Blogging as an Exercise in Writing

Non use of muscles impairs them. Causes them to atrophy. Singers who don’t practice their chords every day risk losing vocal strength. Professional athletes, be they baseball or basketball players or from any sport, rely on repetitive exercise to instill muscle memory so they can perform at a superior level even under extreme pressure. 

Writers—bloggers—are no different. Writing requires more than a haphazard dedication. I can’t believe it has been two weeks since my last posting. Lots of things have happened since then. I’ve started to write several blogs but laziness, sometimes abetted by real reasons, stifled my creative juices. So, here’s a jumble of thoughts on a variety of topics:

Evening News: Gilda and I eat most dinners while watching the evening news, usually recorded so we can fast forward through commercials. When Dan and Ellie were young we restricted their TV viewing to limit their exposure to violent shows. Yet we justified their watching the most violent broadcast of all, the evening news. 

Perhaps as a carryover from my parents’ home, CBS News was our preferred outlet. From anchors Walter Cronkite through Dan Rather, Connie Chung, Bob Schieffer, Katie Couric, Scott Pelley and Jeff Glor we remained loyal to the Tiffany Network’s newscast. Until recently. I like the CBS correspondents, but Jeff Glor as an anchor just does not measure up. So we switched, mostly to ABC World News with David Muir. 

After several months of viewing I noticed that compared to CBS and NBC, ABC has a different way of presenting female correspondents when they appear in conversation with the anchor at his glass desk. They sit across from him, closer to the camera, wearing short skirts with their legs crossed to the right, directly at the camera. Am I suggesting this is a woke moment during this #MeToo time? You betcha!

Another Genocide in the Making? Its denials of an Armenian genocide 100 years ago notwithstanding, Turkey seems poised to undertake another fateful exercise in ethnic eradication. Emboldened by Donald Trump’s capricious decision to withdraw 2,000 American troops from Syrian territory near the Turkish border where Kurdish forces have been fighting ISIS, Turkey has signaled it will launch an assault against the Kurds (https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/turkey-masses-troops-kurdish-held-syrian-town-59984033). 

It is to the everlasting embarrassment, shame and dysfunction of America’s political standing in the world that Trump cares more about the wishes of foreign tyrants than the counsel of American politicians and experts. Trump ordered the troop withdrawal after conversation with Turkey’s despotic leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan despite his own advisors’ strong recommendation to maintain a military presence in Syria.

Vigilance for the Truth: I was reminded again of the need to be forever vigilant in pursuit of the truth during this era of instant mass communications. A friend sent an email suggesting the alleged disrespect for the American flag and the national anthem can be traced to Barack Obama. So I checked its veracity by googling “Snopes: Obama Explains National Anthem Stance?” Of course the claim proved to be false.

“Disinformation campaigns, whether inspired by Russia or any extremist entity, succeed only when recipients of such emails fail to research their authenticity. Any democracy demands vigilance and a healthy skepticism. John McCain provided the best (now viral) demonstration of what we all must do when confronted with salacious untruths. During a campaign town hall meeting in 2008 he respectfully disagreed with a woman who claimed Obama was a Muslim and unAmerican. He corrected her misinformation. Maybe it cost him some votes. But he stood up for the truth,” I wrote my friend.  

Is It Christmas Yet? CBS Sunday Morning reported a survey that found 51% of Americans said they have sent a letter to Santa Claus. I chuckled when I saw that, but truly snorted when I read a Facebook post shared by my sister Lee: “Before you mock children who believe in Santa Claus, remember that there are still adults who believe in Donald Trump.”

Over a picture of takeout Chinese food, my cousin Stan posted on Facebook: “Ok......Hanukkah is over, time to start planning a traditional Jewish Christmas Eve !!!!”

Why do many Jews eat Chinese food on Christmas Eve? Here’s a defining reason from an article in Tablet:

“Whether they have fully thought it through or not, Jews who eat Chinese food on Christmas are proclaiming that, for them, Jewishness is what philosophers call a second-order value. In contrast to valuing Judaism on the first order—enjoying the rituals themselves, sincerely adhering to the tenets themselves—they value the fact of their Jewishness. They go out of their way to do it. They may or may not enjoy General Tso’s Chicken, but if they are eating it on Christmas, their prime motivation is not the general’s sweet, spicy deliciousness, but rather the knowledge that they are doing something that in some adapted way reinforces their Jewishness. They are moved by their hearts, not their tastebuds.” (https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/53569/jewish-christmas?utm_source=tabletmagazinelist&utm_campaign=3b46bc98d0-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_21_12_57&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c308bf8edb-3b46bc98d0-207614241)

Gilda and I will be eating Chinese food Christmas Eve.

History, Realpolitik Lessons from Khashoggi Killing

Here’s what history teaches us: When an absolute monarch or would-be-monarch-with-absolute-powers expresses displeasure with someone within their access there are bound to be sycophants who will eliminate the source of that displeasure. 

Did Henry II of England command the death of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, or did he merely express frustration of his one-time friend and current antagonist when he is said to have said, “Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?”

Who knows? All we do know is that four of Henry’s loyal subjects rode to Canterbury and did away with Becket in the cathedral. 

That was in the year 1170. Yet, even in medieval times kings accepted responsibility for actions taken on their behalf, at least when the murdered is well known and admired by the populace. So Henry accepted blame and took some, light, punishment. 

In 21st century Saudi Arabia—among the remaining principalities that could pass for having Middle Ages morals and values—the monarchy is not prone to accept human frailty or responsibility, no matter how damning the evidence of its complicity appears to be in the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, an outspoken critic of the Saudi regime living in the United States. Khashoggi was killed October 2 inside the Saudi Arabian embassy in Istanbul by a Saudi hit squad linked to the crown prince after he was lured there on the pretense he could obtain proof he had divorced his wife so he could legally marry his Turkish fiancee (Though Turkey is an Islamic country, it does not accept polygamy.) 

Targeted assassinations of a country’s dissidents are not exclusively a Saudi province. Kim Jong-un has dispatched operatives to permanently silence voices, even those of relatives, he doesn’t want talking about his treatment of North Korea. Vladimir Putin has seen fit to rid the world of Russian truth-sayers about his autocratic rule of Russia.  A common thread among these tyrants is that with impunity they care not that these rubouts may occur on foreign soil. 

(These assassinations are distinctly different from those perpetrated by Israel. Israel has killed terrorists involved in the murder of its citizens and those who incite other to seek its destruction. Similarly, the United States approved the assassinations of al-Qaeda and ISIS leadership.)

The brazenness of the Khashoggi killing, with lurid as yet unconfirmed details of torture, dismemberment with a bone saw, and the pathetic, infantile attempt to explain away his disappearance and subsequent admission of the cause of death, has challenged the sensibilities of many in the Western world and those in the Middle East who are not in the Saudi sphere of influence.

But let’s keep in perspective the fact that Khashoggi was a journalist, a contributor to The Washington Post. Had he worked in another profession, or for a less renowned publication, the American furor over his murder might have been no greater than the outcry over the deaths of the 45 other journalists killed around the world in 2018. 

As he hardly has met an autocrat he doesn’t feel akin to, Donald Trump is loathe to criticize the Saudi monarchy. He is mindful, some say too mindful, of the extensive investment Saudi Arabia intends to make in American arms and aircraft (Trump inflates the price tag, but it is substantial in dollars amounts and the number of jobs it will support). As with other presidents before him, Trump’s response to Saudi indiscretion is tethered by realpolitik. 

