We generally refrain from commenting on current events until the passage of time can better inform us. Now however, we are moved by current events to warn of the ongoing narrative that is measurably eroding civil society in the United States.

The recent remarks by the sitting vice-president go beyond all reason in furthering that narrative. By comparing the January 6, 2020 demonstration at the capitol with the truly world shaking events of December 7, 1041 and September 11, 2001, she affirms that we have left the comfortable world of a constitutional republic and are plunging blindly into the chaos of a Kakistocracy.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition, defines Kakistocracy:


  1. Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.
  2. Government by the worst men in the state: opposed to aristocracy, government by the best men.
  3. Government by the worst men.

We are not ignoring the gender narrative.  The dictionary uses the masculine noun “men” to collectively mean human beings without having to dwell on the meaning of “human.”

January 6, 2020

History will eventually sort out the meaning of January 6, 2020. For the time being it seems that it is being used as a cudgel to beat up on “them,” the Trump revolution, right wing extremists, insufficiently woke, anti-vaxers, 9/11 truth, Big Foot, conspiracy theories, cranks, global warming denialism, GMOs, JFK assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, polling…

Something happened on January 6, 2020. What it was is probably not what is being discussed right now. For those who now believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone gunman, here is a good start into some of the players on January 6.


Why has conspiracy become a bad word?  Add the word “theory” after it and the phrase conspiracy theory has become part of our lexicon to demean skeptical people who clearly see the incongruity of something and have the temerity to question authority.

But a conspiracy is just a legal definition: An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors. (https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/conspiracy)

What was the demonstration at the capitol on January 6, 2020.  It was certainly NOT Pearl Harbor!

It may have been a conspiracy.

Here are some links that question whether the government (FBI) was complicit in exacerbating the situation. Remember, it was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration by citizens exercising their constitutional rights.


The New York Times articles online prompt you to subscribe. Is it worth it?  Probably not!

The Hill will tell you what the New York Times said.


Red State:




Washington Times


Synopsis from Revolver:




What is really known?

Many questions remain about the subject of Harris’ speech.  Regardless of what the conspiracies are, who is found guilty, or who are “confidential human sources” and “undercover employees,” or “unindicted co-conspirators,” the inescapable fact is that hyperbole reigns supreme.

Newsweek Questions:


PJ Media


Kakistocracy in Action

Major League Baseball (MLB) is Infected by Ideology

Major League Baseball (MLB) is Infected by Ideology.

This has probably been happening for a long time but has gone largely unnoticed except perhaps by baseball scholars. Now even the casual observer can see that big business baseball has joined mega-business social media giants by injecting itself into the prevailing ideology when they moved the 2021 All-Star Game out of Atlanta in response to the Georgia legislature exercising its Constitutional rights. Georgia passed a controversial voting law that is widely claimed to restrict voter access.

Atlanta area employers including Delta Air Lines and Coca-Cola signaled their disappointment about the new law but were condemned by Democrat activists as being too weak in their “disappointment.”

What the New Law Says

On the surface the law appears to limit voter fraud.  You be the judge about whether the law is unfair or not. You can download the entire text HERE (PDF).    Here it is on Document Cloud – https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527915-sb-202-as-passed

The real question is whether BASEBALL, especially big-money corporate baseball, should be showing its middle finger to 50% of its fans.  Here again you be the judge.

Here Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp discusses the new law.

What Can You Do?

If you are disappointed that the game was moved, there are a few things you can do. None of them will make any difference unless everybody joins in, as in a majority.

1. Read the text of the law.  If you do not understand it all, as most people do not unless they re not trained lawyers, read an unbiased critique of the law.  Good luck trying to find that.  Georgia Public Broadcasting (GPB)  seems to do a pretty good job: https://www.gpb.org/news/2021/03/27/what-does-georgias-new-voting-law-sb-202-do.

2. If you agree that the 2021 All-Star game should not have been moved out of Atlanta, let your voice be heard. Call or email:

  • By Phone
    Customer Support toll-free number: 866-800-1275
    International callers: 972-836-1111
  • By Email
  • By Mail
    MLB Advanced Media, L.P.
    1271 Avenue of the Americas
    New York, NY 10020

Why Do We Care?

In the grand scheme of our Federal Republic, it is important to remember that a pure democracy is the worst kind of government.  You can argue that a dictatorship is worse than a democracy but a pure democracy will result in the dictatorship of the majority.

The founders knew this so the Constitution  was contrived to avoid this as much as possible.  The Constitution was designed to share power so no single entity, including a majority of citizens, can abuse the rights of a minority.

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants the Congress seventeen “enumerated” powers, plus unspecified “implied” powers.  The “Commerce Clause” of Article I, Section 8 gives Congress the power to regulate  commerce among the states. Otherwise all powers not granted to Congress are reserved for the states or the people.

To further safeguard all citizens’ rights, they devised the electoral college and equal state representation in the Senate. Whether those can stand up to an emerging uninformed ideology remains to be seen.

Corporations are People Too

The Supreme Court affirmed that Corporations have certain free speech rights that ordinarily would be attributed to people. Whether that is good or bad is a discussion for another day.

