Category: Uncategorized

On this Easter Sunday, we recited the Lord’s Prayer:

“Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name;

Thy kingdom come; thy will be done; on earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses,

As we forgive those who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever.“

A simple prayer, a humble prayer, a prayer of peace and goodness.

It is said that Jesus Christ taught this prayer to his disciples, making it a Christian prayer. But could it not also be a Jewish prayer, or an Islamic prayer?

And consider the Ten Commandments:

You shall have no other gods before me.

You shall not make for yourself an idol.

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.

Honor your father and your mother.

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor.

It is said that God gave these laws to Moses, who was Jewish, and that these laws were later passed down to the Christians. Could these laws not be Islamic as well? Which of these Ten Commandments contradict the teachings of Mohammed?

The Jewish Torah, the Christian Bible, and the Islamic Quran all mention Abraham as a man who was favored by God, a man who lived a righteous and moral life. Although certainly a simplification, it can be said that Abraham begat Judaism, which then begat Christianity, which then begat Islam. This is why Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all referred to as Abrahamic religions.

Each of these three religions lay claim to being the one true faith, but they all worship the same God, and they all acknowledge the same Abrahamic origin. Which of these faiths a person practices is more a consequence of their birth than of anything else.

The unfounded hubris of man has been used to justify religious wars for over two thousand years. These wars have accomplished nothing except to strengthen the hatred and distrust that exists between people who are actually more alike than they have been taught to believe.

And now we find ourselves in the middle of another religious war. Peace will never come to the Middle Eastern region if the religious basis of these conflicts continues to be ignored and no effort is made to focus on the religious commonality of the three Abrahamic religions.

Religiously speaking, all of this hatred and violence and suffering plays into the desires of Satan, who counts upon His legions those countless political and religious leaders of all countries and all faiths that encourage more hatred and violence and suffering.

For those who are atheists and think that religion is the opioid of the masses, please realize that 75% of all people in the world believe in God, and that religion has been a central part of human life for thousands of years. Understanding what is happening in the Middle East, where 90% of the population follows Islam, must begin with an understanding of reality, an acceptance that religion has to be taken into account.

The United States has been referred to as the Great Satan by Iran for over 45 years. Our response has been to be dismissive of this extreme characterization of our country, and to act in threatening and aggressive ways towards Iran and other Islamic countries in the region that have only served to confirm to a great many Muslims that the United States is, in fact, the Great Satan.

Lasting peace in the Middle East will only be possible once we understand why the United States has been perceived for so long as the Great Satan. Islam is a strange and threatening religion to many in the Western world where Christianity and atheism are the predominant religions. This is a fundamental problem and a barrier to peace.

Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, provides a code of conduct that is intended to teach people how to live peacefully with one another. These religions all encourage strong bonds within families and within communities, These religions all speak of compassion and tolerance. The commonalities between these religions must begin to take precedence over the current obsession with, and mischaracterization of, the differences between them.

It is vitally important the this country begins to speak and act in ways that acknowledge the positive teachings of Islam and serve to foster a deeper understanding and acceptance of Islamic culture and faith, and as a consequence, to develop a respect for its teachings and beliefs.

Contrast this with the destructive, ignorant, and threatening rhetoric being expressed by the regimes of both Washington D.C. and Teheran. The languages spoken may be different, but there seems to be no difference in the meaning of what both sides are saying.

Lasting peace seems to be so far away.

We need to stop coddling and pandering to the ultra-wealthy billionaire class. Giving them tax breaks, tax loopholes, and cabinet-level government appointments, accepting their every word as if it were gospel, admiring their excessive lifestyles of mega-yachts and private jets and palatial homes.

Unfortunately, the ultra-wealthy billionaire class in this country have so much wealth that they have removed themselves from our society and live a separate kind of existence. For many of these people, society exists to be exploited in ways that allow them to further increase their wealth.

This was not always the case. Fifty years ago, there was only one billionaire in the United States, Daniel K. Ludwig. During these past fifty years, the ultra-wealthy have benefited from the economic success of this country and the excessively favorable changes to our tax laws. There are now over one thousand billionaires in the United States, a 100,000% increase statistically speaking.

The people of this country could really use the $5.5 trillion of cash that the billionaire class has secreted away. After all, it was our labor that created this wealth. It is about time that we shared in the prosperity we created.

So, where to begin?

First, we must make sure that the ultra-wealthy actually pay their fair share in taxes and social security. We must eliminate the tax breaks and loopholes that allow the ultra-wealthy to avoid their fiscal social responsibility

Second, we must provide incentives to the ultra-wealthy so that they voluntarily spend a portion of their wealth in ways that actually benefit society.

Third, we must change our estate and inheritance laws so that a greater portion of this accumulated wealth will eventually be repatriated with the working people whose labor created it.

A Return to Pre-Reagan Tax Brackets

President Ronald Reagan believed in the inherent selflessness and generosity of the ultra-wealthy. He believed that the ultra-wealthy, through their corporations and business entities, would share their economic good fortune with their workers. He termed this concept trickle-down economics.

President Reagan used this concept to justify reducing the tax bracket for the wealthy from 70% to 28%, and for corporations from 48% to 34% as part of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. Currently, the maximum personal tax rate is 37%, and the maximum corporate tax rate is 21%.

This, accompanied by a reduction in the capital gains tax rate to a current rate of 20%, along with a myriad of special tax adjustments that for all practical purposes can only be used by the wealthy, means that the ultra-wealthy pay taxes at an effective tax rate that is lower than the rate that applies to most Americans.

The wealthiest Americans receive preferential tax treatment compared to most Americans because of their financial influence and resulting corruption. There is no justification for shielding and protecting the wealthiest Americans from having to pay Federal income taxes at anything less than the applicable tax rate, which is what the rest of Americans have to do.

Something similar can also be said for corporations, many of whom are able to avail themselves of special tax incentives, breaks, and exclusions to the extent that they pay no Federal income tax at all.

A return to a 70% maximum personal tax rate and a 50% maximum corporate tax rate, with all capital gains on realized investment income taxed at the same rate, and the elimination of all special tax incentives, breaks and exclusions, would force the ultra-wealthy and corporations to be fully part of the progressive income tax system that applies to the rest of Americans.

And that concept of trickle-down economics and the inherent selflessness and generosity of the wealthy? It now seems like a quaint and naive fairytale.

Capping Borrowing Against Appreciating Assets

One of the clever ways that wealthy people use to avoid paying taxes is to replace income with debt. By borrowing against appreciating assets and using these assets as collateral, cash flow is preserved by using borrowed money for living expenses instead of either earned income or realized capital gains. If the return on investments exceeds the interest rate of the loan, so much the better.

At the time of death, the wealthy then use a stepped-up cost basis provision in the inheritance tax code that allows assets to be valued on a current cost basis instead of the original cost basis, thereby allowing the transfer of assets to the heirs who then avoid paying any significant capital gains taxes.

This tax provision is of great benefit for the transfer of family businesses and farms that would otherwise have to be sold to pay estate taxes. However, it represents a financial windfall for ultra-wealthy family dynasties, preserving wealth as it is passed on from generation to generation.

The use of appreciating assets as collateral for loans needs to be regulated much more than it is now.

Loans obtained in this manner should be directly linked to specific and documented capital investments. Money obtained from this type of loan without such linkage should be considered to be income, and should be subjected to Federal income tax. Money obtained in this manner that does not result in capital investment should be considered to be a fraudulent loan, with both borrowers and financial institutions subject to severe financial penalties and possible imprisonment.

Uncapping Social Security

There has been a taxable income limit for social security withholding since the inception of the Social Security system in 1937. For 2026, this limit is $184,500. Earned income above this amount is not subject to social security withholding.

There is no constitutionally or legislatively mandated requirement that there must be an income limit for social security withholding. It is estimated that eliminating the income limit and applying the social security withholding to all earned income would result in the elimination of 75% of the projected social security shortfall, and possibly more.

