Category: Uncategorized

(Originally published February 18, 2021)

We are now one month and dozens of executive orders into the Biden administration. Where are we? What do we really know?

• Decisions are being reached but the justification supporting the decision is never made clear.

• Directions are being followed but the reason for choosing the direction is never discussed.

• Policies are being established but the rational behind the policy is never explained.

Who is advising President Biden? How much of the decisions, directions, and policies originate with President Biden, and how much comes from his advisors? There is no accountability or transparency in the Biden administration. It is very much a secret society, a black box of governance.

Whether or not you liked the decisions, directions, and policies of the Trump administration, at least you knew why they were being made and by whom. Things are quite different now.

The general impression being created is that all of President Biden’s executive orders, decisions, directions, and policies are being motivated primarily by an intense dislike of President Trump and anything associated with Trump, and are being unduly influenced by leftist progressives and special interest groups such as the teacher’s unions and Black Lives Matter Inc. Absent of any debate or discussion, how can we be sure that any of this is in the best interests of the American people?

Where is the moderation and unification that we were promised? It is understandable that the 75 million people who voted for President Trump feel left out of the decision-making progress, but how about the 80 million people who voted for President Biden? As many are beginning to realize, they are being left out as well.

Perhaps all the warnings about President Biden were correct – that he is easily manipulated and controlled, unable to direct the course of his own administration. He seems unable to seize the opportunity provided by the presidency to lead, to inspire, to achieve. Where is President Biden’s “Make America Great Again”, his “Shining City On The Hill”, his “Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You”?

President Biden’s election is clouded by suspicions of fraud, allegations of unconstitutional acts, and reports of excessive irregularities. His family is accused of profiteering, selling out the country, and acting unethically. How can President Biden expect the American people to trust him when he has so far refused to really address these issues?

Day after day moderates and conservatives alike question the wisdom of decisions being made by the Biden administration, such as releasing illegal aliens into the country, allowing Chinese products to be used in the country’s power grid, suspending energy-related capital projects, and supporting the postponement of in-person education in public schools. These decisions do not appear to be in the best interests of the American people. On the contrary, sound reasons are given that the decisions are in the people’s worst interests.

But the Biden administration never addresses these questions. It is as if the administration does not feel any responsibility to the American people to explain its actions.

President Biden can repeat “Trump Is Bad – Covid-19” for only so long before it loses its impact and turns into a sad excuse for Biden administration policies that are poorly thought out and harmful to the American people. News Flash – Trump is no longer president, and the Covid-19 vaccination program is well underway. It is all on Biden now.

President Biden recently reminded us during his first town hall of the three principles of his presidency:

• Restore the soul of the country, focusing on decency, honor, integrity, and dignity.

• Rebuild the backbone of the country, expanding the middle class, ensuring that minorities have an equal opportunity to be included.

• Unite the country, basing decisions on consensus instead of one-party rule.

Certainly, President Biden believes in these principles, and they are noble principles that would strengthen the country if they could only be achieved. But it is equally evident that President Biden is an elder statesman, to put it kindly. He needs his advisors, his cabinet, and his vice president to fully support these principles and act accordingly.

Unfortunately, the Biden administration is too woke for its own good, too politically correct, too superficially diverse. There are too many people in highly visible positions who want to make their mark and cannot help but let their own ambitions cloud their judgement and negatively affect the performance of their duties. There are too many undisciplined people who follow their own interpretation of President Biden’s principles in order to suit their own agenda.

Generals Mattis, Kelly, and McMaster brought decency, honor, integrity, dignity, honesty, toughness and pragmatism to President Trump’s administration. It is still early in his administration, but President Biden needs to find his own generals before his principles are forgotten and replaced with a progressive form of corruption based upon wokefulness and personal ambition.

 (originally published January 11, 2021)

The ancient Greeks were famous for their tragedies about gods and heroes, Shakespeare was famous for his tragedies about kings and courts, but this ongoing American tragedy may outdo them all by the time all is said and done.

At the center of the tragedy is President Trump, hero as well as anti-hero. By his own words and deeds he set himself separate and a savior, which became both his greatest strength and then his most profound weakness.

President Trump demanded unconditional loyalty, subservience and allegiance, and created a division within this nation between those who gave him what he demanded and those who would not.

Now he has fallen, taken down by the consequences of his excesses. He leaves behind a damaged nation that searches for a way forward. We look for guidance from our leaders and from our pundits, but they speak with voices that do not ring true. The voices are hollow, insincere, confused, unsure.