The point here is this: Corporations can do whatever they want within the confines of the law. They answer only to their shareholders/stakeholders. Most try to give the customer what he/she/it wants.

Baseball fans are customers. It’s their buying power that makes the teams. players, and owners rich.

If a majority of baseball fans, or Coca Cola, Delta, or Home Depot fans, do not like the actions of the corporation, they can vote by not doing business with those corporations.

Voting with your feet makes little difference unless everybody does the same, and that’s unlikely. Being politely vocal and telling management why you disagree with their often hasty political statements will have more impact, especially if you can use social media to amplify your voice. But it’s unlikely enough people will actually follow through. Owners know that.

Ideological Divide

There is evidence that certain beliefs, ideologies, are going mainstream, including in the boardrooms of major corporations and faculty of some universities. When this happens, the ideological voice of corporate leaders is vastly amplified by the money they control.

When the Koch brothers, known as a conservative voice, put their money where their mouth was, the ideological left condemned the supreme court decision, Citizens United v. FEC that preserved their first amendment rights.

The same rights must be preserved for the Left, or any other voice that does not  call for violence.

The great danger of the current ideological divide resides in a gradual erosion of the safeguards the founders put in place. If an uninformed voting public can be influenced to vote away the safeguards, the United States of America will join previous civilizations that drifted from freedom and prosperity to tyranny and deprivation.

Farewell, Donald Trump

This morning as I awoke, my neighbor texted me the following: “I would like to know how you rate Trump as President? Greatest ever? Mentally flawed? Worst President ever?”

I try to avoid snap judgements, but a text demands an immediate reply, hopefully tempered by observation over 4 or 5 years.  My reply: “A tragic figure. Could have been great but was fighting an impossible battle hindered by significant personality defects.”

The word “defects” was a  mistake. It’s subjective. Many successful people have unusual personalities, hypomania, maybe even bipolar.  They achieve great things that many of us cannot or chose not to accomplish.

I should not have said defects.

Mental Health Professionals

Psychiatrists raged against Trump. Some even volunteered a diagnoses – narcissistic personality disorder.

That’s ridiculous. Narcissism is the public currency of Facebook and Twitter. It is known to be more prevalent among men and boosts self-esteem.  Sadly most of us cannot convert our narcissism into leadership.

Everybody on Twitter and Facebook are narcissists.  It has unconvincingly been called a disorder to associate it with a billing code.

Maybe those who declared Trump a narcissist  were not psychiatrists, like the ones who prescribe serotonin re-uptake inhibitors.  Maybe they were the ones who listen and nod.

The more circumspect among them questioned the ethics of whether mental health professionals should publicly declare mental health opinions.  That seems reasonable.

Trump the Patriot

I have no doubt that Trump is a patriot. His every deed said, “America First.”

Yet, his methods and rhetoric alienated a lot of people.  The entire political world feared what they regarded as his rejection of accepted diplomatic norms. Today Europe and China are undoubtedly looking forward to power politics as usual.

My Swiss PhD friend, who is uncommonly logical and unemotional was pleased to see Trump go. When I asked if he were speaking for all Europeans, he assured me that Angela Merkel was also happy to see Trump go.

Perhaps his assessment is actually unemotional and logical, although that’s highly doubtful given the universal nature of human bias.

Trump the Swamp Drainer

Saul falls on his Sword (from the Worms Bible,  c 1148),  rather than being murdered by his enemy.

Naivete’ or chutzpa.  I suspect the latter. Flagrant boldness with little fear of consequences.  It took a century for politicians and lobbyists to build the federal bureaucracy. Who could presume to clip its wings in a few short years?

Did he fall on his own sword? Did he commit political suicide or was he assassinated?  Did the Swamp win?  Is the Swamp real?

Advocates of Swamp Draining are in disarray. Their sorrow is palpable. The hero is gone. There will not soon be another hero.

Trump’s High Crimes and Misdemeanors

Congress made a mockery of impeachment.  They squandered their time and credibility with over-reaching accusations.

Will Trump be judged harshly as a twice impeached president, or will his unrelenting persecutors bear the shame, not of their political theater but of the unintended long-term consequences of frivolous impeachments. Impeachment doesn’t even carry the weight of a vote of no confidence in a parliamentary government.

The Trump Puzzle

There were a lot of perplexing questions during the Trump presidency.

Why was there such visceral opposition to him even before he was sworn in?

Why did half of a polarized nation fall in behind Trump and cheer him on, while the other half twisted in the political winds in anguish?

Why will half of a divided nation now fall in behind President Biden and cheer him on, while the other half will… ?   Who knows?

Major pieces of the Biden Puzzle are missing, presumably lost. While the honeymoon lasts, the media has filled in the pieces with roses.

What’s Left?


The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend

The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend | Trump is my Friend

Trump is my Friend

I do not know Donald Trump. Most people do not know him but everyone has an opinion of him. The President may not know himself very well. We cannot know how well he knows himself any more than most of us know ourselves.

The  emotional response to Trump is reminiscent of the high emotion of religious conflict of Northern Ireland, or of any of the other such countless conflicts from the Crusades, Thirty-Years War, or the obscure Nagorno Karabakh.  Our species is, after all, not very logical or unemotional.