Having a taxable income limit for social security withholding is a benefit that is only enjoyed by the top 5% of workers in the United States. Interestingly enough, there is no taxable income limit for Medicare withholding. Social Security could and should be treated in the same way.

By itself, this change would not generate earth-shattering revenue for this country. However, it would ensure that the wealthiest 5% of Americans no longer receive an arbitrary, unearned, and unneeded benefit. As a very positive consequence of this change, the Social Security program would become financially sustainable, and the safely net that retired and disabled Americans rely on, many to avoid living in abject poverty, would be preserved.

Creating A Legacy A Billion Dollars At A Time

Once you’ve made your first billion, what’s the point of the second? To see if you can do it again, I suppose. But at some point, making more and more money just to say that you are one of the wealthiest people in the world becomes an empty excuse for a life, certainly not a life well lived, super egos not withstanding.

$300 million for a floating palace of a mega-yacht that you rarely use, $150 million for a few luxurious private jets that you rarely use, $100 million for a few vacation homes in beautiful locations that you rarely use – such a pointless, selfish, and wasteful extravagance.

Would it not be better and more satisfying to spend your billions to create something tangible, something that would be of true benefit to the society that made your wealth possible, something that would last beyond your own lifetime, something that would have people remember you not just as a greedy person but as a good person?

There is still time for all of you billionaires to reconsider your life choices.

According to the Forbes 400 list, there are 123 American billionaires who are worth 10 billion dollars or more.

For perspective, the Mario Cuomo bridge that spans the Hudson River, which was completed in 2018, cost approximately $4 billion. Any of these billionaires could pay for a beautiful new bridge like the Mario Cuomo bridge, and still have a minimum net worth of more than $5 billion, worst case scenario for the poorest of these very wealthy billionaires.

There are a multitude of public works that billionaires could champion, among them:.

• Replacing some of the thousands of deteriorating bridges and dams located throughout the United States. The cost of replacement varies depending on the size and scope of the work, but $4 billion would pay to replace a great many smaller bridges and dams located in rural parts of the country, or would pay to replace a major urban bridge that could serve as a legacy project. It is estimated that replacing the worst of the rural bridges would cost $35 billion, and replacing the worst of the rural dams would cost $35 billion.

• Providing additional electrical capacity for the United States. The cost of a 300 mW wind or solar plant with a supplemental energy storage system is approximately $1 billion. A small-scale 300 mW nuclear power plant is approximately $4 billion, although this technology is still in development. Decentralizing electrical generation by constructing new smaller-scale power plants in underserved locations may be a cost-effective alternative to a wholesale upgrading/replacement of the aging electrical grid of the United States.

• Developing water control, flood protection and flood damage mitigation systems along waterways throughout the United States. Changing weather patterns are becoming more extreme, with periods of very heavy rain and snow, followed by periods of very little rain. The means to control water to protect against catastrophic flooding and, at the same time to collect it for later use, is currently inadequate in many parts of the country. The cost of constructing levees, water transmission tunnels, pumping stations, and underground water storage facilities at critical locations is very site specific, but certainly $4 billion would be an impactful investment.

• Managing Federal and State forests to minimize the potential for catastrophic forest fires that result in the loss of life and billions of dollars in property and infrastructure. There are approximately 800 million acres of forest and woodlands in the United States. an assumption can be made that 10% of this, 80 million acres, is within five miles of cities, towns, and other developed areas. Controlled burning, and removal of deadwood and other highly flammable biomass from the forest floor and converting it into energy or some other carbon-based end product is expensive and must be periodically redone. At $100/acre, an $8 billion investment could clear all 80 million acres.

• Ensuring that medical facilities in rural areas throughout the United States are fully funded. Many of these facilities require financial subsidies from the government because these facilities are not financially sustainable on their own. This funding is vulnerable to politically-based reduction or outright elimination. It is estimated that there is a potential shortfall of $2 billion per year. A $2 billion annual investment would provide financial support for the entire rural hospital system and ensure that quality healthcare is available throughout this country.

• Increasing the domestic capacity for the production of generic drugs and their precursor chemicals, 90% of which are currently sourced from India and China. This is a strategic vulnerability of the United States. The cost of a basic pharmaceutical manufacturing facility, including the capability to produce the necessary precursor chemicals, is approximately $1 billion, so an investment of $4 billion could conceivably construct four facilities. As an additional benefit, these facilities would be able to produce necessary vaccines should another epidemic occur.

• Modernizing and expanding the recycling and reclamation system in the United States so that there is essentially 100% availability for residential, industrial, and construction waste. The use of landfills, ocean depositories, and foreign facilities are all inefficient and unsustainable ways to dispose of potentially valuable materials that have already been mined, harvested, or processed. A recycling facility capable of producing a usable grade of reclaimed material costs approximately $250 million, so $4 billion would be sufficient to fund sixteen regional facilities.

The point is, this country has many immediate needs that cannot be addressed by our current system of government because there is simply not enough money to address them. Immediate needs such as a new bridge or forest fire prevention or rural access to health care are not as sexy as, shall we say, helping to cure cancer, or drilling water wells in African villages, or any of the other works being done through grants made by private foundations/tax shelters that require little thought or action other than to sign a check.

And that’s the point, isn’t it – making a real, tangible difference without needing to make a profit or obtain a tax deduction, or needing to attend gala events with your fellow billionaires to celebrate your magnanimous giving while being served by waitstaff and cooks who are on Medicaid and SNAP.

This giving will never happen without incentives. One commonsense incentive would be that any capital gains realized in the sale of assets to fund such socially-responsible works would not be taxed. At least then any billionaires who did such works would not be penalized for making a positive difference on behalf of society. An additional incentive would be to allow a nominal tax credit to be taken based upon a percentage, e.g., 10%, of the investment made.

Expanding The Scope of Estate and Inheritance Taxes

There are a number of ways that wealth can be passed from generation to generation. To some extent this transfer of wealth is a good thing. For example, a family-owned business or farm should be able to be passed down from one generation to the next without an inheritance/estate tax burden that essentially requires the sale of the business or farm to pay the taxes. So too, passing down a certain amount of accumulated wealth from generation to generation can provide a measure of financial security for the next generation.

The current Federal Estate Tax schedule provides for an exemption of $15 million for an individual, and $30 million for a married couple, to be indexed to inflation going forward. This is believed to be sufficient to protect the transfer of family businesses and farms, and certainly is sufficient to provide financial security for the next generation.

The current Federal Estate Tax rates are progressive in nature, with the maximum tax rate of 40% applying to $1 million or more of estate value in excess of the $15/$30 million exemption. A combination of raising the maximum tax rate to 70% and requiring that asset appreciation be valued on an original cost basis and not on a stepped-up current cost basis may or may not generate significant additional revenue, given the many ways that wealthy individuals are able to protect their wealth. However, it would be a significant statement of the intent of society to limit financial inequality to the generation who created it.

Those who inherit a previous generation’s wealth did not create this wealth, and instead are only the fortunate beneficiaries of this wealth. Should a more robust Federal Estate Tax program be instituted, and the various special tax breaks, considerations, and exclusions that allow wealth to be shielded from taxation be eliminated, then taxing inherited wealth would seem to be excessive.

To the extent that this inherited wealth becomes income-generating, then this income, along with capital appreciation and any realized capital gains would be subject to taxation in accordance with established tax law. In the very end, of course, the Federal Estate Tax awaits.

The Rockefeller and Carnegie Family Legacies

In the late 19th century, John D. Rockefeller founded Standard Oil and created an oil empire that would have been worth $350 billion dollars today. Many generations later, the current combined wealth of the Rockefeller heirs is approximately $10 billion dollars, a significant amount of money but nowhere near the value of the original Rockefeller fortune.

