#1,089: "The Four Horsemen of Calumny:”

August 08, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

When one considers that in the eyes of far too many Republicans and MAGAite bootlickers, the biggest, most dangerous threat to America is Communism, now is probably not the best time to quote Karl Marx in the introductory paragraph of a political blog. Nonetheless, throwing caution to the wind, I shall.

In one of his wittiest bons mots, Marx noted: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.” Not wishing to hear the ominous knock of some lickspittle FBI agent or ICE employee at my front door, I will respond to Marx’s epigram with that of the British novelist/essayist Julian Barnes: “Does history repeat itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce? No, that's too grand, too considered a process. History just burps, and we taste again that raw-onion sandwich it swallowed [decades] ago.”

For those who are avid followers of this blog, you will recall that I posted a piece on how very little MAGAites know or understand about communism a little less than a month ago. Nothing has changed. We are still knee-deep in the burping and belching of politically-challenged idiots; still seeking to find heroes and heroines with sufficient guts and integrity to call out those legislators and party leaders who oh so blindly back their vaunted leader’s every delusion.

When one has difficulty counting on the fingers of one hand the number of Republicans who dare to say things like No you don’t!, Quit lying, you mendacious moron! or Cease your retributive ways! You know the nation’s politics are in a very bad way. And while it is certainly true that not everyone has about them the stuff of heroism - of being a Nathan Hale, a Biblical Yael, or the late Rep. John Lewis (who was famous for urging citizens to “Get in good trouble, necessary trouble, and help redeem the soul of America”) - one might hope that there would be at least a handful that would and could don the garments of fortitude, putting conscience well ahead of partisan politics. How many on that side of the aisle remember - if they ever knew - that to be a “patriot” does not mean to save your own political hide by silently assenting to the treacherous lunacies of a bullying narcissist, but rather, in the memorable turn of phrase attributed to Plutarch, “. . . to call a fig a fig, and a trough a trough.”

Which brings us to the late United States Representative and Senator Margaret Chase Smith (R-ME), likely the last - and greatest - conscience-driven office holder in American history. “Maggie” was born in Skowhegan, Maine on December 14, 1897. Her entry into politics came through the career of her husband, Clyde Smith, whom she married in 1930. Clyde was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1936. Margaret served as his secretary. When Clyde died in 1940 at age 64, she succeeded her husband, winning a special election in which she garnered more than 4 times the number of votes than the second-place finisher. After four terms in the House, she won election to the United States Senate in 1948. In so doing, she became the first woman elected to both houses of Congress.

Senator Smith came to national prominence on June 1, 1950, when she delivered a devastating speech on the Senate floor skewering Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph “Tailgunner Joe” McCarthy. Four months before Senator Smith delivered what she called a “Declaration of Conscience,” McCarthy had rocketed to national attention. In a well-publicized speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, he claimed to possess the names of 205 card-carrying communists in the State Department. Smith, like many of her colleagues, shared McCarthy's concerns about communist subversion, but she grew skeptical when he repeatedly ignored her requests for evidence to back up his accusations. “It was then,” she recalled, “that I began to wonder about the validity... and fairness of Joseph McCarthy’s charges.”

Roy Cohn and Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI)

In those days now long gone, Freshmen senators were supposed “to be seen but rarely heard.” As such, Senator Smith was hesitant to speak out; she hoped a more senior colleague would take the lead. “This great psychological fear...spread to the Senate,” she noted, “where a considerable amount of mental paralysis and muteness set in for fear of offending McCarthy.” As the weeks passed, Smith grew increasingly angry with McCarthy’s attacks and his defamation of individuals she considered above suspicion. Bowing to Senate rules on comity, Smith chose not to attack McCarthy, but to denounce the tactics that were becoming known as “McCarthyism.”

McCarthy was one of the most disliked members of the upper chamber. Known for being both a drunkard and an immoral bully, he was mentored by his chief counsel, the hyper-nasty Roy Cohn, who one day would mentor yet another political bully: Donald J. Trump.

In her 821-word declaration (brief by Senate standards), Senator Smith never mentioned McCarthy by name. But she didn’t have to; everyone in the chamber knew to whom she was referring. One wonders what her colleagues on both sides of the aisle were thinking and feeling as she spoke; did they fully grasp how much courage and conviction it took?

She began:

I would like to speak briefly and simply about a serious national condition. It is a national feeling of fear and frustration that could result in national suicide and the end of everything that we Americans hold dear. It is a condition that comes from the lack of effective leadership in either the Legislative Branch or the Executive Branch of our Government.

That leadership is so lacking that serious and responsible proposals are being made that national advisory commissions be appointed to provide such critically needed leadership….

I speak as a Republican. I speak as a woman. I speak as a United States Senator. I speak as an American….

I think that it is high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think that it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation.

Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism:

The right to criticize;

The right to hold unpopular beliefs;

The right to protest;

The right of independent thought.

The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood nor should he be in danger of losing his reputation or livelihood merely because he happens to know someone who holds unpopular beliefs. Who of us doesn’t? Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own. Otherwise, thought control would have set in. The American people are sick and tired of being afraid to speak their minds lest they be politically smeared as “Communists” or “Fascists” by their opponents. Freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America. It has been so abused by some that it is not exercised by others….

After excoriating her party for their loss of principles she spoke the most memorable words of all: I don’t want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny -- Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear

From there, she urged her colleagues on in words that could just as easily be said 75 years later . . . if there were only a single Republican Senator with the courage and the conscience to say them:

As a United States Senator, I am not proud of the way in which the Senate has been made a publicity platform for irresponsible sensationalism. I am not proud of the reckless abandon in which unproved charges have been hurled from this side of the aisle. I am not proud of the obviously staged, undignified countercharges that have been attempted in retaliation from the other side of the aisle.

I don’t like the way the Senate has been made a rendezvous for vilification, for selfish political gain at the sacrifice of individual reputations and national unity. I am not proud of the way we smear outsiders from the Floor of the Senate and hide behind the cloak of congressional immunity and still place ourselves beyond criticism on the Floor of the Senate.

Senator Chase Smith concluded her declaration with the following:

We are Republicans. But we are Americans first. It is as Americans that we express our concern with the growing confusion that threatens the security and stability of our country. Democrats and Republicans alike have contributed to that confusion.
The Democratic administration has initially created the confusion by its lack of effective leadership, by its contradictory grave warnings and optimistic assurances, by its complacency to the threat of communism here at home, by its oversensitivity to rightful criticism, by its petty bitterness against its critics.
Certain elements of the Republican Party have materially added to this confusion in the hopes of riding the Republican Party to victory through the selfish political exploitation of fear, bigotry, ignorance, and intolerance. There are enough mistakes of the Democrats for Republicans to criticize constructively without resorting to political smears.
To this extent, Democrats and Republicans alike have unwittingly, but undeniably, played directly into the Communist design of “confuse, divide and conquer.”
It is high time that we stopped thinking politically as Republicans and Democrats about elections and started thinking patriotically as Americans about national security based on individual freedom. It is high time that we all stopped being tools and victims of totalitarian techniques -- techniques that, if continued here unchecked, will surely end what we have come to cherish as the American way of life.

1964: The Would-be Republican Presidential Nominee

Senator Smith, unlike Senator Susan Collins, the current Republican Senator from Maine, was the soul of conscience throughout her career. She wasn’t just thought to be reasonably bipartisan; she was the heart and soul of reasonable Republicanism. In 1952, some pundits speculated that she might be the vice-presidential candidate on the Republican ticket. Though that opportunity never materialized (the nomination went to California Senator Richard M. Nixon), in 1964 she pursued her own political ambitions, running in several Republican presidential primaries. She took her candidacy all the way to the Republican National Convention in San Francisco, where she became the first woman to have her name placed in nomination for the presidency by either of the two major parties. In the final balloting, Smith refused to withdraw and so came in second to the Republican nominee, Senator Barry Goldwater.

Senator Smith, after thirty-two years in Congress - both House and Senate - lost reelection in 1972 to Congressman William D. Hathaway, who, after serving a single 6-year term was defeated by moderate Republican William Cohen . . . whose staff assistant was future senator Susan Collins. In 2021, Collins became the longest-serving Republican female senator in history, surpassing Margaret Chase Smith.

In her retirement, Senator Smith returned to Skowhegan and began planning for the establishment of a congressional research library. In 1982, the Margaret Chase Smith Library opened its doors. In 1989, she was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George H.W. Bush. Throughout the course of her long public life, she was the recipient of ninety-five Honorary Degrees. Maggie died at age 98 in 1995.

I find it deeply fascinating that it took only 15 minutes in a 98-year life for Margaret Chase Smith to change the course of American history. Shortly after her June 1, 1950 speech, McCarthy’s power, impact, and life began its downward path. In 1954, he was condemned by the Senate for refusing to cooperate with and abusing members of the committee established to investigate whether or not he should be censured. Following his condemnation, his Senate colleagues avoided him; his speeches on the Senate floor were regularly delivered to a near-empty chamber. He died 3 years later at age 48, a victim of alcoholism and morphine addiction.

