6/16/2025

Which Side is Most Violent? It Depends on Your Definition of Violent

The Facebook algorithm fed me the juxtaposed opinions below shortly after the Minnesota shootings of the state speaker of the house and her husband. My initial thought was that it was either a conservative or someone with a troubled mental history (though, anyone who behaves this way likely has troubles that go beyond one's political bent). It was not unlike my initial thoughts when Donald Trump was wounded last summer - that it was either a radical leftist or a troubled individual. Given what I've read about that shooter, it would seem more to be the latter.



But it got me to thinking. Why do those on the right believe that leftists are more violent, especially when the preponderance of such events tend to target people or facilities that would indicate the perpetrator leans right. Of the mass death events that appear politically motivated, from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Pulse nightclub to the church shooting in South Carolina, it would appear that most would appear to be acts of conservative violence. And it would seem the evidence bears that out - studies and reports from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the University of Maryland all found that deadly violence was more likely to arise from the right.

And therein might lie the perception held by the conservatives, as evidenced in the post above. As the saying goes, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. So, too, might violence. Acts like the Congressional baseball shooter, or the Trump assassination attempt aside (no real ideology has been assigned to the latter), violence suspected of being leftwing tends to be non-lethal, consisting mostly of vandalism and injuries from thrown items. And even there, it is often difficult to suggest these are actually cases of leftwing violence. They are assumed to be because they often involve lower-income, migrant or minority populations that are associated with left wing politics. Yet, the violence may be driven more by personal circumstances - the beating or shooting of a group member, frustration over economic conditions or the frustrations of feeling otherwise powerless - than they are driven by ideology. 

Now, power is a relative thing. I certainly don't have the access that an Elon Musk or even a $10,000 political donor might have. But I have been to the homes of my state senator and a former U.S. Speaker of the House. I know people who know people, which makes me feel empowered politically, and more importantly, economically. I've never felt the need to get angry to be heard. But there are vast, vast swaths of people who feel nowhere near as empowered. Not only that, they often see themselves represented as responsible for their own plight. That they may express rage should come as little surprise. To suggest it's politically motivated to the extent it can be labelled left or right wing is probably a stretch. As I've heard said, hunger knows no ideology.

There is one more reason some might view the left as more violent. Right wing violence tends to, for lack of a better term, happen in a flash. A mass shooting, Oklahoma City, January 6. None lasted more than a day. Most took mere moments. But unrest fills our screens for days. The Rodney King riots lasted five days. The George Floyd protests seemed to last an entire summer. We humans tend to be bad at proportionality, thus we equate duration with intensity and conclude that those who acted longest acted worst.

I'll close by saying I do not agree or support violence or vandalism in any form as a means of protest. I find it counterproductive - and the evidence supports that claim, too. I believe that the numbers and moral standing of those speaking out is far more influential in bringing about change. But I also can differentiate between anger and madness. It's the latter that leads to lethal violence, and the evidence shows that is more common on the right.

6/09/2025

When Do We Finally Say, "Enough!"?

We are told that comparisons to Nazi Germany are counterproductive, and I would agree, but how else is one to explain our concerns when years of dehumanization of immigrants by calling them vermin, snakes or scum, followed by forced deportations without due process and government exploitation of civil disturbances so closely mirrors the years of dehumanization of Jews, followed by Germany's forced deportations of "stateless" Jews in 1938 after Poland stripped citizenship from Polish Jews living abroad, followed by government instigated riots that came to be known as Kristalnacht in the wake of the reported murder of a German national living in Paris by a Jew - all which was greeted as rather ho hum by the general German public and world at large?

I've been asking since at least 2016 when is the time to put one's foot down and say, "Enough!" Is it when a politician first starts describing others as somehow less than us? Is it when the worst elements of a society - the racists, the white nationalists and others - begin to claim that politician as a kindred spirit? Is it when that politician achieves power and begins disregarding basic constitutional rights in the name of "the greater good"? Or is it once support for those undemocratic, unconstitutional, inhumane policies is so great that vigilantes who take the law in their own hands, killing protesters, become lauded as heroes?