Once he had made his fortune, John D. Rockefeller decided to devote himself to doing good works. This is something his heirs have embraced as well. Billions of dollars have been given away and invested over the past 100 years to support various endeavors, from the University of Chicago to improving crop yields worldwide.

Another extremely wealthy man, Andrew Carnegie, had a similar epiphany and invested much of his fortune in such endeavors as the Carnegie-Mellon University, Carnegie Hall, the Peace Palace in the Hague, and the establishment of over 2,500 public libraries worldwide.

A contemporary of John D. Rockefeller’s, Andrew Carnegie founded Carnegie Steel and created a steel empire that would have been worth $309 billion dollars today. In his book “The Gospel of Wealth,” he called on the rich to use their wealth to improve society, stating that there was a moral imperative to do so. He believed that “a man who dies rich dies disgraced.” True to his belief, Andrew Carnegie gave away over 90% of his wealth before he died.

These men and their heirs created true legacies that continue to benefit us all. These wealthy people returned their family wealth back to the society that gave them the opportunity to succeed.

When you consider the eleven richest men in this country – Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Warren Buffett, Steve Ballmer, Jensen Huang, Michael Dell, and Bill Gates – few of them seem particularly interested in anything other than accumulating more and more wealth.

To be sure, these men have their charitable foundations, but much of what their foundations are involved in is focused on intangible goals such as curing disease, addressing climate change, preserving the environment, and improving education, among others. None of these goals provide tangible, real-world, implemented solutions to any of society’s needs. It may not be all smoke and mirrors and tax-deferred strategies, but without substantive results, these foundations appear to be of questionable value.

In addition, these foundations are typically funded with multi-billion dollar endowments, which sounds impressive until one realizes that these endowments represent less, sometimes far less, than 5% of the total wealth of the men and families who established the foundations. Moreover, many of these foundations are secretive in nature, which raises questions as to where and how the foundations distribute their funds.

As an over-generalized observation, there seems to be no real commitment, and certainly no financial sacrifice or sense of personal and heartfelt investment in what the ultra-wealthy do through their foundations. Their efforts and their intentions cannot be compared to those of John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie.

Before they became philanthropists, both John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie were considered to be ruthless businessmen who engaged in unethical and monopolistic practices to eliminate competition, utilized corrupt political influence, faced little or no business regulation, paid their workers low wages, suppressed attempts to unionize, and generally put profit before worker welfare.

Unfortunately, few of the ultra-wealthy contemporaries of Rockefeller and Carnegie believed in any moral imperative to give back to society. Most just wanted to make more and more money. Sadly, and disappointingly, the same can be said for the ultra-wealthy billionaires of today.

And this would be why we need to make the bastards pay.

In the best of times, a democracy is based upon the principle of one person, one opinion, one vote. The majority opinion prevails while the rights of the minority are accommodated to the greatest extent possible.

This is not the best of times. We are enduring a fascist-like administration that has demonized the opposition political party, has unleashed shock troops to violently intimidate and repress its own citizens, has kidnapped and deported hundreds of thousands of peaceful and hardworking people, and has engaged in a policy of brutal retribution against a myriad of institutions, organizations, and individuals who have transgressed in one way or the other.

This administration has three more years left to wield its destructive power before its term expires and we can begin to restore what was good and just and generous about this country, but was then taken away from this country and the world by a madman and his disciples of hate. Hopefully we will be smarter with how we spend our treasure and cast our votes this next time around.

But, no matter how well we address the damage that this current administration will ultimately leave behind, we will still be left with a democracy that is no longer based upon one person, one opinion, one vote.

And why is this? Because we have a democracy that has been thoroughly corrupted by too much money being poured into our political system by a limited number of ultra-wealthy individuals who have an insatiable thirst for political power and the ability to control and manipulate much of the information that we see, hear and read. Until this threat to our democracy is addressed and eliminated, there will be no lasting balance.

The ultra-wealthy billionaire class spends hundreds of millions of dollars to influence the selection of our political candidates, then spends hundreds of millions of dollars more to influence the results of our elections, and then uses this financial investment in our elected politicians as a means to control legislation, regulations, tax incentives – essentially, to ensure that the government does what will benefit them the most, the interests of the people be damned.

And now, the ultra-wealthy billionaire class is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase news organizations, not to make a profit, but to extend its influence to control the very information that a democracy depends on to be well-informed.

This has to stop.

It should be self-evident by now, given the disastrous nature of the current administration and its policies, that allowing the ultra-wealthy to choose our political candidates, hold important political positions, and manipulate the information made available to the public has weakened the ability of our democracy to function in the best interests of its people.

There are two ways to improve the situation that we find ourselves in. First, stop the flow of corruptive money. Second, ensure the independence of our sources of 1st Amendment information.

Revisiting Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)

The 2010 Supreme Court decision known as the Citizens United v. FEC decision, was intended to allow groups of people i.e., corporations, business entities, and labor unions, to speak as one voice in support of, or in opposition to, political candidates. It was argued that preventing such speech through association was a violation of these groups’ First Amendment Right to Free Speech.

Further, it was argued that the Fourteenth Amendment, which was originally intended to extend citizenship to all people (former slaves) born or naturalized in the United States, to extend due process protections to all citizens, and to extend equal treatment under the law to all citizens, applied to corporations, business entities, and labor unions, essentially providing them with due process protections. That seems fair enough.

For some reason, however, the Supreme Court chose to extend the scope of their ruling to essentially equate money with free speech, with a 5-4 majority arguing that any limitation on politically-related financial expenditures would be, in effect, a limitation of these groups’ First Amendment Right to Free Speech.

There are financial limitations to the donations that an individual is legally able to make. Donations of a certain maximum amount can be made to individual candidates, to candidates’ committees, to various political parties’ committees, and to national political parties’ accounts that pay for national conventions, recounts and other legal matters, and for national party headquarters. In addition, limited financial donations can be made to Political Action Committees, i.e., PACs, who then distribute these donations to various party committees as they see fit.

Since corporations, business entities, and labor unions have now been determined to have the right to have and express a political opinion, then the same financial limitations that apply to individuals should also apply to these groups. That seems fair enough as well.

However, the Supreme Court determined that unlimited money could now be spent on political speech by organizations not legally connected to an individual candidate, and this has proved to be disastrous for our democracy.

At the time of the Citizens United v. FEC decision, dissenting Supreme Court justices warned that allowing such unlimited financial involvement by corporations, business entities, and labor unions in the American political process would overwhelm the voices of the actual American people and lead to a corrupt system in which the wealthy exerted undo influence over our elections. And this is exactly what happened.

Within years, Super Political Action Committees, i.e., Super PACs, became the actual voices of political campaigns and changed the political landscape into what exists today. Fifteen years after the Citizens United v. FEC decision, money given by small donors directly to political campaigns has been completely overwhelmed and rendered insignificant by money that passes through Super PACs. This is how the ultra-wealthy exert their influence, buying off politicians in a corrupt, quid pro quo circus that could not be further removed from the democratic principles upon which this country was founded.

Super PACs are able to accept unlimited amounts of money from anyone, almost certainly including money from foreign sources. Super PACs are able to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of, or in opposition to, specific political candidates and political parties. Super PACs are able to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of, or in opposition to, specific ideologies. Super PACs are not accountable to any government regulations, and do not have to disclose who their donors are.

It is clear that the Citizens United v. FEC decision was too broad in its interpretation that corporations, business entities, and labor unions were entitled to anything more than due process, equal treatment under the law., the right to have a political opinion, and the right to give political donations under the same limitations that apply to individuals.

Super PACs should be seen for what they are – a means by which the ultra-wealthy have bastardized the political process to exert undo control over our government.