History will eventually write of President Trump’s triumphs and accomplishments in an honest and thoughtful manner, but not today. Today appears to be a day for vengeance and retribution, a day for a wooden stake to the heart, a day to revel in the downfall of someone who flew too close to the sun.

Now more than ever we need to be honest with ourselves.

Half of the nation doubts the validity and fairness of our Presidential election. If there was fraud and cheating that did indeed influence or even change the results of the election, then this must be known. President Biden must establish a commission of the wisest among us to find the truth, but is he wise enough to do so?

There is no way forward to healing the nation without fully and honestly addressing these concerns and suspicions, but the voices whispering in President Biden’s ear may be like the sirens from the Illiad, so seductive in their partisan song of blood and vengeance that they lead him to ruin before his voyage has even begun.

President Biden will not succeed in his vision for this nation if he cannot convince those Americans who did not vote for him that he is their legitimate, duly elected president. This must be his first priority.

President Biden must also realize that he is surrounded by allies of convenience who have their own agendas – Pelosi, Schumer, Harris, Sanders, and Cortez among others – and who cannot be trusted to give him advice free from their own self-interests and prejudices. The best advice may in fact come from the other side of the aisle.

This rush to impeach President Trump during the last days of his presidency is a clear example of an extremely divisive idea that should have no place in an administration dedicated to uniting the country, and this idea should be discouraged by President Biden in a forceful and direct manner instead of weakly sidestepping around it as he has done up until now.

President Biden must also realize that kind words towards President Trump and the total rejection of disparaging or vindictive remarks will bring him much more goodwill and cooperation from Trump’s supporters than any disappointment voiced by his allies of convenience or the fickle media will hurt him. There is nobility in showing benevolence towards those who have lost the battle, and there is the real possibility that a lasting peace may be achieved by doing so.

President Biden must also object to how the First Amendment right to free speech has been stripped away from President Trump and others. This is more of an assault on our Constitution than anything President Trump has ever said. Let everyone express their opinions in accordance with the First Amendment, and let their opinions rise or fall as they may. We cannot be afraid of ideas that may be different from our own and still be free.

President Trump has earned the right to express himself to his millions of followers. If Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Google, and Amazon insist on using their monopolistic powers to limit ideas and opinions to only those that they deem acceptable, then it is time to recognize that social media platforms are really a new form of public utility and need to be regulated accordingly. Free speech must be available to everyone, certainly to the President of the United States. Five multi-billionaires cannot be allowed to control the thought of a free nation.

As it stands right now, President Trump finally gave a subdued and heartfelt speech that expressed his appreciation for being given the opportunity to lead the nation. It was a speech that did not include any claims about the presidential election, a long listing of his accomplishments, or attacks on his political enemies and the media. It is possible that he is beginning to develop a new perspective on his time in office now that it is clear his time is coming to an end.

Losing this election may be a somewhat humbling experience for President Trump, but how are we to know when he has been silenced? It is hoped that President Trump will eventually find a new means of expression that is more meaningful and significant than either his tweeting or his rallies have proved to be. Less entertainment and more substance would be more fitting for an ex-president.

One day, when there are events where our ex-presidents appear together, hopefully we will see President Trump standing side by side with Presidents Carter, Clinton, Bush, and Obama, honorable men who served the nation the best that they knew how, each with their own flaws and limitations along with their successes, but patriots all.

Let us not compound the tragedy by squandering this opportunity to unite as one nation with one common purpose as a free people, simply because of the inflated egos of our leaders and our collective need to even the score.

For anyone who still has an open mind about these things, the fact is that hardly any Democrat wants socialism. Government control of our lives and the resulting loss of personal freedoms is certainly not what the Democrats have in mind. They are American patriots after all.

The idea that the Democrats would take over the Senate and Presidency on January 20, 2021 and that within a short period of time this country would become a socialist nation like Venezuela or even Sweden is both ridiculous and hysterical. So many laws would have to be passed, so many lawsuits would have to be argued and won, so much civil disobedience would have to be overcome – it just isn’t going to happen. No matter what is being claimed to the contrary, support for true socialism is most assuredly not found within the Democratic Party, except for a few outliers.

However, our current economic system is not doing so well. You can see it in the number of homeless people and the mentally ill, the number of unemployed and underemployed, our widespread drug addiction problem, our declining standard of living, our loss of life satisfaction, rises in obesity, diabetes and heart disease, the increase in left-wing and right-wing hate groups, the rejection of common good in favor of individual anarchy, a willingness to believe the worst about each other. All of this stems from our economic system that generates more wealth than any other but is so willing to abandon so many Americans to lives of desperation and insecurity. There is a sense of foreboding and frustration and anger that so many of us feel. From the abandoned rural areas of the country to the abandoned urban areas of the country, people know that something is wrong.