I accept that my support for Trump may be emotional, but I would like to think it is based on something more pragmatic than emotion.  Perhaps this is the reason. The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend.

The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend

Know Thyself

The ancient Greek aphorism “Know Thyself” is the first of the three maxims in the forecourt of the Temple at Delphi. The other two are “Nothing to Excess” and “Surety Brings Ruin.”  The aphorisms of ancient people certainly seem to be logical admonitions. I hope the President is a student of ancient wisdom but he doesn’t seem to be.  Nevertheless, being President doesn’t require an encyclopedic knowledge of of such minutiae.

Accepting the wisdom of the ages is a logical reason to support Donald Trump, and it is a good defense when somebody challenges your decision. In spite of the Internet, mass media, and all of the other modern reasons that we deem ourselves to be superior, human wisdom has not materially advanced during the last 2,000 years. Certainly a lot of wisdom has been lost because no one wrote it down. It doesn’t matter because there are wise people now writing wise books, which repeat what has already been thought but not preserved in writing.

What has been written, currently or anciently gives us enough justification to support President Trump.

Arthashastra – अर्थशास्त्र

The Arthashastra is an ancient book about how to run a government. Written by many authors over several centuries, its ideas relate to human nature as much today as they did thousands of years ago. It accepts without reservation that individual states are sovereign. The rejection of sovereignty is at the root of our current global struggle.

Book VI is entitled “The Source of Sovereign States.”  It describes a good country:

Possessed of capital cities both in the centre and the extremities of the kingdom, productive of subsistence not only to its own people, but also to outsiders on occasions of calamities, repulsive to enemies, powerful enough to put down  neighbouring kings, free from miry, rocky, uneven, and desert tracts as well as from conspirators, tigers, wild beasts, and large tracts of wilderness, beautiful to look at, containing fertile lands, mines, timber and elephant forests, and pasture grounds, artistic, containing hidden passages, full of cattle, not depending upon rain for water, possessed of land and waterways, rich in various kinds of commercial articles, capable of bearing the burden of a vast army and heavy taxation, inhabited by agriculturists of good and active character, full of intelligent masters and servants, and with a population noted for its loyalty and good character;–these are the qualities of a good country.

The part about taxation jumps out, and by that standard alone the United States is a good country.

Friends and Enemies

In a day when kings presided over relatively small kingdoms with friendly or not-so-friendly kings nearby, a wise king knew who his friends were even if he didn’t like them very much. Chapter II of Book VI, of the Arthashastra is where we get our aphorism, “The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend,” although it is not stated so simplistically. Here is how the Arthashastra explains it.

The king who, being possessed of good character and best-fitted elements of sovereignty, is the fountain of policy, is termed the conqueror…

The king who is situated anywhere immediately on the circumference of the conqueror’s territory is termed the enemy.

The king who is likewise situated close to the enemy, but separated from the conqueror only by the enemy, is termed the friend (of the conqueror)…

In front of the conqueror and close to his enemy, there happen to be situated kings such as the conqueror’s friend, next to him, the enemy’s friend, and next to the last, the conqueror’s friend’s friend, and next, the enemy’s friend’s friend…

That foe who is equally of high birth and occupies a territory close to that of the conqueror is a natural enemy; while he who is merely antagonistic and creates enemies to the conqueror is a factitious enemy.

He whose friendship is derived from father and grandfather, and who is situated close to the territory of the immediate enemy of the conqueror is a natural friend; while he whose friendship is courted for self-maintenance is an acquired friend.

The definitions of acquired friends and natural friends are reminiscent of grade school where students grapple with the meaning of friendship. If we are wise. we should now grapple with the definition of enemy.

When Trump won the election of 2016, there was a great outcry of anguish. Many then and now consider Trump a conqueror. They hate his personality. They believe a mainstream press that labels Trump a Nazi-sexist-homophobe-white-supremacist-systemic-racists.  The people who pay attention to those accusations are  citizens and voters. Does that make them an enemy?

Who is the Enemy?

There are many enemies, just as there are many friends. Unfortunately it is often difficult to know the difference.

Machiavelli cynically observed that friends are people you can control and who depend on you.  Conversely one could argue that friends are the ones who control you and make you feel good about it. Think about who controls you and makes you fell good about it.

Enemies, people you simply don’t like, can be factitious (created by humans) enemies, not really enemies. The real enemy may be the one you cannot not see, an idea.

Will you accept as one definition of enemy, one who seeks to deprive you of your Liberty?

The people of Hong Kong can see the enemy; they know the enemy. We naive Americans watch our network news programs and are told how terrible Donald Trump is. They want to make him the enemy. But are they the enemy? Donald Trump says they are.

Bernie Sanders is a Socialist, but he says he is not really a socialist. He is a “Democratic Socialist” without telling anyone what that means. Superficially Bernie Sanders appears to be a shallow politician who seeks personal power by offering to give free stuff away to a greedy electorate.

Richard D. Wolff is a Socialist, but he is also a leading Marxist scholar. He seems to think there is a way to integrate a redefined Marxism into our ostensibly Capitalist world. Maybe Bernie Sanders is a political manifestation of Wolff’s thinking but there is little evidence that Bernie is that smart.