The bottom line is America will hyperventilate for a while over Khashoggi’s assassination, Saudi Arabia will remain ruled by reactionaries, and despots will continue to confront, assault and kill their adversaries wherever they choose. Recall that for all his bluster about Saudi Arabia’s complicity in killing Khashoggi on Turkish soil, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, president of Turkey, had no regrets about having his thugs attack protesters during his visit to Washington last year. 

Fasten Your Seatbelts for Another Bruising Court Nomination Battle

There is no relief in sight. I’m not talking about the weather, which, depending on what part of the country you are in, continues to assault living creatures with floods, fires, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, mudslides, hail storms and excessive heat. 

No, I’m talking about nonstop big news events, some thrust upon us by Mother Nature, others part of the natural course of daily life, and still more by the actions, pettiness and peculiarities of Donald Trump (notice I didn’t mention principles as I do not believe he has any. And neither does he. How many remember a statement Trump made in the Oval Office to John Dickerson of CBS News last year? When pressed by Dickerson for his position on an issue, Trump demurred, saying, “I don’t stand for anything”).

It has been an eventful 18 months: Paris Climate Accords; NAFTA; Trans-Pacific Partnership; NATO; Russia Election Meddling; Neil Gorsuch; Iran Nuclear Deal; Jerusalem Embassy; Wedding Cakes for Gay Marriages; Muslim Travel Ban; Zero-Tolerance Border Policy.

Tweet after tweet on matters consequential and not. 

It will be up to late night TV talk-show hosts to get us through the coming travails.

Brace yourself for another bruising, months-long battle, the choice of a successor to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy who announced his retirement Wednesday. Apart from the selection of a new member of the high court, bound to be hailed by Republicans, trashed by Democrats, the fiercest part of the confirmation debate may well be over timing—Senate Republicans will want to nominate and confirm prior to the midterm elections in November.

Democrats will be fighting to delay, delay, delay a vote. They will be using the court vacancy as another example of why citizens must register and vote in November so there can be a definitive counterbalance to the administration’s conservative tilt.  

But even if Republicans should lose their majority, newly elected senators would not take office until January, giving Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his caucus eight additional weeks to approve Trump’s choice. 

Keep in mind that just 51 ayes, not 60, are now required to end debate on Supreme Court nominations, a McConnell legacy from the Gorsuch confirmation process.

Minority Leader Charles Schumer will be tested to try and contain the process. Doubtful he will be able to succeed any better than the Gorsuch experience. 

Kennedy’s retirement also will place greater pressure on Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, both in their 80s, to do all in their power to delay leaving the bench as long as possible, at least through the 2020 inauguration of what they hope would be a Democratic president. 

Pundit Hits It: Chris Hayes of MSNBC characterized Trump’s actions thusly: He treats those fleeing ISIS as if they are ISIS, those fleeing MS-13 as though they are MS-13. 

How sad that under Trump our nation has closed its shores to refugees. Did we not learn anything from our heartless response in the 1930s and 1940s to Jews seeking asylum from Nazis and the Holocaust?

Carson Was Prescient: Trump has tweeted his displeasure with late night TV comedians, specifically Jimmy Kimmel, Seth Meyers, Jimmy Fallon and “that guy on CBS.” 

That guy is Stephen Colbert. Noting that Trump said they lacked the talent Johnny Carson had on The Tonight Show, Colbert Tuesday night agreed Carson had talent. And he played a January 31, 1992, Tonight Show clip proving he was a legend ahead of his time:. https://youtu.be/994SI2rT5JA (the clip is just 31 seconds long—worth the link. For those not familiar with Gennifer Flowers, she alleged having an affair with Bill Clinton while he was governor of Arkansas.)

Existential Threats: Jihadists or Neo-Nazis?

Which form of intolerance is a greater threat to Western civilization—extremist Muslims or neo-Nazis?

I posed that question to a buddy who had sent me an article by Giulio Meotti, cultural editor for Il Foglio, posted by Gatestone Institute, an international policy council chaired by John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador, the gist of which argued that Western civilization is endangered by jihadists, much as Eastern Christianity (in Arab lands) has been “extinguished” by them.  

My friend, a former elementary and high school classmate who is a retired U.S. foreign service officer, replied, “Intolerance is not the issue; the issue is how many innocent civilians have died world-wide traced to Salafist ideology.

“I served for 8 years at the U.S. Special Operations Command on Macdill Air Force Base, under Bush 43 and Obama. The Command categorized U.S. homegrown political extremes, from both the right and left, as the responsibility of Homeland Security and the FBI.  We never viewed Occupy Wall Street or the Alex Jones/Roger Spencer acolytes as an existential threat to the homeland.

“The 24/7 focus of our ops cell was draining the ideological swamp of global Jihadism.  Open Source reference tools outline the global reach of both AQ ( al-Queda) and ISIS and their death toll.

“Yes. I am more concerned with Salafism. ADL (Anti—Defamation League) and The AJC (American Jewish Committee) have the toolbox to handle these American losers on the right. 

“Europe replaced the Jews with Muslims.... that is their problem.”

Never one to shy away from a debate, my response followed:

“I respectfully but strongly disagree. I more fear a destruction of Western democratic values than a takeover of Western governments by a segment of a religion whose vast majority have shown a desire to be part of Western society with its openness and inclusiveness. 

“Sure, you can point to the wanton killings of non Muslims, and even Muslims from the wrong sect, as proof that Islamic extremists are evil. But their killings in Europe and the United States and Canada are insignificant (except, of course, to their victims and their respective families) compared to the “sanctioned” deaths we tolerate from permissive gun laws and violations of environmental and food/drug safety laws. In one year alone the U.S. has more deaths by guns than the total Americans killed by al-Queda, ISIS and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And that includes 9/11. 

“We are witnessing a resurgence of fascism and totalitarianism in Western countries. While it might be said to be ignited by the presence of Muslim immigrants, both legal and illegal, it is not the sole reason. Income inequality and the replacement of meaningful jobs by technology or outsourcing have destabilized economies. 

“Western values are being challenged by a return to tribalism. Parts of Italy and Spain seek independence. Britain has Brexit. Poland is becoming anti-Semitic again not just to Jews but first to Muslims. Then to Jews. 

“Under the guise of trying to control the spread of Islamic terrorism the West is relaxing its commitment to shared values of democracy. We are letting fear dominate our thinking. 

“I am not advocating any abandonment of the battle against Islamic extremism. Hunt them down. Do not let them acquire WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). But do not let the battle destroy our principles. No torture. To the extent possible no civilian collateral casualties. No support for despots who deny their countrymen civil liberties. 

“Radical Islam was born from the oppression Arab rulers practiced on their people with the willing consent of America and other Western powers. That fact cannot be denied. Sadly, even if the extremists were to secure their own country, as ISIS has shown, they would be equally if not more repressive and evil than the rulers they would have ousted. What is clear is that the vast majority of ordinary Muslims reject extremism. 

