceful" way to resolve international disputes would be to employ nuclear weapons, something, it appears, that our current president is at least contemplating. Past comments by our current president - and some current comments, too - seem to suggest that our current president thinks that it might be proper to use nuclear weapons, at least in some cases. One gathers that the Pope would not agree.

I'm with the Pope. 

Message to Congress: Step up to the plate, folks! YOU, collectively, are supposed to decide what this nation does, when questions of war and peace are at issue. You have flamed out! Get with it! A number of informed observers are suggesting that our current president is showing increasing signs of dementia. This just reinforces the fact that it is time to forget the McGurn-Bush doctrine (the leaders can do whatever they want). It's time to return to the basics of how self-government is supposed to work in The United States of America. 

Start representing the people! Start doing what the Constitution demands!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.wsj.com/news/author/william-mcgurn

#97 / The Politics Of Presence

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

"What might heal if we trade social media debates for real life civic participation?" 

That question has been posed by Brandon Taylor, in an article that you might be able to read online. Just click this link to read it (if possible paywall protections permit that, of course).

Online, Taylor's article appears under the following headline: "Can We Trade Our Social Media Wars For Something Better?" The hardcopy  version of Taylor's article is titled, "The Politics of Presence." 

I am consistently urging those who might read one or more of my blog postings to "Find Some Friends," and then get together with those friends, in "real life," on a regular, in-person basis. Why get together? Well, "civic participation" describes what I think such small groups should be focusing on. Margaret Mead's injunction - again, often mentioned in these blog postings of mine - point out their civic and political power. 

In terms of my own experience, I am not infrequently stopped on the street by someone who tells me how much they have appreciated all that I have done for Santa Cruz and Santa Cruz County, and often mention how I "Saved Lighthouse Field." 

Well, just to be clear, I did work on that effort, and played an important role, but it was the members of The Save Lighthouse Point Association and voters in the City of Santa Cruz who really "Saved Lighthouse Field." 

The Save Lighthouse Point Association, which numbered about twenty-five or so, met in person on a regular basis, and worked together to reverse the unanimous decisions of both the local City Council and the Board of Supervisors, who wanted to turn this jewel-like field on our coast into a massive development that was proposed to include a high-rise hotel, a huge covention center, a shopping center about the same size as the Rancho Del Mar Shopping Center in Aptos, high-rise condo apartments for the wealthy, and seven acres of blacktopped parking. 

That was the proposed project, and "everyone" (all the electeds, the Chamber of Commerce, the unions, and other civic groups, absolutely supported this). "Everyone" supported it except for "everyone else," comprised of the vast majority of the citizens of the City of Santa Cruz. Citizen action saved Lighthouse Field.

Other, later efforts, after I was elected to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, similarly demonstrated that small groups of people can change the world (just what Margaret Mead always claimed).

Take it from Brandon Taylor. Or, take it from me. There is nothing more satisfying, more "fun," than getting together, regularly, and in person, with friends and neighbors, and deciding to change the world, and then working to do just that. 

And.... (and I know you know this) the world really does need changing. Now more than ever! At the local level, and at the state, and at the national level, and it's not going to happen if we wait around for someone else - including our elected officials - to do it!

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://sojo.net/magazine/march-2026/can-we-trade-our-social-media-wars-something-better

#96 / Another 1,000 Words Item

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Every once in awhile, I run across a picture that I believe needs no further explanation from me. When that happens, I provide the picture, and very little, if anything, else. That practice started with the post I am linking here, published in October 2012. 

Check out that image, above. That is, I think, another such picture. It comes from the March 2026 edition of Sojourners Magazine.

Here are some other images, from past blog postings, that I thought were each worth 1,000 words - or sometimes more. Feel free to click the links, if you'd like to browse my past postings:

• 1,000 Words, II

• Another 1,000 Words Picture

• One Of Those Pictures Worth 1,000 Words+

• Another Picture Worth 1,000 Words

• One More 1,000 Words Picture

• One More Picture Worth 1,000 Words

• Thousands Of Words

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://sojo.net/magazine/march-2026/imago-dei-vs-american-bigotry

#95 / The Right Kind Of Love

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Last Thursday, I wrote about "The Right Kind Of Hope." Today, it struck me, might be a good day to provide some thoughts on "The Right Kind Of Love." 

The kind of "love" that comes most immediately to mind, at least when I think about "love" as a topic - is nicely illustrated above. That is the "falling in love" kind of love. Falling in love is a glorious experience when it happens, and all the more glorious if it happens simultaneously to two different people who find themselves falling in love with each other. That "falling in love" kind of love is sometimes denominated "romantic love," and, as I just said, it's wonderful. 