Are Bernie Sanders, Richard Wolff, and other socialists the enemy?  People who know them say they are very nice people. Perhaps it is not they who are the enemy, but their ideas.

Ideas can be a powerful enemy because they persist long after the people espousing them are dead.  Later, others using the ideas translate them into action, often leading to a loss of our personal Liberty. By that definition, ideas become the enemy.

Capitalism versus Socialism or Friends versus Enemies

This commentary is not a dissertation on Capitalism versus Socialism. It’s a commentary about friends versus enemies.

Our U.S. Constitution was created several hundred years after the Dutch and English fought bloody wars over their notions of capitalism. Karl Marx is credited with thinking about socialism but many others before him imagined a better world with ideas of utopia and happiness. Our Declaration of Independence, arguably a preamble to the Constitution, talked about Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The pursuit of happiness is important, but happiness cannot be guaranteed. Happiness is too ephemeral, fleeting, subjective. Each must pursue it individually. Friends can help. Enemies don’t care about your happiness.

Our founding documents do not mandate any particular economic model.  The Constitution has been amended to eliminate disgusting economic practices like slavery. Laws and regulations continually try to balance citizens’ rights against the interests of unrestrained free market capitalism.  Can we tolerate monopolies that destroy the ability of small capitalists to thrive?  That is not justice.

The allure of unrestrained socialism, tried in other countries, has always ended in economic disaster, so empirically socialism, even so-called democratic socialism, is a bad idea – an enemy. Restrained socialism is already with us.

An economy is like a great ocean liner. If the engines are simply stopped but not reversed, it will go many miles before stopping. Eventually the passengers will notice that the boat is going very slowly and demand that the engines be started. Recessions come and go.  Money is created. Inflation happens. Politicians get bad ideas and make mistakes. Others may be smarter, but they seem to get out of government sooner than the parasites who stay. Citizens are lazy and stupid but they vote.  Stupidity is its own reward. Such persons are factitious enemies.

The Preamble  to our Constitution states its purpose: Establish Justice, Insure Domestic Tranquility, Provide for the Common Defense, Promote the General Welfare, Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity.

Those who would deprive us of any of the five Constitutional Objectives are our enemies.

Is justice served by trying to oust an elected president before he even takes office ?  Or engaging in a sham impeachment? Those who advocated such injustice are the enemy.

Is rioting in the streets and governments’ failure to protect property rights insuring domestic tranquility?  Those who encourage it or who do not condemn it are the enemy.

Trump Defends the Five Objectives

Trump has declared himself a champion of the five Constitutional Objectives. While cities burn, he has condemned it, not defended it. Deregulation and reduced taxes have spurred the economy. Congress has appropriated more money for the military. Trump agrees with and has taken credit for that.  His Space Force will prove to be important to the Common Defense as military assets of potential enemies are deployed in the space around our shrinking globe.

Trump’s most consequential contribution to the cause of Liberty has been the appointment of three Supreme Court justices and hundreds of Federal Judges who take a more constructionist view of the Constitution.  Those who argue for anything except for strict constructionism are arguing to allow judges to perform the duties and responsibilities of legislators  and the people. Judicial activism may be a way to achieve a fast victory but how can voters hold unelected judges accountable for their deeds or misdeeds?  In this respect, Trumps choices of judges fulfill his responsibility to Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity.

Who said The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend?

It’s Time to Defend Trump

Trump may be defeated in the upcoming election. If he is reelected, he will be in office for only 4 more years. Either way, he won’t be on the national stage for very long.

Nevertheless, it’s time to defend Donald Trump, not necessarily the man but the ideas.

I do not know Donald Trump.  He may not know himself.  He says things that I think are silly.  Some people call them lies.

All of that will be gone soon but the ideas will persist:  fake news, mass disinformation, deep state, corruption.  These are all bad ideas.  They are the enemy.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

‘Looks a Little Bit Like Plagiarism’

Wednesday, October 7, 2020

The one and only debate between the vice-presidential candidates took place on Wed. October 7.  The current political climate has degenerated into mindless contention and exaggerated emotion. Many who watched the debate were disappointed that the two candidates remained so calm during the debate. Even when the Vice President threw a real zinger, we suspect that most people had no idea what he was talking about.

When asked what a Biden administration would do to control the pandemic that the Trump administration has not done, Senator Harris rattled off a litany of “facts.”  She asserted that she and Joe Biden have a plan.

At about 7 minutes, 57 seconds into the debate, the Vice President commented on on their plan by saying, “It looks a little bit like plagiarism, which’s something Joe Biden knows a little bit about.”   What follows will help citizens put that remark into historical perspective. The Biden plan is just a repeat of what Trump has already done and calling it their own.

History Lesson

Joe Biden is proof that there is a place in U.S. government for hard working C students who struggle to overcome handicaps. Biden, like Trump, frequently says things that are not strictly true.  They are things said to enhance his prestige.  He borrows other’s words and work and calls it his own. Over the years he has fabricated his resume. Over the years he has consistently been caught.  And over the years he has consistently and unabashedly admitted it.

