Misinformation on the Civil War

The liberal media is blasting Nikki Haley for not mentioning slavery in her answer to a question about the cause of the Civil War. While Haley's response was not very intelligible, there was nothing wrong with her not mentioning slavery. Here is the correct response: "The Civil War was caused by Abraham Lincoln's obsession with preserving the Union. Seven Southern states were trying to peacefully secede, and Lincon refused to allow them to do so, and waged war against them for their desire to leave the union. While the secession was caused by slavery (among other reasons), the war itself was all the North's doing."

When I posted this thought on Facebook, some of my friends seemed unable to grasp the basic truth I'm trying to express here. I will put it as simply and directly asd I can: Secession was about slavery, but the Civil War was about Lincoln's obsession with preserving the union.

Abandoning my support for Israel

I have long been an ardent supporter of Israel's right to defend itself. The Palestinians could have accepted the 1948 partition, as the Jews did, and lived ever since in peace, but instead they rejected the partition and vowed to destroy the state of Israel and "drive the Jews into the sea". Hence my lack of sympathy for the Palestinians.

But what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip goes so far beyond any legitimate right of self-defense that I have to abandon my previous support. By inflicting unspeakable damage on innocent civilians it is creating more future terrorists than it is destroying. The idea that killing all Hamas supporters is the answer makes no sense. You cannot destory an ideology by killing its advocates.

Israel's claim that it is taking every precaution to avoid killing innocent civiians has been exposed as a complete joke by the fact that they killed three of the hostages that they were supposedly trying to free, killing them even though those hostages were shirtless, with their hands up and waiving a white flag of surrentder, and calling out in Hebrew.

The United States becomes increaingly isolatd in world opinion the more it supports the Israeli genocide againt the Palestinian people. Since 1954 the U.S. has vetoed 34 resolutions in the UN Security Council concerning Israel. Our arrogance in ignoring world opinion is disgusting.

President Biden's continuing support of Israel in the face of Israel's war crimes is wrongheaded and will cost him in next year's election, espoecially among young Democratic voters, many of whom will simply stay home home on election day. Biden should do more than lobby Israel in private, as he is doing now. He should announce publicly that the U.S. will no longer support the Israeli war crimes.

Trump will stress in next year's election that two wars have arisen under Biden, while there was no war during his presidency. While this is a superficial statement, it is true information. and most voters cast their vote based on superficiality (like the current gas prices). Biden botched Ukraine support in the opposite direction, denying Ukraine any weapons that might possibly be used inside Russia. In both instances Biden has been guilty of timidity. And then there is the withdrawal from Afghanistan, which many think Biden botched, and the problems at our southern border.

Trump has a solid example of his exercise of restraint. When an American was killed somewhere in Europe, the military wanted to do a strike in response. Trump asked what the civilian casualties would be, and the answer came back "about 150". With ten minutes to go before the mission was to start, Trump vetoed it, saying the response wasn't "proportionate". I haven't seen a better example of a U.S. president implementing the principle of proportionality to veto a military mission.

Those, like Trump, who are troubled by the U.S. interference in the affairs of other countries are on the right side of history. There is no reason for the U.S. to have a military presence in over 150 countries, 3/4 of all the countries of the world. There is no reason for the U.S. to have a "defense" budget as large as the next ten countries combined. When are we going to come to our senses? And when is Israel going to come to its senses? The only people benefiting from this madness are the arms manufacturers.

Should Colorado be allowed to exclude Trump from the ballot?

A recent decision by the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump cannot be on the Colorado 2024 presidential ballot, because he violated the insurrection clause in the 14th Amendment.

Most commentators think the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue on appeal. If it does, it will be fascinating to see what the so-called "conservatives" on the Court will do. The true conservative view is that the federal government should stay out of the business of telling the states what to do. But the hypocritical right-wing Supreme Court justices have consistently violated this principle when political realities come into play, as in the 2000 case of Bush v. Gore, when the so-called conservatives voted to interfere in the Florida vote counting process. If the current court repeats this disgrace, it will lose what little respect it still has left.

What the Court should do is to simply stay out of the process. By refusing to take up the case, the Court would allow each state to run its own elections, a part of which is to decide who can appear on its ballots. The issue of whether a candidate qualifies to be on the ballot is multi-faceted. A candidate younger than 35 cannot run. A candidate who is not a natural-born citizen cannot run. A candidate who has already served two terms cannot run. And a candidate who has engaged in an insurrection, having previously sworn an oath to uphold the constitution, cannot run. It is up to each state to determine whether a candidate qualifies to be that state's ballot.

If the Supreme Court does take up the case, the conservative justices will be put in an embarrassing position, because their position has long been one of "originalism", or "textualism", meaning the provisions of the Constitution, and laws in general, should be interpreted as written. Doing that, Trump clearly does not qualify for the ballot, under the clear provisions of the 14th Amendment.

Conservative philosoophy is that the court should not go into the legislative history, when the law as written is clear. But even if they do go into the legislative hisstory, there is an exchange between two Senators on record in which it is clerified that the provision does apply to the presidency, contrary to what the trial judge mistakenly found in this case.

"The Real Majority", by Richard Scammon and Ben Wattenberg

This 1970 book is about psephology, the study of elections. The word derives from the Greek psephos, meaning pebble. The material relied on by the authors are the election of 1968, and the ones leading up to it. They also examine the mayoral eelctions of 1969.

The authors write about the great ideological issues of the past: The gold vs. silver issue of 1896 which dominated our politics for 30 years, and then the econoomic issues of 1932, which also dominated for 30+ years.

But the authors demonstrate that in 1968 economic issues took a back seat, and social issues dominated. Crime became the number one issue, not, as most mistakenly believe, the Vietnam War. The authors rely on the numerous surveys done by the Harris and Gallup polling organizations which demonstrate that crime and racial unrest were the two main issues in 1968. Much was made of the fact that half of all women were afaid to walk alone at night. The authors predict that whoever can capture the center on these issues, as the GOP did in 1968, will win future elections. The claim that "law and order" was a code word for racism was a losing argument for the Democrats in 1968. All the middle of the road voters who were genuinely concerned about crime in the streets were being called racists, which was NOT an effective strategy for winning over those voters.