Money is not the equivalent of free speech. It has become increasingly evident over the past fifteen years that money overwhelms free speech, and that unlimited money has corrupted our democracy. The Supreme Court must revisit Citizens United vs. FEC and reaffirm that the voice and the will of the people cannot be silenced or manipulated by unlimited political expenditures of unknown origin.

Preserving the Independence of the Fourth Estate

The Fourth Estate, i.e., newspapers, news magazines, cable and streaming news outlets, independent news services such as AP and Reuters, and other sources of fact-based and apolitical investigative journalism must be protected from manipulation and intimidation by the ultra-wealthy and their media and entertainment corporations.

Accurate and timely Information is fundamental to the healthy functioning of a democracy. The Fourth Estate has always functioned as an unbiased and self-correcting source of information about the actions of our government, our corporations and business entities, and individuals who wish to act in secretive or corrupt ways.

The concentration of news outlets into larger and larger media corporations makes it much easier for an unscrupulous government administration to attempt to influence what information will be disseminated to the public. We have seen how the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Department of Justice have been used to block the release of interviews, suspend program hosts, and restrict the independence of editorial boards.

Based upon recent events, ultra-wealthy individuals continue to demonstrate a willingness to exert editorial and programming control to ensure favorable treatment by government departments and regulatory commissions. The value of their investment portfolios and the success of future business ventures is clearly much more important to them than is the preservation of the independence of the Fourth Estate.

Regardless of political party affiliation or where one falls on the liberal-conservative spectrum, we should all be much more skeptical of what is being presented to us as fact-based information than we are. We should all be much more concerned about the ongoing loss of independent sources of news than we are. We should all be much more financially supportive of independent sources of news than we are.

Unlike the ultra-wealthy industrialists from 100 years ago, today’s ultra-wealthy seem to have no social conscience, no sense of social responsibility. Allowing ultra-wealthy individuals to control our collective freedom of speech and our access to fact-based information is an existential threat to the health of our democracy, and to democracies everywhere. It is in the best financial interests of these individuals to limit what we see, read and hear in order to obscure their self-serving, entitled behavior.

It is highly unlikely that the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland will ever feature a roundtable discussion regarding the importance of fact-based investigative journalism to the health of the world’s democracies.

Factual news media outlets, particularly those that engage in investigative journalism, should not be permitted to be part of larger media and entertainment corporations that become susceptible to government influence and are readily manipulated for profit or ideology. However, this is becoming accepted practice.

There is no easy way out of this reality. The old business model for newspapers and news magazines that relied on advertising revenue and subscriptions for operating expenses is, for all intents and purposes, dead. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN – no longer independent, no longer trustworthy sources for unbiased and factual information. The legacy media has slowly become actual fake news.

It is in the best interests of this country to break up these massive media and entertainment corporations, forcing divestiture of factual news media outlets and requiring that they be restructured as non-profit corporations, Given the political influence , legal sophistication, and financial resources that the ultra-wealthy owners of these corporations possess, this approach will take decades, with no assurances of success.

As an alternative, it is suggested that all news media outlets be evaluated by an independent organization to determine to what extent each media outlet operates in accordance with the Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists as defined by the International Federation of Journalists.

The Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists consists of 16 articles plus a preamble and defines journalists’ duties and rights regarding ethics. Essentially and simplistically, the Charter confirms the right of everyone to have access to information and ideas, insists that journalists respect the facts first and foremost, and requires that journalists clearly distinguish between factual information, commentary, and criticism.

The intent is to provide the American people with an objective, non-partisan, independent measure of the reliability of information being disseminated by media outlets. One possible organization that could be given this responsibility is the Society of Professional Journalists.

What is also needed are new champions of independent, fact-based journalism in the vein of Ted Turner, who founded CNN. CNN became one of the most recognized sources of non-biased news reporting in the world before it became an investment property in 1996, when it was bought by Time Warner. As part of a media conglomerate, CNN became more of an entertainment network, with greater emphasis on commentary and other types of entertainment programming, with less emphasis on fact-based journalism.

There is a great and profound need for fact-based journalism in this country, as well as throughout the rest of the world. Certainly there must be some wealthy billionaire or billionaires who understand the importance of fact-based journalism to our democracy, and would be willing to dedicate part of their wealth to this cause.

We are in the middle of a revolution, and it is not going well. The Trump administration is attempting to fundamentally change America in accordance with the beliefs of a small minority of conservative revolutionaries, their manifesto being Project 2025.

The problem is, revolutions are a messy business. There is always violence, whether it be economic violence, political violence, legal violence, social violence, and in many cases, physical violence. Innocent people get hurt during revolutions – the poor, the young, and the old in particular.

A revolution can be romanticized as a noble endeavor that benefits everyone, but more often than not, revolutions are more about a small group of people seizing power and control from those who once had it, and then enjoying the fruits of their victory. Sharing the fruits with the masses may or may not be part of the revolutionary outcome.

An increasing number of Americans are becoming disillusioned with the Project 2025/Trump revolution. So many changes have been made for ideological reasons, so much violence perpetrated on people and private organizations to force compliance and eliminate dissent, but nothing has improved.

The Project 2025/Trump revolution has not made life better for the typical American, and this was probably not the intent of this revolution at all. We see the wealthy – including our president and his family – and the well-connected benefiting, but the people – not so much.

“Viva la revolution” was, in effect, the rallying cry at all of those MAGA events. Now that the revolution is upon us, and the reality of this revolution becomes more clear, fewer and fewer MAGA revolutionaries are remaining true believers.

A revolution is not a replacement for good governance, and a revolution that does not enjoy the support of the people is doomed to fail. This is why the Project 2025/Trump revolution is doomed to fail – incompetent governance, and less and less support for the government by the governed.

Every new administration blames the previous administration for as much as they can for as long as they can. That’s politics. But each new administration has kept in place the basic structure and workings of the government, providing continuity from one administration to the next.

Until now.

It seems that every day brings with it a new directive from this administration that drastically changes or eliminates some aspect of our government. There never seems to be a clear need for these changes, and there never seems to be any plan as to what will happen once the new directive takes effect. This has lead to chaos and uncertainty, and a paralysis of intelligent thinking.

Probably more than most, this administration is a reflection of the president and his state of mind. A great arch! Buy Greenland! Venezuelan oil! Deportation! A free 747! Retribution! Trump accounts! Domestic terrorists! Roseless garden! Eliminate NATO! Bomb Iran! Close the Lincoln Center! Crypto Trump! Vaccines kill! Inject beef tallow! Pardon the unrepentant! Suspend the constitution! A great banquet hall! Battleship! Lawsuits! 2 a.m. texting! Don’t call it football! America needs no one! Tariffs for all! Big Macs! Bathroom tile! Stolen election! Delusion! Paranoia! Seething rumination!

What else can this possibly be than the product of a chaotic mind? A mind that has created an alternate reality, a Bizarro world where violence is peace, intimidation is compassion, destruction is creation, and ugliness is beauty.

The alternative to chaos is continuity. The serious study of issues and goals and what is in the common good, with thoughtful changes being made to laws and regulations and policies in a bi-partisan manner – that is continuity. In this way there can be slow, but consistent, improvement that continues from administration to administration.

Again, good governance is not a revolution but instead is evolution. It is hoped that good governance will always lead to improvements in the common good, but in reality this does not always happen. Sometimes there will be laws and regulations and policies that prove not to be in the common good. Continuity means that these failings will be carefully studied before being addressed in ways that are, once again, intended to achieve the common good.

The Machiavellian, antidemocratic, reactionary, and rigid nature of the Project 2025 manifesto, which most of the policies of the Trump administration appear to be based upon, has served neither the American people nor the administration well. The wholesale elimination and/or replacement of laws and regulations and policies on ideological grounds, which is an apt description of the actions taken by the current Trump administration, has lead to chaos.

