Ukraine-location, location, location, timing, timing, timing

 Realtors tell us it’s all about location, location, location.

They also tell us timing is everything.

Political analysts, I’m sure, would agree.

When my daughter was in college she became friends with a fellow student, who our family quaintly refers to as, Mary from Ukraine, to distinguish her from Mary from Princess Anne High School. Since graduating, they correspond regularly and have visited each other on several occasions in Ukraine, France, Morocco. The two are on similar journeys that began as college students and has continued as they’ve become single working girls, newlyweds and now with their own families.

Had either gone to another school or enrolled in different semesters they never would have met, and both would have missed what looks to be a lifelong friendship. Life certainly is all about timing and location.

That is what I told Mary’s father in my only correspondence with him. When Jessica returned from her visit to Ukraine she delivered a gift to me from him—a pewter glass holder. Before sending him a thank-you letter I researched the significance of the image portrayed on it.

It seems that in the 1600s, Poland was a powerful nation controlling much of Eastern Europe. The people of Ukraine resented living under what they considered to be a repressive regime, much the way a century later we would resent being under England’s thumb.

In 1648, under the leadership of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, Ukraine Cossacks successfully revolted and gained their independence from Poland, just as we would one day do from England. His image is the one on the glass holder. He was Ukraine’s George Washington before there even was a George Washington.

Ukraine wanted what the American colonies would later desire and they were willing to put everything on the line to gain their independence. Like the American colonies, they were successful. But unlike the American colonies, Ukraine was unable to sustain lasting independence, mostly because of its location and 1650stiming.

It was a different time and a different place. The politics of the day demanded they align with a bigger, stronger nation or risk falling back under Poland’s control. By the mid-1650s, Ukraine was under the protectorate of Tsarist Russia. In the end, their fight for independence had resulted in merely escaping the grasp of one European powerhouse only to fall into the repressive realm of another. Their alliance with Russia would, in the long run, prove more destructive than if they had remained with Poland.

In the first few years after our victory over England, we experienced many hardships of forming a new government, but our independence was never threatened. Again, timing and location made the difference.

As a nation, we had room to breathe. Our borders weren’t at risk.  Something else existed in 1776 America that did not exist in 1648 Ukraine—fresh ideas.

In the period between Ukraine’s revolt and the American Revolution, something happened. Something that changed the world.

John Locke was born in 1632 and in his lifetime, he would propose doctrines that would change the world and the way people thought about themselves. He, along with Rousseau, Voltaire and others would shape politics and the approach to governing.

Before these men, revolutions were about replacing repressive governments with similarly repressive ones. But the American Revolution was about revolutionary ideas like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—ideas first put forward by John Locke. In 1648, Ukraine did not have these forward-thinking ideas as a resource.

That is what I wrote to Mary’s father when I thanked him for his gift. At the time Ukraine, like many other former Soviet states, had broken away from the Soviet Union and seemed to be making a move into mainstream Europe. But as we watch the pictures coming out of Independence Square in Kyiv, we realize the Ukrainian people are again at a crossroads and faced with the same problems it had in 1648—whether it will align with Europe and gain a greater degree of independence or return to being a Russian satellite.

This time it has the benefit of revolutionary ideas, but it must also overcome 400 years of Russian influence. The struggle is also being fought in an area of much unrest and turmoil and at a time when where they wind up will have major repercussions for all the nations involved.

No one knows where this current struggle will end, but again, as always, the times and the location will play a major role.  

This was written in 2014 at the time of Ukraine’s last struggle with Russia. Putin was Russia’s leader then and continues to be today, so again, Ukrainians find themselves at war with a man willing to destroy them in order to control them. Maybe now is the time and place to finally gain the independence they’ve been fighting four centuries for.

And now is the time for Bogdan Khmelnitsky to be replaced by Volodymyr Zelenskyy as Ukraine's latest hero in its fight for independence.