What has happened since 1968 has certainly borne out the authors' prophecy. "Family values" dominated the 1980s elections, and abortion and other social issues have dominated recent elections. What has made the switch from economic issues possible is the success of the era when economic issues dominated. The success of the union movement has paved the way for many workers to join the middle class, and many of them have become more conservative.

The issue of abortion in 2023 demonstrates the truth of the authors' conclusions. The right has taken an extreme position on abortion, out of step with the vast majoirty of U.S. voters, and it is costing the GOP at the ballot box. Every referendum on abortion to date has been won by the pro-choice crowd, even in red states like Kansas. The best chance Biden has to win next year would be to run every single ad showing Trump bragging about being responsible for overturning Roe v. Wade. Any other strategy would be a loser for Biden, who at this writing has an approval rating of a pathetic 34%, the lowest yet for his presidency.

"Suicide of a Superpower", by Pat Buchanan

When I got done with law school 48 years ago and went out into the adult world to practce law, the thing that shocked and upset me the most was the blatant racism exhibited by judges and fellow lawyers I came into contact with. I expected it among my blue collar clients, becuase they didn't know any better, but not among other professionals. How could people with 19 years of education still be so racist? It made no sense to me.

Living and working in this hostile world was a source of continuing disappointment to me. I always felt like a reluctant visitor to an alien environment. I was a stranger in a strange land.

In the reading and studying I have done in my retirement, I have come to understand that racism is a natural part of the human condition, which is to say that we are a tribal species. This is the central theme of Pat Buchanan's 2011 book, "Suicide of a Superpower". Buchanan gives numerous examples from all around the world of the emergence of tribalism as the dominant force in the world today. The more general, and probably more accurate, term he uses is "ethnonationalism".

Concerning the United States, the superpower which Buchanan correctly diagnoses as dying, he says this: "Eisenhower's America was a nation of 160 million with a European-Christian core and culture all it own. We were a people then. And when, in 2050, we have become a stew of 435 million, of every creed, culture and color, fron every country on earth, what will hold us together".

Buchanan's general point is that countries based on ideology do not survive. Considered in that light, the miracle is not that the United States republic is dying, as it surely is, but that it has lasted this long. The Soviet Union's ideology-based country lasted only 74 years; ours has lasted an amazing 247 years and counting.

Buchanan's idea that we are a tribal species has received strong support in recent years from a perceptive article in "National Affais" by Jonathan Rauch. Rauch notes that "tribalism has been the prevalent mode of social organization for all but approximately the most recent 2% of years that humans have lived on the planet". He concludes that "the more parties weaken as institutions whose members are united by loyalty to their organization, the more they strengthen as tribes whose members are united by hostility to their enemy". So, the rancor today among different political and ethnic groups, so condemned by most of us, is really quite natural in human history.

The Dubious Value of an Ivy League Degree

The recent epidemic of anti-Semitism on college campuses, and Ivy League colleges in particular, has drawn my attention to a long-simmering issue, which is, why do we think an Ivy League degree is so valuable? So much of what we hear from Ivy League campuses these days reflects a moral degeneracy. In an encouraging, though belated, indication of some pushback, some prospective employers are now asking for a list of Harvard students who signed onto a declaration blaming Israel for the 10/7 Hamas slaughter of 1,400 Israeli civilians, for the purpose of denying those misguided students future job interviews.

With the benefit of this new insight, it seems absurd to me that the most prominent affirmative action cases all involve entry into universities. Bakke (1978) involved an application to a University of California medical school; Gratz and Gutter (2003) both involved applications to the University of Michigan law school; and Fisher (2016) involved admission the University of Texas; All of these cases upheld race-based admissions. But now we have two companion cases decided this past summer, one involving Harvard and the other the University of North Carolina, in which the Supreme Court broke with the past and struck down race-based admissions.

I am incredulous at this obsession with what college you go to. To my way of thinking, a degree from a quality liberal arts college is more valuable, in any meaningful sense of the word, than a degree from one of the "elite" universities. The three things employers value most in an employee--integrity, honesty, and a good work ethic--are most likely to be found in a college setting which encourages and nurtures those values.

To the extent that employers still over-value the elite degree, I say, so what? No man ever lay on his death bed and rued that he didn't spend more time on his business. The very thought is silly, what they always say is that they regret not spending more time with their family.

If we look at the Supreme Corrt justices, almost all in recent years have been graduates of Ivy League colleges. And the result is that the Court has a historically low approval rating, because the Court is out of touch with the country. The prevalence of Ivy League graduates has been almost as damaging to the country as the prevalence of Catholics on the Court.

"Day of Reckoning", by Pat Buchanan

In this book, published in 2007, Buchanan expounds on the themes he has explored in his other books, like "A Republic, Not an Empire" (1999), "The Death of the West" (2002), "Where the Right Went Wrong" (2004), "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War" (2008), and "Suicide of a Superpower" (2011).

"Day of Reckoning" is Buchanan's resposne to Geroge W. Bush's war on Iraq, which Buchanan considers the greatest blunder in United States history. In fact, Buchanan felt so strogly about this that in 2002 he launched a new magazine, "The American Conservative", dedicated to opposing the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The main concept Buchanan explores is the idea of ideology. He examines Bush's speeches after 9/11, and concludes that Bush became consumed by ideology, making statements lie "moral truth is the same in every culture i every time, and in every place", "the requirements of freedom apply fully to the true Islamic world", and "We are in conflict between good and evil, and America will call evil by its name". Bush became consumed by his dsire to overthrow Iraq's ruling regime, and substitute a democratic state in its place. Buchanan calls this the use of ideology to justify war as nothing more than "war propaganda".

Buchanan says that "ideology really means poitical fanaticism". He examines past U.S. wars, and concludes that couching our justification for involvement in ideological terms was, in every caase, an after-the-fact justification for wars which were entered into out of nationl interests.