All these things have taken place in the ten years since Donald Trump entered the political stage. And all of them took place in Germany between 1923 and the advent of WWII.

Most of us still get up in the morning, have our coffee, our warm shower, go to work and come home to our loving families. Life as we've always known it goes on, so we feel no great urgency to speak out or act. And those who do are derided as alarmists. Meanwhile, the normalization of the abnormal proceeds unabated.

All these things, too, have taken place in the ten years since Donald Trump entered the political stage. And, again, all of them took place in Germany between 1923 and the advent of WWII.

But when a president does everything listed above, when a president says he would be fine taking those same steps against U.S. citizens, when it's said by a president who demonstrates no understanding of the rule of law, let alone  any respect for the law, should we not all be speaking out?

If not, do we really understand what patriotism truly is and the responsibilities of citizenship that democracy demands? Or worse, do we really not care? 

3/31/2025

We Should Take Trump's Thoughts on a Third Term Seriously. Very Seriously

[Note: I hesitate to share this piece publicly because it seems so ridiculous, but that is precisely why I've decided to share it, because I want to point back to this moment in the event it comes to pass. It's a question of where the line between vigilance and conspiracy theorism lies. These days, I just don't know.]

Donald Trump suggested yesterday that there "are methods" that could allow him to serve a third term as president. We can presume these would take advantage of the 22nd amendment's wording that "no person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice." One such way suggested is that Trump could run for vice president, then take over in  the event the elected president dies or resigns, thus working around that troublesome prohibition on being elected. This would require someone able to win, yet be willing to give up the presidency. Some believe J.D. Vance may be that person, but it's hard to picture someone as willing to debase himself as Vance has been in the pursuit of power giving up the presidency after attaining it. Furthermore, such a gambit would be seen immediately as the naked attempt to circumvent the Constitution that it is, not that that would necessarily matter to the devotees.

Another possibility, far more treacherous - and thus, much further under the radar - but one we need to begin preparing for now, is that Trump uses the levers of power to remain in office. What might this look like? Well, he has a Secretary of Defense who stated in the opening of his book The War on Warriors that he would be willing to fight on the side of rebels against the United States armed forces to save our country. He now has that military at his disposal - a military that has been transformed in eight weeks from a professional defender of the Constitution to a something that risks becoming a political tool at Donald Trump's disposal, following the firing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chief of naval operations, the vice chief of the Air Force and the top JAG generals at the Air Force, the Army and the Navy. None of these officers were fired for incompetence or dereliction of duty. Instead, they were let go and replaced with people sympathetic to or outwardly supportive of Donald Trump. That is not how our military has ever been staffed. It is now.

Pete Hegseth asks in his book what a military rebellion might look like "in a world of F-35s and hypersonic missiles." We may find out. It is certainly more likely with a Defense Secretary who would muse about such things and a president who would think it prudent to nominate such a man. Especially a president who ruminates about a third term and who chose a man who has stated his openness to armed conflict against his own country.

There are a whole host of options that lie between the two scenarios above, from declaring an emergency that requires postponing the next election to packing the Supreme Court with justices willing to interpret the Constitution anyway Trump sees fit. It may be hard to fathom any such ridiculous turn of events, but then we have to ask ourselves - when has this president ever shied away from the ridiculous? 

2/25/2025

A Laundry List of Mistakes

For my own purposes, I am going to log the actions Donald Trump is taking that I see as dangerous, illegal or threatening to the long term health of our nation, or simply evidence of his lack of understanding what America is all about or what makes us great. These are in reverse chronological order, with most recent first.