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Legitimate Political Discourse

 

Stop shouting. I can barely hear myself think

People died, were injured, and/or were terrorized by all that “talking” that Republicans are now calling legitimate political discourse. Yelling “fire” in a movie theater is still wrong and not protected by the first amendment, but something that can get you killed is legitimate political discourse.

Can we now use the word deplorable to describe those who defecated on the floors and walls of the Capitol? For those who don’t like reading about sh*t in their morning newspaper, how would you feel about walking into your office tomorrow and finding sh*t on your desk next to your nameplate?

How does “Hang Mike Pence” even begin to equate with legitimate political discourse like “I don’t think I can vote for that?” Don’t even try to write it off by declaring “Democrats say nasty things, too.” Trump blew that defense out of the water by declaring there were good and bad people on both sides in Charlottesville. Nazis? White supremacists? Good people?

How does “We have to fight like hell” not be a call for violence when the resulting action becomes a violent, no-holds-barred, inflict-as-much-pain-as-possible insurrection?

Republican leaders continue to defend the big lie. They think the only good Americans are Republicans in good standing. What should we expect from a party always demanding loyalty oaths?

Trump, who speaks for all Republicans—at least the good ones (sorry Pence), call Democrats un-American traitors? No Republican said this was wrong. Even “Some Democrats are un-American traitors, and some are not,” would have been a step in the right direction.

Republicans continue to defend the “big lie” because they are, and have been for some time, big liars, tying themselves up in knots trying to explain their behavior. They stand by a man who says, “…if we don’t stand up and fight, we will lose our country,” when this same man is literally destroying our country.

How deplorable must a Republican leader be to cower to this immature coward? How deplorable must voters be to support these leaders?  

Ask someone who says, “I’d rather die than get vaccinated.”

Giving Ideas a Voice & Room to Grow

 

These are front and back covers of book I'm currently working on.

Now they are Deplorable

As a Democrat, I have to say I’m getting a little tired of the constant criticism that Republican leaders are being subjected to, for simply being Republican leaders. This goes for everyone from Trump to Cruz and McConnell, Rubio and Hawley, Ron Johnson, the ever-ridiculous Louie Gohmert, and a whole lot more.

True, they are all hypocrites, clueless and idealess, which is a whole lot more problematic than being an idealist. They stand for nothing other than self-preservation in a dog-eat-dog world of politics, which is why it has become easier than it’s ever been to make fun of them or box them into a corner by throwing their own words back at them.

Nevertheless, ridiculing Republican leaders has become all too easy, because they are simply doing the only thing they feel they must do to hang on to their jobs—appeal to Republican voters by being loyal Republicans. They are wrong of course. They could be leaders, but leadership is not what Republican voters look for in their leaders. Trump won in 2016 because he said what Republican voters wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear.

For this reason, while media fatigue has allowed me to let Republican leaders off the hook, and because they deserve our pity more than our scorn, I am disgusted with Republican voters. Not just because more  of them seem to be white supremacist, racists, bigots, religious fanatics, law-and-order enthusiast who don’t respect the law, Constitutionalist who don’t respect the Constitution, and in many cases, may not have ever read the Constitution, or just plain folks who simply don’t care about anyone other than themselves.

I’m disgusted with them because they just don’t seem to be that smart.

I’ve listened to QAnon conspiracist rationalize why they supported and continue to support Trump and it’s mind-boggling—not only for what they think they know, but what they honestly don’t know, and make no mistake, QAnon conspiracist vote Republican.

So do a lot of other crazies—Proud Boys, boogaloo boys, that old standby KKK, those people who think masks aren’t necessary, or the ones who think guns are not only necessary but vital to our survival.

Too many of these not-so-smart Republicans think a debate on healthcare or wages or the economy or politics can be won by throwing out the words Socialism, traitor, un-American, fake news, Soros and lately Hunter.

They are so ill-informed, and willingly so, that Republicans were able to run in the last election on a platform completely devoid of ideas or policies, other than, we’ll do whatever Donald Trump wants us to do. This was the Republican platform and 74 million Republican voters said, “Sounds good to me.”