For at least 15 minutes in her long, long life, Senator Smith was a visionary who possessed the conscience of a true patriot and the courage of a Marine. The words she spoke on that spring day 76 years ago could - and should - be repeated today. For the Four Horsemen of Calumny (Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry and Smear) are still threatening our land. Might I suggest that if you have a Republican who is representing either your state or House District, that you send them a link to Margaret Chase Smith’s 1950 speech with the recommendation that they follow in her shoes?

G-d bless you, Senator Smith. How do we arrange for a resurrection?

2 Comments 0 Likes

#1,088: How Low Can They Go?

August 03, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

In just about every aspect, Anthony Fauci, MD, longtime (1984-2022) director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), was the best physician/medical researcher in the history of the United States. During his nearly half-century in the American public health sector, he acted as an advisor to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan. As head of NIAID, Dr. Fauci made lifesaving contributions to HIV/AIDS research, the 2009 swine flu pandemic, the 2014 Ebola virus crisis, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Hauntingly, although IT was a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, established in late January 2020, Dr. Fauci did not meet with IT until three years after his inauguration as POTUS. And while America’s Fondling Father was making outrageous suggestions about how to treat COVID (such as using bleach), Dr. Fauci was hard at work conducting real medical research.

The recipient of nearly 4 dozen awards, including the 2008 Presidential Medal of Freedom (awarded by President George W. Bush), Dr. Fauci was also granted a preemptive pardon in January 2025 by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., to protect the good doctor from what POTUS described as politically motivated and unjustified investigations and prosecutions threatened by the then-incoming Trump administration and congressional Republicans.

I believe a solid majority of the American people see Dr. Fauci as a professional’s professional; a physician who has long taken the Hippocratic Oath to heart in every imaginable way. And yet, of late, Congressional MAGA-ites and senior members of the regime have been building a case against him; urging that despite his preemptive presidential pardon, he be found guilty of “illegally” taking the Fifth and thus committing perjury before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Kentucky senator (and former ophthalmologist) Rand Paul. When one takes into account Senator/Dr. Paul’s occasional votes against issues near and dear to The Fondling Father’s heart, the Kentucky legislator’s contempt for Anthony Fauci seems to have nothing to do with him getting back into the good graces of the president. It does, likely, have everything to do with professional jealousy. How and why? First and foremost, when Dr. Paul considers Dr. Fauci, he sees a man who has near-universal respect from both the medical and scientific communities. Senator/Dr. Paul, on the other hand, suffers from a backstory about his medical board certification. In brief, Dr. Paul has long claimed to be a “board-certified physician,” but in truth, he isn’t certified by the respected, century-old American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO). Instead, he is “certified” by the National Board of Ophthalmology (NBofO), which he founded. He is president, his wife is vice-president, and his father-in-law is secretary.

In a 2010 statement to Politico, Paul described how his certification saga was his battle against a "hypocritical power play that I despise." Paul basically protested against the ABO's decision to require recertifications of medical licenses every 10 years for anyone who was board-certified after 1992. He fell into that group, found the decision to be "discriminatory," and took it upon himself to set up the National Board of Ophthalmologists (NBO). Paul was board-certified for around 10 years by the ABO until letting it lapse in 2005. So it turns out, this folderol may have nothing to do with politics, but everything to do with professionalism . . . and insecurity. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), another member of the committee, focused on documents released by Senator Paul, purporting to show that during the pandemic, NIH staff helped Fauci solicit nominations and ethics approvals for awards, including a $900,000 cash prize that he received. “You used federal employees so that you could go and get cash money,” Hawley said.

Citing thousands of pages of government records, Hawley and Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) held Dr. Fauci responsible for school closures and lockdowns during the pandemic; accused him of enriching himself as people died; and even mocked his interactions with celebrities. Most significantly, they accused him of funding research that led to the creation of the coronavirus that causes Covid, and of lying about it under oath to Congress. And they threatened to hold him in contempt of Congress, saying he was not even eligible to invoke the Fifth Amendment because President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had granted him an unconditional pardon. It should be noted that while Senator Hawley is a graduate of Yale Law, Senator Tuberville is a former football coach (Ole Miss, Auburn, Texas Tech and Cincinnati) who knows as much about Constitutional issues as RFK, Jr. does about vaccines and autism.

Sen. Bernie Moreno Lashes Out at Dr. Fauci

Then there was Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who lobbed an expletive at Dr. Anthony Fauci during the Wednesday hearing about the origins of, and government response to, the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreno said he decided to run for office soon after learning that a woman was arrested at an Ohio middle school football game in 2020 for refusing to wear a mask, which was reportedly against the school’s policy at the time. Moreno, who defeated then-incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown for the Ohio Senate seat in 2024, is best-known for being the former father-in-law of Ohio Representative Max Miller, who has been accused of viciously assaulting Moreno’s daughter. Moreno is so furious with Miller after holding his own counsel for several months that he has now called for Miller’s resignation from the House.

As angry and accusatory as members of the Republican congressional caucus are about Dr. Fauci’s having pleaded the Fifth about 110 times, virtually none seem to recall - or care - that their boss invoked his Fifth Amendment rights over 400 times in a deposition for his civil fraud case in 2022. A judge in that case stated in a motion appointing a court monitor to oversee the Trump family's businesses that Trump used the Fifth Amendment to refuse to answer questions over 400 times — a claim Trump's defense team did not appear to dispute When their guy takes the Fifth, it’s a constitutionally sound move; when a guy from the other party does so, it is a criminal offense for which he should be sentenced to life in Leavenworth.

During the hearings, Senator Paul released more than 1,000 pages of Dr. Fauci’s personal diary. The diary does not provide the smoking gun that Senator Paul is seeking. Rather, it echoes past disclosures showing Dr. Fauci wrestling with a fast-moving crisis as scientists’ views evolved. But it further inflames a polarizing political battle over the origins of the virus and how history should treat Dr. Fauci. Hey, let’s face it: tons of famous, not-so-famous, and otherwise accomplished souls have kept diaries throughout the ages. Ever heard of - let alone read - the diary of Samuel Pepys (pronounced “Peeps”), without whom no one would know the first thing about the Stuart Restoration in 17th-century England? (Sorry to be such an intellectual snob; I’m not terribly smart, but I just love to learn . . . ).

One of the most fascinating - and nauseating - aspects of the release of the Fauci diary involves Katie Miller, the wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. It turns out that before calling for his imprisonment, Mrs. Miller and Dr. Fauci were actually on very friendly terms. Katie Miller, a former Trump administration official and current conservative podcaster, has, of late, been calling for Anthony Fauci to be jailed. How’s that? During President Trump’s first term, when Katie Miller was then-Vice President Mike Pence’s communications director and involved in the White House’s response to Covid-19, she appeared to be quite close with the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Fauci provided regular medical advice to the Millers, counseling the family after Katie tested positive for the virus in 2020 while she was pregnant, when her husband had Covid-19, and when her newborn child had a medical episode. NOTUS (News of the United States) quoted the following diary entry: “I am calling Katie frequently to check on her a couple of times per day. She is very anxious about getting very ill since she is 10 weeks pregnant. Tonight she had an anxiety reaction. I calmed her over the phone,” Dr. Fauci wrote in his diary on May 9, 2020. Fauci wrote in another entry how he called the doctors treating Miller’s child directly, to discuss the baby’s medical care. Imagine that: a doctor making daily calls to check in on the health and progress of a pregnant woman who, in truth, was not even his patient. As a rabbi and medical ethicist, I cannot tell you how much time I’ve spent calling and chatting with people who were having medical, psychological, or spiritual woes and worries. Why would I do it? Because that is what a caring human being does. Today, Katie (who grew up within walking distance of Cleveland Clinic, Weston, Florida, where I worked for nearly 20 years), accuses Dr. Fauci of being a "narcissist" who "weaponized" her pregnancy and child "to aggrandize.” So: if I am to understand this properly, all those who keep daily diaries (myself included) are nothing more than narcissists. Oy! My mother, my sister and my wife would be shocked to learn this . . .

So what lies beneath this rush to humiliate, shackle, arrest and imprison a galaxy-class epidemiologist? Two words come to mind: COVER UP. I’ve got to believe that beyond Rand Paul’s professional jealousy, Josh Hawley’s deliberate misreading of legal history, Bernie Moreno’s lack of an off-switch, and Katie Miller’s stunning hypocrisy and need to significantly boost the number of people who subscribe to her podcast, there is the need to give Americans something other than the Epstein Files, the war in Iran, high gas prices, and POTUS’s frontotemporal dementia (naming just a few among tens of dozens of issues) keep Americans engaged . . . and far, far away from what really, truly matters.

It all brings to mind a slight reworking of a line in Chubby Checker’s 1962 hit Limbo Rock: “How low can they go?”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, M.D., does not deserve to be trashed in public. He has devoted countless decades to the service of humanity and earned the near-universal respect of physicians, scientists, and clinical researchers on all seven continents. Because of him, millions more people are living healthy, productive lives. Let the good doctor live out his well-deserved retirement (or for him, pretirement) with dignity and the deep thanks of a grateful planet. Dr. Fauci has always done his best to raise the bar of professional excellence in the service of humanity . . . even as they (and you know who they are) keep lowering it for your own psychopathic purposes.