“To prevent radical thought from spreading in the West we need to provide a stable economic platform plus education and civil rights to all. Regrettably, some will still not accept Western civilization. They will terrorize us. But they will be no more effective than the Las Vegas shooter. Yes, they will kill an untold number of Americans but unless we capitulate they will not be able to kill off our ideals.” 

I await his reply.

Trump: The Inscrutable, Promotional President

With rare exceptions most people have public and private faces, revealing the latter only to their closest confidants or under extreme duress. Countries and political movements operate similarly.

Saudi Arabia, for example, professes to oppose radical Islam but through its funding of madrasas throughout the world it is the number one propagator of extreme Wahhabi Islam that is anti-Semitic, dismissive of any infidels and behind much of the carnage by radical Islamic terrorists.

It is useful and instructive to assess a politician’s, a government’s, a movement’s true intentions by monitoring their words and deeds expressed to and understood by their primary audiences. Take the PLO, for example. Even as some of its leaders say they accept Israel’s existence, it continues to teach children hatred of Jews while lauding terrorists who kill Israelis, even rewarding their families with payments if they die in their efforts. 

It’s a two-sided street. Over the years Bibi Netanyahu has expressed support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but almost everything his government has done in the West Bank territories has undermined the prospect of that ideal becoming a reality.

Which brings us to Donald Trump. Casting himself as the great dealmaker Trump envisions being a peace broker between the Palestinians and Israel as well as a coalition builder of “moderate” Arab states to defeat ISIS.

With an oversized Santa Claus bag of military goodies, Trump curried favor with the Saudi royal family and the dictators of other Sunni lands, but how credible is he in their eyes? Did the rhetoric their ears heard in Riyadh erase what they witnessed and heard for nearly two years, months upon months of attacks on Islam, including in March 2016, “I think Islam hates us”?

Which are his baseline beliefs—his diplomatic use in Riyadh of the phrase “the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires,” or the catchphrase “radical Islamic terrorism” featured in all his rallies and in his attacks on President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for their failure to similarly identify Muslim attackers?

One wonders if the Arab Sunni world will be as discriminating as U.S. courts have been concerning Trump’s candor on the campaign trail. In restraining implementation of Trump’s travel ban from seven predominantly Muslim countries, courts have determined candidate Trump’s words are a more realistic reflection of his inner beliefs than his post-election public posturing.

Trump shows his true, unfiltered face when he tweets or departs from prepared remarks. 

Apparently under duress from the probe of alleged Russian influence on his campaign during the election, Trump seemingly revealed his lack of understanding of constitutional restrictions on the powers of the presidency. If James Comey is telling the truth, Trump asked the then-FBI director to stop investigating former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s ties to Russia. It has also been reported that Trump asked the director of national intelligence and the director of the National Security Agency to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion with Russia during the 2016 election. 

Under duress to score political wins, Trump has turned his back on campaign promises never to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid funding. His proposed fiscal 2018 federal budget might not get passed as is, but it is instructive as to Trump’s true feelings. 

His budget calls for an $880 billion cut in Medicaid, a $191 billion cut in food stamps, a $72.5 billion cut in aid to the disabled, and a $21.6 billion cut in welfare over the next 10 years. Many of those reductions would impact the very voters who propelled Trump into the White House. 

Trump also promised to repeal and replace Obamacare with a better, less expensive health care program that would cover more people. But the bill he supported that passed in the House of Representatives would reduce coverage by 23 million over a decade, be more costly and provide less coverage, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (https://nyti.ms/2qXzbSq).

Again, Trump’s core voters would be deeply affected by Trumpcare, if passed as is. 

So how to gauge the true Trump? Might I suggest this measuring stick—consider him the “promotional president” not bound to any rigid doctrine or philosophy. He cares only about the optics of winning, of promoting himself, without regard to those who may be adversely affected by his waffling positions and advocacy for legislation or executive orders that are detrimental to millions of Americans, many of whom voted for him in the expectation he would improve their lives.

We have always had wheeling and dealing presidents, perhaps none better at closing the deal than Lyndon Baines Johnson. Trump, however, does not seem to be rooted in any political principle other than his personal aggrandizement. Perhaps that’s why he reacts so quickly and violently to any slight, real or perceived. Perhaps that’s why he is eager to share the perqs of his office with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador, why he is willing to bow down, even curtsy, before the Saudi king, why he could not help himself but risk a constitutional crisis by firing Comey, the man responsible for leading the investigation of his administration. 

Trump is a man of limited vocabulary, limited attention span, limited fealty to the truth, limited appreciation of historical context, limited loyalty to principle. It is not a compliment to say he is inscrutable. One would hope a president of the United States stands for values long forged in the American experience, not someone who favorably compares our values with those of Saudi Arabia where, among many repressive actions, public dissent is illegal, women are considered chattel with few rights, slavery still exists, religions other than Sunni Islam are not tolerated and where the press is restricted. 

Saudi Arabia practices Sharia Law. But that’s okay with Donald Trump. After all, they extended to him a welcome fit for a king, complete with a gold medal, showering him with praise. To get a $110 billion package of military hardware, the Saudis knew just how to appeal to his ego. 

   

To Make America Great Again, Understand What Made It Great

As the Trumpster hurried out of Dodge Friday on his first global journey to Make America Great Again and to escape his administration’s mounting scandals, perhaps it would be instructive to review and agree upon a time when America was great in the first place.

Does the would-be-bomber-in-chief want to go back to a time when schoolchildren hid under their desks during nuclear attack drills while fathers built bomb shelters in the back yard? Well, we now know hiding under oak desks won’t shield young lives, but underground vaults are in vogue again as Trump has ratcheted up fears of a nuclear conflagration with North Korea.

Does the six-time-bankruptcy-petitioner-in-chief want to go back to a time when American industry ruled the world? A worthy objective, but that was when unions provided safeguards for workers and assured them middle-class incomes and company paid medical benefits. It was a time when the individual tax rate was as high as 90%, when the differential between average compensation for Fortune 500 chief executives and their average workers was 20-to-1 in 1950, just 42-to-1 in 1980, but is now a whopping 204-to-1, according to Bloomberg.

Does the fence-builder-in-chief want to take us go back to a time when our borders were mostly sealed to Eastern European Jews, resulting in their inability to find refuge from Nazi Germany? It was a time when racist, anti-Semitic bigotry flowed over the airwaves through Father Coughlin’s radio diatribes and was disseminated in print by Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent newspaper. Sadly, Trump’s candidacy and victory have unleashed parallel restraints on immigration of oppressed people while opening the microphone to alt-right extremists whose mantra resembles the worst tenets of the Third Reich.

Does the climate-change-denier-in-chief want to go back to a time when America’s rivers were too polluted to swim in, when the air from coal plants and car exhausts made breathing difficult?

Does the would-be-autocrat-in-chief long for the days when America supported every despot who promised to fight Communism regardless of his repression of human rights? Substitute ISIS or Radical Islamic Terrorism or Drug Traffickers for Communism and Trump’s foreign policy doctrine (in places like Turkey, Syria and The Philippines) becomes clearer. 

Does the discriminator-in-chief want to return to the time when housing could be denied based on the color of one’s skin or one’s religion? Should we return to a time when every day but Sunday meant shopping in small town, Main Street America at manufacturers suggested retail prices?

Does the self-proclaimed healthcare-expert-in-chief want to go back to a time when medical bills could bankrupt a family, when pre-existing conditions allowed insurers to deny insurance coverage or to charge exorbitant fees, when women’s health issues were not covered? 