But, lest we forget, the Biden administration was very much ideologically based as well. Due to the inability of President Biden to be a strong leader, indecision and paralysis of action characterized much of his administration – a different manifestation of chaos, but chaos nevertheless.

It is hoped that continuity of governance will characterize the newly elected Congress in 2027, and the newly elected President and Congress in 2029. If the Democratic Party regains sufficient power in these elections, much of the excesses of the Trump administration can be mitigated with expediency.

However, great care should be taken during this period of power transition to ensure continuity of governance and to avoid creating additional chaos by letting ideology be the basis of actions taken. Careful thought and deliberation must prevail.

This will have been a long time coming.

.

Now we can all see with our own eyes the harsh reality of Trump 2.0. It has been one year of very damaging leadership by this President’s administration. Nothing is this country is better, except that we have regained control of our southern border, which is a good thing.

But what else is better? Not the cost of living. Not our international standing. Not our safety and security.

Kamala Harris was a bad presidential candidate, but she did point out the worst tendencies of Donald Trump and warned us that giving Donald Trump another presidential term would be disastrous, and it appears that she was right. But not even Kamala Harris could have foreseen the extent to which Donald Trump would go in order to glorify himself, enrich himself, seek personal retribution and vengeance, and ultimately lead this country down the darkest of rabbit holes.

Now we have ICE – a brutal private army – engaged in illegal forced entry into private homes, asserting that they, and they alone, are uniquely allowed to do so without a judicial warrant. This private army engages in needless and excessive physical abuse of U.S. citizens and legal non-citizens, as well as various categories of people who are here in this country illegally. This private army can seize people off the streets of this country and send them to undisclosed locations without any due process, even deporting them without giving notice to their families, friends, and legal counsel. And now, as we have seen, this private army has begun to murder American citizens who were naive enough to expect to be treated in a way that did not violate their constitutional rights or the Geneva Convention.

It has taken awhile for much of the American public to understand that the actions of this president and his administration are just not right. Many people proudly living in so-called red states naively thought that Donald Trump could do no wrong, and were happy to see that the leftist socialist god-hating agitators that lived in the so-called blue states were finally getting what was coming to them.

There are a lot of reasons why this thinking was erroneous, one of them being that most of the so-called blue states have 40% or more of their citizens that are pretty conservative leaning. These people are being punished right along with their more liberal neighbors. You could say that they are just collateral damage, but the damage has been done to them all the same.

What should be more concerning to these red-state conservative people is the fact that their elected senators and representatives have chosen to let President Trump and his administration do whatever they wanted to without any serious questioning. No objections, no oversight, no policy debates, no acting in the best interests of the people that they were elected to represent.

I know that these red-state conservative people have been led to believe that the Democratic Party that their grandparents voted for is the godless party of the devil, but the Democrats are not the party in power now. The Republican Party has a lot to answer for, because it has allowed all of the bad things that are going on right now to happen. Are you really going to blame the trans movement and Joe Biden for this current disaster? Seriously?

This is the time to take a stand for decency, for generosity, for respect, for faith and friends and family values. In its own dysfunctional way, the Democratic Party is now the party that stands for these ideals. Not to mention standing up for the Constitution, the rule of law, due process, checks and balances. Not to mention taking a stand against shooting a naive good-natured woman point-blank in her face, and shooting a well-meaning unarmed man point-blank in his back.

Rest assured, the Republican Party will eventually find its way back to a more balanced approach to conservative values. But for right now, the Republican Party is failing to address the needs of the American people, and is allowing the Trump administration to destroy the legacy of our country.

The Trump administration is engaging in a selective war against its own people through legal means, through intimidation and violence, and now murder. It has made a concerted effort to eliminate parts of our history when the story being told conflicts with its own ideology. It lies about its own people to its own people, and then demands that we believe its lies.

And now we are sending ICE personnel to Italy to protect our Olympic athletes. Will they be masked and heavily armed, without any limitations being placed on their actions? What other countries are sending a similar quasi-military security force to protect their athletes? Is protection of our athletes the real reason for ICE to be there, or is it to intimidate our own athletes to ensure that nothing will be said or done that could embarrass the Trump administration in such a visible forum?

It is hard to imagine a more provocative and threatening selection of an agency to provide security for our Olympians. Having experienced the Trump administration for the past year, this is probably the point.

There is something very, very wrong with our president.

Donald Trump is not in his right mind. He has gone mad before our eyes. Where he was once lucid and willing to listen to reason during his first term in office, in this second term he has surrounded himself with crackpots, bigots, Machiavellian manipulators, economic opportunists, cosplay tough guys, and angry and bitter women, all reveling in the power of their positions to hurt other people, with none daring or caring to question his actions.

Donald Trump wants to be remembered as the greatest president this country has ever had, but he will almost certainly be remembered as the president who would be king, the king of chaos and self-absorbed insanity.

Donald Trump is able to act like a king because he has achieved unconditional support from nearly every Republican senator and representative, and appears to have the tacit approval of a majority of Supreme Court justices. No one with the constitutional power to oppose him dares to do so. But there is nothing normal about what he says or what he does.

Donald Trump believes in his own greatness, and is constructing monuments and ballrooms as evidence of his greatness. He splashes his name and likeness everywhere he can, from the Lincoln Center to the White House walls, reminiscent of his private branding of the Trump name prior to his entering politics.

Donald Trump believes that the presidency is an opportunity to increase his personal wealth. His cryptocurrency and real estate dealings that are controlled by his Trump business empire are perfect avenues for him to receive tribute and lucrative business opportunities from undisclosed sources. So far his take since the beginning of his second term is estimated to be in excess of $3,000,000,000.

Donald Trump believes that no one should question him or prevent him from doing as he pleases, and he will stop at nothing to achieve revenge and retribution on those who dared to do so. He seeks vengeance from attorney generals to judges to prosecutors to senators to representatives to legions of civil servants for slights real or imagined.

Donald Trump believes in his own infallibility, and therefore believes that he is without need of counsel because he is always correct. He ignores the recommendations of experts in virtually every field, and seems to delight in creating policy that contradicts established practices that have worked well for decades, and thoughtlessly terminates new initiatives that are needed to prepare this country for a changing world.

Donald Trump believes that alliances and agreements are of limited value and represent obstacles to his ability to act as he sees fit. Instead of working within our alliances to achieve common goals that would benefit many countries, and instead of renegotiating agreements to achieve a more balanced outcome for all parties concerned, he has chosen to denigrate NATO, denigrate the UN, denigrate the EU, denigrate our most important trading partners, and denigrate virtually every international initiative that this country was once a part of.

Donald Trump believes that an important part of the greatness of his legacy will be to add territory to the United States. Just as the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 doubled the size of the country, and the Mexican Cession of 1848 and the Alaska Purchase of 1867 more than doubled its size once again, the annexation of Greenland, either by purchase or by force, would represent the largest land acquisition in the history of this country. It could be said that such an achievement would certainly be worthy of a truly great president.

Donald Trump believes that the most certain way to peace is through the expression of power, intimidation, and terror. Forcing countries to act in accordance with his demands has become the fundamental basis of his administration’s foreign policy. Venezuela is the most glaring and current example of this, but a takeover of Cuba is certainly not far behind, with more countries to come, His willingness to send ICE agents into the streets of American cities to terrorize, brutalize, kidnap, and murder people who are already living peacefully within our borders is simply an extension of his need to dominate, subjugate, and control.

This is going to end badly for our country, particularly if Donald Trump invokes the Insurrection Act in an attempt to prevent the mid-term elections from happening. This continues to be a very real possibility, something that apparently Donald Trump has openly ruminated about in private meetings. The only thing better than trying to overturn the results of an election is to prevent elections from happening at all.

That being said, the reign of Donald Trump will end in three year’s time, and this country will then have an opportunity to reverse the damage that his administration will have done to our country. To say that things will return to normal is not correct – but it is hoped that we will find a new normal that is based in fact and science, compassion and common sense.