There are a mere 93 days until the 2026 Midterm Elections.

2 Comments 0 Likes

#1,087: Hatikvah ("The Hope")

July 23, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Generally speaking, whenever the interlocking terms Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism collide with the old prefrontal cortex, four world-class quote-meisters come to mind: Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, Albert Einstein, and William Shakespeare:

Mark Twain: Never argue with stupid people; they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience;
Oscar Wilde: There is no sin except stupidity;
Albert Einstein: The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits;
William Shakespeare: The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.

Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland. Zionism has been a central tenet of Judaism for thousands of years. Connection to the Land is at the heart of Judaism, with its festivals tied to the agricultural seasons in the Land of Israel. Although most Jews were forcibly exiled from the Land of Israel after the Roman conquest in 70 CE, a significant number of Jews remained in the Galilee, writing the Mishnah in the 5th century CE. The Sanhedrin, the governing body of 70 rabbinic sages, functioned in the Galilee until the 3rd century CE. Although Muslims conquered Israel in the 7th century CE, Jews fought side by side with Arabs against the Crusaders, and some survived to still live in their Land. After the Spanish Inquisition, more and more Jews returned to their ancestral homeland to this day.

Anti-Zionism is the denial of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland. Anti-Zionism perpetuates a subtle form of antisemitism that denies the indigeneity of Jewish people in the Land of Israel. Anti-Zionism is a virulent form of antisemitism. Antisemitic tropes in media result in violence against Jews worldwide. Anti-Zionism denies Jews their right to self-defense. Anti-Zionism denies the historical connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel. Anti-Zionism and its demonization of Jews lead to violence. Recent polling of 600 four-year US colleges by the University of Chicago found that “66% of Jewish college students understand the chant ‘Free Palestine from the River to the Sea’ means the expulsion and genocide of Israeli Jews. 62% of Jewish students report fear for their safety. Anti-semitism is cloaked in critiques of the Israeli government and its supporters, claiming they don’t have any issue with Jews; rather, their problem is with Zionists, a catch-all for anyone who supports the Jewish state. The vast majority of the global Jewish community are Zionists. Open and respectful debate are essential ingredients in fostering progress for all. Therefore, when discussing sensitive issues with colliding narratives, it is crucial to remove hate and misinformation from the conversation.

"When people condemn Zionists - they mean Jews. You're talking anti-semitism.” Martin Luther King.

To listen to folks go on and on about the unmitigated power of Jews these days might lead one to believe that the people of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachael and Leah are engaged in a worldwide conspiracy. The fact of the matter is that on a planet inhabited by slightly less than 8.3 billion human beings, Jews make up no more than 16.5 million souls... about 0.2%. (Israel and the United States are home to the largest Jewish populations of 7.76 million and 6.30 million, respectively. Believe it or not, Americans significantly overestimate the number of Jews living in the USA, according to a survey released a little over 4 years ago. Respondents guessed, on average, that 30% of the U.S. population is Jewish — a sum 15 times the actual proportion. It should be noted that in 1939, the core Jewish population reached its historical peak of 16.6 million. By 1945, due to the murder of almost six million Jews killed during the Holocaust, this number was reduced to a scant 11 million.

Unsurprisingly, the recent rise in Anti-Semitic hate crimes in the United States is the result of a complex and multi-faceted set of factors, and it started long before the October 2023 terrorist attack on Israel. Some factors that have been identified include: an increased tolerance for open calls for violence; a climate of polarization that perpetuates anger and “cancel culture;” a worldwide increase in nationalism; and social media, which provides an outlet with a worldwide audience for views to spread. Keep in mind that there are significantly more Muslims than Jews in the world. According to global demographic data from organizations like the Pew Research Center, the global Muslim population stands at approximately 2 billion people, making it the world’s second-largest religion and fastest-growing religious group on the planet.

Keep in mind that while a lot of Jewish people - whether they be culturally, religiously, gastronomically, or ethnically so - are not big fans of P.M. Netanyahu or the current state of Israeli politics. I, like many Jews, have a fairly evolved understanding of Israeli political history; its mixture of multi-party British Parliamentarianism alongside a Turkish executive presidency that concentrates broad powers in the hands of the president, who serves as both the head of state and head of government. This means that although m’dinat Yisrael (“The State of Israel”) has had majority governments in the past, no single party has ever won an outright majority of seats in an election. As a result of this, every Israeli government (with the one historical exception occurring in 1969) has been a coalition, where multiple parties join forces to form a parliamentary majority (at least 61 of 120 seats in the Knesset (the Israeli legislature). To keep Netanyahu’s center-right coalition in power requires an unwieldy amalgam of religious nationalists and hard-core defense hawks, trying to work alongside politicians representing West Bank settlers, and a smattering of old-line socialists and the very rich.

Sometimes it works; other times its teeters on the precipice. But, as the late Chief Rabbi of the U.K., Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks (1948-2020), notably said on more than one occasion, “In Israel, there is always hope.”

Indeed, Rabbi Lord Sacks’ pithy bit of brilliance and optimism is to be found in the very name of Israel’s national anthem: הַתִּקְוָה (Ha-tikvah “The Hope.”). There are nearly 200 official national anthems globally. In the main, they serve as the musical counterparts to flags, primarily expressing internal unity, national identity, and patriotism. They celebrate a nation's unique character, history, and core values—such as resilience, freedom, and devotion—uniting citizens during ceremonies, sports events, and national holidays. In countries that have experienced decades - even centuries - of relative peace, anthems express the natural beauty of the land and people being represented.

As old - and young - as Israel (at various times called Judea, Palestine, Canaan, Ottoman Syria, Mandatory Palestine, and a host of others) was and is, its national anthem, הַתִּקְוָה (Ha-tikvah)is actually far newer than that of the United States. Its roots trace back to an 1878 nine-stanza poem originally תִּקְوَתֵנוּ (tikvatenu - literally Our Hope) written by the Galician-born poet Naftali Herz Imber (that’s him in the photo above). In 1882, Imber came to Ottoman-ruled Palestine as part of the First Aliyah, which occurred after pogroms ravaged Jewish shtetls, when Jews fleeing Eastern Europe, as well as Yemen, returned for the first time in hundreds of years to their homeland. When they arrived, they set up agricultural villages, the very first kibbutzim. Seeing the beginnings of these settlements inspired Imber to write his poem, "Our Hope."

**Composer Bedřich Smetana (1824-1884)**

Over time, the original poem was shortened to include only the first two stanzas, and a melody was added by Samuel Cohen, a composer from Romania who also arrived in Palestine during the First Aliyah. It was first publicly sung at the foundational First Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, in August 1897. At 1937’s 18th Congress, held in Prague, it was officially adopted as the Zionist anthem. By then, it had been reduced by one line and sung to the Czech composer Bedřich Smetana’s symphonic poem The Moldau, which originally evoked the flow of Vltava (Moldau) River from its source in the mountains of the Bohemian Forest. Ironically, more than half a century after Smetana’s death (1884), the Nazis unsuccessfully attempted to ban the 10-minute piece from being played in public; they saw it the deeply patriotic music as a symbol of resistance and national pride against the 1939 German occupation of Czechoslovakia. The 3rd Reich banned performances of the piece to crush the cultural morale and independent spirit of the Czech people. Try as they might, however, they failed.

At this point, Israel, which is being assumed throughout much of the world as the perpetrator of genocide, needs all the tikvah - “the hope” - it can get. Understand the fact that Israel, including what the world refers to as the West Bank and Gaza, is 8,522 sq miles (roughly the size of New Jersey), while Muslim nations surrounding it with the same language, religion, and culture comprise 5,392,668 sq miles.

This does not include Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Indonesia, southeastern Europe, Turkey, etc. This would add another 3 million sq miles. It seems to me the question becomes not whether tiny Israel needs to divide half of what is left of Israel (about 4,000 sq miles) to a terror organization. The fact is that people occupying nearly 5.4 million sq miles are attempting to squeeze out the Jewish ancestral homeland; a land only ever a state under Jewish rule and which has had Jews residing in it for 3,761 years continuously. Do keep in mind that depending on how one measures the total area of Muslim land mass, it is anywhere between 600 and 1,300 times larger than Israel. And a hefty percentage of these people lawfully living on approximately 5.4 million sq miles have as a major objective the destruction of virtually all the people living on a measly 8.522 sq miles.

Is it any wonder that Israel’s national anthem is entitled Hatikvah?

1 Comment 0 Likes

categories / Israel/Zionism

1,086 Don't Worry: This Won't Be on the Final Exam

July 13, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Just over a week ago - July 4, 2026 - the “Fondling Father” and anywhere between 4,800 and 7.500 of the MAGA faithful gathered at Mt. Rushmore. Attendance for the celebration was strictly limited to ticketholders, who had secured their spots through a public lottery. They were all there to listen to their fearless leader speak in celebration of the nation's 250th anniversary. For non-MAGAites, the question was “What in the world is he going to say? Will it be scripted, ad libbed, or a combination of the two?” Will it be warm, patriotic, and historically accurate, or cruel, politically nasty, and barely worthy of a fourth-grader?