Does the vote-counter-in-chief want to go back in time to when Afro-Americans were denied the right or ability to vote? 

Does the fear-monger-in-chief want to return America to a time when citizenship offered no protection of constitutional rights, to a time when Mexican-Americans were deported, the loyalty of citizens with German or Japanese heritage was suspect, when they were attacked and placed in internment camps?  

Okay, enough with the sarcasm. Let’s agree on what made America great. 

The United States was a land of opportunity, especially when compared to the rest of the world. Still is, as evidenced by the desire of people the world over to emigrate to our shores rather than anywhere else.

We are a nation of immigrants, save for Native Americans. Immigrants enriched our culture imbuing us with a desire to get better. We absorbed the men, women and children of other nationalities who had the courage to start life anew in a country where customs, language and laws were different than their native lands, where they knew scant few, where they shed Old World hatreds and feuds to forge a pluralistic society based on the rule of law, not bound or restricted by a state religion. 

Our country encouraged education plus development of the arts and sciences. After a fitful start, unions harbored the working class, affording its members the opportunity to live a middle-class life. Capitalism was encouraged, but when poverty and unemployment overwhelmed the economy’s ability to support vast numbers, the government stepped in with progressive programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start, as well as infrastructure projects that transformed America, including the Tennessee Valley Authority, the interstate highway system, a series of dams and the Internet. 

Above all else, America amalgamated all the above to become a beacon not burdened by discrimination (though, in reality, it exists even to this day), a land where, yes, the sons of millionaires become president but so do the offspring of hardscrapple or broken homes. 

What made America great is our diversity—diversity of ethnicities, diversity of opinions, diversity of languages, of religions, of culinary tastes, of histories, of cultures that thrown together accepted the rights of others and, at its best, practiced a creed of tolerance and understanding. 

Our nation became great through a cult of optimism. Under Donald Trump, too many have replaced optimism with fear, with envy, with bigotry. We are already a great country. We can improve, but only if our leaders, especially our president, preaches hope not despair, unity not division, equality not discrimination. 

American Values In Death Spiral, An Unintended Consequence Of TrumpAction

Two weeks into the death spiral of our national values, some fears about a Trump presidency have morphed from assumptions to realities.

Donald Trump does not see governing as the give and take of ideas and beliefs. He sees it as a top down hierarchal management system, like a business where the chief executive officer, even in publicly traded companies, has the final say and the minions have to obey his commands or they are shown the door. 

Dissent, even if it is along disputed constitutional grounds, is not tolerated, as acting Attorney General Sally Yates found out Monday night after she questioned the legality of Trump’s temporary ban on entry to the United States from seven mostly Muslim countries.

Trump is used to having his dictates implemented. Government, however, doesn’t always follow a straight path. One wonders how he will react to two Republican women senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, rejecting his nominee for secretary of education. 

Perhaps a clue can be seen in his advocacy of the “nuclear option” to limit filibusters for Supreme Court nominations if Democrats try to foil his pick of Neil M. Gorsuch to fill the seat left vacant a year ago by the death of Antonin Scalia. Trump thought it appropriate to call for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to “delay, delay, delay” consideration of President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. But he’s not amenable to similar treatment by Democrats. For Trump all the rules must be tipped in his favor.

Trump’s executive style has not been tempered by years of migrating up the leadership ladder. He doesn’t have a rags to riches story, or even a J. Pierrepont Finch ascent from the mailroom (really the window washer’s perch) to the corner office (for those oblivious to the reference, check out “How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying”). He was born to power and privilege. As long as he stayed out of prison he was destined to take over his father’s business.

From the start he was an autocrat. He  never had to learn the art of answering to anyone. If he ran into problems financially, he sought bankruptcy protection. If he didn’t want to pay the agreed upon price for a project, he stiffed contractors.  

‘“My sense is that Trump takes no one’s counsel but his own. That’s bad management, period,”’ Jeffrey Pfeffer, professor of organizational behavior at Stanford and the author of “Power: Why Some People Have It and Others Don’t,” said in a New York Times article assessing Trump’s first weeks in office. 

Effective leadership “requires an openness to being challenged, and some self-awareness and even humility to acknowledge that there are areas where other people know more than you do. This doesn’t mean decisions are made by consensus. The person at the top makes the decisions, but based on the facts and expertise necessary to make a good decision,” said Jeffrey T. Polzer, professor of human resource management at Harvard Business School. https://nyti.ms/2k3Vj9S

It’s just two weeks. He could shift his management style, though it is highly doubtful. The real damage to America is that he has imbued a meanness of spirit to his dictates. He is not governing for the full population but rather for the minority of voters who he was lucky enough to have live in enough states to provide him an Electoral College victory. 

He is entitled to follow through on many if not all of his campaign pledges. But unlike his spoutings on the hustings, his actions from the Oval Office carry consequences, some of them unintended. TrumpAction after TrumpAction puts people’s lives at risk.

Trump’s advocacy of moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, his acceptance of Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and a reported interest in withholding funds from the Palestinian Authority released by former Secretary of State John Kerry, no doubt thrilled hard liners in Israel and their American backers. But, individually and collectively, these actions are likely to incite more terrorist attacks within Israel and against Americans domestically and internationally. It won’t be his life sacrificed.

Trump’s passionate desire to rid the world of ISIS and other Islamic terrorists is laudable on its face, but his implementation has been dreadful. His executive order to temporarily ban entry to America from seven predominantly Muslim countries and to indefinitely suspend the relocation of Syrian refugees gives jihadists a public relations coup suggesting the United States is at war with Islam. It also has divided families and failed to recognize the contributions many Muslims made to assist American forces combating terrorists in their native lands. 

His decision to cut off funding for international groups that provide abortions or even advise pregnant women of their right to choose will endanger women’s health. It may very well lead to more at-risk pregnancies and births and more children born into poverty. As The Times stated in a precis of an article on the impact of the funding cut, “Health workers say President Trump’s ban on abortion counseling will hurt even those health services that do not involve abortions.” (https://nyti.ms/2k6EFqI)

Moreover, Trump has indicated he wants to cut back foreign aid that is meant to help the impoverished. America First, after all.

Trump wants to cut all federal funding for Planned Parenthood because it provides abortions and abortion counseling. He ignores the non-abortion related health care Planned Parenthood provides to women which encompasses 97% of the organization’s activities.

Women will have abortions even if Trump is able to reduce the number of legal, medically safe procedures at Planned Parenthood clinics and other registered facilities. Only many of them will not be performed by licensed practitioners in safe environments. Deaths are sure to result. So much for his concern for the sanctity of all life.

Trump’s decision to deny funding to sanctuary cities places more lives at risk as municipal governments have to cut back social services or other programs to compensate for reduced or eliminated federal monies. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti says federal funds, up to $500 million in 2017, are used to protect the port, the airport and to keep homeless veterans off the streets. Without those funds the safety of the rest of the country could be impaired.

His approval of the Standing Rock oil pipeline under the Missouri River imperils the safety of drinking water to millions of downstream residents, not to mention it violates the sanctity of Native American lands. 