There is nothing "wrong" with falling in love, and please let me make that clear, lest anyone who sees my use of the word "right," in my title today, might think that I am suggesting that any kind of love different from what I want to highlight in today's blog posting is, in some way, "wrong." That's not what I am getting at! As I say, if it happens to you, if you're lucky enough to "fall in love," there's nothing "wrong" with that - though do check out the Ten Commandments for some possible pitfalls.

Here's my point: "Falling in love" is something that "happens to us." Again, that can be glorious! There is, however, a different kind of love that is not something that happens to us, but that is something that we, ourselves, "do," something that is the product of deliberate choice, and that may, actually, require some "work," and even "sacrifice." That's what I am calling the "Right Kind Of Love," not because other kinds of love are necessarily "wrong," but because I think that achieving what is commanded of us is an accomplishment truly worth celebrating. 

"Commanded?" Yes. 

The Ten Commandments, already mentioned, are requirements that tell us what NOT to do. Here is something from the Book of Matthew (Matthew 22:37-39) that tells us what we are supposed to do: 

A lawyer, asked him a question ..., saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

We need to appreciate all the good things that are given to us (and, even in troubled times like our own, there are many such good things). That granted, I always believe that what is most important is not what happens to us, but what we do, ourselves - what we make happen by our own choice and action. 

We can, really, "do" anything. "Possibility" is, in fact, the category that rules us all. We need to choose, and act, and that is the "real" glory in our human life. Or, so I think. I believe that Jesus got it right in outlining exactly what we are commanded to do. Two things only, as the commandments on which hang "all the law and the prophets." 

That kind of love does not just "happen to us."

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.redbubble.com/i/art-board-print/Falling-in-Love-by-Nightlea/134013201.7Q6GI

#94 / If We Don't Make It

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I have been somewhat depressed lately - just to provide anyone reading this blog posting with a bit of personal confession! As I have tried to figure out why - since I don't think depression is a very good state of mind for anyone - a line from Bob Dylan's song, "It Takes a Lot to Laugh, It Takes a Train to Cry," has kept coming to my mind. 

Click that link, above, for the full lyrics. Here's the line I am talking about, in the first verse, and highlighted below: 

Well, I ride on a mailtrain, baby
Can’t buy a thrill
Well, I’ve been up all night, baby
Leanin’ on the windowsill
Well, if I die
On top of the hill
And if I don’t make it
You know my baby will

I have a couple of children, and three grandchildren, and none of them, really, are "babies" anymore, but the sentiment Dylan expresses in this song, the way I am presenting the lyrics, here, is one that I think is pretty common, and it certainly speaks to my own condition, as the Quakers might say. I am pretty much reconciled to my personal departure from this wonderful world, having been practicing that "Memento Mori" advice that I dish out here in this blog. No regrets - and a lot of celebration when I think of what a wonderful life I have had! I am 100%, all-in for the "right kind of hope," as I just wrote about a couple of days ago. 

Still, and isn't this true for just about everyone who does have children, I am wishing the best for my kids, and for my grandkids, and for all the "younger generation" that I have always felt will carry on, and maybe even get to the "top of the hill," as Dylan forecasts in his song. 

I am starting to worry that might not be true. I am starting to worry, much as I try to avoid the thought, that I'm going to be around here to see the end of everything. Our current president's war in Iran, his fascination with the idea that he might like to use nuclear weapons, and his decision to stop every initiative underway that might help us stave off the impacts of global warming - that global warming that is proceding apace, and that is speedily heading for its multiple "tipping points" - are two big things that are undermining my confidence that "if I don't make it, you know my baby will." 

Will our kids make it? If they don't, and it's depressing to think they might not, we are all looking at the last verse of that Dylan song, not the first verse - and that last verse turns out to be a lot less hopeful the first verse is:

Now the wintertime is coming
The windows are filled with frost
I went to tell everybody
But I could not get across
Well, I wanna be your lover, baby
I don’t wanna be your boss
Don’t say I never warned you
When your train gets lost

 

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.bobdylan.com/songs/it-takes-lot-laugh-it-takes-train-cry/

#93 / An Abecedarium

    

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Wikipedia tells us that Robert Polito is a poet, biographer, essayist, critic, educator, curator, and arts administrator. Polito received the National Book Critics Circle Award in biography in 1995 for Savage Art: A Biography of Jim Thompson, and he was the founding director of the New School Graduate Writing Program in New York City. Polito also served as the President of the Poetry Foundation from 2013 to 2015. 