Applying Buchanan's principles to the current Israel-Hamas war, it can be easily seen that Isael is making a big mistake in invading the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu is couching it in terms of "fighting against evil", which it surely is, but to justify war on that basis is wrong. We also see tht Netanyahu, like Bush, is ignoring the Pottery Barn Rule, which says that "if you broke it, you bought it". Who is going to run the Gaza Strip when Hamas is destroyed? Another similarity is that by waging war on Muslims, you are simply creating more future terrorists. In referring to Islamic terrorists, Buchanan likes to say that "they're over here because we're over there". Hamas might be destroyed, but so what? Another group will be formed in its place. Then there is the problem of innocent civilians being killed.

The 2023 World Series

The Texas Rangers won in five games over the Arizona Diamondbacks. I was thrilled by this, as the Rangers had never won a championship in their 63 years of existence. They were twice within a strike of winning in 2011 against the Cardinals, only to have it cruelly ripped away from them. This time, hpwever, they were not to be denied.

The first game was a classic, with the Rangers tying the game with a late-inning homer, and then winning in the 11th on another homer. The other four games were rather mundane by comparison.

MVP for the Series was Rangers shortstop Corey Seager, who honmered in three of the five games. He became only the fourth player to win two World Series MVP awards, and only the second position player, joining Reggie Jackson in this regard. (Seager had previously won in 2020 with the Dodgers, while Jackson won in 1973 with the A's, and in 1977 with the Yankees.)

A disappointment is the mediocre broadasting team which FOX Sports foisted on us. How I miss the halycon days when Joe Buck and Tim McCarver called the games! The pre-game and post-game team of ex-ballplayers was equally disappointing. The knowledgeable team at ESPN, folks like Tim Kurkjian and Karl Ravech, would have been light-years better than this group.

Rangers manager Bruce Bochy made history by becoming only the third manager to take three different teams to the World Series (Bill McKechnie and Dick Williams being the first two). Well done, Bruce!

An oddity is that in this World Series the visiting team won every game. And, most impressive, the Rangers went an amazing 11-0 in the postseason as the visiting team!

Rangers second baseman and leadoff hitter Marcus Simien set an interesting record with the most plate apperances in a season (including postseason), in MLB history. He got to the plate an amazing 835 times! This was made possible by the enhanced playoff system in effect this year, but still an impressive record.

The Election of 2023

Yesterday's election was a good day for Democrats and a good day for freedom. The two Ohio ballot issues passed easily. Issue One on abortion received 56.6%, and Issue Two on marijuana received 57.0%. This was a great win for freedom of citizens from big government overreach into our private lives.

Kentucky's Democratic governor Andy Beshear won re-election. He gave a great victory speech, with the theme of the people of Kentucky not wanting to go left or right, but forward. His Repubican opponent had embraced Trumpism, and had enthusiastically touted Trump's endorsement. As with most Trump endorsements, this one fell flat, continuing quite a horrific losing streak for Trump-backed candidates.

The third key election was for control of the Virginia legislature. Control had been split between the two houses, but now Democrats will control both. A huge loss for Virginia GOP governor Glenn Youngkin, who had spent much of his political capital trying to gain full control of the legislature.

The League Championship Series

Astros-Rangers. The Houston Astros met the Texas Ranges in an all-Texas ALCS. The series was noteworthy in that the away team won every single gsme! Rangers right-fielder Adolis Garcia was the clear choice for ALCS MVP, hitting five homers in the last four games.

The demise of the Astros meant that none of the six division winners will appear in the upcoming World Series.

The Rangers were certainly the sentimental favorite, as fans cannot forget the Astros' cheating scandal of a few years ago, nor should they. One of the feel-good stories of the 2023 Rangers is the success of their manager, Bruce Bochy. With the Rangers win in the ALCS, Bochy became the first man ever to manage three different franchises to the World Series.

I remember weatching Bochy during the 1992 season when he managed the Wichita Wranglers, the Double-A farm team of the San Diego Padres. I liked the way he handled his job, but I never could have predicted he would ever get to manage in the majors. But the Padres, to their credit, recognized his excellence asnd steadily promoted him within their system, until naming him as their manager for the 1995 season. He took the Padres to the World Series in 1998, and later managed the San Francisco Giants to the World Series three times in the 2010s.

Phillies-Diamondbacks. The Philadelphia Phillies and Arizona Diamondbacks met in the NLCS. I was rooting for the Phillies earlier in the postseason, but here I had to cheer for the D-Backs, who are one of the great Cinderella stories of the 2023 season.

The Phillies set a record for most home runs in a single postseason with 24. Their three sluggers, Bryce Harper, Kyle Schwarber, and Nick Castellanos, had five dingers each.

The Future of our Republic

242 years ago today, British General Cornwallis surrendered, ending the Revolutionary War, and paving the way for the establishment of our great nation, the only nation in the history of the world established on an idea, rather than on commonalities like race, ethnicity, or religion. Our challenge today is whether we can keep this great republic, which has been bequeathed to us by our wise and visionary Founders.

The reason for our current problem is that we have a significant group of people who refuse to accept the results of elections, and encourage violence against election oficials who are simply trying to do their jobs. We have a long history in this country of election losers graciously conceding to their victors, as exemplified by Jefferson in 1796, and Adams in 1800. That is no longer the case, which calls into question the viability of our system of government.

The Division Series

None of the four Division Series went to five games. Two ended 3-0, and the other two went 3-1. Three of the four teams with first-round byes lost in the Divison Series, suppporting my thesis that the time off is not helpful to the top teams.

The only bye team to advance was the hated Astros, who took care of the Twins three games to one. The Rangers swept the Orioles, and the Diamondbacks swept the Dodgers, with the Dodgers never holding a lead in the entire Series! And the Phillies elilminated the Braves 3-1, with Nick Castellanos becoming the first player ever to hit multiple homers in consecutive postseason games.

The Evils of the Catholic Church

Vatican archivist Giovanni Coco has discoverd a "yellowed letter" sent by the German Jesuit Lothar Konig to the Pope's private secretry in December of 1942, informing the Pope that "up to 6,000 men die every day" in the "blast furnace" at the Belzec concentration camp.

This puts the lie to the Vatican's long-standing position that Pope Pius XII never knew about the evils of the Holocaust. While this might be dismissed as the failings of one person, what cannot be dismissed are the repeated efforts of the Catholic church to beatify this guy. It has been widely believed that Pius XII must have known about the Holocaust, but now there is proof in black and white that he did. And yet, the Cathlic Church continues to be in denial. For shame.