Trump appears to be acting as if still in campaign mode. And so does his chief apologist, Kellyanne Conway. When called upon, frequently, to defend her boss, Conway reverts to attack mode, pointing out the flaws in candidate Hillary Clinton or the Obama administration rather than explaining the ramblings and rants of the leader of the free world, at least as now constituted.

Press Secretary Sean Spicer added salt to the wounds of internal dissent when he said those at the State Department who questioned Trump’s immigration ban “should either get with the program or they can go.”

‘“Debate and dissent are essential to reaching any thoughtful outcome,”’ Lindred Greer, an assistant professor of organizational behavior at the Stanford Graduate School of Business told The Times. “Comments like Mr. Spicer’s ‘will discourage anyone from speaking up. You end up with group think, an echo chamber where people only say what they think the president wants to hear.’”

Oy! A Common Refrain In the Age of Trump

Oy.

Oy vey.

Oy-yoy-yoy. 

Oy—a Yiddish exclamation of chagrin, dismay, exasperation or pain.

It looks like it will be worse than expected. It looks like Donald Trump will systematically destroy the foundations of our country while a vast majority of the Republican Party shows itself to be a spineless entity only interested in staying in office with no regard for truth, justice and the tenets of their sainted Ronald Reagan.

Oy vey—Yiddish for “Oh, how terrible things are.”

Let’s start with some basic agreements. First ISIS and al Queda are terrorist organizations. They can attack us and kill scores at a time but they are not existential threats to America, at least not in a physical sense. They do no more physical damage than Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., or Seung-Hui Cho at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va.

The danger from Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik in San Bernadino, Calif., or a Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, Texas, is that we will overreact and start to dismantle constitutional protections. We should fear the loss of liberties we all take for granted.

We are in no danger of sharia law overtaking our judicial system.

Second thing to agree on, existential threats may come from governments with the power to undermine our democracy, our safety and our economic system. Those threats can come from two countries—Russia and China.

Or they may come from within, from politicians who issue falsehoods while denying the truth, who divide to conquer, who fail to see real existential threats while promoting false ones, who undermine belief in our country’s principles and institutions by substituting their own misguided values and by not sharply rebuking and disavowing the bigoted rants of fringe groups, thereby giving them undeserved legitimacy.

OY-YOY-YOY: Yiddish for an exclamation of sorrow and lamentation.

It is widely believed by intelligence experts inside and outside our government that Russia tried to influence our recent election by hacking into Democratic Party and officials’ computers.

Donald Trump doesn’t believe that. But then Donald Trump believes it is okay to retweet falsehoods as legitimate news. So does his choice to be national security advisor, retired general Mike Flynn. So does his choice to be chief strategist, Stephen Bannon.

But as troubling as those individuals are with their careless and carefree regard for the truth it pales in comparison to the hundreds, if not thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Republican politicians and voters who are not protesting their insanity.

Now that the election is over, GOP senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham, especially the former, now seem ready to fight for the integrity of the government rather than for the in-the-moment-victory of a Republican presidential candidate no matter how flawed he might be or how crass his behavior toward them was during the last 18 months. 

Under the existing rules of our electoral system, Trump won the election, though not a mandate, as he claims, as close to three million more voters opted for someone besides him to lead America. He won the Electoral College vote, but that shouldn’t mean all truth and logic gets dissolved in his acidic view of reality. The optimal word in that last sentence is “shouldn’t.” 

Oy.

Trump is creating an alternative universe where intelligence does not exist if it doesn’t match his gut instincts and his desire to make a buck. He has mastered the art of the sham and the public diss. How exquisitely perverse was his dangling interest in Al Gore’s explanation of climate change and environmental vigilance only to rebuff it quickly by nominating an Environmental Protection Agency chief who rejects it all and has no appreciation of the link between fracking and the thousands of earthquakes that have shook his home state of Oklahoma.

Cabinet departments were established to further the benefits of their disciplines and constituencies. Yet Trump has chosen a labor secretary who doesn’t believe in a minimum wage and who is anti-union. Trump has chosen a housing secretary with no prior experience in public housing other than the fabrication (by others) that he grew up in public housing rather than near it. He’s chosen as United Nations ambassador someone with no foreign relations experience. During the campaign Trump blasted Hillary Clinton for being close to Goldman Sachs, yet he picked three current or former Goldman Sachs bankers as teammates (Steve Mnuchin as Treasury secretary, Bannon and Gary Cohn, the current Goldman president, as director of the National Economic Council).

The Bill of Rights was adopted to protect and enshrine freedom of speech, religion and assembly. Yet Trump disparages—bullies, actually—those who make fun of him, those who burn the flag as a protest, those who adhere to Islam, those who assemble peacefully. 

Republican values are being torn down by Trump. From Teddy Roosevelt and Richard Nixon such values included stewardship of the land and natural resources. Yet Trump surrounds himself with fossil fuel advocates and climate change deniers even as the oceans rise, the polar cap melts, residents of cities like Beijing and New Delhi choke under pollution from coal and fossil fuel exhausts. Do we really want to return to the days of smog in Los Angeles when children, seniors and those with respiratory ailments were advised to stay indoors? Is that how Trump will make America great again? 

Abraham Lincoln is revered for fighting for racial equality. Yet Trump and his minions want to roll back laws that have advanced voting rights of minorities. 

Reagan was the consummate anti-Russian. Yet Trump rejects such Republican orthodoxy. He sees Russia only through the eyes of an entrepreneur, as a market to exploit, failing to see how Vladimir Putin has aggressively sought to undermine Western values and democracies. 

Trump lacks a world view commensurate with the responsibilities of the commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation on earth. There is one silver lining in his leadership. He is a teetotaler, so there’s no danger of his being drunk and ordering some dangerous military adventure as Nixon’s top staff worried in the days before his resignation. Of course, our last experience with a non drinker would not instill such confidence. Abstainer-in-chief George W. Bush got us into two wars in the Mideast in which we are still engaged. 

Trump also poses a downside risk—he says he gets just four hours of sleep a night. Last week AAA said driving on four hours’ sleep is as dangerous as driving while intoxicated. Driving on 4-5 hours’ sleep increases the chance of an accident by 400%. Less than four hours increases the crash risk by 12 times.

Teenagers, older adults and those who have sleep debt are among the group with the most risk of an accident, according to AAA.

So how comfortable should we feel about the decision making skills of a 70-year-old future president who boasts he gets just four hours sleep a night?

Oy vey!

How Should Hillary Act During First Debate?

Advisors are counseling Hillary Clinton to be firm but ladylike during the first presidential debate next Monday with Donald Trump. The public, they say, does not embrace a woman in attack mode.

I, on the other hand, would prefer if she looks to Margaret Thatcher as her debate model, not in policy but in demeanor and comportment. The Iron Lady of British politics confronted head-on those who would challenge her. It is time for Hillary to stand up to the vicious, insulting lies, innuendos, misstatements and falsehoods promulgated by Trump and his cohorts. Do so not in a belligerent way but in a detailed, controlled fashion of righteous indignation not just for herself but for the American people who have been hoodwinked by a carnival barker masquerading as a serious candidate for the presidency.

Hillary needs to show emotion to demonstrate how passionate she is to serve the American public and to defend them against the regressive, repressive policies Trump wants to impose. It is time to take the gloves off, time to expose Trump for the clueless, shiftless character he truly is.