  • I will not make a prediction, but dropping a bomb on Iran because Israel started a fight with them would seem to be the tail wagging the dog. Iran was off our radar militarily until Israel attacked them. We did not have to join in, but we did, raising the question who is really the power player here.
  • Yesterday, just as the president authorized sending U.S. Marines into the city of Los Angeles to quell rather mild anti-ICE protests, he spurred active-duty soldiers into booing American citizens and politicians who oppose the president. I should not have to say anything more to explain why this is so troubling. That I feel the need to say more is just more evidence why it is. I hope to find time to expand on this before it becomes just another day in the life. (June 11, 2025)
[I've been too busy to expand my thoughts above in-depth, but suffice it to say that watching a president who began his political journey by painting Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug dealers during what I thought (hoped?) would assuredly be a disqualifying candidacy announcement speech, who went on to incorporate classic dehumanization language to describe immigrants in general as snakes, vermin and an infestation, then began turning that same language against his domestic opponents, going so far as to suggest execution of his former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff  - to watch him encouraging members of the armed forces to boo their fellow Americans as the enemy is beyond the pale. I would challenge anyone alive to picture, let alone find, another president of our lifetime doing such a thing. He is, quite simply, priming the military to treat the American public as the enemy. In doing so, he is proving correct every one of us who have opposed him so vehemently from the start.]
  • I may have to start a separate JFK thread, but yesterday he dismissed all seventeen members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). A 6:37 AM report suggested people visit the ACIP profile page, which was still available at that time. When I went to view it ten minutes later, it was unavailable. This administration is going to needlessly kill people. (June 10, 2025)
  • I listed the nomination of RFK, Jr. as Secretary of HHS below and here is both an example of why I did that and an addition to the laundry list itself - suggesting he might ban government scientists from publishing in independent scientific journals like the Lancet, JAMA and the New England Journal of Medicine, three of the most respected medical journals on the planet, suggesting instead a government-run publication. One can't help but see this as the politicization of science that will lead to junk science and corruption.
  • This is one prediction that will be wrong until it's not - the GOP's tax cuts that the president fought for in person on Capitol Hill yesterday (5/20/25) will eventually undermine our credit rating, our economy and our position as the financial capital and financial leader of the world. Not once in the 44 years since Ronald Reagan's first tax bill has a tax cut not resulted in higher deficits, yet somehow the GOP keeps claiming they won't and we, the people, keep buying it. At some point, the chickens will come home to roost. 
Beyond the fiscal irresponsibility of this tax cut, we need to ask our legislators to justify the need for these cuts. I've argued elsewhere that there are times, as was the case in the early 80's, where  the scarcity of investment capital and the need for investment was so great that cutting taxes was justified. We are so far from such a scenario today, with U.S. businesses sitting on nearly $7 trillion in cash and billionaires sending friends and celebrities to space in their hobby rockets, that the old argument is beyond pointless. In fact, today's AI-driven economics argue for a near reversal of the GOP's tax policy. As AI eliminates more and more jobs, including those that have long been the entry-level gateway to white collar professions (basic coding, legal document review, data entry and bookkeeping, to name just a few), we need to be seriously addressing how we will manage a large, underemployed cohort of educated, intelligent folks and their lesser skilled counterparts forced into less than fulfilling jobs at best and unemployment at worst. Instead, we continue to reward those who develop the technologies that are creating this crisis. It is shortsighted and dangerous.
  • Nominating Casey Means to be Surgeon General. The fireworks that have erupted within the anti-vax, anti-science movement over this nomination is so convoluted that conspiracy theorist extraordinaire Laura Loomer comes across as the voice of reason.
  • This mistake is on us, but allowing the president to accept a luxury 747 from Qater's foreign government as though it's just another Tuesday shows just how normalized unethical behavior has become. It is hard to imagine a more blatant violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause, which prohibits gifts from foreign entities without specific authorization by Congress That the president said only stupid people would turn down such a gift demonstrates how lacking he is in both ethics and in understanding what stupid really means.
  • The deportation of Kelmar Garcia to a prison camp in El Salvador without due process is bad enough (if anyone is denied the right to due process, none of us has a right to due process), but the president's admission that he would be fine with shipping U.S. citizens to El Salvador prisons should be a clarion call to anyone who professes loyalty to the Constitution. And if this president disobeys court orders regarding this, or any case, that would be yet one more impeachable offense. [Footnote: the glib glee that our president and the president of El Salvador took in laughing off the Supreme Court order to facilitate Garcia's return betrays an underlying cruelty that has been evident since Donald Trump stated that if hate were needed to serve justice in the Central Park Five case, so be it. New York journalist Pete Hamill captured it best at the time: 
“Snarling and heartless and fraudulently tough, insisting on the virtues of stupidity, it was the epitome of blind negation. Hate was just another luxury and Trump stood naked.” 