Of much greater concern is the loss of trust and respect and admiration that the rest of the world once had for this country.

Donald Trump’s madness would upend the world’s monetary system. Once he is able to control the Federal Reserve and politicize monetary policy, he will have effectively ended the use of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. There will be serious ramifications to our financial stability once countries cash in their dollar holdings in favor of the Chinese yuan, the most likely alternative.

Donald Trump is slowly and methodically removing the U.S. from as many international agreements as possible, effectively isolating this country from world affairs. He has already eliminated support for over 50 international programs, many of which are part of the United Nations. He has essentially ended U.S. humanitarian foreign aid, which provided clean water, food, medical supplies, roads, schools, field hospitals, and other vital services to millions of people in impoverished, less developed countries. He has withdrawn from various climate change organizations, calling climate change a hoax, while the seas rise and extreme weather events become commonplace.

Disturbingly, he has threatened to withdraw from NATO, and is considering military action against our closest allies in order to annex Greenland.

This isolationism and aggression is both unnecessary and ill-advised, yet Donald Trump is obsessed and cannot be dissuaded from these strategically moronic actions.

These are all examples of the mad king syndrome. And, in his madness, Donald Trump will bring an end to the greatness that, up until now, has defined this country.

We have not had a great president for a long time. George W. Bush and Barack Obama provided solid leadership, but Donald Trump and Joe Biden were presidents that made extremely poor decisions.

Donald Trump did a terrible job of initially responding to the challenges of Covid, and then tried to overthrow an election and precipitated an assault on the United States Capital building to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

Joe Biden created a de facto open border policy that allowed millions of undocumented people into this country in an uncontrolled manner, and then refused to stand by his word that he would be a single-term president until it was too late for the Democratic Party to nominate a knowledgeable, qualified candidate.

Instead, in its wokeness, the Democratic Party gave us an inept, inarticulate Presidential candidate in Kamala Harris, a woman who could not lead or inspire, a woman who was too ignorant to realize that she needed to have a vision for a better country if she had any chance of defeating Donald Trump.

And, in its cravenness, the Republican Party anointed Donald Trump as its chosen one, proceeded to confirm the worst, least-qualified cabinet in the history of this country, and then fell all over itself trying to justify his cruelty, vindictiveness, personal greed, and now his madness.

This country has never had such a destructive president as Donald Trump in his second term. He has declared war on a large portion of the American people, and he has declared war on our friends and allies.

The Mad King of Mar-a-Lago will not reign forever, but once he is gone, what kind of country will we be? Will we be like the Phoenix, rising from the ashes of a purifying fire to reclaim our democratic spirit, or will we become a shithole country, an oligarchy of the rich and well-connected?

Sociopathology is not normally considered to be a character trait of the wealthiest individuals in our society, but it is time that this theory be reexamined.

There are millions of millionaires in our society, multi-millions of multi-millionaires, but there is a limit as to what their wealth will allow them to do. They can live a life with a significant measure of luxury. A larger house, a second vacation home, nicer cars, a fishing boat or small yacht, country club memberships, extended vacations, private schools for their children, more nights out on the town, a maid or a nanny. There is a certain measure of economic protection that this type of wealth brings as well. But there is a limit to the luxury and the economic protection, and this measure of wealth can be squandered if one is not careful and prudent.

Surprisingly, most millionaires and multi-millionaires have much more in common with the poor and the middle class than they do with billionaires, simply because they are susceptible to the rise and fall of the economy, and could be faced with possible financial ruin. Millionaires and multi-millionaires may need to adjust their spending and investment strategies if the economy takes a downturn.

However, there comes a time in wealth accumulation where one becomes immune to the effects of an economic downturn. In fact, economic downturns become an opportunity to acquire more wealth by investing or purchasing assets that have become undervalued by the poor economy. In this scenario, the extremely wealthy are able to increase their wealth by taking advantage of other people’s economic misfortune, typically at advantageous terms.

It is unclear how much wealth is required before a person becomes immune to the effects of an economic downturn, perhaps $100 million dollars, a sum unfathomable to nearly everyone. And once this level of wealth is realized, attaining the next level of wealth – billionaire status – often becomes the goal. Approximately 1,000 people in this country have achieved billionaire status.

This amount of wealth far exceeds what any person could accumulate from their individual labor alone. For example, if a person would make $500 per hour, and work 8 hours a day for 365 days a year for 40 years, this would only be $58,400,000 for a lifetime of work. CEOs at Fortune 500 companies accumulate this amount of wealth in less than 5 years.

At some point, such levels of wealth can only be achieved by taking a significant percentage of the value of the labor performed and generated by employees. It could be argued that this is actually theft of services. Others would argue that this is acceptable practice in a capitalistic society. However, few workers would agree that this is fair, particularly when most people are being paid a half, a third, or a quarter of the true value of their labor.

If there was an equitable distribution of wealth, more people would be able to do basic things such as have an emergency savings account, not have to work two or three jobs, afford to buy a house, afford child care, afford health insurance, afford healthy food, and begin to pay federal income tax.

The fact that these basic expectations are up for debate at all is a profound indictment of this country’s capitalistic, wealth-driven economic and political system that so many Americans are so proud and protective of even though they are victims of the very system that they defend.

In addition, the fact that so many multi-millionaires and billionaires exhibit such an obvious lack of concern for the well-being of the many people whose labor has made their wealth possible is very disappointing but not surprising. Their wealth separates them from the rest of us and allows them to claim ignorance and deny responsibility.

One aspect of this excessive accumulation of wealth that has not been discussed is the fact that this wealth is invested and not spent.

When money is spent, it multiplies in value as it circulates through the economy. As a simple explanation of this economic mechanism, each dollar spent becomes available to be spent by the receiver, and is then available to be spent by the next receiver, and so on and so on. It is estimated that each dollar in circulation through the economy multiplies in value three times, and is available to benefit many people.

In contrast, when money is invested, whether it be in stock, bonds, gold, bitcoin, artwork, etc., the money is removed from the economy and cannot multiply in value. This money does nothing for anyone other than the person who owns it. Multi-millionaires, and billionaires specifically, control approximately 50% of the wealth in this country, wealth that is not being made available to the economy in a useful and productive way.

Imagine what this amount of money could do if it was used to create tangible products and services that allowed millions of people to have high-paying jobs. If only billionaires who control so much wealth would use it in constructive ways instead of hoarding it or using it to acquire other existing companies. Any concerns about generating profitability in producing the products and services needed by the American people should be the last thing on the minds of any socially aware billionaire given that they are so well insulated from the effects of profit and loss.

To reiterate, once a measure of wealth is achieved, additional wealth brings the ability to isolate oneself from the challenges and aspirations that most Americans have to deal with on a daily basis. It must be easy for the very wealthy to convince themselves that society’s issues have nothing to do with them, and to deny any responsibility for contributing to these issues, let alone committing to addressing and solving them.

Once a measure of wealth is achieved, acquiring more wealth at any social cost to others appears to become the goal. The wealthy seem to believe that they are entitled to magnitudes more of everything than are most Americans, and think nothing of manipulating the financial and political systems of this country in order to achieve this goal at minimal, if any, cost to themselves.

Moreover, the wealthiest among us believe that their opinions about anything and everything should take precedence in any discussion or debate, when in actual fact they have no expertise at all other than the fact that they were able to acquire great wealth at the expense of others. Too much attention is given to the ignorant and unsubstantiated opinions of the wealthy.

To allow such people to determine the future of this country is to ensure that the current system of wealth distribution will never change.

Which brings us back to the transition from millionaire to billionaire to narcissistic sociopath.

Per the Mayo Clinic, the definition of a narcissist is one who has an unreasonably high sense of their own importance. They need and seek too much attention, and they want and demand that people admire them.