This is what the progressive Democrats are trying to talk about, but they just can’t seem to find the right words to explain themselves without going down rabbit holes and alienating, frightening and angering many people that would otherwise support the cause.

We don’t need socialism, we need social democracy. This is the idea that society’s interests should be taken into consideration as a moderating influence to capitalism’s profit motive. It does not mean eliminating the profit motive entirely in favor of some theoretical kumbaya-based Marxist system that no one except a few extreme ideologues really want. Hard work, entrepreneurship, relative value of labor, and creativity still need to be recognized and rewarded for any economic system to be acceptable. We just need our economic system to be brought back into balance.

Social democracy is not a radically new idea. As a historical simplification, society’s interests were part of business and political decision-making from the end of World War I until the early 1970’s, encompassing both Roosevelt’s New Deal and Johnson’s Great Society. The income tax was instituted early on during this time to address gross disparities in wealth that had developed from monopolies in oil, steel, and railroad transportation. This worked well for most, but then the ideas of the economist Milton Friedman and the theory of Reagan’s trickle-down economics gained favor in the 1970’s. Profit for shareholders and upper management became the overriding business consideration, employees became overhead instead of assets, and politicians became dependent on political contributions from business interests to stay in power instead of from the support of their constituents.

The 1970’s is when everything changed for most of us, meaning the working class and the small business owners that make up 99% of all Americans – those who make less than $450,000 per year, more or less. The 1970’s meant no more gold watches, no more pensions, no more unions. Tax cuts and tax breaks only for the rich and well-connected. The rise of the millionaires and then the rise of the billionaires.

A recent report by the Rand Corporation suggests that if we had simply stayed on course with social democracy, the average family’s annual income would be $95,000 instead of the $50,000 that it is today. What a difference this would have made to us both individually and to the country as a whole.

The last 50 years has seen an incredible transfer of our collective wealth from 99% of Americans to the upper 1%. It has even become necessary to create a new 0.1% category to describe the uber-wealthy. While many people object to the idea of income redistribution from the wealthy to the working class as being unfair to the wealthy, very few take into account the extreme income redistribution that has already occurred and has resulted in this current concentration of wealth.

It is a testament to the seductive persuasion of the rich and powerful how so many Americans in the 99% have been convinced to vote against their self-interest time and time again, and it certainly appears that this is going to happen again in this election as well. After 50 years of stagnated economic gains for nearly all of us, it would be reasonable to assume that we are all tired of the status quo and want our country’s economic wealth to start being shared fairly. Unfortunately, many people have been convinced that change will only make things worse, not better, and they will make their decisions out of fear and not from logic and faith.

Taking it to the extreme, according to Forbes magazine, the top 10 wealthiest Americans are now worth nearly 800 billion dollars. This is more or less the equivalent of the skinny bill that the Republicans in the Senate have been trying to pass as Covid-19 relief for the entire country.

How unbalanced is the current distribution of wealth? Consider –

The top 2 wealthiest American individuals are worth more than all of the Black households combined.

The top 3 wealthiest American individuals are worth more than all of the Latino households combined.

How can this be justified by anyone?

This current concentration of wealth has lead to a situation where, if you are young and black or Latino (not to mention Native American), there is a strong likelihood that you will never achieve the American dream. Even if you are young and white or Asian, there are insufficient opportunities to go around. So much talent and creativity and vitality is being wasted by our current economic system. So much economic hopelessness is being created instead.

This is why extreme income inequality has to be addressed before it really gets out of hand and further destabilizes and divides our country. This is why social democracy should be welcomed and supported by the 99% of us who have been paying the economic price for decades. America will never be a socialist country, but it can certainly be a more equitable one.

Let the battle begin!

As we all know, due to the coronavirus pandemic the in-person Democratic and Republican conventions were not held. Both parties were given the opportunity to put on a virtual convention that would give each party ample opportunity to present to the American people their vision for the future without the pageantry and other trappings of an in-person convention. Neither party took advantage of this opportunity.

The Democratic virtual convention showed a party without focus, other than a shared dislike/hatred of President Trump. Having a different actress serve as the Master of Ceremonies for each night was unnecessary and continued the Hollywood – Democratic Party connection that adds nothing of substance and is proving to be a distraction and a detriment. Not having a consistent, more formal and impressive venue for the various speeches was a mistake. Not expressing more patriotism was a mistake. Not condemning the violence and looting was a mistake. Not expressing support for law enforcement was a mistake. Not defending Democratic mayors and governors was a mistake. Not reaching out to rural America was a mistake. Not putting to rest this “open borders” nonsense was a mistake. Having Bill and Hillary Clinton appear only served as a reminder of their past unethical and immoral behavior and how much they are disliked – a big mistake.