And now I have learned that William Tyndale was executed by the Catholic Church for heresy, for the "crime" of translating the Bible into English. You wouild have thought that a truly Christian institution would have welcomed this, but not the Catholic Chruch, because the Catholic Church does not want its members to be able to think for themselves.

Many of the shortcomings of the Supreme Court in recent years is due to the prevalence of Catholics on the court. This number is currenly six of the nine, but has been even higher in recent years. Currently there are only two Protestants on the court, and that's being generous in counting the Episcopalian Neil Gorsuch, who was raised a Catholic, as a Protetant. The Catholic-dominated Court has repeatedly embraced the expansion of Executive power, to the point that the government is now free to make personal reproductive decisions for the women of this country.

The Catholic Church mandates fealty to a patriarchal autocracy, in which people are discouraged to think for themselves, and are instead commanded to allow the Pope to dictate their personal decisions. This emphasis on Papal infallibilty is decidely unchristian, as the Bible teaches us that we are all sinners and have fallen short of the glory of God, even the Pope.

Liberals have been consistent in advocating "diversity" on the Supreme Court, but this has turned out to be a sham. The liberals' idea of diversity mandates diversity of race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, but ignores the most important kind of diversity, that of religion, resulting in an almost total elimination of Protestant values from the Supreme Court. Martin Luther's 95 Theses exposed the evils of the Catholic Church, and it's time we undertood this and acted accordingly.

First Round of the MLB Postseason

The MLB postseason started this week, with a new and improved playoff format after the awkwardness of last year's format. Now the first round consists of eight best of three match-ups in what is being calloed the "wild card" round, with the top two teamss in each league getting a bye into the division round.

All four match-ups resulted in two-game sweeps, and I was generally pleased with the results. The Rangers ousted the Rays 4-0 and 7-1. The attendance at the Rays stadium for the first game was a paltry 19,704, the lowest for a non-COVID playoff game since 1919! The lack of support this year by the Rays' fans is disgusting. The average home attendance this year was 17,781, ranking the franchise 27th out of 30. Tampa Bay doesn't deserve a team, and the rest of the league doesn't deserve to be forced to play on the atrocious artifical turf, in the monstrocity known as Tropicana Field. MLB shoud move the Rays to a city that will appreciate them, as they are one of the best-run franchises in the league. In addition, the Rangers deserve sympathy because they were leading their division for the last part of the season, only to have it snatched away from them by the hated Astros on the last day of the season.

The Phillies beat the Marlins 4-1 and 7-1. Here again, we have a franchise in the Marlins whose fans don't appreciate them. Average hone attendance for the Marlins was a pitiful 14,355, next to last ahead of only Oakland. When is MLB going to realize that the Florida teams need to be moved? Florida has proven that it doesn't deserve any MLB teams. The Phillies, by contrast, have notoriously unruly fans, but at least the fans there care about the team, averaging over 30K per game, good for sixth in the league. And the Phillies owner has done everything he can to field a winner, opening his checkbook to sign top-flight free agents such as Bryce Harper and others. They deserve postseasson success.

Twins over Blue Jays, 3-1 and 2-0. Both of these teams have good fan bases, but the Twins have an awesome new ballpark and have achieved a lot for a team in such a small markiet. In addition, the Twins had an incredible record of losing 18 straight playoff games, so it's good to see them getting off on the right foot this year, winning their first playoff series in more than 20 years.

Diamondbacks over the Brewers, 6-3 and 5-2. The D-backs had a great year, as expected after their good offseason moves prior to the season. But I like the Brewers also, so no strong feelings about this match-up, although on balance I guess I have would preferred the Midwest, blue-collar Brewers to the desert-dwelling D-Backs.

The Trump Lackeys

The Trump lackeys seem to be standing by him despite being charged themselves with serious felonies. All this is doing is making their attorneys rich, at least those who are lucky enough to be getting paid.

A prime example is the case against former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows for interference in the Georgia vote count. His attorneys filed a frivolous motion to remove his case to federal court, on the ridiculous basis that he was performing his duties as Chief of Staff when he interjected himself into the Georgia election process.

This was a meritless claim on so many levels that one hardly knows where to begin. He testified that he just happened to be in Georgia visiting his kids in college, and decided to stop in to observe the vote-counting process. Totally absurd, as the vote-counting is by law a state function and the federal government has no legitimate role in it, and he was not even permitted in the room under Georgia law.

And the Hatch Act prohibits federal employees from involvement in political activity, so by definition it could not have been a part of his duties.

Faced with a loser of a case, a good attorney will advise a client to cut his or her losses and work out a deal to resolve the case. The Trump lackeys either have poor attorneys or are too stubborn to listen to them.

The First Republican Debate

Eight GOP candidates participated in Wednesday's debate. Here are some of my takeaways.

Only two candidates indicated they would not support Donald Trump if he were convicted of a crime, the two being Asa Hutchinson and Chris Christie. And one, Vivek Ramaswamy, indicated he would pardon Trump on day one.

Ramaswamy was the most interesting of the candidates. He started out coming across as an electric, very charismatic, character, but by the end he had been so battered and bruised by criticism from the other candidates that he was revealed to be the inexperienced interloper that he is. Nikki Haley, Mike Pence, and Chris Christie were the most agressive critics of Ramaswamy, who really self-destructed when he called climate change "a hoax".

Oddly, the candidates pretty much left Ron DeSantis alone and went after Ramaswamy instead. My theory for this is that they recognized that DeSantis is a failing candidate and would self-destruct if left alone. DeSantis came across as arrogant, angry, and uniquely unlikable. His performance was easily the worst of the eight. He repeatedly refused to give a straight answer to simple questions, instead going into prepared rants. He wouldn't answer whether he favored a federal abortion ban, even when asked by a reporter after the debate. And he wouldn't answer whether he thought Mike Pence did the right thing on January 6th, 2021.