When Hillary Clinton declared Trump supporters were deplorable, and was rightfully called on it, she immediately apologized and admitted that not all of the 60 million people who voted for Trump in 2016 were deplorable, only many of them. Of course, she was talking about the white supremacists, bigots, racists, fanatics, conspiracist and extremists, but not every Republican voter fell into these categories.

Some were just lifelong Republicans, probably born and raised in Republican households, just as many Democrats are lifelong Democrats born and raised in Democratic households.

Close elections are generally not won or lost by these voters, but rather by those in the middle who tend to lean one way or the other depending on the year, the issues, or the candidates.

For any number of reasons, 60 million voters chose Trump in 2016, and while they were not a majority, they were strategically well placed to secure an Electoral College win for who turned out to be, the worst president ever.

Twenty-twenty was a different ballgame entirely. Democrats picked up 17 million votes, which wasn’t surprising considering Trump had spent four years bashing Democrats as Socialists and un-American traitors.

What was surprising, was Trump picking up 14 million more votes after a presidency that should have only pleased James Buchanan, a presidency that included a public love-fest with a Korean dictator and murderer, a tax law that benefitted millionaires and billionaires and very few middle class Republicans, two impeachments and the groundwork for numerous lawsuits once he left office. There was also a wall that Mexico never paid for because it was never built, an immigration policy that separated hundreds of children from their families, and a response to a world-wide pandemic that was disastrous for the nation and fatal to 500,000 and counting Americans.  

The events of January 6, 2021, as well as Trump’s behavior in the two months after the election, only solidified for me that Trump is not qualified to be president, and yet, he appears to have lost little support among his base. Seventy-four million Americans voted for Trump in 2020, after a presidency that gave him a leg up in the race for worst president ever. I shudder to think what those voters saw in Trump’s presidency that made them want to go down that road again.

The devotion of Republican politicians to Trump was evidenced recently by their behavior at CPAC, where they publicly proclaimed what we all knew they were doing privately—pledge their allegiance before a cartoonish golden Trump mannequin. I don’t expect them to behave any differently than they do. I’d like to think they answer to the Constitution, but I’m not naïve. They only answer to voters, Trump voters.

Again, maybe not all of those voters are deplorable. It’s possible that some might just be foolish, but the fourteen million new Trump voters, if they had been paying attention—and how could they not have been paying attention—surely they are deplorable.

No one in their right mind could have witnessed the last four years, listened to Trump speak, read about his missteps—no not missteps, but rather crimes since even Republicans attest to his guilt—and not realize that he is a dictatorial demigod, and totally unfit to be president.

As sensible, thinking Republican voters continue to jump ship, making the party less sustainable than a Trump casino, Republican leaders are not the problem so much as Trump voters, the deplorable ones are, and they are not just a problem for the Republican Party, but for the nation.

 

 

...I will support and defend the Constitution...

I am watching the Trump Impeachment hearings with interest. I watched the events unveil on January 6, and concluded that day, because I had been paying attention for the last four years, that President Trump was obviously responsible for inciting the insurrection. He has spent his entire personal life courting conflict, and devoted his one-year campaign and four-year presidency to provoking, condoning and relishing in violence. Trump is not a difficult man to understand.

At the same time, the big question surrounding his impeachment seems to revolve around what Republicans will do. Actually, this isn’t the big question. The big question is why won’t Republicans do the right thing—and again, the answer appears obvious.

No attempt has been made to hide this fact that Republicans are expected to vote for acquittal because they fear political retaliation from Trump supporters, should they do the right thing and stand up to Trump by condemning the January 6 insurrection. This apparently outweighs the fear the rest of us have of the damage their dereliction to duty will do to our democracy should they give Trump a pass.

I think House managers are doing an excellent job—an effort, we are told, which is being missed by many Republican senators who are behaving childishly, as Trump has often been accused himself, by refusing to pay attention.

Overall, I think most senators are paying attention. As with Trump’s election in 2016, setting a low bar is oftentimes what we do best in this country.

One thing does bother me about the hearings, and I don’t know if changes will be made down the road. I hope so, but fearful they won’t.