It was a relief to hear Joe Biden deliver the best speech of his career when it was all on the line. Hopefully this was not the high point of his campaign, because if he cannot or will not travel the country and express his vision for America in a clear and concise manner, and then answer questions afterwards, the Democrats will certainly lose the election.

It is extremely unfortunate that the Democrats did not focus on the most important parts of their platform:

– Establishing a better and more effective means of responding to future pandemics, learning from the failures of the Trump administration where it failed to address the coronavirus pandemic with timely instructions to the American people and were unable to identify and isolate the infected. The result of the Trump administration’s failure is going to be that 1 out of every 1000 Americans will end up dying from the coronavirus. There is little that can be done at this point in time to prevent this from happening, but at least we can be prepared for the future.

– Addressing the profound difference in wealth between 99% of Americans and the top 1% of Americans that has developed over the past 40 years due to changes in the tax structure and the passage of various laws that favor the wealthy. This redistribution of wealth from the lower and middle class to the upper class has taken resources from the Federal Government that could have paid for improvements to infrastructure, for example, as well as decreasing most people’s effective standard of living. It is not a socialist concept to believe that every person who works 40 hours a week should have an income that is above the poverty level without having to work two or three jobs. $15.00/hr. meets this basic standard, resulting in an annual income of $30,000.

– Ensuring that all Americans have access to affordable health care as a basic principle is not a socialist concept. A single-payer government-controlled system may not be a viable approach as a next step due to questions about cost and political viability. Having a government option of Medicare for those who want it, and requiring people to pay for it may very well be the best option right now. A public/private partnership similar to Medicare Advantage Plus programs may be an effective means of including our health insurance industry as part of the solution instead of eliminating the entire industry and the jobs that go with it.

– Providing employment opportunities for our young people so that they can take part in our economy instead of having to wait and wait for things to change. The current trend towards eliminating jobs and making the remaining employees work harder and faster may result in short-term improvements in corporate profitability, but this comes with widespread dissatisfaction of both overworked employees as well as the unemployed. This is not a long-term solution. Encouraging the return of domestic production of goods and services through tax code incentives would produce more jobs, as would a nationwide infrastructure improvement program.

– Reaching out to rural America, which is not directly effected by social unrest and which does not seem to have much understanding of the problems facing urban America. A non-judgmental acknowledgement that living in rural America brings with it a different sense of patriotism, religious faith, second amendment rights, and independence from government influence would be refreshing and inclusive.

– Acknowledging that law enforcement is a noble and necessary profession instead of demonizing all of law enforcement because of the admittedly racist and cruel actions of a small percentage of law enforcement personnel. The fact that people who live in minority neighborhoods want more law enforcement and not less should be acknowledged and appreciated for what it means. Law and order is a fundamental necessity for a healthy society.

– Accepting that many of our minority citizens believe strongly that they are treated like less-than-equal citizens and do not feel fully accepted into American society. There is historical precedent for this belief, as well as ongoing issues. Whether it is called systemic racism or something else, it is real and needs to be acknowledged and addressed. Black, Latino, Native American, and Asian cultural influences are everywhere in our society. A celebration of our diversity as a people should be the goal. Cultural appropriation as a negative needs to be replaced with cultural inclusion as a positive. We have come a long way since the civil rights movement in the 1960’s – now is the time for a concerted effort to strengthen the fabric of our society.

On the down side, the Democratic party seems to be full of negative internal influences such as conflicting ideologies, unwillingness to compromise and work together, a tendency to stand on principle to the bitter end, raging egos and control issues, a lack of cohesive vision, people who publicly say stupid things, and a lack of understanding how to be patriotic, optimistic, tough, and progressive at the same time. This internal chaos may prove to be the downfall of the Democratic campaign.

In contrast, it is clear that the Republican party sure knows how to put on a show, how to have a coherent theme throughout their virtual convention, and how to take advantage of the trappings of the presidency. The Republican virtual convention was extremely well produced, nearly flawless.