Mike Pence was unusually (for him) aggressive, which might help him some. But he also made a fool of himself by repeatedly interrupting the others, so much so that he had to be ademonished by one of the moderators. Pence used a line I'd hoped I would never hear again, which is that "we need a government as good and decent as the American people". To me this is total baloney. Pence seemingly was trying to be a reincarnation of Ronald Reagan, but there was only one Reagan, and Pence's efforts fell flat. Other candidates were correct in pointing out that we have serious problemns, and morale is low in this country. To say that our best days lie ahead of us, as Pence did, just sounds like nonsense, and ignores the need to solve the serious problems facing this country.

Pence had a cringeworthy moment when he told Ramaswamy "I'll talk slower", a patronizing comment which was reminiscent of that infamous moment in the 1984 vie-presidential debate, when George H.W. Bush said to Geraldine Ferraro, "Let me help you with the difference between" (two named countries), a remark so condescending that it elicited audible gasps from the audience.

Tim Scott gave a disappointing performance. He could have helped himself with a compelling performnce, but instead he was bland and unimpressive. Doug Burgum, the North Dakoota governor, had a unique prspective as a small town guy who espoused small town values. He will certainly move up in the polls.

Nikki Haley probably helped herself the most. She would clearly be the best candidate for the general election. But, given the sorry state of today's GOP, there is little chance of her getting the nomination.

Haley had several moments which stand out. She vigorously called out Ramaswamy for his lack of foreign policy experience, saying he had no such exerience, "and it shows". Then, turning to the audience, she repeated, "It shows". In discussing the war in Ukraine, she took a suble and very effective swipe at DeSantis, who had said that he would not support additional funding for Ukraine until European countries start doing their part. Without mentioning DeSantis by name, she pointed out that eleven European countries are spending more as a percentage of GDP than we are for the defense of Ukraine. A third highlight moment for Haley is when she asserted that the Republicans are as guilty as Democrats for the explosion in the national debt. She pointed to the $7.4 billion in earmarks requested by Republicans in the 2024 budget, compared to only $2.8 billion asked for by Democrats. “So you tell me who are the big spenders,” she said. “I think it’s time for an accountant in the White House."

All eight shamelessly demogogued the abortion issue. Same with the inflation issue. They all repeatsedly blamed Joe Biden for the recent inflation, even though he is clearly not to blame. The inflation is caused by the cut-off of oli from Russia, the reduction in agricultural products from Ukraine, and the supply chain bottlenecks caused by the pandemic. U.S. inflation is less than in any of the other developed covuntries, so this should be a plus issue for Biden, rather than a negative. But this type of demagogic criticism is all the GOP can muster against Biden. And of course noone mentioned that unemployment is at a 50-year low.

Football belongs in the fall, not the summer

I was shocked to see the local high school football team practicing in the first week of August. Back in the day you couldn't start practice until August 20th.

And now they're actually playing games in August! With global warming being what it is, the football season should be starting later, not earlier! Do we not care about the health and welfare of our youth?

The Iowa Caucuses

Almost all of the Republican presidential candidates are at the Iowa State Fair. I am totally perplexed by this obsession with Iowa. A review of the history reveals that the winner of the Iowa caucuses is the eventual nominee only about a third of the time in contested elections.

This review shows these winners: for Democrats, Muskie won in 1972, with eventual nominee McGovern 2nd; Gebhardt won in 1988, with eventual nominee Dukakis 3rd; Harkin 1st in 1992, with eventual nominee Clinton 4th (with only 3% of the vote!)

On the GOP side, Bush won over Reagan in 1980, Dole won over Bush in 1988, Huckabee won over McCain in 2008, Santorum won over Romney in 2012, and Cruz won over Trump in 2016.

Caucuses are a horrible way for a political party choose its candidates. because only the most passionate party members turn out, and these are usually the most extreme party members. The result is we get radical leftists from the Dems, and radical rightists from the GOP, adding to the horrible polarization in today's politics.

"The Journalist and the Murderer", by Janet Malcom

This is one of the most fascinating books I've ever read. The author delves into the complex relationships between journalists and the subjects they are writing about.

The book is about one of the most interesting legal cases I've ever encountered. Jeffrey MacDonald, convicted of the murder of his wife and two children, sued Joe McGinnis, whom he had authorized to write a book about his murder trial, and had made a part of his defense team. The book that McGinnis eventually published, called "Fatal Vision", took the position that MacDonald was guilty, which MacDonald alleged was a violation of the implied agreemnt between the two that the author would publish a book from the subject's point of view. A verdict was obtained for MacDonald, and the case was settled during the appeals process.

Malcom interviewed all of the players in the case who would talk to her. In interviewing MacDonald's attorney, the attorney said that his initial reaction to MacDonald was that he was "libel-proof", meaning that it is impossible to libel a convicted murderer. But as he investigated the facts, which showed that the author had spent four years ingratiating himself with the murderer, thereby disguising the fact that the book he was writing took the position that the subject was guilty, he changed his mind and went forward with the case, and won it.

Malcom's book is a philosophical essay on the complex relationship between journalists and their subjects. There are no easy answers here, but it is certainly a topic with exploring. Malcolm clearly believes that McGinnis crossed way over the line here, and, therefore, that she agrees with the jury verdict against him. But the question of where exactly the line is is something that cannot be clearly defined.

Malcom impresses me as one of the four great female journalists writing intelligently and thoughtfully, usually in "The New Yorker", about issues in the last half of the 20th century, along with Renata Adler, Joan Didion, and Hannah Arendt.

Great Fun at the Bridge Club

A memorable hand is one thing that is so great about our local bridge club. (The other is the great social interaction.)

My last hand in our most recent game came playing with Karen, against Linda and Anita. I was dealt a hand with six hearts and (slightly) fewer than opening points, so I was ready to open with a weak two bid. However, Karen had dealt and opened one diamond. So at that point, I was ready to raise to one heart. But then, Linda overcalled in front of me with a one heart bid!

I was void in diamonds, so I felt compelled to bid, but Linda had foreclosed my planned heart bid. Then I noticed that I had four spades, headed by the Ace. So I bid one spade. Karen responded with four spades, and I must have made quite a face in response to this, because the whole table erupted in laughter.