It should be noted at the outset that Mt. Rushmore was the ideal setting for the speech; It has repeatedly floated the possibility of having his face carved or blasted into the historic national monument. Last year, just after he was inaugurated for the second time, Florida congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna proposed it directly: “I have officially introduced legislation to place President Trump's face on Mount Rushmore. His remarkable accomplishments for our country and the success he will continue to achieve deserve the highest recognition and honor on this iconic national monument."

Turns out, POTUS’ speech had Washington, Jefferson, T. Roosevelt, and Lincoln gagging, groaning, and upchucking . . . if such a thing were possible for larger-than-life carvings. For in his Mt. Rushmore speech, after speaking ever so briefly about American exceptionalism (something one would expect on such an august occasion), he veered into a darkly political space, overflowing with warnings about a sinister threat of communism. “Communism,” he blared, “is a mortal threat to American liberty . . . It is the greatest threat to our country, including World War I, World War II, Pearl Harbor, or even 9/11.”

Say what? Standing at the base of a monument commemorating some of America’s most prominent presidents, his words were both shocking and historically flat. In the days leading up to July 4, IT, left incredibly angry by how well left-wing Democratic candidates did in New York primary contests (as well as Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio and Texas), began invoking this communism meme, hoping that it would resonate beyond his core supporters ahead of November’s midterm elections. Between June 23 and July 8, POTUS invoked communism 81 times, calling some of the victorious candidates “hardcore, godless communists.”

That’s pretty rich coming from a man who lies, cheats, lines his pockets with billions of dollars while serving as POTUS, and has spent less time in church than Thomas Jefferson, America’s most distinguished Deist. Who in Hell is he to accuse anyone of being “godless?”

I wish I could get myself a credential and attend one of his pressers (press conference). When it came time for Q&A, I would ask him: “Mr. President. You keep talking about the grave threat communism poses to America’s future; of how it is the greatest threat to our country than both world wars, Pearl Harbor, or 9/11. My question is this: what kind of communism are you referring to? Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism, or something else? And while you’re at it, as an apparent expert on the subject, could you briefly explain the differences between these various approaches?”

Somehow, I don’t think he could answer my question. And I know it would result in my being disqualified from attending any more such gatherings. But then again, on those occasions when I’ve been accused of being a Socialist or communist, I have generally asked the person making the accusation what kind of Socialist or communist I am. What generally follows is something straight out of the Simon and Garfunkel archive: The Sound of Silence.

And so, let’s take a moment to get ourselves into the know. And don’t worry, none of this will be on the final exam:

Marxism is the theoretical-practical framework on which Socialism and Communism are based.

Leninism builds upon and elaborates the ideas of Marxism, and served as the philosophical basis for the ideology of Soviet Communism after the Russian Revolution of 1917, and the establishment of the Soviet Union. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870 - 1924) argued in his 1902 pamphlet "What is to be Done?" that the proletariat can only achieve a successful revolutionary consciousness through the efforts of a "vanguard party" composed of full-time professional revolutionaries and through a form of disciplined organization known as "democratic centralism" (whereby decisions are made with internal democracy but then all party members must externally support and actively promote that decision). It holds that Capitalism can only be overthrown by revolutionary means, and any attempts to reform Capitalism from within are doomed to fail. The goal of a Leninist party is to orchestrate the overthrow of the existing government by force, seize power on behalf of the proletariat, and then implement a dictatorship of the proletariat, a kind of direct democracy in which workers hold political power through local councils known as soviets.
Stalinism is a more pejorative term for Joseph Stalin's vision of Communism (which Stalin himself described as Marxist-Leninism). Proponents of the term argue that it includes an extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around an absolute dictator, as well as extensive use of a secret police to maintain social submission and silence political dissent, all of which are trappings of Totalitarianism.
Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism advocated by Leon Trotsky (1879 - 1940), who considered himself an orthodox Marxist and Bolshevik-Leninist, and argued for the establishment of a vanguard party. Trotsky's politics differed sharply from the Marxism-Leninism of Joseph Stalin, particularly in declaring the need for an international proletarian revolution (as opposed to Stalin's "socialism in one country"), and unwavering support for a true dictatorship of the proletariat based on direct democratic principles. One of the defining characteristics of Trotskyism is the theory of permanent revolution to explain how socialist revolutions could occur in societies that had not yet achieved advanced Capitalism (which, according to Marx, was a prerequisite for socialist revolution).
Maoism (or "Mao Zedong Thought") is a variant of Communism derived from the teachings of the Chinese leader Mao Zedong (or Mao Tse-tung) (1893 - 1976), and practiced in the People's Republic of China after the Chinese Revolution of 1949. Maoism developed from the Marxism-Leninism of Stalin, but introduced new ideassuch as Social-Imperialism (Mao accused the Soviet Union of dominating and exploiting the smaller countries in its sphere to the point of organizing their economies around Soviet, not domestic, needs), the Mass Line (a method of leadership that seeks to learn from the masses and immerse the political leadership in the concerns and conditions of the masses - "from the masses, to the masses"), people's war and new democracy. The "Great Leap Forward" of 1958, an attempt to industrialize and improve China's economy, proved to be disastrous, and millions died from the resulting famine. The Cultural Revolution, begun in 1966 under the so-called "Gang of Four" in an attempt to rid the country of any remaining "liberal bourgeois" elements, resulted in further social, political, and economic chaos, eventually bringing the entire country to the brink of civil war. Since Mao died in 1976, his original ideology has been radically altered, marginalized, and reformed in China and has become known as "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" (which is actually closer to Keynesian Capitalism than Communism). Maoist parties exist in Peru, Nepal, India, and the Philippines.
North Korea is not truly communist in the economic or philosophical sense, although it is officially designated as a socialist state and functions as a totalitarian dictatorship. While it originated from Marxist-Leninist ideals, the country abandoned traditional communism in favor of self-reliance and military-first ideologies. In practice, the state enforces strict class divisions, features a dynastic hereditary leadership, and the economy increasingly incorporates elements of private enterprise and informal markets.

Precisely how and why Felon47 got into this “communism is our greatest threat” maneuver makes for a fascinating tale. First and foremost, we must ask, “Who was POTUS’ earliest political mentor?” The answer, plain and simple, is “Roy Cohn.” “Who was Roy Cohn?” you might ask. Well, Cohn (1927-1986) was an attorney who first gained fame as a prosecutor of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in their trials (1952-53) and as Senator Joseph McCarthy’s chief counsel during the Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954. Before that, Cohn had been assisting “Tailgunner Joe’s” investigations of suspected communists. Cohn was chiefly responsible for convincing McCarthy that there was a great deal of political capital to be made in finding “communists under every bed.” In his dealings with the future president, he undoubtedly shared that bit of political wisdom.

The closest thing to a Roy Cohn in the current White House regime is Stephen Miller. In more ways than one, the resemblance - both sartorially and politically - between Miller and the late Mr. Cohn is startling. Miller wears the same retro skinny suits that Cohn favored. Both share pale, hooded eyes that observers describe as cultivating a “just-try-to-stare” that seems to bore through their adversaries. As writer Martin Vasquez recently noted, “Miller hasn’t just adopted Cohn’s tactics. He has stepped into the same structural role that Cohn played for McCarthy, and later for Trump in the 1970s and 1980s.” Not only has he single-handedly created POTUS’ views and hardline policy proposals on immigration, Homeland Security, and Birthright Citizenship; he has also likely created his boss’s "reds-under-the-beds” strategy just in time for the upcoming midterms. I, for one, cannot see this political blueprint attracting more than a handful of non-MAGA voters.

Personally, as a “Hollywood Brat,” I am absolutely livid at the thought of yet another communist conspiracy raising its head from the muck of idiocy. Over the years, I had the opportunity to sit and listen to the memories of those charged with being “Premature Anti Fascists” (a nonsensical term used to tar New Dealers in the late 1930s), “knowing Soviet agents,” and just plain “commie bastards” . . . for which they suffered blacklisting, greylisting, bankruptcy, and exile. I well remember sitting, lunching, and listening to the likes of Norman Corwin, Norma Barzman, Herschel Bernardi, and Marsha Hunt talk about the pain and loathing of the McCarthy era and how they managed to survive - and even flourish. (n.b. Except for Bernardi [1923-1986], who died from a heart attack at age 63, the other three all lived past 100.)

Please. Pay no attention to IT or his followers when they accuse anyone who doesn’t agree with them of being part of some hideous, lethal communist conspiracy. These unschooled lunatics haven’t the slightest idea of what they or whom they speak; they are simply affixing a political epithet - and conspiratorial label - to their political enemies in the hope of maintaining a simulacrum (à la Jean Baudrillard’s theory) of power for themselves.

Just 113 days until the Midterm Elections, comrade!

Comment 1 Likes

categories / IT

#1,085: Hyam Salomon: Son of Liberty

July 05, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

In a recent national survey conducted by the Cato Institute, 46% of Americans polled did not know that the Fourth of July commemorates the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. This civic knowledge gap was particularly pronounced among younger demographics, with 61% of Gen Z respondents unaware of what the day celebrates. Ouch!