Unfortunately, there is no Republican platform to discuss. The Republican virtual convention celebrated a party without direction, other than to turn President Trump into “Our Great Leader” and to demonize anyone who does not follow the Trump dictates as both unpatriotic and an existential threat to our country. The entire focus of the virtual convention was to deify “Our Great Leader” and to present President Trump’s first four years in office as being a resounding success, completely ignoring any facts that might call into question just how successful or even unsuccessful some of his actions have been. It remains to be seen just how effective this virtual convention has been in framing the parameters of the remaining campaign. The Republicans may have very well successfully dictated the terms of engagement going forward and with it assured their victory.

In some ways, the last night of the Republican virtual convention that saw Donald Trump formally accepting his party’s nomination also showed the separation between the haves and the have nots, and how no matter what was said by the speakers the harsh reality of our society was starkly evident to those who bothered or cared to observe it.

Sitting on the lawn were well-dressed people of privilege, mostly white, apparently corona virus free, no masks, no social distancing, appreciative of Donald Trump’s huge tax break for the top 1%, his focus on law and order, the wholesale elimination of regulations, the opening up of federal lands to economic exploitation, excessively large tax breaks for corporations – all of which serves to preserve and increase the wealth of the few. Throw in some touching human interest stories as a distraction, talk about abortion and the second amendment to appeal to single-issue voters, wave the flag, have a very impressive fireworks display, and conclude with an opera singer. It was a night to remember.

In contrast, on the other side of the fence were people from the bottom 99%, protesting the Republican message of inclusion by exclusion, unruly, frustrated, angry, powerless, not allowed to join the party on the lawn.

The battle royale is about to begin.

Donald Trump has the benefits of incumbency, a great deal of money, an energized and loyal base of supporters, and a blood lust for destroying his opponents through demeaning characterizations – both personal as well as professional.

Joe Biden has been able to take a low-key approach and benefit from miss-steps that Donald Trump has made. These self-inflicted wounds that Donald Trump has taken are significant but not fatal, and in a sense have made him an even more dangerous opponent.

Joe Biden has been characterized as not having been a leader while in the Senate or as Vice-President, having lost several steps in terms of his mental acuity, and without a clear vision of where he intends to take the country should he be elected president. These are significant perceived weaknesses that he must address as the campaign begins in earnest.

He must learn to turn these weaknesses into strengths if he is to win the presidency.

Joe Biden is not a leader? He has spent his career preparing for this moment, to be the leader that can return balance and sanity to our country. Joe Biden has been a senator for decades, a member of the most important legislative body in our government. He has seen and been involved with every important piece of legislation passed during his time in office. He has the experience to know how the business of government is conducted. In addition, Joe Biden has been the vice president for two terms, at the side of the president. He has seen and been involved with many important matters of state, both foreign and domestic. No one has more experience than Joe Biden. He bares the scars of many battles won and lost, and he has endured. This is deserving of respect and admiration.

Joe Biden suffers from cognitive decline? Well, he has never been a great orator, he struggles with a speech impediment, and he can veer off into weird tangents instead of sticking to his main talking points. This is not evidence of cognitive decline, but these limitations and tendencies should be addressed. It is important for Joe Biden to be able to deliver a focused message – preparation will be key. If it takes time for Joe Biden to gather his thoughts, then his demonstrated need to be thoughtful before speaking should be welcomed and commended.

Joe Biden has no vision? He has not yet shown that he has a clear vision, with a plan and program for everything. But what Joe Biden has is a profound feeling for what is right and fair and just. He has empathy. He is humble enough to seek counsel from those around him, and is the type of person who could gather strong and experienced people around him to build a solid cabinet. His integrity will come from within; his strength will come from without.

As the campaign unfolds, Joe Biden must learn to be a rock, to let the attacks of Donald Trump be like a wave breaking against the cliffs, an impressive spray but with no lasting effect. This will take concentration and preparation. Donald Trump has an insidious way of breaking down his opponent’s focus and will. Joe Biden must learn to use silence and a smile to deflect Donald Trump’s attacks, then speak from his heart and deliver a succinct message that does not focus on defending himself but instead speaks past and above whatever Donald Trump says to connect with the soul of the American people.

Much is made of the fact that the U.S. is a country divided, with red states that are conservative, rural, and Republican-leaning, and blue states that are liberal, urban, and Democrat-leaning. Our politicians and pundits love to say that we must come together as one people and one country, and then their conversation degenerates into partisan bickering, name-calling, and blaming.

We need to realize and accept that our politicians and pundits are often motivated by money and power and ego, and that their words of wisdom are simply expressions of their personal bias and self-interest. They are quick to see this in others and point it out ad nauseum, but have no interest in acknowledging their own similar failings. Unfortunately, many of us have taken to acting the same way.