Despite the fact that most Republicans appear to have made up their minds to acquit, House managers are proceeding as if they are dealing with impartial jurors, who will ultimately do the right thing.

The nation can count on fifty Democratic senators voting to convict, not because they are biased, un-American traitors as the ex-president suggests, but because they were at the Capitol on January 6, witnessed the violence, and don’t need to be told what an insurrection looks like, or who provoked it.

This impeachment is all about convincing 50 Republicans that what they saw really happened, and that they must do the right thing so that it never happens again. Republicans would have us believe that now is the time to come together and respect President Biden’s call for unity, and question whether Congress can work as a unified branch if Democrats insist on going forward with, not one, but now the second impeachment of Donald Trump.

Democrats, despite their desire to work with Republicans, know they are taking this unprecedented action because Donald Trump has not once, but twice, committed impeachable offences. Democrats are not the villains. Donald Trump is the villain.

Neither are Democrats the jurors everyone is questioning whether they will do their duty.  

House managers should stop addressing the Senate as a whole and start aiming their case directly at the Republicans. This cannot be another, “there were good people on both sides,” or “no harm, no foul.” When the argument is between right and wrong, justice can only be on one side.

There was real harm done on January 6, physical harm and psychological harm, and our democracy was threatened, and continues to be threatened.

Whether this crime is punished rests not with the Senate, but with Republican senators, and House managers need to stop ignoring the elephant—pun intended— in the room, and forcefully and unequivocally address their case to the only people in the room that matter.

It is not a question of, can we allow the president’s actions to go unpunished, but can you, Republican senators, allow the president’s actions to go unpunished.

It is not a question of, can we honor the oath we took and stand up for democracy, but rather, can you, Republican senators, stand up and protect democracy.

It is not a question of, can we muster the courage to stand up to Donald Trump and say no, no more, enough, but rather can you, Republican senators, stand up, finally, and say no, no more, enough.

No effort has been spared to point out that impeachment is not a trial. That is not to say a trial isn’t taking place. Make no mistake; the Republican Party is being put on trial—the trial of public opinion, which I would remind them is where election are won and lost.

There can be no doubt how history will look upon this impeachment effort, and at the behavior of Senate Republicans. History is full of accounts of heroic individuals standing up for what they believed to be right, as well as cowards who for political expediency did what they knew to be wrong.

The senators should be aware of this, but for those that aren’t, House managers should make the case, so that there can be no doubt, that this impeachment will not be decided by the Senate. The decision to convict will be determined by Republican senators, and history will hold them accountable, and the accountability in question might very well be, who was responsible for the fall of democracy in America.

  

The Life, Times & Adventures of Hoag Franklin: Indian Scout, Buffalo Hunter, Lawman & Vaudeville Entertainer

Like many of the people who settled  the old west, Hoag lived a full and adventurous life, which would have gone unnoticed had an unpublished manuscript telling his story not been discovered in an antique store.

Hoag crossed paths with many of the people, whose names we recognize—Calamity Jane, Annie Oakley, Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull and a host of lesser known individuals, each of whom played vital roles in settling the west and creating the nation we know today.

He fought alongside the legends of his time—Buffalo Bill, Kit Carson and Bat Masterson.

Yet, no one has ever heard of Hoag Franklin—until now.

His story begins when, as a young man still in his teens, he rides off on his first buffalo hunt before joining a wagon train as a scout, and eventually heading off to California in search of gold. For the next fifty years, he did almost everything a man could do as the nation expanded from the Mississippi to the Pacific Ocean. He even did things few men ever do.

These are his adventures, in his own words, written in the seaside town of San Pedro, California at the turn of the last century, a town he visited regularly during his Salt Lake City to Los Angeles stage coach run.

My latest novel, The Life, Times & Adventures of Hoag Franklin: Indian Scout, Buffalo Hunter, Lawman & Vaudeville Entertainer, with illustrations by Danielle Grandi.  