In last week’s pre-4th of July blog (Some Thoughts on America’s Semiquicentennial), we spent time with 3 Founders whose names are known to one and all: Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Dr. Benjamin Franklin. Today, I would like to spend some time with one of the least-known (and most essential) of our founders: the Polish-born Sephardic Jew, Haym Salomon (1740-1785), who was the Revolutionary War’s financier. Without the likes of General George Washington, Gilbert du Motier (the Marquis de Lafayette), and General Nathaniel Greene, the colonists would never have defeated the British on the various battlefields. Without Salomon, there wouldn’t have been any funding for that historic victory; no guns, no ammunition, no uniforms, no horses or grain, no food or blankets for the troops, and no money to send to the folks back home.

Although born in Leszno, Poland, in 1740, Hyam Salomon’s family was Sephardic. After being expelled from Portugal in 1492, they made their way first to Germany, and then, when it became too dangerous, moved further east to Poland, where Hyam was born shortly after their arrival, on April 5, 1740. Born into a middle-class family, highly educated Salomon traveled widely throughout Europe, learning the merchant’s trade and becoming fluent in at least 7 languages, including German, Russian, Polish, French, Spanish, Ladino (the Sephardic version of Yiddish), and perhaps most importantly, unaccented English. His travels throughout Europe as a merchant and broker broadened his worldview and gave him a deep understanding of international finance. He also witnessed firsthand the persecution of Jews across the continent, which helped shape his belief in liberty and tolerance.

By the early 1770s, seeking greater opportunity and freedom, Salomon emigrated to New York City, then one of the busiest ports in the British Empire. There, he established himself as a successful merchant and financial broker, quickly becoming a respected member of the city’s small but influential Jewish community. After nearly a year in New York, he moved on to Philadelphia, where he married, started a family, joined the Sephardic Mikvveh Israel synagogue, which had been founded in 1740 (the year of his birth), and was accepted as a member of the Philadelphia branch of the super-secret Sons of Liberty. This was the grassroots, paramilitary organization formed in 1765 to protect colonists' rights and fight British taxation without representation. Best known for orchestrating the 1773 Boston Tea Party, their acts of defiance were instrumental in sparking the American Revolution

N.b. Although it moved and was rebuilt shortly after Hyam Salomon first became a member of Mikveh Israel, its current location makes it the longest-continuously operating Jewish congregation in the United States.)

Exposed and arrested for being a member of the Sons of Liberty (which the British considered a terrorist organization), Salomon was arrested and imprisoned. When the British military command learned of Salomon’s extraordinary language skills, they released him in exchange for his promise to act as a secret agent on their behalf. This he agreed to do; this he never did. He would be arrested once again about a year later, only to escape and go into hiding.

By this point, Salomon was already raising money for the Continental Army. The story is told that one Erev Yom Kippur, while attending services, he received a sealed missive from General Washington, informing Salomon that the army was in dire need; they must have an infusion of at least $650.000 (about $20 million in 2026 dollars) Washington wrote, or their cause would be lost; troops were threatening to walk off the battlefield unless they had warm clothes, more ammunition and a few pounds to send back to their families. Salomon managed to raise over $50,000 from his fellow congregants . . . payable right after the conclusion of Yom ha-Kippurim. In addition to Salomon, other prominent members of Mikveh Israel making substantial donations were Col. Mordecai Sheftal (1735-1797), the highest-ranking Jewish officer to serve in the American Revolution and, his cousin Sheftal Sheftal; Gershom Mendes Seixas (1745-1816), the first native-born Jewish leader in the United States; Dr. Phillip Moses Russell (1747-1830), Washington’s personal surgeon at Valley Forge; and prominent businessman Jonas Phillips (1736-1803) who was the first to contribute. In all, the members of Mikveh Israel and the Jewish communities of New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Georgia raised untold thousands of dollars, thus giving General Washington’s urgent fundraising plea a great start. And mind you, in 1776, when the population of the 13 colonies stood at approximately 2.5 million, the Jewish population was a mere 2,500; less than .0008%

Salomon quickly got in contact with Robert Morris, a Liverpudlian by birth who, by 1775, was reputed to be the richest man in the colonies. In 1775, while serving as a representative from Pennsylvania to the Second Continental Congress, he was named Superintendent of Finance to oversee financial matters in the colonies. Morris accepted this appointment and also served as “Agent of the Marines”, from which he controlled the Continental Navy. Hyam Salomon knew that if he were to succeed at the task urged upon him by General Washington, he would need Morris by his side. As things turned out, Morris, who is slightly better known than Salomon today, was one of only two people - the other being Roger Sherman of Connecticut -who signed the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the U.S. Constitution. He was also a Senator from Pennsylvania from 1789-1795)

The two worked very well together. Salomon’s job was largely traveling back and forth between the colonies and Europe, where he brokered Continental bills of exchange for hard currency. For this exhausting task, he charged an inconsequential quarter of a percent for his services - mostly for his travel expenses. (While researching my first book about the Jews of Congress [2003’s The Congressional Minyan], I learned that Salomon also made interest-free loans to many of the Founding Fathers [Jefferson, Monroe and Madison] for the purchasing and/or upkeep of their family estates - all of which today are on the list of National Historic sites.)

It is estimated that Salomon raised in excess of $650,00.00 (c. $20 million in today’s money). And when this turned out to be less than was required, he gave unstintingly of his own personal fortune. So much so that upon his death in 1785 at age 44 (tuberculosis), he owed his creditors in excess of $650 K. Ironically, when he died in 1806, Robert Morris was also intestate. However, the reason(s) for his financial problems was/were bad investments, not being overly generous.

Salomon’s heirs, despite more than nearly 2 centuries of trying, never managed to be financially reimbursed for their progenitor’s patriotic largesse. In the years after Hyam’s passing, a couple of forms of public acknowledgement did come his way:

In 1939 (Hollywood’s greatest year . . . the one in which they could “do no wrong”), Warner Bros released a two-reel (20:44 minutes) short entitled “Sons of Liberty, starring the magnificent Claude Rains as Salomon, and Academy Award-winner Gayle Sondergaard as Hyam’s wife Rachel. Directed by Michael Curtiz (the best director on the Warner Bros.’ lot), from a script by the former silent actor (Crane Wilber), it was, for 1939, an extremely gutsy movie to create and screen. It was so well received by the industry that it won an Academy Award for the best 2-reel short of 1939. What made it so unique and heroic was that in 1939, few, if any, studios were producing pictures realistically depicting Jews. Sons of Liberty made no bones about the fact that one of America’s Founding Fathers was a practicing Orthodox Jew, and actually portrayed scenes in which he was davening and wearing a tallis.

There are those who have long contended that the geometric figure floating above the eagle’s head in the Great Seal of the United States is a Star of David, placed there in memory of the Jewish broker who kept the nation’s finances afloat, and,
On December 15, 1941, the Heald Square in Chicago (which includes the statue of Haym Salomon alongside George Washington and Robert Morris) was officially dedicated and unveiled, finally recognizing the two Founders most responsible for raising the funds to underwrite the most significant rebellion in all modern history.

On this, the 250th anniversary since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, please remember the importance and central role that Hyam Salomon and one teeny-tiny kahal (community) played in creating this great, great nation . . .

Happy 250th, one and all!

1 Comment 0 Likes

categories / American History

#1,084: Some Thoughts on America's Semiquincentennial

June 30, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

“Jefferson,” “Franklin” and “Adams” in “1776”

The last time I participated in a large outdoor 4th of July celebration was for America’s Bicentennial, July 4, 1976. I well remember that one: it took place at Camp Hess Kramer in Malibu, California, where I spent the summer as the camp rabbi and songleader. The camp is located just a stone’s throw from the Pacific Ocean, a heavenly spot for a summer camp. It was a great 4th of July: the hot dogs were delicious, the music quite loud, and the fireworks utterly breathtaking. At that time, Gerald Ford was POTUS, Nelson Rockefeller was V.P., and a gallon of gas cost anywhere between .59¢ and 61¢ (that’s $3.46 to $3.58 a gallon when adjusted for inflation in 2026). For those who have a vivid recollection of the time, getting a fill-up was quite a bit more expensive than what we had been accustomed to paying just a year before; what made matters even worse was that it took anywhere between 45 and 65 minutes just to get to the pump . . . we were undergoing a drastic shortage of gas, thanks in the main, to OPEC.

The fact that I never attended another mass outdoor 4th of July gathering after the Bicentennial had nothing to do with politics; it was mostly a matter of climate. It just turned out that South Florida weather was too hot and, G-d knows, too temperamental and inconsistent for being outside, sweating on a picnic blanket. Instead, Annie and I created the tradition of watching the classic film musical “1776,” based on the book and screenplay by fellow Angelino (though totally unrelated) Peter Stone (née Sturmwasser) and directed by Peter Hunt. Although not 100% historically accurate (what Broadway play, historical novel, or movie ever is?), it has always filled us with pride and amazement at how many brilliant, accomplished, worldly, highly educated men there were in 1776 who could cobble together that miracle known as the United States of America. (n.b. The 3 actors in the photo above are, right to left, Ken Howard [Thomas Jefferson], William Daniels [John Adams], and the formerly blacklisted Howard Da Silva as Dr. Benjamin Franklin.) Then, after dabbing our eyes and feeling pride in our khiskes, we go out onto our covered back porch and watch the fireworks ascending from a park in Boca Raton.