It turned out that Karen had four spades, including a couple of honors, with a void in hearts. So, we both had a void in the other's suit. Unfortunately, when I tried to pull trump, Anita showed out on the second trick, so I knew that Linda had started with four trumps against me. (This is the danger with a 4-4 trump suit, compared to the more usual 5-3 split. Consulting Pascal's Triangle, the fifth row is 1-5-10-10-5-1, meaning that the chances of a 3-2 split of the defenders' trumps are (only) 20/32, or 5/8. So not as unusual as you might think to get a bad split.)

Not a complete disaster, but still presenting a serious challenge. So how do I prevent losing total control of the hand? I decided to use my remaining trumps (2 in my hand and 2 in dummy), for cross-ruffing. I ended up running myself totally out of trumps, with Linda still having two left! With four tricks to go, I led a diamond from dummy and Linda took the trick with the King of diamonds, cashed her two trumps, and then led a diamond, which gave dummy's queen the last trick! Had she had any other suit left, I would have gone down.

So, I made the contract, ending the night with +710, compared to -10 had I gone set. (+620 for the vulnerable game, rather than -100 for going down one vulnerable, a 720-point swing).

"Shadow", by Bob Woodward

This 1999 book looks at the various crises faced by the five presidents who served following the Nixon resignation caused by Watergate. Woodward demonstrates how the legacy of Waterate has causesd a weakening of the office of the presidency, making it more difficult for succeeding presidents to respond to crises.

Gerald Ford faced two major problems during his presidency. The Nixon pardon is the most obvious one. Ford hoped to put Watergate behind him and the country by pardoning Nixon, but the pardon had the opposite effect. Journalists continued to press Ford about whether there had been a deal wherein Ford would issue a pardon in exchange for Nixon's resignation. For example, during his first press conference after the pardonm, 15 out of 21 qyuestions were about Nixon or the pardon.

The other scandal of the Ford administration was little-known at the time. It involved the outright insubordination of Ford's Secretary of Defense, James Schlesinger, when Schlesinger refused to carry out Ford's order to send U.S. aircraft to evacuate as many South Vietnamese as possible, during the fall of Saigon in 1975. This bnreakdown in the military chain of command was, Woodward believes, "perhaps the worst and most significant scandal of the Ford presidency".

The first crisis of the Carter administration unfolded soon after he took office, after the Washington Post learned that the CIA had been making payments and other favors to King Hussein of Jordan. The favors included providing prostitutes. President Carter became irate when this was published, a posture totally at odds with his stated policy of honesty and openness.

A second crisis was the expsoure of Carter's management style, which consisted of coldness and abrasiveness toward his subordinates. It is said that Carter was following Admiral Rickover's approach of never complimenting a subordinate. Speaking of hs old boss Rickover, Carter has stated that "The absence of a comment was his compliment". Woodward concludes that Carter "was not only removed from the capital city but alienated from it. Watergate had helped produce the most unlkely president: a loner."

Then there was the Bert Lance scandal, involving shady dealings in Lance's banking past. Woodward concludes here that Carter had "ostentatiously sought high ethical and legal standards but was quick to seek an exeption for a friend".

Next came the Hamilton Jordan mess, involving allegations that he had used cocaine at a New York night club. A special proscutor was appointd to look into the allegations, and six months of investigation concluded the allegations were not true.

Then there was firing of HEW Secretary Joe Caifano. Carter said one thing in public and another in private about this sordid affair. Wooward concludes that "Carter regualarly broke his most basic promise when he campaigned for the prsidency. He did not always tell the truth."

The major crisis of the Reagan administration was the Iran-Contra scandal. A special prosecutor was appointed and spent over three years invedtigating and prosecuting the wrongdoers.

Georgem H. W. Bush had problems regarding his handling of the Gulf War. Woodward's inside account describes how Bush secretly wanted the war, and feared an Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait before the war started. He kept his concerns hidden from the public, however, and Woodward concludes that "Bush did not trust the Congress or the media to sort out or explain his dilemma and responsibility without sensationalizing it. Watergate had made a sober account of the truth by the president almost impossible."

With Clinton the scandal was, of course, the Monica Lewinsky affair which Clinton tried to cover up.

Summing up, Woodward says that there are "two fundamental lessons of Watergate. First, if there is questionable activity, release the facts, whatever they are, as early and completely as possible. Second, do not allow outside inquiries, whether conducted by prosecutors, congressman or reporters, to harden into a permanent state of suspicion and warfare."

Woodward concludes that Reagan did the best of the five presidents in taking this approach. Reagan appointed a new Chief of Staff, Howard Baker, and instructed Baker to get to the bottom of the Iran-Contra fiasco. Reagan made it crystal clear to his entire staff that everyone was to cooperate fully with Baker. The result was that Reagan was able to serve out his second term with no threat of impeachment.

Clinton's response to his crisis was the worst, in that he repeatedly tried to avoid telling the truth. Had he come out immediately and confessed to what he'd done, the pubic would have been far more forgiving. The worst thing is for the truth to come out in litle dribs and drabs, keeping the matter in the news for months on end.

In my mind a companion book to "Shadow" would be Arthur Schlessinger's "The Imperial Presidency". Schlessinger chronicles how the power of the presidency, especially in war-making, has increased throughout the years. The book, published in 1973 when the Watergate investigation was all over the news, makes the case that Nixon's power grab was a logical conclusion of the movement toward an all-powerful presidency, something the Founders never contemplated.

Schlessinger says that "Watergate was potentially the best thing to have happened to the presidency in a long time", because it demonstrated to future presidents that when they place themselves above the law, there wil be serious consequences. Schlessinger says that "corruption appears to visit the White House in 50-year cycles". Hence, Watergate provided immunization against presidential wrongdoing till 2023. He was off by only seven yearss, as the election of Donald Trump in 2016 marked the end of the limited presidency.

So who is right? Woodward, who claims that Watergate's weakening of the presidency was a bad thing, or Schelessinger, who says it was a good thing? I have to side with Schlessinger here. Woodward does not make a convincing case that the crises which arose in the five presidencies following Watergate were caused, or exacerbated by, Watergate. He does, however, make a strong case that there is much to learn from Watergate about the proper way for a president to respond to those crises.