Trump does not react well when confronted. He doesn’t react well to strength and criticism. It makes him fabricate the truth and lash out with insults, the type of behavior that makes him an unstable candidate to be president. 

So here’s a sample of what Clinton should say during the first debate: 

If there’s a question about the Clinton Foundation, she should say … “Mr. Trump has questioned the role of the Clinton Foundation. Here’s the truth. The Clinton Foundation has raised and allocated tens of millions of dollars to fund social welfare programs overseas. My husband and I have donated (put amount here) to the foundation. Meanwhile, since 2008 Donald Trump and his family have given zero dollars to the Trump Foundation. He has made a point of saying he is giving away lots of money but it is other people’s money. Moreover, the Trump Foundation has paid out more than a quarter of a million dollars to settle lawsuits against Trump companies and to buy two portraits of Donald Trump for Donald Trump properties, both actions that are illegal. Perhaps Crooked Donald would be an appropriate nickname.”

If there’s a question on taxes … “Donald Trump wants to overhaul the tax code. During the last eight years my husband and I have paid (put in actual amount here) in federal taxes. X percent of our annual income. During that same time we have no idea how much Donald Trump earned or paid in taxes because he has cowardly refused to release his taxes. Even though he is being audited the IRS has said he is not prevented from releasing his tax forms. We can only assume he has something to hide, such as his low tax rate, or his entanglements with Russian and Chinese investments that would make it impossible for him to objectively deal with these countries. Donald Trump wants to eliminate the estate tax. The estate tax affects only the wealthiest in our country. It’s another example of how Donald Trump wants to change the tax code so that he and his family and his billionaire and multi-millionaire friends and cronies can benefit while working people bear the burden of their greed."

If there’s a question on Iraq … “Donald Trump claims he was against the second Iraq war from the get-go. Not so. Donald Trump  was interviewed on The Howard Stern Show on September 11, 2002. When directly asked by Howard Stern if he was for the invasion of Iraq—before it occurred—Donald Trump said, “Yeah, I guess so.” Yet, the man who has said he would never lie to the American people continues to this day to lie about his support for the war. I regret my vote for the war, but Donald Trump is too cowardly to stand up for his actions.”

If there’s a question about how to defeat ISIS … “Donald Trump has advocated illegal activity by our military. He has specifically said our military should kill the families of terrorists. He has said we should torture suspected terrorists. He has said we should have taken Iraq’s oil. These are all violations of international law and our own code of military conduct.”

If there’s a question on child care … “Mr. Trump last week said he supports child care benefits for employees. Yet he does not provide that benefit to his own employees and had the chutzpah to claim he did so at his hotels when the truth is he provided child care benefits to his wealthy hotel guests but not to his own workers. He would have some credibility if he would be providing child care benefits to those already under his control but he doesn’t. His proposal is nothing more than a campaign come-on. He has no more interest in seeing it put into law than he has shown in his own companies. What’s more, a Republican controlled Congress would never pass such a benefit.”

If there’s a question on the environment … “Donald Trump went to Flint, Michigan, recently to provide comfort to the families affected by the polluted water. That was commendable, but let him explain how residents of Flint and the rest of the country would be safeguarded from similar incidents if he follows through on his plan to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency.”

If there’s a question on immigration … “Donald Trump’s signature theme has been he will build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. And that he is a great negotiator. Yet, when he met with the president of Mexico he was too weak to say during his press conference that the Mexican president told him Mexico would not pay for the wall.”

If there’s a question on improving the economy … “Mr. Trump claims to be a great businessman. Yet his companies have filed for bankruptcy protection six times. He has claimed he never settles suits. Yet he has done so numerous times. His Trump University is under investigation in several states for fraud. In Florida his charitable foundation made a large contribution to the re-election campaign of the state attorney general within days of her decision not to join other state attorneys general in the investigation. Good business decision by Mr. Trump? I think it looks highly suspicious.”

If there’s a question on terrorism … “Mr. Trump is against our Constitution. He questions the very foundation of our legal system that you are innocent until proven guilty and that you are entitled to legal defense. He would deny Ahmad Khan Rahami, the alleged pressure cooker bomber, his legal right to an attorney. And he questions our civility in providing medical treatment to his wounds. Is that the type of society America wants to become? I think not.  I hope not. Mr. Trump wants to have a national stop-and-frisk policy even though a federal court ruled it unconstitutional.”

If there’s a question on gun control … “Donald Trump falsely claims I want to repeal the second amendment. No, I want to limit the proliferation of assault rifles. I want background checks on all gun purchasers. But tell us, Donald. What would be your words of comfort to the next families whose loved ones are gunned down with an AR-15 or similar type weapon? What would you have told the parents of Sandy Hook? Do you really want us to go back to the days of the Wild West when everyone carried around a revolver? Is that your idea of a civilized society? While citizens of the rest of the free world walk around without weapons you would have us turn into an armed camp.

If there’s a question on the federal budget … Mr. Trump claims to be fiscally conservative. Yet he wants to raise the Pentagon budget beyond what our military leaders want. He wants to build a wall. He wants to lower taxes, all actions that independent tax experts say would increase our national debt. But does Mr. Trump care? Apparently not as he says if he were president he would renegotiate our debt. He would single-handedly destroy the financial credibility of the United States. And that would be a legacy all of us, our children and our grandchildren would pay for for generations to come.”

Enough examples. 

The debate is billed as Trump vs. Clinton. But really it is between the values upon which America was built and a re-imagined America that would repress minorities and specific religions, would shun our immigrant heritage, would look to curtail the freedom of the press, the separation of church and state, and the right to vote without harassment,  and would question our national commitment to the good and welfare of all our citizens while rewarding the elite. 

Regret Is Not An Apology

I’m starting to get really, really worried. Donald Trump and I seem to share an increasing number of traits and experiences. Like Trump, I evaded the draft during the Vietnam War by flunking my military physical in 1970 and receiving a 1-Y deferment. My draft lottery number of 139 was high enough, like Trump’s, not to be called in subsequent years.

Fast forward to 2016. We both have a tendency to spout the wrong things when agitated. But where I have always apologized for my indiscretions, The Donald never ever backtracked, never ever apologized. Thursday, in Charlotte, NC, Trump looked like he was eating crow, admitting that sometimes his mouth runs a little faster than his brain.

“Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don’t choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that. And believe it or not, I regret it.

“And I do regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues,” Trump told a rally of his supporters.

But wait. My apologies always cite my specific transgressions. Trump was vague. He never delineated what exactly he regretted. Was it his slur of a Gold Star family? Was it his deprecation of prisoners of war and specifically John McCain for getting captured? Was it his demeaning Mexico and its people? Was it his undermining of the legitimate election of Barack Obama with his advocacy of the birther movement? Was it his scary, unprecedented request for Russia to hack the emails of his opponent? Was it his veiled invitation to second amendment advocates to take out Hillary Clinton before she could take away their guns, which, by the way, as president she would not have the power to do but which Trump riles up his audience with the suggestion she does? Was it his consistent fabrication of the truth, be it his alleging Obama and Clinton founded ISIS, or they wanted to engage in nation building in the Middle East, or that he never supported the invasion of Iraq, or any number of other deliberate misstatements of the truth? Was it his heartless ridicule of a physically handicapped reporter?