This basic failure in communication is why we have not had a unified direction or purpose for the past 25 years. We have accomplished nothing substantive in this time, nor have we paid much attention to how the world has changed around us, so now we are poorly prepared to address the demands that the future is bringing, both domestically as well as globally.

While our politicians and pundits bicker and posture away, we continue to be in the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic that shows no signs of being under control. Wishful thinking cannot take the place of a vaccine. Right now we have nearly 115,000 deaths due to Covid-19, with a projection of hundreds of additional deaths every day with no end in site. Now that the focus is to reinvigorate the economy without regard to minimizing the spread of the Corona virus, it is not unreasonable to consider the possibility that we could have 330,000 deaths by the end of 2020. This would mean that 1 out of every 1,000 Americans will die from Covid-19 in a year’s time.

No matter if you live in rural America or urban America, a red state or a blue state, this should be a horrifying prospect. This is not a sign of a healthy and vibrant country, this is a sign of a dysfunctional society.

We need a combination of ideas, both red and blue, if we are to regain our balance and direction. We should all embrace our past, which began as a struggle for independence and self-determination. We should all consider ourselves to be independent-minded. We should all question and reject our politicians and pundits when they speak to us in a partisan and manipulative manner. We should insist that the most important issues of our time be addressed with fact-based debate and reasoning.

The major issues facing this country are pretty clear:

A discussion of these issues during the presidential campaign would be a welcome change from the partisan talk and insult politics that is more than likely what we will end up with. Hopefully, at least some of the time, Trump and Biden will take the high road and speak to us in an inspirational and inclusive manner.

Talk about wishful thinking.

We are all aware of the recent murder of a black man in Minnesota, as well as the many other deaths and beatings of civilians at the hands of law enforcement officers that have occurred over the years. Many of these incidents are racially charged and are perpetuated upon men of color, but white men have also been treated this way. Most of the time being a woman allows one to avoid the worst of the violence.

But not always.

A few years ago in New Jersey, a local police officer confronted a man who had broken into a house. The intruder then grabbed a young female college student to serve as a physical shield. Rather than temporarily retreating from the scene and calling for backup and a mediator, the police officer panicked and shot the college student dead before shooting the intruder. Apparently this was the first time that the police officer had drawn his weapon in the line of duty.

After a review by a law enforcement review board, this was determined to have been a justified shooting because the police officer believed that his life was in danger.

At the time that this incident occurred, I had an acquaintance who was attending the police academy. When I asked him if this tragic incident had been discussed at the academy, he told me that it had. The police instructors agreed that it had been a justified shooting, that it was unfortunate that a civilian had died, but that sometimes collateral damage was acceptable in order to protect society.

Who determined that this young woman’s life had to be taken, that her death was simply acceptable collateral damage, and that the local police officer had acted appropriately?

My understanding is that the determination of acceptable police procedures and the review of police actions are typically made by law enforcement professionals who are primarily concerned with ensuring the safety of law enforcement personnel as they act in the line of duty. This is all well and good, but this goal needs to be balanced with the importance of preserving the safety, the dignity, and the right of civilians to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

There is clearly an imbalance in the training of law enforcement personnel because the rights of civilians are ignored time and time again whenever law enforcement personnel feel threatened or disrespected. Add in the inherent racist beliefs of some officers and the related devaluation of civilian lives, and the result has been tragedy after tragedy, accompanied by emotional pain and trauma of families and entire communities. This has lead to resentment and distrust by communities of the very people whose responsibility it is to serve and protect them.

The status quo must be changed if things are to improve.

One idea is to require that the training of law enforcement personnel be subject to review and approval by civilian boards appointed by state governors. It is understood that law enforcement organizations generally do not like civilian involvement in their business, but without civilian input and oversight, law enforcement becomes detached from the community at large, and an “us vs. them” mentality can take hold, which is exactly what is not needed.

A second idea is to require that any complaint regarding the actions of law enforcement personnel alleging violations of civil rights be subject to review by this same civilian board, with the facts and findings of the board being made a matter of public record.

A third idea is to require that any shooting or beating of a civilian by a law enforcement officer be considered to be a potential violation of the civilian’s civil rights, with each situation subject not only to review by the civilian board, but also automatically referred to the FBI for review as well.

Law enforcement is too critical and too important a part of our society to be allowed to exist in separation from society. At the same time that we acknowledge the physical and emotional stresses, as well as the actual physical dangers that law enforcement personnel experience during the course of their careers, we must also insist on the right of civilians to be involved in establishing what are acceptable police procedures.