The man is what he is and always has been - heartless, soulless and thoughtless. Convince me otherwise. 

  • Tariffs. Nothing can better demonstrate the breadth of this man's shortcomings, from intellect to business smarts to effective human and foreign relations. His insistence that tariffs are paid by the originating country is just the tip to the iceberg (I've written checks to pay his tariffs), but anyone who's read behind the scenes tales of his distaste for trade (I have) can tell you he has no understanding how economics works. Thus, tariffs on products impossible to produce here that only serve to raise the cost.
  • Punishing law firms out of favor with the White House by revoking security clearances. One firm, Skadden, Arps agreed to perform $100 million in pro Bono (free) work on causes dear to the administration to avoid such a penalty, which is difficult to distinguish from extortion. Targeted law firms are not those who've broken the law, violated security requirements or behaved unethically. Instead, they have all employed lawyers who worked cases opposite Donald Trump or on cases contrary to his aims. This threatens to chill representation for anyone who is targeted by the Trump Justice Department (see Kash Patel and Dan Bongino for an idea of how this could imperil fundamental American legal rights and protections).
  • Attacking universities while withdrawing billions in research dollars that have been one of the great sources of global U.S. economic power (March 18, 2025). [this NY Times article confirms what I've noticed on French websites and discussion sites - that Europe is ready to roll out the welcome mat for researchers who no longer feel welcome or appreciated int he U.S. I cannot think of a more foolish, shortsighted, well, I can't call it a strategy, so I'll just go with stupid mistake - and I think that is being overly kind).

          On April 29, 2025, American University released a report showing that the average American                 could wind up $10,000 poorer due to the reduction in government investment in R&D.
  • Eliminating references to Ira Hayes (a Pima Indian who was one of the six famous flag-raisers on Iwo Jima) and the Navajo Code Talkers from Defense Department web pages. References celebrating those who served from groups who were at times treated as less than full citizens have served to build pride and loyalty among those groups, thus tightening the bonds of citizenship.



  • Yesterday, February 28, 2025, was the low point not just of the Trump administration, but of my experience as an American. Except for those irretrievably attracted to Donald Trump or the blindly partisan, what happened in the Oval Office with Vladimir Zelensky was awful, a turning of the back on American principles and the moral standard we've set since the end of WWII. My fear is that there are worse days to come. I'll extend the offer I made to a local township trustee - I'll sit down in the location of your choosing to review this exchange so you can point out where Zelensky was the one being rude.
  • Removing or altering more than 8,000 government websites covering topics from vaccine research to Census Bureau datasets. As a data junkie who seeks source material rather than what third party sources who might have an agenda choose to share, this bothers me to no end.
  • Canceling a planned meeting of scientists who were to discuss flu strains expected this winter (2025), thus putting research for next year's flu strain at risk
  • Naming Lynn Deklava, a lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council, an industry group that spends millions of dollars lobbying against chemical regulation, as head of the EPA group responsible for chemical regulations (February 26, 2025). As I've argued elsewhere, there needs to be a healthy balance between business and government to check the greed and desire for power inherent in human nature. This undermines that completely.
  • Selling $5 million gold cards to wealthy foreigners as a path to citizenship (February 25, 2025) We don't need people who are going to move here to join a country club, we need people willing to work their asses off to get here and get their hands dirty to build a future for their family. That's what has always made America great.
  • Firing JAG officers without cause. ( see this also February 21, 2024)
  • Firing of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and two other generals for suspicion of being DEI hires (February 21, 2025).
  • Nominating Fox host Don Bongino to be Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who posted this on Twitter/X less than a year ago
  • Nominating Pete Hegseth, who proclaimed his willingness to rebel against the United States in his book The War on Warriors, as Secretary of Defense (November 13, 2024)
  • Nominating Kash Patel as Director of the FBI (December 2, 2024)
  • Nominating Tulsi Gabbard, who has expressed sympathy for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, among other troubling security issues, as Director of National Intelligence (November 1, 2024)
  • Nominating Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (November 14, 2024) Note RFK Jr.'s unscientific take on the March 2025 measles outbreak.
  • Nominating wholly unqualified Oprah Winfrey guest Mehmet Oz to serve as administrator for Medicare and Medicaid Services (November 19, 2024)
  • Nominating the World Wrestling Federation's Linda McMahon for Secretary of Education (December 5, 2024) [Note: McMahon would go on to refer to AI (artificial intelligence) as A1 (as in the steak sauce), ironically suggesting intelligence itself is absent in the one heading the department responsible for education.
  • [At this point it might be instructive to insert a passage from Hannah Arendt's 1951 magnum opus, "The Origins of Totalitarianism" before suggesting one re-read the list above. 
"Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first rate talent, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty." 