Polito is the author of a recent book, pictured above, which the publisher's book jacket calls "an abecedarium of chapters surveying [Dylan's] albums, performances, films, and books since 1991." With respect to designating Polito's book as an "abecedarium," that means that his chapters are not numbered, but are alphabetized, instead - A, B, C, D, etc., from A to Z - with the first word in each chapter begining with the letter that heads up that chapter, and with the subject matter of the chapter also resonating with the chapter's alphabetic designation. How much this adds to the content of the book remains unclear, at least to me, but I did enjoy the book, and despite this distraction. 

If you are interested in Dylan, there is lots of information in Polito's book, which "arcs from [Dylan's] Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award on February 20, 1991 ... through his 2021-2024 Rough and Rowdy Ways tour." The main thesis of the book is that Dylan's second thirty years should be considered as something quite different from the early years - years that almost everyone knows something about - and that Dylan's place in history goes far beyond what he contributed then. In fact, says Polito, "those second thirty-odd years alone would surpass the lifetime achievements of approximately anyone else I could summon for resonant parallels, whether musicians, composers, poets, novelists, philosophers, or painters." 

I, personally, was quite moved by Polito's description of Hibbing High School, which Dylan attended. I had the very same reaction when I visited it, back in 2023. My visit, then, was one of the "High Points" in my year.

In sum, Polito's book is aimed at those who already have a high regard for Bob Dylan (in any of the categories listed by Polito in the third paragraph in this blog posting) - and I think I'd add on "spiritual and religious thinker," too.

Since I am, indeed, a person with such a high regard for Dylan, here is my comprehensive summary and review of After The Flood: HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/218569895-after-the-flood

#92 / The Right Kind Of Hope

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Pictured above is the Reverend Dr. William J. Barber, II. Reverend Barber is Pastor of Greenleaf Christian Church, Disciples of Christ in Goldsboro, North Carolina. He is the architect of the Forward Together Moral Movement that gained national acclaim with its Moral Monday protests at the North Carolina General Assembly in 2013. The cover of his book, Revive Us Again, is pictured below: 

Chapter Six of Revive Us Again bears this title: "The Call To Be Positioned As Powerful Prisoners Of Prophetic Hope." According to Barber, that phrase, "prisoners of prophetic hope," originated with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and it struck me, as I read that Chapter 6 excerpt from Barber's book, that "prophetic hope," as he and Dr. King were defining it, is something quite different from the kind of "pious hope" that is, perhaps, the way "hope" most usually appears to many of us. 

A "pious hope," to cite to the Cambridge Dictionary, is "something that is unlikely to happen."

In fact, for many of us - and probably for all of us, sometimes - when we start "hoping" for something we are automatically telling ourselves that it's not going to happen. "At least we can hope," we might say!

"Prophetic hope" is a different thing. What I learned from Dr. Barber's discussion is that "prophetic hope" isn't based on the possibility ("don't we hope") that something good might happen. "Prophetic hope" accompanies a determined effort and commitment to "make it so," to cite to a fictional character whose statements to that effect indicate that "anything is possible." 

In fact, "prophetic hope," I believe, is nothing other than the kind of "possibility" that I am always celebrating as "my category." That kind of "possibility," that kind of "prophetic hope," is the right kind of hope to have, because that kind of hope is a personal commitment to "try," to do whatever can be done to realize the "hope." Dr. King, and Reverend Barber "organized" and "acted" to realize the "prophetic hopes" to which their lives were (and are) dedicated - and with great and transformative success, too. 

Prisoners? Why that word? How willing might we be to chain and bind ourselves to a task that is defined by our greatest and most glorious hopes? Isn't this, in fact, exactly what we are, all of us, called to do?

Let us imprison ourselves to the prophetic hope that this world will survive, that neither Global Warming nor nuclear war will erase from this Earth all the greatest of humanity's possibilities - that we can, and will, defying all our differences, live together, in peace, and in a shared and prosperous community . 

A "pious hope?" No. A prophetic call to "Lean In," and to lead our lives dedicated to the achievement of our deepest needs and aspirations.

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credits:

(1) - https://www.epi.org/people/rev-dr-william-j-barber-ii/

(2) - https://www.beacon.org/Revive-Us-Again-P1422.aspx

#91 / The Immigrant Advantage

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I haven't read the whole book, pictured above, just Chapter 6. I got a copy of that chapter from COPA (Communities Organized for Relational Power in Action). COPA describes itself as "a Broad Based Organizing Group made up of (and owned by) 23 Member institutions across Monterey Bay, from as far south as Greenfield to as far North as Santa Cruz. These Member institutions are congregations, schools, and unions who have come together ... to act on behalf of families."