Per the Cleveland Clinic, the definition of a sociopath is one who has significant, consistent, and persistent disregard for other people. They exhibit a lack of empathy, a willingness to disregard social norms, and to act impulsively without considering the consequences. They engage in consistent and repetitive abusive behaviors like gaslighting, manipulation, and deceit.

Based upon these definitions from highly respected medical authorities, one has only to observe the behavior of the very wealthy to conclude that many of them have indeed become narcissistic sociopaths. Perhaps they were born this way, perhaps they became this way over time as their wealth accumulated. It really doesn’t matter. The end result is the same.

Americans have to wake up. The very wealthy are not gods to be worshipped, idolized, and emulated. They are sick people. They are a cancer that grows uncontrolled in our midst. And right now, they are killing us.

Donald Trump is no dictator. Donald Trump is no Hitler, no Stalin, no Mussolini. But Donald Trump believes, in his heart of hearts, that he is a king.

And Donald Trump has no respect for the American people. The recent A.I. generated video on TruthSocial makes this very clear. The video depicts Donald Trump wearing a golden crown flying a military jet and bombing innocent Americans who are exercising their 1st Amendment rights to peaceful assembly and non-violent protest with a full load of excrement.

King Donald Trump just shit all over the American people, and then laughed about it.

Some people say that these weren’t real Americans, that they weren’t true patriots, and that they should be thankful that it was just A.I. and not real shit. Funny stuff.

But in this one A.I. moment, the real Donald Trump was revealed, and the absence of expressions of disgust from the Republicans in Congress and across the country is truly pathetic. It is really beyond me how this type of behavior as exhibited by our president could be condoned by anyone, but apparently it is better to be silent and invisible than to take a principled stand and invite a shitstorm of presidential abuse in return.

President Trump’s callus and uncaring response to the current government shutdown speaks volumes as well.

Despite declarations of a mandate from the American people, Donald Trump only received 49.8% of the popular vote during the 2024 election, while Kamala Harris received 48.3% of the popular vote. His big, beautiful bill was passed by the Republican House and Senate, without any Democratic input, through the use of the reconciliation process. The entire process completely disenfranchised the 48.3% of American voters who are represented by Democratic Senators and Representatives.

The Democrats were given no opportunity to protect the American people from the loss of healthcare benefits and subsidies for millions of poor and middle-class Americans that will be the result of various provisions of the Big Beautiful Bill.

Now, as their final option, the Democrats are demanding that the healthcare benefits and subsidies taken away by the Big Beautiful Bill be added back through revisions to the Bill so that these benefits and subsidies will not be lost, and that this be agreed to in writing before the government shutdown is brought to an end with a bipartisan vote.

The Republicans have offered their reassurances of good-faith debate regarding the status of the healthcare benefits and subsidies, but that first the Democrats must agree to end the government shutdown.

In this Trumpian age of brutal partisan politics, no reasonable person would take the Republicans at their word regarding these good-faith debates. This is almost assuredly nothing more than an empty and cynical promise.

The Democrats are following a desperate strategy. The longer the government shutdown is allowed to continue, more and more government workers will go without paychecks, more and more government services will be suspended, and more of the economy will be affected.

Already the air traffic control system is failing because air traffic controllers are refusing to work without pay, military families cannot afford to buy food and are being forced to stand in line at food banks, and the SNAP program that 1 out of 8 Americans rely upon to eat will no longer be fully funded. These are the three of the most visible effects of the government shutdown. The Democrats could be blamed for all of this.

However, the fact is that the Republicans control all three branches of the Federal government, and they have the power to end this government shutdown if they chose to do so. A majority of Americans understand this.

All the Democrats want is to ensure that poor and middle-class Americans, whether Democrat or Republican, will be able to have access to health care during the duration of the Trump administration. Apparently, the Republicans believe that this is a debatable proposition. Americans will die if the Republicans succeed in destroying the existing health care safety net.

This is why the Democrats must continue to stand strong and united, and to continue to repeatedly explain to the American people what is at stake in this government shutdown.

In the meantime, Donald Trump ended up deciding that now was the right time to throw a gala Halloween party in the Mar- a-Lago ballroom. Friends, family, rich donors, celebrities, and corporate titans were among the guests in attendance. Poor people were there too – the waitstaff, the chefs, the entertainment, the cleanup crews.

The rich, oblivious to the suffering of the poor. This is Donald Trump’s vision for America, sorry to say. The Golden Age of Donald Trump. Not what the MAGA crowd was expecting, but here we are.

This gala party was styled after the Roaring Twenties, a period from 100 years ago that was characterized by significant economic prosperity, new technologies, stock market growth, and cultural change including women’s rights and artistic experimentation. Much of this was shared by the middle class, although minority communities such as the Blacks, the Jews, the homosexuals, and even the Catholics were marginalized during this time. It all came to an end in 1929 with the failure of the stock market and the banking system due to the lack of financial controls and capitalistic greed.

This current period of time is more accurately a reflection of the Gilded Age, a period from 125 years ago that was characterized by a concentration of great wealth in the hands of a few industrialists, widespread economic inequality and poverty, and political corruption. The Gilded Age had Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, and J.P. Morgan. Trump’s Golden Age has Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Larry Ellison – just to name a few. The Gilded Age slowly ended as the extent of economic inequality and poverty eventually led to the rise of the progressive movement.

The recent “No Kings” movement may be the beginning of the end of the Golden Age of Trump and the raping of the American economy by this new group of billionaire robber barons who exploit every opportunity to accumulate more wealth and buy off our politicians in order to do so. One hopes that this ending happens peacefully.

Some people might conclude that President Trump believes that declaring Martial Law, invoking the Insurrection Act, suspending Habeas Corpus, postponing Federal elections, and ordering the National Guard, the Army, and the Marines into major U.S. cities will somehow intimidate and subjugate the American people, and allow him to continue his reign indefinitely.

It would be wise for President Trump to reflect on the end of the 18th century, the year being 1793, the period of time being the French Revolution. This year was the beginning of a violent period when the French people rose up against their King and his aristocratic administration due to extreme economic chaos and widespread hunger. The King’s army could not protect the King and the aristocracy from the anger of the French people. Many, including the King and Queen, were summarily executed during this time.

When one sees the photos of the vast Viennese dessert table that was part of the Trump Roaring Twenties Halloween party, and then when one reflects on the current times of economic inequality and increasing poverty, one can only wonder if this is Trump’s tone-deaf response to the concerns of the American people – let them eat cake.

The short answer to this question is, in the long term, no. However, Donald Trump will have caused significant damage to the United States during this, his second administration. There has been such a failure of the Constitution’s checks and balances that it will take a lot of work to repair the damage. It will be up to the Democrats to return this country to normalcy. 

The Republicans had a plan that was years in the making. The Republicans forced their plan through a partisan reconciliation bill, through executive orders, and through executive actions taken without any congressional debate and with tacit approval by the Supreme Court. The Republican plan does not benefit 99% of Americans, and this is a real problem in a democracy. 

The Democrats need to develop a plan of their own, and to realize that a moderate approach with bipartisan input will be necessary to accomplish anything while Donald Trump is President. Of course, the real normalization of this country can only happen once the Trump presidency is over due to his veto power, his willingness to ignore the intent of Congress, and his bizarre behavior that threatens peace and stability, both foreign and domestic. It takes 2/3 of both chambers of Congress to vote to override a presidential veto, making bipartisan agreement critical if this is to be done.

The recent “No Kings” demonstrations of 7 million people dwarfed the collective attendance at all of the Trump rallies combined. If one accepts the premise that there were 10 people in agreement for each rally participant, then this means that 80 million Americans support the protests and objections that define the “No Kings” movement. That is a lot of people.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the Republican Party is no longer the party of the working people. Its slick messaging, its bible beating, its flag waving – it has all been a lie, a grand and cynical manipulation.