Re-reading the list above, starting with Dan Bongino, might now be in order.]

  • Siding with Russia to vote against a UN resolution condemning Russia's war against Ukraine (February 24, 2025)
  • Conceding to Russian demands with nothing in return to end the war in Ukraine (February - February 24, 2025) 
  • Allowing Elon Musk's unvetted team unfettered access to our payment systems and other sensitive data stores, opening the door to a threat far worse than anything Hilary Clinton's email server could have posed.
  • Shutting down the US Agency for International Development, opening the door for China and Russia to fill the void in building influence. (February 6, 2025)
  • Removing online climate data farmers use to plan sowing and harvesting because the data contradicts the administration's preferred climate narrative. [Note: I've long said one of life's greatest disappointments is learning data doesn't support one's arguments, and that one of life's greatest mistakes is refusing to reconsider one's opinion in light of the data. This is even worse, reminiscent of former Soviet Union tactics, where anything (or anyone) contradicting the party line was "disappeared.] (January 30, 2025)
  • Demanding that Ukraine turn half its mineral resources over to us as tribute for the support we provided in their war against the Russian aggressors. [the deal as finalized is not as ominous as originally presented, yet the appearance of "blackmailing" Ukraine in return for our help is troubling, and I fear, unwise strategically.]
  • Objecting to NATO's use of the word "aggressor" to describe Russia's actions in Ukraine
  • Sending Vice President Vance to Munich, a city closer to Kiev, where Russian bombs are falling, than Washington DC is to Atlanta in order to scold them that Russia is less a threat than their own refusal to give a platform to a party whose rising star is a young man who confessed to pasting swastikas on a church.
  • Claiming in his inaugural speech that God saved him from an assassin's bullet to save America (if God was willing to do that, why didn't he save Abraham Lincoln, a far more pious man in a far for grievous period, from an assassins bullet? Might it be that both were done as God's punishment of America? January 20, 2025)

1/20/2025

Predictions for Trump 2.0

I made some predictions of what a Trump presidency would look like on November 27, 2016 that turned out to be pretty accurate, especially when I wrote “And whether Trump's supporters decide to turn against their man or double down in support if things go south remains to be seen. Much will depend upon whether a President Trump seeks to turn their anger against the very institutions his oath swore to uphold.” We know how that turned out on January 6 four years later.

Predicting Trump 2.0 is far harder because the stakes are so much higher and the guardrails so much weaker, while the amoral, unprincipled once and future president is still very much like an unknotted balloon let loose - unpredictable and subject to the whims of the moment. But here goes.

Climate

We will ignore decades of climate change/global warming evidence and irresponsibly glorify fossil fuels in the way a toddler gleefully defies his parents, laughing as he smears poop on the walls. But unlike that toddler, whose parents will correct and clean up after their misguided child, we will be forced to live in the mess of our own making. (parenthetically, we did a science experiment in 9th grade where we kept adding nutrients to our petri dishes filled with bacteria colonies. They thrived like crazy - until they didn’t. After days of exponential growth, we came in to find our colonies dead, victims of their own waste. When asked if the same could happen to mankind, our teacher, Mr. Godo, said no, because mankind is smart enough to identify the risk beforehand and address it before it becomes an issue. I believe Mr. Godo gave us too much credit.)