What Kolker says, in her very persuasive report on her visit to Chicago's "Little Village" neighborhood, is that immigrants bring an approach to community that maximizes mutual support, and that provides a model that non-immigrant communities should seek to emulate. 

Neighborhoods that provide mutual support for all the residents who live there? What a great idea! How about this? Let's find a way to incorporate immigrants who have come to the United States into our society, instead of rounding them up like criminals and putting them in concentration camps. 

What do you think?

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Immigrant-Advantage/Claudia-Kolker/9781416586838

#90 / Why Democracy Needs The Rich. Wow!

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Last February, about a month ago, The Wall Street Journal provided a book review of the book that is pictured above. "Wow," I thought, when I saw that "Bookshelf" column in the paper! I was really stumped. Why does democracy "need the rich?" I have to be honest, and I need to tell you the truth: no good answer sprang immediately to my mind.

At any rate, while I am not a "kill the rich" kind of guy, I have never thought that "democracy" would be in trouble if there weren't a lot of those "rich" people hanging around, making themselves available for the betterment of our democratic institutions. In fact, if you think back to what some might title the "Months of the Magnificent  Musk," shortly after our current president took office, in January 2025, the willingness of billionaire Elon Musk to get deeply involved with our democratic government, in Musk's "hands on" effort to make the government run better, turned out to be the very opposite of inspiring - and the very opposite of helpful. Musk is definitely one of the "rich," so his involvement with government does not seem to support the thesis expressed in the title of the book. 

And it's not just Musk, either. There is a pretty good case to be made, I think, that the "rich" people whom our current president has brought into government with him - and not to forget our current president himself, who is certainly among "the rich" - have spent most of their time figuring out how our "democracy" can help them, and can make those rich folks even more rich. I don't know whether you'd agree, but I haven't seen much impact going the other way.

Well, John O. McGinnis, the author of the book I am profiling, who is the George C. Dix Professor in Constitutional Law, at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, has a very simple answer for any skeptics (like me, and maybe you). Democracy "needs the rich" because [quote] "public policy is heavily shaped by interest groups and bureaucracy. The rich have the freedom to provide alternative perspectives" (emphasis added).

Wow! (My second "wow" in this blog posting!) McGinnis thinks that "the rich" are helping out our "democracy" by generously giving us their "alternative perspectives." Wow! (third time). I never thought of that!!

Let me give you a more ample outline of McGinnis' argument by quoting from the book review published in The Journal (emphasis added): 

A law professor at Northwestern University and former U.S. Justice Department official, Mr. McGinnis seeks to defend the ultrawealthy from the growing number of accusations leveled against them. Although incomplete, Mr. McGinnis’s argument deserves to be taken seriously.

Who are the rich? If they’re defined by wealth, Mr. McGinnis would include people in the top 0.1% of asset-holders—$61 million and above—as “truly rich.” What matters to the author isn’t how much they are worth, but how free they are to express their views, take risks and support innovative activities.

A highly paid corporate executive or celebrity isn’t necessarily immune to pressures from the marketplace, government regulators or adoring fans. However, someone who has amassed a vast fortune, especially through entrepreneurial skill, Mr. McGinnis argues, has greater freedom to act with impunity or champion unpopular causes. That makes the rich especially valuable in a representative democracy like the U.S., where policy is normally shaped by the play of public opinion, competition among interest groups and the weight of a permanent bureaucracy. The wealthy—and the organizations or politicians they assist—have the means to provide alternative perspectives, typically rooted in the practical realities of building a business rather than in intellectual theories, media stereotypes or government rules.

Arent' you tempted to say, "Wow," too? 

"Democracy," at least as commonly understood, is based on the idea that ALL CITIZENS are to be encouraged to "express their views," and to "provide alternative perspectives" and actually to be engaged in "self-government," which is what I call what many people, including McGinnis, denominate as "democracy." In fact, given just how much "the rich" have assumed full, and effective, and defacto control over our government, and over everything our government does, it seems especially important that the "poor," and just plain-old "average" Americans get personally involved in "politics," and in political decisionmaking, and come up with "alternative perspectives." 

Talk about someone who truly doesn't "get it" about "democracy." Mr. John O. McGinnis really takes the cake. 

Wow! 

To Subscribe, Just Click This Link

 

Image Credit:

https://www.wsj.com/arts-culture/books/why-democracy-needs-the-rich-review-a-wealth-of-ideas-646e083f

#89 / Is Someone Preparing Ahead - And For What?