Woodward's problem is that his reporter's eye for detail prevents him from seeing the historical perspective that the historian can offer. Woodward is so consumed with the need to describe the trees, that he cannot see the forest. The fact is, as Schlessinger convincingly demonstrates, that the presidency had become too strong, with the checks and balances envisioned by our Founders having largely fallen by the wayside. Watergate helped restore those checks and balances, with Congress reasserting its oversight role, uncovering evidence of the CIA's use of assassination and other covert ops which far exceeded the proper CIA role of gathering intelligance, and enacting legislation limiting the president's powers to wage war without consulting with Congress.

The French Pension System

The French pension system was established in 1945, when the life expectancy was 65, and the birth rate was 19.6 per 10,000 people. Today, the French life expectancy has risen to 83, and the birth rate has fallen to 10.9 per 10,000 people.

Obviously these changes mandate changes in the French pension system. And yet the French have violently protested agaisnt any raises in the retirement age. A few years ago there were riots in the streets when raising the retirement age from 60 to 62 was proposed. And now, there are similarly violent riots over a proposal to raise the age from 62 to 64. Apparently France is full of selfish, small-minded people who are unable to see beyond themselves and consider the common good.

We have the same destructive syndrome here in the United States. The allegation that you are for "cutting" social security or Medicare is the kiss of death for any political candidate. Indeed, a PAC backing Trump has been running TV ads accusing Ron DeSantis of voting three times to "cut social security". Fact-checking this allegation, we find that the basis for it is a vote DeSantis made when he was in Congress in 2013 for a nonbinding budget resolution backed by the Republican caucus, a resolution calling for raising the retirement age and restructurijmg social secutity and Medicare to make them more financially sustainable.

The ridiculous situation which arises out of this flawed thinking is illustrated by Trump's claim that he can avoid cutting defense and entitlements, and still balance the budget. This is demonstrably false, and was proven so by Trump's failure to reduce the deficit, in fact ballooning it, during his time in office.

The selfishness and short-sightedness has infected many areas of our political life. We have gun-owners who think their right to own weapons of war supercedes the right of schoolchildren to be safe in their classrooms. We have anti-abortion fanatics who think they have the right to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of the country. We have people who think they can deny kids the right to read books which they don't want their own kids to read. We have an 89-year-old Senator who refuses to resign, even thought she can no longer function as a Senator. I could go on and on.

The core problem is a lack of community in this country (and apparently in other countries like France). We have lost the glue that holds a society together and allows it to function.

Schipkov's Trap

Schipkov's trap is a black trap in the Smith-Morra Gambit. The line runs 1 e5 c5 2 d4 cd 3 c3 dc 4 Nxc3 Nc6 5 Bc4 e6 6 Nf3 Qc7 7 0-0 Nf6 8 Qe2 Ng4 9 h3?? Nd4! and white is lost.

Instead of the losing 9 h3??, the books recommend 9 Nb5!, the idea being that after 9...Qb8, white can now play 10 h3 as the N/b5 is guarding the d4 square.

I have found eight games in my personal records from before I learned about 9 Nb5. In one I tried 9 Bg5, and managed to win a long game.

In another I played 9 Rd1, which left me with a horrid position after 9...Bc5 10 Be3 BxB 11 fe, though I managed to win in 23 moves.

In the other six games I played 8 g3. Two of these ended in only 12 moves: 8 g3 Be7 9 Bf4 d6 10 Nb5! Qb8 11 Nxd6+ Bxd6 12 Bxd6 1-0 (his queen is trapped!); and 8 g3 Bd6 9 Qe2 0-0 10 Rd1 Ng4 11 Nb5 Qb8 12 Nxd6 1-0 (white has won a piece).

The trick here is to delay playing Qe2. White can also play h3 before castling. White must keep this trap in mind to avoid disaster. Several high-level tournament games have ended early when white was caught unawares.

MLB Predictions for 2023

My predictions last year were incredibly accurate. I think this was due to the marked disparity between the haves and the have nots, rather than to any great insight on my part. For example, I correctly predicted the bottom two teams in all six divisions, illustrating how easy it is to identify the have nots. Overall, I correctly predicted the final finish for fifteen teams, I was one place off for twelve teams, and two places off for three teams (Yankees, Rays, and Guardians).

At any rate, here we go for 2023.

AL East: Yankees, Blue Jays, Rays, Orioles, Red Sox

AL Central: Twins, Indians, White Sox, Tigers, Royals

AL West: Astros, Rangers, Mariners, Angels, Athletics

NL East: Mets, Phillies, Braves, Marlins, Nationals

NL Central: Cardinals, Cubs, Brewers, Reds, Pirates

NL West: Dodgers, Padres, Diamondbacks, Giants, Rockies

Notes:

AL East: The Yankees scored a great coup in re-signing Judge, while the Jays also had a good offseason. Especially exciting for the Yankees is their new shortstop, 21-year-old Anthony Volpe, who won the starting job during spring training.

AL Central: The Twins had a good offseason, retaining Correa and making other useful additons as well. The White Sox have disappointed in recent years, and there is no reason to think that will change this year.

AL West: The Astros won their division by 16 games over the second-place Padres, and it is highy doubtful they will fall back enough to lose this year. The Rangers had a terrific offseason, upgrading their pitching staff by signing deGrom and others.

NL East: The Mets and Phillies both had good offseasons.

NL Central: The Cubs had a good offseason, so I'm looking for them to sneak past the Brewers for second.

NL West: The Dodgers won their division by 22 games, and it is inconceivable they will drop back by that many games. Padres and D-Backs both had good offseasons.

About Section 230

An important case was argued yesterday before the U.S. Supreme Court. It involved Section 230, which protects Internet platforms from liability for third-party posts. All but one of the Justices, liberals and conservatives alike, expressed skepticism about the request that the Supreme Court rewrite the law to allow for liability in some cases.

Kudos to those Justices for their skepticism. In our overly-litigious society, we often rely excessively on the court system to make new laws and redress all grievances. It is NOT the function of the courts to do so.

The Justices clearly understood that it is up to Congress to study this issue and come up with new rules which will strike the proper balance between free speech and liability for harm done. The Justices seemed to understand that doing away with Section 230 entirely would kill the Internet as we know it.