In talking with people in our neighborhood about their plans for the upcoming 4th, quite a few of the conversations have turned to the current political landscape. And mind you, most of our neighbors don’t know the first thing about my involvement in politics or that I have been writing this blog for more than 20 years. Many say that they just can’t get terribly excited about America’s Semiquincentennial because they hate the president, they hate MAGA, they hate the Democrats . . . they hate, hate, hate. When I hear someone gearing up to tell me how bad things are as compared to the last major American anniversary (1976 - the Bicentennial), I wonder just how much they know about our history. I mean, we are celebrating the history of a country, not the current moment or cast of characters.

As a country, we are about to observe our 5th golden anniversary. And you want to know something? July 4, 1826, 1876, 1926, 1976, and 2026 have all had their historic problems amid celebration. Let’s take a quick trip back into American history:

July 4, 1826: Without question, America’s 50th anniversary was just downright eerie. The country was in the throes of the Missouri Compromise, where the country had its first major sectional crisis over slavery. It had to be on everyone’s mind. And just two years earlier, there was an extremely bitter presidential election in which, famously, Andrew Jackson, who, despite receiving the most popular and electoral votes, lost the election when it went to the House, which gave the stamp of approval to John Quincy Adams. Talk about political divisions in the country!

July 4, 1826, was also one of the most unique, downright bizarre days in all American history. For on that day, at around 12:50 p.m. Thomas Jefferson, America’s 3rd president, passed away at his home in Virginia. He was 83. Five hours later, up in Massachusetts, John Adams, America’s 2nd president, passed away at the age of 90. Adams’ last words were reportedly either "Thomas Jefferson survives,” or "Thomas Jefferson lives.” How remarkable that the two should both pass away precisely on the day America was celebrating their greatest mutual achievement: The Declaration of Independence. Shortly thereafter, the two - who had worked hand-in-hand during the Revolutionary War - saw their relationship disintegrate over their highly differing views on the power of the federal government: Adams favored a strong, centralized national government to maintain stability; Jefferson, fearing centralized tyranny, advocated for strong states’ rights and an agrarian society. Eventually, a mutual friend, Dr. Benjamin Rush (who also signed the Declaration), put the two back together after 12 years of silence. In 1812, Dr. Rush urged the two to reconcile. Eventually they did, although they never again saw one another face-to-face. They did, however, begin a 14-year correspondence in which they exchanged well over 150 letters on subjects ranging from politics and history, literature and philosophy . . . even the parsing of Hebrew passages from the Bible. To read their letters is akin to being privately tutored by two of the most civilized, highly-educated people in all American history.

July 4, 1876: This is the year we tend to mark the end of Reconstruction. Lasting from 1861 to 1900, this is the historic period in which the United States grappled with the question of how to integrate millions of newly-freed African Americans into social, political, and labor systems. At the time of America’s centennial celebration, there were still ongoing acts of horrific political violence going on in the South. America was still, largely, a divided nation.

July 4, 1926: At the halfway point of the “Roaring Twenties,” America was in the midst of yet another gilded age. While movie stars like Chaplin, Fairbanks, Pickford, and Swanson were earning more than $20K a week ($191K in today’s money) the stock market was soaring, and the Ford Motor Company became the first major corporation to officially adopt a 5-day, 40-hour work week, Congress was passing the notorious Johnson-Reed Act that established strict national-origins quotas and completely excluded immigrants from Asia. It aimed to drastically reduce the flow of immigrants, primarily from Southern and Eastern Europe. The law limited the number of immigrants allowed entry per year to 2% of the total number of people of any nationality living in the U.S. as of the 1890 census. This act would not be officially repealed until passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. And you think today’s immigration situation is bad?

July 4, 1976: In the midst of a Swine flu epidemic, and still reeling from the resignation (and eventual pardon) of Richard M. Nixon, the United States, at the time of its Bicentennial celebration, had an average Misery Index (Unemployment + Inflation rate) of 16.00. (By comparison, the Index averaged 8.83 under Barack Obama, and a slightly higher 10.15 under Joe Biden.) Inflation stood at 5.76%, and a 30-year fixed mortgage at 8.87%.

July 4, 2026: At the time of our Semiquincentennial, America feels like a country that has lost its way. Every hour seems to bring breaking news about some embarrassment emanating from the White House or Capitol Hill. There is a yawning chasm of difference between haves and have-nots. We are saddled with a president who is sinking further and further into the quagmire of insanity and, instead of draining a swamp, has turned a once beloved reflecting pool into one. He presides over an administration whose incompetent accomplices are there for accomplishing precisely two tasks: buoying up their master’s massive ego, and unquestioningly supporting his polymorphous perversity.

To many, it seems that we are far, far worse off, far too retrograde than we were at the time of the nation’s Bicentennial. Guess again. While it is certainly true that these are not the best of times, we have, nonetheless, come a long, long way. Consider:

In 1976, no woman had ever been appointed to a seat on the Supreme Court. Today alone, there are 4 (Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson);
In 1976, the 94th Congress (January 1976-October 1, 1977), only 18 women were seated in the House - 17 of whom had the right to vote. Today, in the 119th Congress, there are 155 women, representing 28% of the legislature; 128 women in the House (including 4 non-voting delegates) and 26 in the United States Senate.
In 1976, there was but a single woman serving as a governor: Ella Grasso, a Democrat in Connecticut. In 2026, there are a record 14 women serving as state governors - 10 Democrats and 4 Republicans.

And while it may seem that our current POTUS (aka the “Fondling Father”) is having his way in virtually everything, consider that of the 176 times he has been sued in court, he has come up short nearly 80% of the time.

For all those who say it is next to impossible to celebrate the 4th of July with a full heart, remember several things:

We are neither celebrating a moment in time nor a particular president .. . but rather a country that has been a miracle since the days of Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, and their colleagues;
While the current POTUS wants, with every fibre of his being, to act like a king, he is still faced with the system of checks and balances first created by the Founders. and,
While DJT may be the POTUS, America - and “we the People” - are still the realities that keep him from being the King he wishes he were.

Bring on the fireworks of freedom! We have much to celebrate . . . whether from our porch out back or in a municipal park.

3 Comments 1 Likes

1,083: Shep'n Nachas (שעפּן נחת)

June 22, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

For all those who believe that Yiddish is nothing more than Jewish jargon or slang, I’ve got news for you: it’s a real, honest-to-God, living, breathing language . . . it’s even taught at all 8 Ivy League schools. Such diverse writers and poets as Émile Zola, Jules Verne, Charles Dickens, Arthur Conan Doyle, William Shakespeare, and the Scandinavian writers Ibsen, Strindberg, and Knut Hamsun have all been translated into mama loschen (Yiddish for “the mother tongue”). Writers of classical antiquity, such as Aeschylus, Sophocles, Plato, as well as Aesop’s Fables (משלים פון עסאפ - m’shalim fuhn Aysaf), have long been available in Yiddish translation, as well as important nonfiction works like Darwin’s Origin of Species, Nietzsche’s Also sprach Zarathustra, a few volumes of Freud, and countless volumes of socialist and communist theory—usually bound in red.

But a mere jargon? Not on your life.

Whether you know it or not, most English speakers make use of Yiddish words daily without batting an eyelash. Who, as an example, doesn’t have such words as kvetch (complain), kvell (beam with joy), gonif (thief), kosher (proper, or apt), goy (a non-Jew), or kibitzer (one who gives unsolicited advice) in their vocabulary?

(n.b. It is not well known that the popularity of the term “kibitzer” likely dates back to the late 1920s; in 1929, future motion picture superstar Edward G. Robinson [Emanuel Goldenberg] starred in a well-received Broadway play entitled “The Kibitzer,” which Robinson had also written. It was made into a motion picture of the same name in 1930; That long-forgotten film starred the equally long-forgotten Harry Green [Blitzer]). Almost immediately, expressions like “don’t be such a kibitzer” or “all she knows how to do is kibitz” entered the glossary of possibilities.)

There is another Yiddish expression that has been getting a major workout the past couple of days: שעפּן נחת (pronounced Shep’n nachas). The first word (shep’n), which is an infinitive, literally means either “to scoop” or “to shovel”; while nachas, which comes from the Hebrew (where it is pronounced “nachat,) means “quiet joy.” So, when one translates the term shep’n nachas, through דער קאָפּ (der kopf - “the head”), it literally means “scooping quiet joy,” which is linguistically impenetrable. Ah, but when translated through the די קישקעס (kishkes - “the guts”) it takes on the feeling of “reaping limitless joy.”