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I was struck by an article in the Saturday, March 21, 2026, edition of The New York Times. Click the following link to read that article, which is titled, "In Trump’s Administration, Military Housing Is Becoming a Hot Commodity."

The article to which I am referring is headed up by the set of photographs reproduced below. If you can't identify those pictured, read the article. They include the person whom our current president has selected as his Deputy Chief Of Staff For Policy, who is the person who has urged on the kind of attacks by ICE agents which have terrozied many, throughout the country, and which have led to the death of a few citizens who have protested or objected. Others pictured below include those persons selected to guide our foreign policy, our intelligence policy, the "War" Department, the Department of "Homeland Security," and the author of "Project 2025," which has provided an outline of many of the most controversial initiatives of the administration. All of those individuals pictured below are now living in "military housing."

The picture at the top of this blog posting appeared in a different article in The Times, that article published on Wednesday, March 25, 2026, and titled, "When Trump Wants Something Done, He Dispatches ICE To Do It." 

Another Times' article that I suggest is important is "Chuck Schumer: This Is Trump’s Plan To ‘Guarantee The Midterms.’"

I am informed that all of the articles I have linked can be read in their entirety (no paywall!), and I certainly encourage anyone reading this blog posting to make use of those "gift links" to do just that. My following comment, as I already said, has been prompted by that article that lets us know that a number of key advisors to our current president have now been provided with "military" housing. When I read that, I began wondering why - and as I began wondering why, I began entertaining what are really some rather dark thoughts. 

Here's my thought process. The highest legislative priority for our current president is, clearly, the so-called "SAVE Act." Click the link just provided to hear from the League of Women Voters, which strongly opposes this suite of bills. The "SAVE Act" and its impact is also well-described by Chuck Schumer in that opinion piece from The Times that I have linked. If enacted, the "SAVE Act" would help ensure that the current administration's control over Congress will continue. But what if it is not enacted (and there is a good chance that it won't be)? In that case, political forecasters are thinking that the current administration will probably lose control of the House of Representatives, and possibly the Senate, in the so-called "midterm elections" coming up in November. If that happened, our current president would, to a significant degree, lose his ability to act unilaterally, as though he were a "King," a title that he has has enjoyed discussing in the past. 

Assuming that the Congress does not pass the so-called "SAVE Act," and/or that upcoming elections do deprive our current president of his current ability to do whatever he wants to do, unimpeded by the currently acquiesent Congress, the extent of his frustrations can be imagined. I would not be surprised if he began making increased use of those Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) troops, which have already been deployed to carry out operations that seem intended to terrorize the communities to which they are dispatched. As that Times' headline says, when he "wants something done," our current president "dispatches ICE to do it." 

Well, is there some possibility that our current president might be thinking about sending ICE troops to local communities which have "resisted" - or might "resist" - his desires, to compel then to sit down, shut up, and do what he says? Is there some chance he might send them to the polls, during elections? Things like that could occur, should our current president continue to assert that he, and "he alone," is going to make decisions for this nation. If he used federal (ICE) troops, and/or regular armed forces troops, to insist that things be done "his way," we would be facing a real, constitutional dilemma, with the armed forces asserting control over our constitutional and "civilian" government.

Could that ever happen? I would like to think not, but IF it ever did, it might be very important for our current president to have those he relies upon most in his administration protected in their homes, which could be accomplished by locating their homes in "military housing." 

That was my thought process. Is there some hidden reason that the key administrators of our key administrative agencies are now living in housing located in the midst of a "military" enclave in our nation's capital? Maybe, they're all just a bit "greedy," and wanted to take over desirable residences formerly allocated to people serving in leadership positions in the military. That's pretty much the impression left by the article in The Times. 

But, there could be a different explanation. If you have been following along with my "thought process" you will understand at least one possible explanation that came to my mind. 

How should we all be acting, given what has been going on in this country? Well, what I will call the "Minnesota Model" has come to mind. That model relies on small groups of neighbors and friends, who coordinate with other such small groups, and confront difficult situations nonviolently. Those whose minds might contemplate the kind of thoughts I have outlined here should probably start thinking seriously about the contingencies that might become realities in the months ahead. Forming up a "Nonviolent Peaceforce," and getting ahead of the curve, could be an appropriate reaction to our recent news. 

As our current president might say, "Thank you for your attention to this matter." Let's all start thinking, seriously, that things could get a lot worse than they already are.

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credits:

(1) - https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/23/us/politics/trump-ice-airports.html

(2) - https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/21/us/politics/trump-aides-military-housing.html