“Ladies and Gentlemen. I’ve been dumb”

Back to Kamala Harris and her Performance at the Debate.

During the debate, Harris breathlessly told a story about Abraham Lincoln refusing to appoint a Supreme Court justice until the next president was elected.  We do not know if Pence is a student of history. He may have suspected something was fishy about the story, but he didn’t call her on it. He knows the Twitter-sphere will immediately correct the record.

Rather than elaborate on the actual Lincoln history, we will rely on Snopes’ cursory  dismissal of  Harris’ fantasy.


The Truth behind Honest Abe’s Supreme Court Appointment

As expected, many news organizations hopped on exposing Harris’ fabrication.  Left leaning commentary tends to forgive sloppy assertions that fit their overall narrative. The same for the Right.

The Washington Post is viewed by some as Left-leaning but their writer, Gillian Brockell, did a nice job of explaining how a canny Abraham Lincoln navigated a difficult political situation during the Civil War when Chief Justice Roger B. Taney died.

Washington Post Article HERE

The Rise and Fall (and Rise) of Salmon P. Chase by Rick Beard gives a detailed view of  of the corrupt state of politics and infighting that Lincoln had to endure. Replacing a Supreme Court Justice was the least of Lincoln’s troubles. But the vacancy proved to be a blessing when Lincoln nominated his fierce rival, Salmon Chase to fill Roger Taney’s seat on the Supreme Court.

Later Chase changed parties from Republican to Democrat, hoping that he could fulfill his lifelong goal of becoming president.

He is now mostly unknown except among history buffs and those lucky enough to have one of the very few remaining (but not circulating) $10,000 bills.

President Trump’s Dexamethasone

Dexamethasone is not like Hydroxychloroquine that caused such a freak-out when the President seemed to promote its use as a treatment or preventive against  Covid-19.

Hydroxychloroquine is used to prevent and treat acute attacks of malaria. It’s use in Covid-19 is based on immunosuppressive  and antiautophagy properties that theoretically could benefit people with Covid-19. That’s why doctors tried it with varying success.  As with many drugs, timing is a critical factor in whether it is useful of not.

Dexamethasone is a long acting corticosteroid used to slow the body’s natural and often inappropriate response to things that cause inflammation. There are shorter acting steroids such as prednisilone that have a similar action. None is a cure or preventive for Covid-19, only a treatment when appropriate. There is no substance or drug that will prevent Covid-19.  Once infected, a person’s immune system is the only cure.  A vaccine, when available, will cause the body’s immune system to produce substances to recognize and destroy the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19.

Press Coverage of President Trump’s Infection

After it became known that the President was administered dexamethasone as part of his treatment for Covid-19, the legacy press exploded with uninformed comments about the severity of his infection.

Networks make an appeal to authority by having medical correspondents on the air to explain what different treatment options may mean.  One such correspondent is Dr. John Torres who appeared in numerous reports on  NBC following the announcement that President Trump contracted the virus. In one report, Dr. Torres cited NIH guidelines for using dexamethasone.  He said. “The fact that he got dexamethasone throws up a red flag,”

The press loves red flags.

Some people seized on his explanation of the guidelines as proof that the President was in worse shape than he claimed. That’s not what the doctor really said. A red flag means “ask more questions.” But he did mention the NIH guidelines, and failed to clarify that the panel “may modify these recommendations.”  You be the judge.

“Based on the preliminary, unpublished results of the RECOVERY trial, the Panel recommends dexamethasone 6 mg daily for up to 10 days in patients with COVID-19 who are on mechanical ventilation (AI) or those who require supplemental oxygen but who are not on mechanical ventilation (BI). The Panel recommends against using dexamethasone to treat patients with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen (AI). The Panel may modify these recommendations based on the final published results of this study and the results of other ongoing studies.”

When guidelines are cited by an authority, many uninformed people, as most voters are, assume that the use of a drug outside the guidelines constitutes some kind of transgression. Conversely, if the guidelines are followed, then the condition of the patient must be as severe as the guidelines would suggest. Both are wrong. The guidelines are wrong. Every patient’s immune status is different.

Dr. John Torres Explains the President’s Treatment

Guidelines are Subject to Revision

Doctors are still learning how to treat Covid-19.  A lot of mistakes were made in the beginning, particularly waiting too long to start patients on steroids until they required ventilation. Remember the panic about not having enough ventilators?

Medical science will certainly rewrite the guidelines for the use of dexamethasone in treating the sequelae of Covid-19. Other steroid drugs may be more appropriate in specific cases.  Or none at all.

Doctor Paul Marik, Chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, in Norfolk, VA has published a protocol for treating Covid-19 that deserves attention. In it, he correctly observes that Covid-19 is a steroid responsive disease, but timing is critical.  Again he is correct.

You can download a copy of the protocol HERE

Be aware that the protocol is a suggestion based on available research. It will change as more information becomes available. Certainly the NIH will be slow to publicize current observational results.

For the time being, we are confident that the President’s physicians are aware of everything in the protocol and are weighing whether any of it or none of it applies to President Trump’s unique circumstances. We think he got the steroid at an appropriate time. Doctors can argue about which corticosteroid should be given at what time and in what dose. After all, they are practicing.