ThemVersUs

Historically, the roles of the Republican and Democratic parties seem to hinge on blaming the other party for everything that goes wrong and taking credit for everything that goes right—and staying as far away as possible from working together to find real solutions to real problems.

This is harsh, but justified criticism for two groups that somehow manage to bilk American citizens out of millions, billions, and soon to be trillions of dollars every election cycle. For what? Balloons, yard signs and annoying and harmful 30-second divisive, fear-mongering ads.

The one thing both parties can ever seem to agree on is American Exceptionalism, not because they have done exceptional things, but rather because they believe the American people have done exceptional things, and the parties aren’t above taking credit for what the people have done.

In reality, the only exceptional thing we have done was when 56 men assembled in Philadelphia in 1787 to create a government, which had probably been imagined but never before seen. Everything after that—the Civil War, the land grabs, racism, labor struggles, self-interest infighting and deceit has been more or less standard fare.

As human beings, Americans haven’t behaved much differently than the ancient Persians or Egyptians, the feudal societies of the Middle Ages, the Conquistadors of imperial Spain, or the European opportunists who divided Africa up in the late 19^th century. A basic flaw in humanity has defined our behavior from the earliest days of the Stone Age right through to the Space Age we now live in. Again, instances of exceptionalism such as what occurred in Philadelphia in 1887 have been rare.

This flaw in the human condition, which keeps both individuals and, by extension nations, not only in constant conflict, but prevents them from being truly exceptional, is the Us/Them factor, which after watching a lot of TV and being subjected to too many pharmaceutical ads,  I’ve reduced to one word, ThemVersUs because it is so basic to understanding humanity.

We (us) have always been suspicious, fearful, or threatened by them—anyone who isn’t us. This isn’t an American problem. Just as we are not exceptional, neither are we the only culprits in the world. Neither is ThemVersUs a political problem, which government can fix—no matter how many balloons and yard signs political parties buy, to convince us they are the solution.

The ThemVersUs problem, as basic as it is, manifests itself in many different ways, both between nations and within nations. Obvious in this country is racism, but it also surfaces in class struggle, labor relations, economics, health care, housing, education, and anything else where there are two positions creating us versus them situations—even mask wearing during a pandemic. Rural communities and large cities distrust each other, as do sparsely populated states and heavily populated states, and people owning guns thinking people without guns are going to take their guns away—by, I dunno, twisting their arms.

Taken to the extreme, Middle America fears the inhabitants of the two coasts are conspiring against them and vice-versa. Our forefathers couldn’t have foreseen this because Middle America back then were the coastal states of Maryland, Virginia and the Carolinas.

There’s an old Woody Guthrie where he takes on one job after another in order to convince his girlfriend what a hard worker he is, to the point where he just about wears himself out. If we truly want to lay claim to being exceptional, we don’t have to do a whole lot of things, but each individual acting in concert with other individuals will actually have to do something exceptional—something that historically has rarely been done. Namely, deal with the ThemVersUs by learning to get along with them, which ironically, will actually entail less effort than attacking them, and be easier on everyone in the long run.

As I’ve said, this is not a political issue so much as a humanity issue, but the divisions created do prevent the exceptional government designed by our forefathers from working, and even threatens to bring about its collapse as in 1861, and again more recently on January 6 when us/them went after them/us.

If Americans truly want to lay claim to the title of exceptionalism, we will have to do something truly extraordinary, learn to live with and not fear them who surround us, or we will suffer the same fate that has plagued every other society and cursed humanity from its earliest days—a never ending struggle that has no winners.

It won’t be easy. Being exceptional has never been easy, certainly not as easy as being predictable, which requires no special talent or effort. It wasn’t easy for those 56 men in Philadelphia, but despite their differences, they understood that ordinary people can do exceptional things, once they stop doing the senseless things they think they’re expected to do.

The conflict between us and them cannot be won in the courtrooms, or in Congress, or on the battlefield where the war has been waging continuously ever since Cain first determined Abel represented a threat and needed to be killed. It can only be won when we stop fearing them, and learn to live with them—or even better, when we learn that there is no us and them, but only us.