Community policing and community involvement by the police should be the rule and not the exception. The positive actions of our law enforcement officers must always be acknowledged and encouraged. The removal of law enforcement officers that disgrace the profession through criminality, racism, and cruelty must become standard practice.

Clearly, changes have to be made so that civilians, particularly in our minority communities, can trust the police to treat them fairly. Making law enforcement more transparent and accountable is critical to the changes that have to be made.

My memories of Minnesota are innocent ones, wonderful summers spent as a child with my grandma and aunt at their house in Minneapolis, and weeks-long canoe trips as a child in the boundary waters between northern Minnesota and Canada. Later on I would spend a few weeks with my aunt in a small cabin in the Minnesota woods, with a hand pumped well in the kitchen, a root cellar under the floor, an outhouse out back, and fields of sumac from which we made sun tea and juice.

As a child, I was oblivious to the fact that Minnesota had practiced lynching 100 years ago, and that Minnesota would develop over time into a state with such an underlying fear and distrust of people of African-American descent that any white supremacist would feel right at home. One cannot get much further north in the continental United States than Duluth, Minnesota. Racism has spread everywhere like uncontrolled cancer.

Having grown up in Marquette, Michigan, a very northern city in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, my exposure to people of color was limited to a few Native Americans, a few black men stationed at K.I. Sawyer Air Force Base, and a few black college students studying at Northern Michigan University.

Once I transferred to the University of Michigan in downstate Michigan, I was exposed to many more black college students and the existence of a separate black subculture. Being a shy young man from a small wilderness town, I can’t say that I made too many friends in general, but I could have had a black girlfriend if I hadn’t been such a social incompetent. I don’t remember her name, but she really liked me. We all have missed opportunities, and she was one of mine.

During the course of my engineering career, I became friends with our black warehouse foreman Yves, who was from Haiti, and with a cute young college intern named Zakia, whose parents were from England. I called her my Princess of Wales, she called me her Boo. A 25 year age difference was a critical factor in our just being really good friends.

Later on, I spent much of a summer travelling to various Caribbean islands, working with the local construction crews, most of which were made up of black men. My job was to instruct them on the installation techniques for the products my company was providing for various jobs. Even though I didn’t spend enough time at most of the projects to develop good friendships, it was a great experience and reinforced my general impression that a friendly smile and a respectful manner transcends a lot of perceived differences.

It is incredibly sad to see the horrible state of affairs in Minneapolis right now that has resulted from the callus brutality of four police officers. The brutality that ended in the murder on a busy street in broad daylight of a black man already secured in handcuffs and laying helpless on the ground could not have been a more graphic display of how our racist past lies just under the skin of our society, ready to burst forth in hatred and cruelty, and how so many of us are so ready to embrace this ignorance without shame or remorse or a moment’s thought.

This illustrates in the starkest of ways why “Black Lives Matter” is such a profound plea that white people need to understand and accept how much racism still exists within our country.

There are many things that we as individuals cannot change right away. We cannot eliminate racist, sadistic, heartless police – only the police can do that. We cannot eliminate the economic and medical disparity that exists for all the poor – Black, Latino, White – only society as a whole can do that.

What we can do as white people is to make a concerted effort to develop empathy and try to understand what it has been like for people of African-American descent to live in this country as a feared and disrespected minority, generation after generation after generation.

I came to realize not too long ago that in 1957, the year I was born, there were still such things as whites-only drinking fountains, hotels, restaurants, etc. The entire civil rights movement has occurred within my lifetime. In many ways things have changed for the better, but we are a few generations away from being able to come together as one people. The old ways of thinking need to die with those who think them before we can truly be free.

In the meantime, each of us can reach across the color divide and make personal connections. Share your stories, share your photos, share your recipes, share your beer and barbecue. If I were a black person, I think that I would be appreciative and relieved to find out that my white neighbors wanted to be part of my life in a positive and friendly way, and I would be happy to reciprocate.

The point is that it is hard to hate a friend.

]

The extent of our country’s social and political failings has been starkly brought to light by our pathetic response to the coronavirus. Right now we are a sad people.

The U.S. has less than 5% of the world’s population, but has nearly 30% of the Covid-19 deaths. This one fact documents for the world the fundamental failure of our society. Unfortunately, we ourselves don’t seem to realize the profoundly negative significance of these statistics.

Our political system has failed to protect us. Just like the 9/11 terrorist attack, advance warnings of impending disaster were ignored by our federal government, the disaster that could have been avoided occurred unimpeded, and our response has been to blame the Democrats, the Republicans, the Chinese, anyone else but ourselves. Our strategic stockpiles of PPE were hopelessly inadequate, our domestic testing procedures failed miserably, our travel restrictions were instituted too late, and we wasted at least a month pretending that everything was under control when there were actually no controls or plan in place.