One Vote Away: How a Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History

One Vote Away: How a Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History is the title of Senator Ted Cruz’ new book. He wrote it during the Covid-19 lockdown.  It promises to be a detailed look at Senator Cruz’ long relationship as a lawyer and lawmaker with the Supreme Court. Otherwise the title says it all. We hope it explains how a single Supreme Court Seat can change history.

Hand of Providence

We try to refrain from commenting on current events.  History has a way of giving us greater insight and judgement with the passing of time.

But accidents happen and history is thrust upon us.

The recent death of Justice Ginsberg has been heralded by religious people as the Hand of Providence in what may be the waning days of a Trump presidency.  His choice of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacant seat has been greeted with glee from the political Right and with great “weeping and gnashing of teeth” from the Left.

Skepticism requires us suspect that both will be disappointed.  Nevertheless the new Justice Barrett will be on the court for many years.  Senator Cruz’ book might give us insight into how her appointment can change history.

Fox News Interview with Senator Cruz

Our book is on order so we can’t comment on it’s content yet.

A short sample from the book discusses how the replacement of Justice Scalia became a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign.  As Senator Cruz said on a yet unknown page of his book, “For many Americans, myself included, it was the single most important reason we voted for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.”

When Amy Barrett is inevitably confirmed by the Senate, will that take the Supreme Court off the table for 2020?

Here Senator Cruz discusses his book with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News, Sunday September 13, 2020.

Still Just One Vote Away

Regardless of the outcome of the 2020 election, the Supreme Court will remain potentially one vote away. While Justices are not supposed to be influenced by their biases, they clearly are to some extent;  otherwise the political calculus about how a particular Justice leans would not be relevant.

Here are the ages of the current Justices assuming Amy Barrett is confirmed.

A swing vote is defined as as a vote that is notoriously difficult to predict.  All we can hope for is that the plain words of the Constitution will prevail, preferably as the majority in Heller read those plain words.

That decision was written for the majority by the now deceased Justice Antonin Scalia.

Stare decisis is Latin for “to stand by things decided.”  In short, it is the doctrine of precedent. Some Justices believe this doctrine more firmly that others. Amy Barrett is on record affirming her belief in Stare decisis.  That should give comfort to citizens whose burning issue is Roe v. Wade.

We hope that Justice Sotomayor will feel the same about Heller.  As a lower court judge, she was known to use stare decisis,  but mostly as cover for decisions with which she already agreed.

Obviously future decisions are potentially one vote away.

Cancel Columbus Day

Constitution Day

Constitution Day in the United States has become a bit of an afterthought. The Constitution is who we are as a people. We should celebrate it, not Cristóbal Colón.

Apple does not add Constitution Day to the calendar that pops up on iPhones.  A Google search of U.S. Holidays only shows the big ten U.S. holidays – the ones Congress  designated as federal holidays.  Another, Inauguration Day is an 11th that’s celebrated once every 4 years on January 20.

Who Celebrates Constitution Day?

Constitution Day is celebrated across the country on November 26 to commemorate the adoption of the Constitution… in India.

It’s called Samvidhan Divas, also National Law Day.

Indian Constitution

India has a great constitution. They borrowed it from other constitutions: Parliamentary government from Britain; Method of election of President from Ireland; Impeachment of the President from the United States; A few nice things from South Africa, Canada, France, and Australia;  5-Year Plans from the old USSR; Suspension of Fundamental Rights during an emergency from Germany; and Article 21, which they got from Japan – “procedure established by law.”

Procedure Established by Law

We have something similar to Procedure Established by Law.  We call it “Due Process,” but the Indians purposely left our version out of their constitution. Our version,  Due Process, says that if you are accused of breaking a law, you have access to courts and maybe even a trial by jury.  The law of which you are accused of breaking might even be declared unconstitutional and the whole law thrown out. In other words, due process means you might get justice.


“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” (Article 21. Indian Constitution)

India cannot end police brutality. It’s legal.

United States

“… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”  (Amendment V, Constitution of the United States)

Police brutality occasionally happens in our Republic, and due process can fix it.

Notice that we also have property rights along with life and liberty.

Lawless, Corrupt, and Sclerotic

In his 2015 book, By the People, Rebuilding Liberty without Permission, Charles Murray says that the government our Back Covwer Leaf of "By the People"founders gave us to protect our rights is no longer functioning. The Constitution has been discarded. Pretty strong language.

In the preface to Part I entitled,  Coming to Terms with where we Stand, he summarizes what has happened after the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787

  1. “The founders’ Constitution has been discarded and cannot be restored, for reasons that are inextricably embedded in constitutional jurisprudence.
  2. Aspects of America’s legal system have become lawless, for reasons that are inextricably embedded in the use of law for social agendas.
  3. Congress and the administrative state have become systematically corrupt, for reasons that are inextricably embedded in the market for government favors.
  4. The federal government is in a state of advanced sclerosis for reasons that are inextricably embedded in the nature of advanced democracies.”

Inextricably embedded means that the solutions are beyond the reach of the electoral and legislative processes. We can’t just vote them out. They resist change because too many people live off the giant federal government.