Funny, Trump blamed the heat of the moment during debates for his foul mouth disease. But all those apology worthy examples cited above came out during speeches or tweets or interviews when he had ample time to consider what he was saying.

We just don’t know what he regrets because Trump hasn’t told us specifically what he regrets. It is like his plans to end terrorism or improve the economy or solve the racial divide in the country. We just have to trust him that he will do a fabulous job and do it quickly.

So I guess I’m not really like him. I apologize in specific detail. With a promise not to do it again. Trump offers no such assurance of future behavior, especially since the one on one debates with Clinton are more than a month away from starting and just days ago he double-downed on his behavior by vowing to act the same way he has throughout the primary season and general election campaign.

I regret when I say something untoward. I regret that my incendiary words elicit offense, hurt, pain and any number of other reactions. And, I regret the loss of stature in the eyes of those I’ve offended and those who heard me. I regret my embarrassment. I regret that I have to apologize for my actions.

No doubt, Trump regrets the drop in his poll numbers from his insults and diatribes. 

But regret does not encompass or substitute for an apology. Donald Trump needs to specifically apologize to those he has demeaned and to the American public for dragging the political campaign for the highest office in the land down to the lowest depth of any modern day candidate.

Along the Border With Gaza Life Is Anything But Routine

It’s been a little more than a week since they returned home to a mostly quiet border. They’re back in their gardens, their kitchens, their places of work. The routine and the out of the ordinary are known to them. Muffled noises from beneath the ground very likely come from another tunnel from the Gaza Strip being built by Hamas. The pounding sound at night is the exchange of artillery fire between ISIS and the Egyptian army. A red alert means you have 15 seconds, or less, to seek shelter before a rocket launched from Gaza may land in your backyard, or worse.

“They” are eight women from the Eshkol Regional Council of Israel who spent two weeks in the New York metropolitan area and Washington, DC. The Eshkol district encompasses 32 communities housing 14,000 residents on 190,000 acres east of the southernmost 40 kilometers of the Gaza Strip and seven miles along the northern Sinai border with Egypt. 

They came from kibbutzim and moshavim as guests of Shalom Yisrael, a Westchester, NY-based organization celebrating its 30th year of bridging connections between Israeli citizens and their American counterparts. During the first 23 years of its existence, Shalom Yisrael (then known as Zahal Shalom) sponsored wounded veterans and civilians. For the last seven years guests of the organization have been women who serve as trauma care first responders and security officials in their respective home towns.

How do you react when a door slams shut? If you’re like most people, you’re startled. You turn toward the sound, quickly ascertain the origin of the noise, and go on with your life.

If you lived in the Eshkol region, the bang of a sharply closed door might engage a condition we in the United States have come to recognize as PTSD. Post traumatic stress disorder. Years of rocket barrages from mortars and missiles launched from the adjacent Gaza Strip, coupled with almost nightly artillery clashes between the Egyptian army and ISIS in the nearby Sinai Peninsula trigger rapid heart beats and feelings of “we’ve been here before.” 

“Before” means a time of war, last experienced full time two summers ago. 

“In the first morning that I woke (in Westchester),” said Yehudit, a 46-yer-old responsible for the administration and security of her moshav, Yated, “I heard strange sounds, sounds that I had forgotten, sounds that I had forgotten from my past. And when I paid attention I understood that these were the sounds of the tree leaves and the sounds of birds. And I heard the sounds of silence and tranquility.

“Suddenly I was really frightened because I understood that I am already used to waking up to the sounds of explosions. And that’s a bad sign.”

Their everyday life has been transformed. Truck traffic has vastly increased on the region’s roads from deliveries of building material to Gaza, though the flow recently has been tightened because of Hamas’ tunnel building activity (http://nyti.ms/27J4IF6).

No one wants to be caught in an embarrassing situation in case of a rocket attack, so short showers are taken. Before entering the bathroom a towel and robe are laid out just in case a quick exit is required. 

Nira’s 13-year-old son chooses to sleep in the family’s safe room rather than his own bedroom. Not every residence has a safe room. The government supplies a safe room for homes within four and a half kilometers of Gaza. Those living further away have safe rooms only if they pay for them on their own, at a cost of roughly $10,000. In those areas, the only government-provided security is a shelter for kindergarten children. 

Safe rooms are needed because the heralded Iron Dome missile defense system, jointly developed by Israel and the United States, cannot protect them. They live too close to Gaza, so close, in fact, they can see Hamas training exercises. 

They long for a return to a time when they interacted freely with the citizens of Gaza. They are convinced Gaza residents want to live in peace as well, but Hamas does not let them. Before Hamas took control of the strip, many Palestinians worked on their farms—60% of Israel’s produce is grown in the region. Israelis had their cars repaired in Gaza and bathed on its beaches. 

Israelis have a reputation of being a stubborn people. Even during the 2014 conflict, when one-third of all the rockets that landed in Israel fell in the Eshkol region, elderly citizens in the district refused to abandon their homes. Instead, every day they came to the senior center. 

The Shalom Yisrael guests displayed their own mettle. 

“When I landed in New York two weeks ago,” said 58-year-old Yael of Kibbutz Urim, the head of occupational therapy at the senior center, “the weather was pretty cloudy, raining, and I thought to myself, if I can get used to missiles I can get used to rain. 

“But to missiles and noise of war you never get used to, and you get used to rain because the rain grows a future, and noise of war destroys the future for peace.”

Wherever they went, from visiting high schools to meeting with U.S. Representatives Nita Lowey, Eliot Engel and Susan Davis, the same question kept surfacing: “Why do you continue to live there?”

The answer, Yehudit said on her last night in Westchester, could be found in a poem written by Ehud Manor:

I have no other country

even if my land is aflame

Just a word in Hebrew

pierces my vein and my soul—

With a painful body, with a hungry heart, 

Here is my home.

Brussels and the True Threat to our Values

Gilda and I have flown into the Brussels airport several times. We’ve walked around Brussels. For that matter, we’ve walked Paris and London and Copenhagen, as well as Prague, Budapest, Vienna, Rome, Florence, Venice, Tokyo, Moscow and St. Petersburg. We’ve walked all over Israel. At least three times a week we are in Manhattan. In short, we’ve been to many places terrorists— Islamic jihadists or run-of-the-mill types—would go to sabotage normal life.

I don’t know how to combat fanaticism. But I am certain it is not through repression. Even in totalitarian states individuals willing to forfeit their lives can blow up complacency. Not deliberate complacency. Just everyday vigilance gone soft because no society can maintain 24/7/365 red alert status against the deranged or misguided. 

So we’re left with trepidation mixed with ernest resolve. Fear of flying balanced by an unwillingness to let the terrorists win in their random assault on our liberties to travel as we please, to dine out, to attend concerts or commute to work.

Fear of new attacks is driving more people to consider Donald Trump a rational choice for president. No doubt fear is a powerful motivator. One can only hope that fear doesn’t trump (pun intended) more rational emotions like decency, tolerance, integrity and compassion. Otherwise, the terrorists surely would have succeeded in toppling Western values.

Are you afraid ISIS is an existential threat to America? Don’t be silly. We are in no danger of losing a battle, much less a war, with ISIS or any other extremist organization or country. Our military is the strongest in the world, in the history of the world.