Our economy has failed to protect us. We are being told that no one realized the extent of our reliance on foreign countries to supply us with raw, partially-finished, and finished goods, but in reality our large corporations knew, the commerce department of the federal government knew, and anyone who shopped in Walmart, Target, Home Depot, Lowes, Wayfair, Overstock, etc. and bothered to read the labels that identified country of origin knew. At some level we all knew, but from what I can tell, very few of us were concerned.

Our people are failing to protect us from ourselves. A few parts of the country have been able to moderate the spread of the coronavirus through lengthy stay-at-home periods, but the rest of the country does not seem to think that this is important. Many are resuming their normal way of life without concern for basic protective measures like wearing a mask and practicing social distancing. The federal government has issued science-based recommendations for safely reopening our economy, and far too many states have promptly ignored the recommendations in favor of placating a minority of selfish, ignorant people who have no concept of social responsibility.

Here is what is going to happen. The country’s economy will open up and people will go back to work. People will continue to become sick with the coronavirus, but 95% will survive with minimal symptoms, with others surviving after suffering through the illness and recovery. We will need to protect our most vulnerable citizens such as older people and those with underlying health issues by limiting their involvement in society, because otherwise they will become infected and many will die. We will experience a second wave of coronavirus later in the fall and we will try to downplay it, but in the end the deaths due to coronavirus will certainly exceed 150,000 and may approach 250,000 before we develop improved treatments for the most vulnerable and possibly a vaccine for all of us.

So if we are the greatest nation on earth, with the world’s best health care system, why are we so pathetic, and why are we not doing something about it?

There is a difference between making a deal and making a decision. We need leaders who have mastered the art of the decision, not the art of the deal.

At best, a deal benefits everyone involved in a fair and balanced way, with all parties following through with their obligations – the classic win-win scenario.

At worst, a deal unfairly benefits the party that has the most power, and is agreed to by the weaker party only because they have no other alternative. More often than not, the more powerful party ultimately reneges on their obligations, making the deal even more one-sided – the classic win-lose scenario.

We have a president who boasts about making win-lose deals, and who has shown through his business history of bankruptcies, unpaid bills, tax avoidance schemes, and broken promises that he is always ready to renege on his obligations. He’s even written self-congratulatory books about the success of his business methods.

However, the presidency is not the boardroom. The presidency requires decisions, not deals. This president’s art of the win-lose deal has lead to winners and losers in most of the actions that this administration has taken. This president’s brazen, intimidating, and insulting style has provided entertaining cover for his actions, most of which have benefited the very rich and the large corporations at the expense of the poor, the middle class, and small businesses, not to mention threatening the environmental health of the country and destabilizing important international relationships that have served to provide political and economic stability for seventy-five years.

We need to move beyond the art of the deal. It has not served us well. Instead, let’s begin to practice the art of the decision, more specifically, the art of the good decision.

The art of the good decision begins with justifying its need. There must be a clear understanding of the anticipated outcome of the decision, what improvement over the status quo is intended to be achieved.

The art of the good decision must be based on unbiased facts and data, without the influence of partisanship, preconceptions, or constraints. Having unbiased facts and data is required to accurately understand the status quo, to develop of a plan of action intended to achieve the anticipated outcome, and to have a basis by which the success of the decision can be measured.

The art of the good decision requires that it be timely so that the conditions to be addressed by the decision do not change before the plan of action can be put into effect. A delay in making a decision makes it much more likely that the anticipated outcome will not be achieved.

Finally, the art of the good decision also requires a recognition that facts and conditions are always changing and evolving. Adjustments to the plan of action may be required during implementation. What is certain is that all good decisions must always be revisited to ensure continued relevancy and to address unintended consequences.

We have a president who makes self-serving decisions that are more like win-lose deals. His anticipated outcomes are intended to benefit his power base, manipulate his supporters, and support his personal agenda. His decisions are not based upon having the correct facts and data or on having a clear understanding of the status quo, and more often than not are full of personal bias, ego, and retribution. Even his best decisions rarely have a well thought-out plan of action, often involve significant delay, and as a result are unlikely to achieve the anticipated outcome.

To be fair, the president is not alone in his inability to make good decisions. This failure transcends party affiliation, and seems to be seen as a virtue by many in whom we have placed our faith and trust.

The art of the decision is appreciated and mastered by few; the art of the good decision is mastered by fewer still.