He covers a lot of territory in his book. Too much to discuss here. One small part serves to illustrate the problem.

Due Process Denied

The regulatory government has grown so large that there is a regulation for almost everything. If you break one of those rules, an unelected federal bureaucrat (or public servant depending on your point of view) may assess a very large fine or even seek jail time.  You certainly can fight it in court because you have due process.  But wait, the lawyers say it will cost a million dollars to fight it all the way to a district court, or to the U.S Supreme Court. You don’t have that much free cash at the moment so you do what most people do. Negotiate something you can live with short of going to jail. The regulators win.

What to Do?

Charles Murray has some suggestions in his book but even he says such ideas are a long shot. Like Civil Disobedience.

It took a long time to build the regulatory state and, if it is to be repaired, it will take a long time and a populace demanding that it be done.

Constitution Day, a federal holiday with time off from work and an adequate budget, might refocus the nation’s attention to our founding document. A more robust Constitution Day will never become reality until people who are deeply concerned about the rights of the minority and the electoral college start pressing to have a day that really focuses our attention on the Constitution, not Citizenship Day.

The last time Congress fiddled around with Constitution Day in 2004, they created the “Constitution Day and Citizenship Day” from a previous Citizenship Day celebrated in May.  The Act they passed mandates that educational institutions government agencies promote the history of the American Constitution on September 17.  Of course Congress did not appropriate any money or any other incentives.  Very few people know about Constitution Day, except some dedicated people who maintain a website, Constitutionday.com.

Get Rid of Columbus Day

Get rid of Columbus Day and make Constitution Day a 4 day weekend to show it is something special. It could run from the first Friday after September 13 until the following Monday – Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday.   Everybody off from work, spending money and traveling for 4 days.  Fifty years from now, everyone will look forward to Constitution Day and nobody will ever remember a holiday for the explorer who enslaved native people in the Caribbean.

Trivia Questions

How does the Constitution spell   “choose?”  How many times. Does spelling count?

Which words are misspelled?

Which sections of the Constitution have been changed by amendments?

…House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot…

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker…

6 times-  chuse

5 times -choose

9/11 Should NOT be a National Holiday

As much as we mourn the loss of people on 9/11, the date should not become a national holiday.

Twenty years after the attack on the World Trade Center in N.Y and on the Pentagon in Washington DC, vivid memories persist of the people lost and the lives ruined .  It’s natural to remember our most recent tragedies. – painful events that happen within our lifetimes.

Almost 3,000 people died that day and many more have died since then from the toxic effects of substances to which first responders and others were exposed.  Yet 9/11 did not plunge us into a World War, although that may have been a motive of the attackers.

The wars that followed 9/11 were an escalation of wars that have been going on for a long time. One side calls it jihad (meritorious struggle); the other calls it self-defense. A self-styled Mahdi—the “Expected One”— led a jihad against infidels and apostates in Sudan during the late 19th-century. Current jihadists repeat his words as they wage their religious struggle against people they consider infidels and apostates around the world.

Another “Sneak” Attack

There are few people still alive who are old enough to remember the attack on December 7, 1941.  That “sneak” attack by Japan killed  2,403 Americans and wounded 1,178 more.  Between the European and Pacific theaters of World War II, over half a million Americans died.

In 1994, over 50 years after Dec. 7, 1941, Congress designated December 7 of each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, not a National Holiday.

In 2051 or thereabouts, a future U.S. Congress, benefiting from the hindsight of history, should consider whether Sept 11, 2001 was a pivotal date like Pearl Harbor was. Then Congress can decide if 9/11 should be a Remembrance Day.

Do We Need Another Holiday?

We already have a holiday to remember everybody who has died in all the wars we have ever fought. That day is Memorial Day.

We include the Civil War with 655,000 lost on both sides; the Spanish–American/Philippine–American Wars (about 7,000); World War I (115,000); World War II (670,846-official); Korea (92,134); Vietnam (153,303 ); Gulf War (849); Afghanistan (20,050); Iraq (32,222).  We should also go back to the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Mexican American War, Northwest Indian War and numerous other wars against native Americans…  Well you get the idea. Sadly a lot of people have died in wars.

Memorial Day

Memorial Day was originally called Decoration Day to honor those who died in the American Civil War,  “for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village and hamlet churchyard in the land.” (General Order No. 11. Issued by General John Logan in 1868.)

In a recent poll, 55% correctly describe Memorial Day as a day to honor the fallen from all the nation’s wars. For younger people, age 18-34,  the percentage drops to 40%.  Some people believe Memorial Day is a time to put flowers on the graves of relatives.  Others say it is the beginning of summer.

The Uniform Holiday Act of 1968 declared Memorial Day a federal holiday to be observed on a Monday, thus adding it to our list of 3 day holiday weekends.

  • Washington’s Birthday: third Monday in February
  • Memorial Day: last Monday in May
  • Labor Day: first Monday in September
  • Columbus Day: second Monday in October

Reason for the 9/11 Attack

As a nation we should continue the debate about the reasons for the 9/11 attack. We continue to have troops in many places around the world where we perceive threats caused by radical Islam.