“The Boss” dings “Land of Hopes and Dreams”

Watching the live broadcast of the Obama Presidential Center dedication this past Thursday has had me shepping nachas ever since. Listening to the brilliant, humble, almost sermonic remarks of the President and former First Lady; seeing the obvious love the two share with one another; watching a real A-list of world-class performers like “The Boss,” Stevie Wonder, U-2’s Bono and The Edge, John Legend, and The Roots tear up the stage (while the camera was all along panning Barack, Michelle, Malia and Sasha singing along) brought tears to my eyes, a bounce to my step and hope to my heart. Indeed, it was precisely what the good doctor ordered. The entire event, from start to finish, was, in short, that which fuels nachas, makes us want to live and act with greater purpose, makes us want to look to the future with greater hope. . . . and points out in stark detail how great a role intelligence, class, literacy, modesty, decency, humility, and just plain kindness can and should play in our leaders lives’. And by this I mean in both public and private.

As someone who has written more than his fair share of political speeches for others, it has never ceased to amaze me just how great the Obamas are on the podium. Rarely do you hear the word “I” in their addresses. They can easily turn a terrible truth into a breath of fresh air, while leaving those who despise them and/or wish them ill wondering what in the world they just heard. Hebrew sums up this profound skill in a mere 2 words: ha-maskeel ya-veen (המשכיל יבין), namely “The wise/understanding one will understand.

Ever since then-Illinois State Senator Barack Obama was chosen to address the Democratic National Convention in the summer of 2004, political cognoscenti knew that this was a truly special man; someone who had an unlimited future. At that speech 22 years ago, he said something that could have easily been said last Thursday: “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America—there's the United States of America." He was just as electrifying then as he was last Thursday. The message on that summer’s evening in 2004 was just as powerful and persuasive then as it was last Thursday: that hope is the greatest fuel there is.

I have to wonder what would have happened in the intervening 22 years if it had been Michelle Obama, not Barack, who had given that convention speech; for like her husband, she is a gifted and truly remarkable communicator. Like her husband, she is brilliant, humble, charming, and self-confident . . . without needing to - in the memorable title of Norman Mailer’s first autobiography, write "Advertisements for Myself.” Just watch and listen:

Those watching the former FLOTUS’s speech (or watched it live), will no dubt recognize that both she and her husband made obvious and telling references #45/#47 on innumerble occasions without once stating his name; a perfect example of what it means to possess class, forswear retribution as a modus operandi, and understand the meaning of ha-maskeel ya-veen (“the wise one will understand.”)

In his speech, President Obama dealt more specifically with the purpose and nostalgic underpinnings of the Center. It is, after all, unlike any other presidential “library” ever built. It is not some kind of “Egyptian crypt” meant to serve as a hagiographic gathering spot for a leader few still remember. (According to the National Archives, the majority of these presidential libraries stand empty more than 90% of the time.) No, Barack and Michelle Obama purposefully designated this spot a "center,” rather than a "library.” It celebrates the American people far more than a presidential family. Where Melania Trump replaced Jacqueline Kennedy’s Rose Garden - once festooned with vibrant floral beds of subdued pastel roses - with paved limestone walkways, the Obama Center now has rose gardens where citizens themselves can come in and plant roses to their heart’s content - all under the watchful eyes of professional gardeners. Where IT built a gigantic octagonal cage for bloody MMA fights on the White House Lawn, the Obama Center has a full-sized basketball court for normal people to engage in the former president’s favorite athletic pastime (well, he is the only president who has a 6’8” college basketball coach as a brother-in-law). Within its 19 acres, the Obama Presidential Center has outdoor picnic areas, walking paths for hand-in-hand strolls. The main structure is built of concrete, a material that will last for untold centuries. In short, the Obama Center, far from being a place to learn more about him, his family, and his presidency, is a place for all of us to learn more about ourselves and the country we call home. It is a place for shep’n nachas.

For those who somehow missed President Obama’s masterful speech, check it out:

One wonders what was going on in the mind of the current POTUS as he watched and listened to his predecessor’s speech. One cannot imagine how much ego pain he felt upon seeing 4 living ex-Presidents and First Ladies sitting behind the current POTUS First Lady. Did the size and heartfelt merriment of the guests, musical superstars, and just plain Southside folks get to him? Could he even come close to understanding why he and Melania weren’t invited?

The Bidens, Obamas, Bushes, and Clintons

In short, how could The Fondling Father go through a day that was so overwhelmingly not about him? Especially one in which a former president - one who actually was and is a happily married self-made man with an obviously loving family - was standing there giving this wreck of an eighty-year-old man a powerful masterclass in leadership, democracy, and American values. As the current POTUS watched, listened, and stewed, his younger, far more beloved predecessor summed up the American experience in precisely 114 words:

“A belief in the intrinsic dignity and worth of all people and that no one is above the law or beneath its protection. A belief in … accountability that comes with an independent judiciary and a robust free press. A belief that our military and law enforcement owe allegiance not to any president or political party but to the people and our Constitution. “

“A belief in the peaceful transfer of power after the people have spoken in fair and free elections … And a belief that qualities of character – honesty, integrity, kindness, compassion, a sense of duty and honor – those things matter in our public dealings just as they do in our private lives.”

Is it any wonder that so many Americans and friends around the world are shep’n nachas? For the first time in quite a while, we have been reminded that class and compassion. energy and empathy, integrity and intelligence can actually beat in the heart of a leader . . . along with a great sense of humor!

And best wishes for a slightly belated Happy Father’s Day.

3 Comments 1 Likes

categories / The Giants Amongst Us

#1,082 An Essential Challenge For We the People

June 15, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Let’s face facts: For the past many years, We the People have been in the grips of an all-pervasive pall of malaise. We are uncomfortable; many are angry, hurt, and feeling abused. We fear for the future of both our once great nation and the world itself. Increasingly, we find ourselves making greater, more expressive use of our middle - rather than our index - fingers, and seeing villains and bogeymen lurking, not in the shadows, but in front of the cameras. A majority of us are sick and tired of being lied to. We long for a return to a time when our leaders - though mere mortals - were not public embarrassments. It is painfully obvious that our government - as well as many of its leaders - are bought, sold, and paid for by millionaires, billionaires, and - as of 48 hours ago - the planet’s first trillionaire. As a result of all this, we tend to seek simple solutions to complex challenges... or else sit on our hands and kvetch.

Want an example or two of the “simple solutions to a complex challenge” approach? Well, there’s ITs overly repetitively redundant insistence that just as soon as we win the war in Iran (which he first declared over as early as March 20 of this year), gas prices will immediately tumble and inflation will hit an all-time low. Then, there are all those who will tell you at the drop of a hat that once Democrats reclaim the House and Senate, 47 and his dastardly henchmen will be impeached, thus rescuing our imperilled democracy from the hands of traitorous autocrats, putting science and medical research back in the hands of the professionals, and restoring the nation’s reputation around the world. Sorry, but that’s not the way things work in a complex world.

Defeating troglodytic right-wing legislators who are beholden to special monied interests and replacing them with backbenchers more beholden to “we the people” is certainly a good start; however, beware - it is only a beginning. Putting Congress back in the hands of Democrats, independents and non-MAGA Republicans cannot and will not restock executive-branch departments that have been decimated and replaced by hacks whose only asset is total loyalty to a madman. It certainly will not replace professional, high-ranking officers who have been summarily fired for being the wrong gender or color. Restoring funding levels for public essentials like national parks, rural hospitals, emergency clinics, childhood vaccines, and USAID, cannot and will not happen overnight. Nothing is that easy.

For longer than I can remember, I’ve been contemplating what the biggest challenge(s) is/are facing “We the People” might be when it comes to remedying our most toxic political maladies. The other day, while poring over some of my past political articles and essays, I came across a piece published in late October 2010, entitled Worse Than Dred Scott. (For those scratching their heads, Dred Scott was an enslaved black man who, along with his wife Harriet, sued for their freedom in St. Louis Circuit Court in 1857. They claimed they were free due to their residence in a free territory where slavery was prohibited. On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney read the majority opinion of the Court, which stated that enslaved people were not citizens of the United States and, therefore, could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. The opinion also stated that Congress had no authority to ban slavery from a federal territory. This decision moved the nation a step closer to the Civil War. Ever since, American historians have considered this to be the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court. )

Worse Than Dred Scott was a 1,350-word piece on the then-recently decided Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case. The case (558 U.S. 310 (2010), which the court decided by a 5-4 vote on January 21, 2010, “... limited expenditures on political campaigns by groups such as corporations, labour unions, or other collective entities violates the First Amendment because limitations constitute a prior restraint on speech.” In other words, what SCOTUS did in its ruling was fundamentally alter American elections by allowing corporations, unions and wealthy individuals the legal right to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns. Hence, the title of that essay meant to state upfront that, in my opinion, Citizens United v. FEC was replacing Dred Scott as the worst decision in our history. I found the original article on my hard drive, but could not bring it up on the internet. I did, surprisingly, find an AI-generated discussion of it . . .

What made - and still makes - the Citizens United decision so politically lethal are some of its ancillary “benefits”

Creating Super PACS: The ruling paved the way for “Super PACS,” which raise and spend infinite sums of money to influence elections. While they cannot technically coordinate directly with candidates, critics argue that this firewall is frequently breached.
Rise of "Dark Money": It facilitated a massive surge in "dark money," allowing wealthy donors and corporations to funnel tens of millions into elections through non-profit organizations that are not legally required to disclose their contributors.
Distorted Representation: Unlimited spending by billionaires and corporate interests drowns out the voices of everyday voters. This system forces elected officials to become overly beholden to elite donors rather than their constituents.
Unfair Competition: Because the Supreme Court ruled that corporate spending is protected speech, deep-pocketed entities can effectively buy massive amounts of political advertising, making it incredibly difficult for underfunded, grassroots-supported candidates to compete.