Immigration

We will be divided into those who cheer and those who are horrified by the methods Donald Trump employs as he seeks to remove undocumented workers from the United States. How much we come to lament that effort will be determined by how successful it is. The more successful, the more we will lament it as we realize just how important and productive those immigrants are to our social and economic success. The fact is that we, like the rest of the world, are facing a demographic disaster and immigration is our best hope. We not only want to attract the best and brightest (scientists, coders, doctors, et al) that will tip the competitive balance in our favor, but also the most motivated, which includes those willing to trek 2,000 miles with their families across jungle and desert, land and sea, to reach our borders. Our wealth as a nation has been built for more than two centuries by such newcomers. That we now plan to round them up and send them packing will be done to our everlasting regret.

Debt and Taxes

We will extend the Trump tax cuts, which will overheat our economy, revive inflation, further exacerbate the wealth gap (putting even more power into the hands of the fortunate few), drive interest rates higher and put the dollar at risk of losing its place as the global reserve currency. Not long ago I heard John Boehner asked if he felt socialism was a threat to the U.S. Of course he said, “Of course.” He then went on to criticize a system that promises people, in his words, “Free shit.” I assume he was blaming Democrats, but I would ask just who has convinced the American people they can get things without paying for them (so-called free shit)? Who has spent nearly five decades cutting taxes without asking for any sacrifice in services from the American people? Who has spent five decades claiming that tax cuts pay for themselves with additional growth? Who has taken zero responsibility for the tax-free deficits that threaten to devour our children’s futures? I would argue it is the Republicans. Some of us are old enough to remember the epithet “tax-and-spend liberal.” Yes, liberals sought to spend government money, but at least there was an expectation - a threat - that if we wanted more from government that there would be a price to pay. Not anymore, and for that we can thank the GOP. We will see if that "thanks" some day becomes blame. Much will depend upon the timing of when the bill for our profligacy comes due since we are not very good at extrapolating policy with outcomes beyond the current election cycle. Thus, the next Congress or next president may be the unfortunate scapegoats for today’s fools (much as Obama took so much heat for the financial mess left by his predecessor - blame which opened this former Republican’s eyes to how myopic and partisanally-blind the American people really are).

Tariffs

I set this separately from taxes for emphasis rather than to distinguish them from taxes, because make no mistake about it, tariffs are taxes - and they are taxes on the American people. Want proof? My company ordered items from China. When they arrived, there was a 25% tariff on them. You want to know who wrote and signed the check? Me. And you know whose account that money came out of? Ours. Donald Trump speaks a lot of bullshit (excuse the language, but since the once and future president likes to use that word to describe how he sees things, well, bullshit it is) and the fact is nothing is a bigger load of hooey than his claim that tariffs are paid by other countries. Yes, no country wants tariffs put on the products they export because they make them less competitive, but the reason they are less competitive is because consumers must pay more for those products. Note that I said consumers, not producers - and we are the consumers. Expect to see Donald Trump's first term tariffs on steroids, and likewise the global economic impact. They are government intervention in free markets in the most damaging and ham-handed form.

Geopolitics

It is impossible for any student of history to not see today’s parallels with the 1930’s. Economic uncertainty, bulging wealth gaps, worldwide resentment of “others”, infatuation with demagogic nationalists, nagging regional skirmishes that presaged larger geopolitical conflagrations. There are two large differences between 1935 and 2025. The first is that the center of global industrial might now resides in China instead of the United States. And the second is that the U.S. is about to be led by an incurious, non-strategic, inward-looking president infatuated with anti-democratic strongmen, instead of a strategic realist with an appreciation for global relationships and a deep understanding that American greatness was built on democracy and liberty. We are at a dangerous crossroads and it is impossible to know how the next one, three or ten years will go, but I am quite comfortable (uncomfortable as it makes me) in predicting that the world, and our place in it, will be far less stable and secure at the end of Donald Trumps’ next four years than it is today (January 20, 2025).