Why were 19 young 20th century men so eager to die when they crashed the planes into their targets on September 11, 2001?  Why were they so eager to kill a lot of other people in the process? And wreak billions of dollars in property damage?  And make such a big statement about something based on archaic ideas that they may or may not share with 24% of the world’s population.

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

Congress chartered the 9/11 Commission “to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission was also mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks.”

Usama bin Laden

The commission did a good job of outlining how the attack was financed, how the perpetrators were recruited,  and what their assumed motivations were. It describes how Islam came into existence and provides a history to distinguish between various factions of legitimate Islam and what the commission describes as radical beliefs espoused by Usama bin Laden and the terrorists he recruited. The personal histories of the perpetrators read like a novel.

The county has spend vast sums of money carrying out the commission’s recommendations, some would argue, to the detriment of our personal Liberties. For 20 years the war on terror has prevented new attacks similar to the 9/11 tragedy.  The commission also defined other threats:

“In the post-9/11 world, threats are defined more by the fault lines within societies than by the territorial boundaries between them. From terrorism to global disease or environmental degradation, the challenges have become transnational rather than international. That is the defining quality of world politics in the twenty-first century.” (p361)

Global Pandemic



The global pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, demonstrates the difficulty of being prepared to prevent every danger. There may be a commission to determine what went wrong. Why were we not prepared?

The death toll from the pandemic will far surpass the death toll on 9/11.

In our fractured political environment, the current President is being blamed for everything. He points his finger to the World Health Organization (WHO) and China, who clearly tried to conceal person-to-person spread of the virus.

The obvious question is “Where was the elaborate intelligence network set up to prevent transnational threats?”  Maybe a commission can find the answer.

House Judiciary Hearing of Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Attorney General William Barr is a patriot and strong advocate for the rule of law. His favorable place in History is assured, while his tormentors will be soon forgotten.  July 28, 2020 was such a day of mindless torment for Mr. Barr but he appeared amused by the committee’s antics and survived unscathed.

TheHearing exposed most of the Democrats on the committee as true children of post-modernity. If you are not sure what post-modernity, or postmodernism, is, there are two good definitions, one for kids and one for graduate students.  Take your pick.

Definition of Postmodernism for Kids

Postmodernism is a way of thinking about culture, philosophy, art and many other things. The term has been used in many different ways at different times, but there are some things in common.

Postmodernism says that there is no real truth people can know. It says that knowledge is always made or invented and not discovered. Because knowledge is made by people, a person cannot know something with certainty – all ideas and facts are ‘believed’ instead of ‘known’. There may or may not be some sort of ultimate truth, but we cannot know it. People often believe they know the truth, but their opinion will change later. This is different from traditional views of ‘objectivity’, which say there is a single knowable truth independent of anyone’s observation or opinion.  https://wiki.kidzsearch.com/wiki/Postmodernism

Definition of Postmodernism for Graduate Students.

The late French cultural theorist,  Jean Baudrillard (July 27, 1929 – March 6, 2007), is famous for his work on the “meaning of meaning.”

Here is his definition of post-modern ideology:

“Postmodernity is said to be a culture of fragmentary sensations, eclectic nostalgia, disposable simulacra, and promiscuous superficiality, in which the traditionally valued qualities of depth, coherence, meaning, originality, and authenticity are evacuated or dissolved amid the random swirl of empty signals.”

Baudrillard was not a fan of Americans.  But his ideas have been picked up by academics and are taught in University courses whose names end in “studies.”  Many in Congress are now influenced by his ideology.

The the hearing was not a hearing.  That implies somebody was listening.

The members did not want to hear AG Barr. They wanted to puff their feathers up in front of the camera, ask Mr. Barr questions, and then refuse to let him answer. Reclaiming their time, they themselves provided the answers they wanted to hear.

It was an obvious display that most of the Democrats on the committee are deeply influenced by post-modern ideas.  When ideas attain the emotional quality demonstrated the hearing,  it is known as ideology.

Depth, Coherence, Meaning, Originality, and Authenticity

The ranting members of the committee clearly displayed their preference for an alternative reality as they preened in front of the camera, believing that their precious constituents would be watching and cheering approvingly.

Attorney General Barr on the other-hand patiently endured their abuse.  He displayed the traditionally valued qualities of coherence and meaning.  His message was simple. He takes his oath of office seriously and he is faithfully enforcing the law without regard to political or outside influence.

When asked a question under penalty of perjury and then not allowed to answer, he forcefully insisted on answering.

Entire Five Hours of the Hearing

If you are interested in skipping through the entire 5 hours of the hearing, you will see how toxic the political environment has become.

Watch Ms. Mucarssel-Powell (D-FL) show riots in Venezuela to accuse the administration of gassing “peaceful” protesters in the U.S. Her insufferable bullying includes accusing President Trump and Mr. Barr of  allowing her constituents to die.

Throughout the hearing you will see the unflappable patience of the Attorney General.  We have little doubt that history will treat Mr. Barr with admiration, while the miscellaneous temporary players on the congressional stage will fade like Shakespeare’s characterization of Life in Macbeth:

Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

(SCENE V. Dunsinane. Within the castle.)

The Hearing