Morning Joe's Worst Interview Ever

This morning there was an awful, horribly awkward interview with Christopher Miller, author of "Soldier Secretary". Miller was Secretary of Defense during the last two motnhs of the Trump regime, and questions centered around his inaction in protecting the Capitol during the January 6th insurrection.

The five questioners bent over backwards to be respectful to their interviewee, but in the process they failed to zero in on the issues. Joe did his usual long lead-in to his questions, and as a result the issues got lost in the weeds. It made me nostalgic for the good old days of Lawrence Spivak, Tim Russert, and David Brinkley, newsmen who consistently got to the heart of whatever matter was under discussion.

The questioners were outdone in their confused, mealy-mouthed approach by the muddled "answers" provided by the guest. This guy had no credibility whsatsoever, both because of his awkward mannerisms and his inexplicable defense of then-President Trump. He insists that he could not put military troops in the capitol because it would have looked like a coup. He made spurious sparation of powers arguments for why any troops would have been there to protect the protesters and NOT to protect the Capitol!

Ken Jennings vs. Mayim Bialik

After initially supporting Mayim Bialik for the next host of Jeopardy!, I have come to undertand that Ken Jennings would make a much better host. He is much smoother and more knowledgeble about trivia than Bialik is. And, he has an uncanny knack for connecting with the contestants.

The only specific blunder I can point to with Bialik is when she ruled against a contestant who gave an answer of "auto racing". Since the answer was "drag racing", she obviously should have responded by asking for a more specific response.

And now comes the current champion, Jake DeArruda, who has an expert's view of the issue, in contrast to my more casual observations. In preferring Jennings to Bialik, Jake states that “It’s obvious to close watchers that she mispronounces words, blows through punctuation, and is genuinely inconsistent in her pacing. Ken, meanwhile, has been in trivia for most of his life, so he knows the proper words to emphasize and generally seems consistent with his pacing. This is important for buzzer timing purposes.”

Jake says that all of the week's contestants were happy when it was announced that Ken would be hosting that week. There seems to be a general consensus that he is much more suitable for the hostsing job. Keep up the great work, Ken!

"If you see something, say something."

We are told, "If you see something, say something". This would be good advice, except that the powers that be never seem to pay attention.

The administrators at a Virginia elementary school were warned three times that a six-year-old boy had a gun and was threatening to shoot other students. Three times, by three different people! And still they refused to do anything! The result of this indifference on the part of the administrators was that a teacher ended up getting shot.

Many examples could be cited. Most tragic is how the FBI repeatedly ignored red flags reported to it leading up to 9/11. Two men of middle eastern descent are paying $10K in cash to learn how to fly a plane. And the plane they want to learn to fly is a Boeing 747. And they don't care about learning how to land the plane! C'mon FBI, how many red flags do you need before following up?

And now we have the five members of the SCORPION police unit in Memphis who recently murdered a 29-year-old Black man. It turns out that there were numerous complaints made about how this renegade police unit was harassing Memphis citizens. These folks saw something and were saying something, but the powers that be ignored them.

Most often someone who "says something" is chastised for interfering in other people's affairs. We have a "mind your own business" culture, unlike other countries which have a sense of community that is sadly lacking here.

Why does Tony Dungy still have a job?

Football commentator Tony Dungy has come under fire recently for three different problems. As far as I'm concerned, three stirkes and you should be out.

First, his wooden and passionless work as color commentator for Al Michaels in a recent playoff game has been soundly criticized. His total lack of energy is striking. Everyone watching was excited about the Jaguars' miracle comeback after being down 27-0, but Dungy was unmoved.

Second, he invoked the name of Bills' injured player Damar Hamlin in an anti-abortion rant. Totally classless.

And third, he accused schoolod districts of "putting litter boxes in the school bathrooms for the students who identify as cats. Very important to address every student's needs." A totally snarky and false accusation.

As of now he still has his analyst job, but let's hope NBC comes to its senses soon and gets rid of him.

Thoughts on the Debt Limit

The United States treasury reached the national debt limit last week. The Trearury Secretary says she can get by till June with accounting tricks, but after that, it will be default. Everyone agrees thaat a default would be financially catastrophic.

There are several issues in play here. First, there is no reason to require Congress to approve an increase in the debt limit. It is a complete historical anomoly. The U.S. Treasury is spending money that Congress has already appropriated. If Congress thinks the debt is getting too high, it can adjust its spending and taxing priorities.

Then there is the gross Republican hypocrisy when it comes to fiscal issues. Whenever there is a Democrat in the White House, all of a sudden the GOP pretends to be SO concerned about the budget deficit. But the facts show that the deficit has increased much more under GOP presidents since Reagan took office in 1981. The deficit doubled under Reagan (and the national debt tripled), it increased 67% under Bush I, then Clinton actually eliminated the deficit and produced a healthy surplus, then Bush II left with a deficit of $1.4 trillion, cut in half by Obama, and then tripled by Trump. Details here: https://amarkfoundation.org/us-federal-deficits/

The conservative clique which opposed McCarthy for Speaker are the same folks who would rather default on our federal debt obligations than actually see the U.S. economy survive and thrive. They are akin to terrorists, people who have gone to Washington not to govern, but to blow up the government. And McCarthy is beholden to this group because they stepped aside to allow his election as Speaker on the 15th ballot. Consequently, it is unclear whether the House will be able to take any responsible action on raising the debt ceiling. Stay tuned.

Why the college football ratings are complete garbage

I can pinpoint the exact moment when I came to realize that college football ratings were a bunch of garbage. It was the 1985 season, and the supposed number one team was playing the supposed number two team in a bowl game. And the number two team was a seven-point favorite! How can this be? It is because the people who vote on the rankings are unable to think and reason clearly.

For the record, Penn State was ranked #1 because it was undefeated, and Oklahoma was #2 because it had lost to the #3-ranked Miami Hurricanes, in a game in which its starting QB was hurt. Penn State had played a relatively weaker schedule, and of course, they lost 25-10 to the Sooners in the Cotton Bowl, and the voters were exposed for the idiots they are.

And now, fast forward to 2022, when the voters made a similarly ridiculous decision in putting TCU into the four-team playoffs over Alabama. The pathetic result of this disaster was TCU getting blown out in a complete joke of a final game to Georgia 65-7.