Miscellaneous

Big tech will be given more free reign, making the possibility it can be used to disperse propaganda that much more of a threat. It is ironic that Apple's 1984 Super Bowl commercial, which promised that technology would save us from Big Brother, proved so blind. Instead, it is precisely tech that threatens to be Big Brother in ways even Orwell could not imagine, using AI and their own knowledge of our preferences, predilections and peccadillos to feed us not what we want, but what they want us to want. This will only get worse under a subservient Donald Trump.

God help us if another health threat arises. JFK, Jr. and Dr. Oz, who could charitably be called a nutjob and an opportunist, do not exactly inspire confidence. This truly promises to be a National Enquirer administration, where sensationalism outweighs expertise. How does one even begin to predict how that will play out?

Many of the maladies Trump decried during the campaign were either vastly overblown, well on their way to self-correcting (eg, inflation) or were outright lies (immigrants eating pets, we're no longer energy independent, we're a laughingstock). All will be "fixed" by Donald Trump, via nothing but proclaiming them to be so, which is exactly how most of them came to be problems in the first place - by Trump proclamation.

Our military, especially if Pete Hegseth becomes Secretary of Defense, risks becoming not a defender of the U.S. Constitution, but a tool at the disposal of those who wish to redefine the Constitution for their own purposes, such as to empower Christian Nationalism or other doctrine at odds with American constitutional democracy. 

A bigger fear - and threat - is the twisting of American mythology. History has shown how noble mythologies can be transformed in the service of less than desirable forces. Such was the case in the 1930’s, when the Bushido code that guided the personal, political and military lives of Samurai warriors was co-opted in the service of Japan’s military leaders. Likewise, Nordic imagery based upon the Teutonic warrior played an outsized role in creating the Aryan ideal at the heart of Nazisim. 

The United States has it own mythic warriors - the Minuteman of Concord and Lexington, ready to serve when Lady Liberty calls, and the Cowboy of the Old West, the stoic individualist ready to mete out justice where none exists. Both have been evoked in recent years in the name of defending truth, justice and the American Way. The Tea Party movement following the financial crisis, the standoffs with the Bundys over grazing rights and the Weavers at Ruby Ridge, the celebration of Kyle Rittenhouse as a hero, and the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol are at the very least warning signs that something is amiss in what we view as patriotic. We are in a dangerous place when lawlessness and vigilantism are celebrated as examples of the American spirit, for there is no law when justice is determined by might and righteous anger rather than due process, especially in a nation with a vast, not-so-hidden cache of semi-automatic assault weapons largely in the hands of those who view the 2nd Amendment as guaranteeing the next wave of Minutemen will be assured the arms needed to take on a government they view as corrupt. Where do we turn if the people decide to take the law into their own hands in a country where the courts are increasingly filled with judges more loyal to a man or an ideology based upon a misguided view of our Constitution, and the military is led by men (and if one has read Pete Hegseth's books, it will be men) who believe they are doing Christ's work in siding with the armed mob? The blindly righteous are too often guided by that blindness. I've read his book and Pete Hegseth is just that type of person.

We risk losing what little remains of our soul. Economic might and growth have always been front of mind for the American people, but always with the undergirding of liberty and human dignity. People once argued during the Cold War that proof of American superiority over Soviet communism could be found by comparing grocery stores in the two countries. I countered by arguing that the real difference, the real proof of ideological superiority could be found on the street corner outside those grocery stores, where an American was free to shout criticism of his own president and government, while a Soviet citizen who did the same risked prison or worse. That is what is at risk with the ascendancy of a nearly religious fervor in service to wealth and material goods, a strident righteousness regarding law and order at the expense of justice, and a misguided loyalty to a man instead of the Constitution that has already cowed one party into silence out of fear that standing up for principle will demand too high a price. Yes, we’ll pay lip service to freedom, but only as far as it allows one to impose their will on another. Dog eat dog survival of the fittest. I can honestly say that is not the America I grew up loving, nor is it a country I look forward to experiencing.

This is the threat we face. Donald Trump is not the man to calm the waters. That there are no small number of people who think that is a good thing is evidence of the fretful place we find ourselves on the day of his second inauguration.