But America could be lost if we allow our values and system of government to be eroded. Look no further than the Republican scheme to undermine the constitutional process of nominating and confirming an appointment to the Supreme Court because, the GOP says, the next justice would have a long term impact on the future of the country and therefore should be chosen by the next president elected by the people, ignoring the reality that the people chose Barack Obama, not once but twice, to serve for full four-year terms. 

There is nothing in the Constitution that requires the Senate to vote on a presidential nomination within a specified number of days. But by suggesting that in the last year of office a president should not nominate a justice Senate Republicans are emasculating the powers of the chief executive. By extension, they might also argue that a president in his last year in office should not conduct foreign policy, should not advocate legislation, should not command our armed forces. All these tasks would affect the future of our country, as would a successful nomination to the Supreme Court. The Senate has a right to reject a nomination but it is constitutional malfeasance to not even meet with, interview or schedule a vote on the president’s choice. 

Would-be presidents Trump and Ted Cruz would like to abrogate our values in other ways pertaining to the ISIS threat. Trump wants to legalize torture and kill families of terrorists. Apparently indifferent to causing civilian casualties, Cruz wants to carpet bomb ISIS strongholds. He also wants to “empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods (in the U.S.) before they become radicalized.” 

Cruz seems to be advocating a medieval “ghetto” solution. Perhaps he could ask Muslims to make it easier for police to keep track of them by “voluntarily” wearing yellow crescent armbands. After all, such a private citizen solution to our country’s problems have a long Republican history dating back at least to George H.W. Bush’s “thousand points of light” initiative to bolster the safety net rather than have government provide for the needy, George W. Bush’s call for consumer spending as a response to the September 11 attacks, and Mitt Romney’s belief that illegal aliens would voluntarily repatriate to Mexico.

Confronted with their draconian pronouncements, Trump and Cruz have waffled between doubling down or retracting or modifying their statements, oblivious to the impact such original comments would have throughout the civilized and uncivilized world. Diplomatic-speak is not a language that falls trippingly off their tongues.  

Marcomentum Assaults the Constitution

Next January 20th the president-elect will swear the following oath of office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Does anyone see a conflict with the following statement?:

“We are clearly called, in the Bible, to adhere to our civil authorities, but that conflicts with also a requirement to adhere to God’s rules. When those two come in conflict, God’s rules always win (emphasis added). In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin, violate God’s law and sin, if we’re ordered to stop preaching the gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that. We cannot abide by that because government is compelling us to sin.”

Pundits are calling his surge in the polls “marcomentum,” but, to my way of thinking, with that statement, handsome and wholesome-looking Marco Rubio has disqualified himself from being president by asserting that God’s laws—if there is a God—supersede man’s. That might hold true in a theocracy like Iran or the ISIS caliphate but here in the United States we have always valued separation of church and state. 

Until now, apparently. Besides, who’s to say who gets to interpret God’s law? Catholics? Jews? Muslims? Protestants? Hindus? Shintos? Mormons? Which of their respective sects gets to adjudicate what God meant, which of the laws must still be followed? The Bible and Koran condoned slavery, prohibited the eating of pork, permitted multiple wives and admonished believers to live according to rules modern cultures consider barbaric. 

The Framers of the Constitution were quite clear in creating a separation between church and state. No pope, no ayatollah, no cleric would be supreme above the law. Neither would a president. 

Sadly, Rubio is not alone among Republicans who would place their religion above executing the law. Among candidates still in the race, include Ted Cruz. And through his comments on restricting Muslims from entering the country, even U.S. citizens, count Donald Trump among those who would violate the Constitution. 

Also sadly, acceptance of religious diversity is fading in our land. During his visit to a Baltimore mosque Wednesday, President Obama appealed for tolerance. But derision greeted his visit from quarters that have reviled almost all of his actions during the first seven years of his presidency. How could it not when almost three out of 10 Americans (43% of Republicans) think he is secretly a Muslim, according to a CNN/ORC poll last September? 

The Political Blame Game: Obama, Hillary, ISIS

So I watched the Republican debate Thursday night. What did I learn? Not much as to specifics of what the candidates would do if elected, but I did learn that all of our problems can be summed up in three words—Obama, Hillary and ISIS. Oh, and it was confirmed again that debate moderators are more interested in he said-he said schoolyard squabble questions than asking candidates to outline in detail their plans to govern. They let the hopefuls get away with plugging their Web sites for their full position statements, as if the average voter will spend much time rummaging through the BS to be found there alongside calls for donations. The moderators let the candidates evade questions and only once, by my count, did they follow up an answer with another question.

The world, at least the United States, would be a better, safer place if a Republican sat in the Oval Office, they said, not daring to remind voters it was a Republican president in the White House when we were attacked on September 11 and subsequently when we began two destabilizing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention it was that same Republican president who presided over the cratering of the U.S. economy. 

Primaries are times to duke it out, so let’s consider attacks a valued, if sometimes demeaning, means of assessing how a candidate responds to criticism. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio were the targets of most of the barbs. Neither distinguished himself as presidential material. They obfuscated their respective positions on fixing the illegal immigration dilemma. 

As for the other five men on the stage, they were almost afterthoughts, though I wonder how a seemingly solid thinker like John Kasich would have fared in a less vitriolic campaign season. 

Local boy Chris Christie apparently decided his best tactic would be to smear Hillary Clinton’s qualifications any time he was called. It was hard to tell who he thought endangered the republic more, ISIS or Hillary. 

It also was not startling to hear the pretenders castigate the outgoing incumbent president. But, like many a political representation, inaccuracies abounded. Consider the Associated Press’ fact-checking on several claims by Cruz:

“CRUZ: ‘We have seen now in six years of Obamacare that it has been a disaster. It is the biggest job-killer in this country. Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, have been forced into part-time work, have lost their health insurance, have lost their doctors, have seen their premiums skyrocket.’

“THE FACTS: Lost jobs? Since the time Obama signed the health care law in March 2010, the nation’s jobless rate has fallen from 9.9 percent to 5 percent. The economy has added more than 13 million jobs over that period.

“Lost insurance? The share of Americans without coverage reached a historic low of 9 percent last year, according to the government’s National Health Interview Survey. More than 16 million people gained coverage since 2013, just before the law’s big coverage expansion got underway.”

Ah, well, let’s chalk it up to politics as usual.

On the other hand, there’s a feeling going around that President Obama deserves a lot of blame for the sorry state of Democratic head counts in the Senate and House of Representatives (http://nyti.ms/1ORWjFM). 

Yup, he earned his fair share of responsibility by not working hard enough for his party’s candidates during the mid-year congressional elections. But let’s not pin all the blame on him. 

As a party Democrats failed to project the positive aspects of the car industry bailout, the passage of Obamacare and the resurrection of the economy. 

More importantly, Democrats—leaders and rank and file party members—have failed to see the small picture, the importance of winning elections on the state and even more local levels. Losing governorships and majorities in state houses has left them vulnerable in national elections. Based on the 2010 census, GOP-controlled state houses have redistricted (gerrymandered) congressional seats to give Republicans an almost insurmountable majority in the House through 2022. Thus, even if a Democrat wins the presidency, he or she will be stymied by Republican majorities in Congress. We are in for stalemated government for at least the next six years. 

Obama can be blamed for lots of the problems Democrats face. But as Cassius explained in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”