When given the opportunity to make America great again, the Republican Party pledged fealty to the billionaires who finance its candidates and to a deranged populist would-be king. The Republican Party chose to follow a reactionary playbook called Project 2025, a manifesto of sorts written by a small number of people working through the Heritage Foundation who want to transform our country into something that matches their vision instead of that of the originators of our country and our constitution. 

Apparently, this vision involves turning this country into a Christian, anti-science theocracy led by an authoritarian Executive branch that will force its will and concept of morality and ethics upon the American people, all without the benefit of any democratic input from the American people themselves. This is not how a democracy is supposed to work.

Who suffers from this? Pretty much everyone – our poor, our farmers, our research universities, our lawyers, our teachers, our elderly, our long-term undocumented residents, our journalists, as well as anyone who lives in a major city with a Democratic mayor or governor. 

Who benefits from this? The very rich, the very large corporations, and the politicians who are paid off by them through dark money donations to PACs. 

None of these observations are original or ground-breaking, but they are factual and accepted by an increasing number of people, even by some who supported Donald Trump and the Republican candidates in the last election.

It is important that Americans continue to resist and speak out against the anti-democratic, immoral, and unethical direction that the Trump administration is leading our country. The most certain way of stopping this movement is by voting out its supporters in favor of more democratic-minded candidates. 

Rest assured, the Trump administration will do everything in its power to prevent this from happening. As public approval of the Trump administration continues to weaken, it becomes more and more likely that the Democrats will be able to regain control of at least one chamber of the legislative branch of the Federal government. It is even possible that both the Senate and the House of Representatives could end up being controlled by the Democrats following the upcoming mid-term elections. 

In order to prevent this from happening, President Trump would certainly like to declare martial law and a national state of emergency, and as a consequence, postpone the mid-term elections and even the subsequent presidential election indefinitely. Martial law means that the military would assume control of governing the states and nation instead of our elected officials.

As commander-in-chief of the armed forces, this means that President Trump would become the principle governing authority of the country, thereby completing his takeover of the United States. 

The Insurrection Act of 1807 and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 theoretically limit the President’s ability to enact martial law. Qualifying conditions for the enactment of martial law include insurrection, riot, and civil unrest. 

It is critical, in this next year leading up to the mid-term elections, that those opposed to the actions of President Trump refrain from any actions that could be construed as insurrection, riot, or civil unrest. During this time, the Trump Administration will be praying for the occurrence of any sort of violent activity in order to justify the declaration of martial law. This must be avoided at all costs.

There is no reason to believe that the Supreme Court would not uphold the right of the President to declare martial law if there was any justification, no matter how minor and insignificant, given its support for essentially everything that President Trump has done up to this point. This is despite the clear intention of our founding fathers to prevent the ascendance of a king. So much for constitutional originalism. 

The recent non-violent “No Kings” demonstrations, the numerous legal actions being taken in the lower courts, and the speeches given by our elected officials denouncing the actions of President Trump and his administration should serve as examples of non-violent protests that would not justify the declaration of martial law.

Repeated discussions and public debates such as town halls are necessary forums to highlight the financial injustices of the partisan “Big Beautiful Bill” reconciliation act, the monetization of the presidency by Donald Trump in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, the heartless deportation of de facto citizens of this country, the creation of an ICE-based secret police force that is not burdened by the limitations of any laws, and the unjustified murder of citizens of other countries in international waters in the name of the United States and its people.

What is even more important is that Democrats and independents create a counter to Project 2025, the blueprint that is being used to force a restructuring of all aspects of American governance and society without consideration of the will of the citizens of the United States.

Project 2029 needs to be developed now to serve as a blueprint to restore the Federal government to a more moderate, bipartisan existence, to lay out a plan to address the income inequality that exists in this country, to reverse decisions made that ignore established science, to revamp our immigration system to be fair and humane yet provide necessary protections, to restore accountability throughout the government by reestablishing the roles of inspector generals, and to preserve clean air and clean water and prevent exploitation of public lands by profit-driven private corporations, to mention only a few of the myriad of other actions made necessary by President Trump and his administration’s anti-democratic, corrupt, and fascist-like approach to governance.

It should be clear that the extremes of both of our political parties have proven to be disastrous for this country. This country needs a return to moderation, bipartisanship, and common sense.

The Republicans have caused great harm by refusing to check the actions of President Trump, and by rights should lose control of Congress based upon their dereliction of duty alone. However, the Democrats need to learn to speak authoritatively about substantive matters and leave the wokeness for another day in order to be seen by American citizens as a competent and better choice.  

That may be asking for too much from a political party that is still fighting old battles with old ideas and seems unable to discern what is most important for this country.

Charlie Kirk is dead.

Just another senseless death by gun perpetrated by a mentally unstable young white man who had crazy, violent ideas.

According to Charlie Kirk, we should accept his murder as simply the price we must pay to preserve our second amendment rights. That is what he said, that is what he believed. I am sure that he never thought that he would be part of this price to pay.

Charlie Kirk had many ideas that were divisive. Basically, he seems to have wanted this country to be a Christian-based theocracy where women would be subservient to men, black people would be feared, homosexuality would be outlawed, Jewish and Islamic faiths would be closely monitored and controlled, and the Democratic Party would be considered to be an enemy of the state. Is this an accurate summation of Charlie Kirk’s message? Possibly.

In his mind, apparently, these changes to America would make this country great again.

Charlie Kirk believed in what he preached. This was his gospel. He welcomed debate and had a righteous conviction in what he espoused.

His death is sad, tragic, and pointless. His journey to find the truth was cut short. One can only assume that Charlie Kirk would have become more understanding of other people as he gained the perspective that comes with age. One cannot be a faithful follower of Jesus Christ and not believe in the goodness of love and acceptance.

But no one talks about these things.

Instead, the blaming has begun.

Charlie Kirk’s own words and ideas caused his death? He got what he deserved? I don’t think so.

Liberals and Democrats created a hateful culture that encouraged his murder? I don’t think so.

I had an opportunity today to watch the 90 minute long interview/discussion between Governor Gavin Newsom and Charlie Kirk that occurred about six months ago. It was the type of discussion that we need more of in society. Both Gavin Newsom and Charlie Kirk listened to each other, and spoke to the points raised, without any personal attacks or animosity.

Gavin Newsom was direct, informative, and reasonable, as was Charlie Kirk. This interview/discussion showed both men in a very positive light.

Perhaps if Charlie Kirk’s murderer had seen this interview/discussion he would have not been so determined to end Charlie Kirk’s life. Charlie Kirk had great potential to be an impactful voice of conservative reason for a long time. Unfortunately, the Charlie Kirk of the Gavin Newsom interview/discussion does not seem to be the Charlie Kirk that appeared on university campuses, on the Charlie Kirk podcast, and on viral soundbites. This more public and widely seen Charlie Kirk was much more divisive and aggressive.

Based upon the Charlie Kirk that I saw speaking with Gavin Newsom, I do not think that Charlie Kirk would have wanted the outpouring of hate and blame towards liberals in general and Democrats in particular that is coming from conservative politicians and commentators. I do not think that he would have wanted people to be fired from their jobs for trying to make sense of this senseless tragedy. I do not think that he wanted to be turned into a martyr, or have his murder used as a litmus test for political correctness.

None of this inflammatory rhetoric will make this a better country and make us a better people. This rush to weaponize his murder is really disgusting. Everyone other than a few sick individuals believe that Charlie Kirk’s murder was a senseless and unnecessary act of violence, and great sympathy has been expressed for his wife and two young children.

To try to turn this into an eye-for-an-eye moment, to say that the liberal left has declared war on the conservative right, to do this a day after Charlie Kirk’s murder – this is such a shameful response.

Instead, this should be a time for us all to reflect on what our country has become, and to express our collective sorrow for this most recent victim of our hate-filled culture.