At this point, I can hear your question: “So how in the hell can we get rid of Citizens United? Wouldn’t doing so tend to put politics back on a more level, moral plane? The answer to the second question is, “I personally believe so.” Without all that anonymous gelt pouring into campaign coffers, candidates and incumbents might have to return to the historic job of serving their constituents’ needs, rather than their donors’ demands. So far as the first question - about expunging or overriding the Court’s Citizens United decision - the answer is, surprisingly, a bit more objective, but a whole lot more complex.

From the point of objectivity, polls from various organizations, including Bloomberg and Issue One, have shown widespread disapproval of the Citizens United decision. As of 2025, 22 states and hundreds of local governments have passed resolutions calling for a constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United. Within Congress, Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA), Dean Phillips (D-MN), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Jim McGovern (D-MA) have repeatedly introduced the Democracy For All Amendment to the Constitution. It would overturn legal precedents that have allowed unrestrained campaign spending and dark money to corrupt American democracy. According to the Center for Public Integrity, “Three quarters of survey respondents - including 66% of Republicans and 85% of Democrats - back such an amendment.” Unfortunately, amending the Constitution of the United States is a terribly difficult procedure. The Founders meant it to be that way.

(n.b. In our entire history, only 27 of the thousands upon thousands of amendments that have been proposed have met the strict two-thirds congressional approval and three-fourths state ratification requirements as outlined in Article V of the Constitution. The first ten of those amendments were passed on a single day (September 25, 1789), and one of the 27 (#18, the Volstead Act banning the manufacturing or sale of alcohol) was overturned a mere 14 years later [December 5, 1933] by the 21st Amendment.)

For generations, conservatives were far more “states’ rights” oriented than progressives. What they, the conservatives, feared the most was that giving too much power to the feds would, in the long run, put a roadblock on things they - the states’ righters - cared the most about . . . like slavery, lower taxes, a strong national defense, and what could and could not be taught in public schools. Fascinatingly, over the past several years, when it comes to supporting their most pressing issues, conservatives have begun putting more and more faith into the feds than the states. It is their feeling that an overwhelmingly conservative Supreme Court will, in the long run, be able to turn back the tide of state courts and legislatures. And perhaps, just perhaps, they can elect a POTUS who doesn’t really care about the Constitution.

So maybe Democrats, progressives, and independent voters should start looking to the states when it comes to something as evil as Citizens United. Believe it or not, the Great State of Montana has been doing just that. A little over 2 months ago, the Montana Supreme Court dismissed a challenge from a coalition of business and industry groups over a proposed ballot initiative seeking to limit corporate spending in Montana elections. In a unanimous decision, the court said reviewing the constitutionality of an initiative is “disfavored” because Montanans have a right to go through the initiative process. The statutory initiative, dubbed “The Montana Plan,” would create a new Montana law to prohibit corporations - known in law as “artificial persons" - from spending money on political candidates or ballot issues. The Montana Plan is, of course, a direct challenge to Citizens United. Should enough Montanans sign the petition to put Ballot Issue 10 on the ballot this November, then the Big Sky will become the first state to eliminate Citizens United from doing its thing on its home turf.

And we can also add Hawaii to the list: less than 5 weeks ago, the Hawaii legislature passed S.B. 2471—a bill by which the 50th state would no longer grant artificial entities, including corporations, the power to spend in Hawaii’s politics. It passed both chambers with overwhelming bipartisan support. Governor Josh Green has said he will sign it. S.B. 2471, which is based upon the Center for American Progress’ “Corporate Power Reset,” is not a regulation of speech. It is a redefinition of corporate power.

How’s that for an idea and an inspiration? Instead of attempting to eliminate Citizens United from the top down (e.g., at the federal level), start at the state level and work your way up. We have seen that when We the People get really riled up (such as the “No Kings” movement), we come out in droves to protest against The Regime and political corruption. So why can’t we do the same with a nationwide End Citizens United protest?

My strong recommendation is that, instead of sitting back and kvetching, we contact our local city council members, county commissioners, and state legislators and create petitions to put anti-Citizens United initiatives on state ballots.

We have nothing to lose . . . and everything to gain. It is a supreme challenge that can pay enormous dividends.

Comment 1 Likes

categories / Power to the People!

#1,081: Sometimes, Dreams Do Come True - Hopefully, This Isn't One of Them

June 09, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

(A note about this week’s blog: The genesis of this essay begins with my friend and student, Nate W. Now nearly 39 years old, I was (and still am) Nate’s rabbi and mentor; I trained him for his bar mitzvah more than a quarter century ago. After college, Nate’s career took him to Israel, Eastern Europe and, for the past 14 years, Germany. Every Sunday for as long as I can remember, we spend an hour or so Facetiming. We learn Torah together, Nate asks innumerable questions about Jewish tradition, customs and history, and we delve into the world of ethics and politics - mostly American and Israeli. About 2 weeks ago, Nate asked me what I thought about the “golden noose” lapel pin that Israeli Minister Bin Gvir and many of his ultra nationalist colleagues wear in the Knesset. After answering that I really didn’t know what he was referring to, I promised that I would check it out. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that the American media really had not reported on Bin Gvir. And so, I did my research - from Israeli and European (mostly French) sources. Thanks, Nate, for stimulating my curiosity. Talk to you this coming Sunday!

In the United States, we have a monstrosity of a Defense Secretary named Pete Hegseth. He is both a racist and grossly misogynistic, as well as ill-equipped for his job and an international embarrassment. Just yesterday (June 6, 2026), in a speech meant to commemorate the 82nd anniversary of Allied forces storming the beaches of Normandy (to liberate Nazi-occupied Europe in 1944), he instead criticised European nations over migration for allowing what he described as an "invasion" on their shores. So much is this man - and what he represents - reviled by our former allies, that he was actually "disinvited” (non merci) by the residents of nearby Langrune-sur-Mer, who said his "warlike views" were unwelcome in their village, and questioned his commitment to "democratic values". It turns out that after making a speech at the American military cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer (“Omaha Beach”), he conspicuously skipped the afternoon’s main international ceremony. For les gens de Colleville-sur-Mer, it was un rêve devenu réalité (“a dream come true”).

Secretary Hegseth’s counterpart in Israel is the Jewish State’s השר לביטחון לא (Minister of National Security), Itamar Bin Gvir - generally called by his hyphenated last name (Bin-Gvir). Like Pete Hegseth, Ben-Gvir is a far-right extremist. Like Hegseth, he is an ardent nationalist. Where Hegseth is a member of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, which advocates Christian Nationalism (that frequently frames military actions in religious terms), Bin-Gvir is an Orthodox Jewish politician who leads Israel’s religious Zionist movement. He heads the far-right עוצמה יהודית (Otzma Yehudit), which translates as either “Jewish Strength” or “Jewish Power.” Bin-Gvir’s political godfather is the late ultra-nationalist Rabbi Meir Kahane, who was assassinated at age 58 in 1990.

Bin-Givir: Israel’s Minister of National Security

Kahane espoused a virulently racist ideology. During his life, he founded both a violent Jewish extremist movement and a fascist political party in Israel. Kahane’s Jewish Defense League murdered dozens of people. It injured hundreds of others in numerous violent attacks against Palestinians, Americans, and others in Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, and the United States itself. His Israeli political party, כך (kach, that’s Hebrew for “Thus!”), was, during his lifetime, fairly marginal in Israeli politics. However, decades after his assassination in New York, he remains an inspiration for Jewish extremists, and his racist ideas are, frightfully, far more mainstream. During the 2019 and 2021 Israeli election campaigns, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud party entered into political agreements with Kahane’s followers in the religious Zionist movement to help elect them to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament), prompting condemnation even from some of Israel’s staunchest supporters. In December 2022, Bin-Gvir became Minister of National Security with expanded powers under Netanyahu. And ever since, he has exercised total control of Israel’s police and its paramilitary border security in the occupied Palestinian West Bank.

Getting back to similarities between Hegseth and Bin-Gvir, we turn our attention to the military. Hegseth was a longtime member of the National Guard; he submitted his resignation after a fellow guardsman flagged him as an “insider threat” in 2021. This resulted in his removal from the National Guard security mission for President Joe Biden’s inauguration on January 20, 2021. The problem arose because of concerns over his tattoos, specifically one bearing the Latin phrase Deus Vult (“G-d wills it”), which had been appropriated by white extremist groups. In the case of Bin-Gvir, he was exempted from mandatory service in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) due to his extreme right-wing views and affiliation with the outlawed Kach party. He first came to infamy as a teenager when he stole the Cadillac emblem from the car of Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin. Hegseth also came to public awareness as a teenager, when, as publisher of the Princeton Tory, a deeply conservative student newspaper at Princeton University, he espoused intolerance of “gays, feminists, and atheists,” and praised conservatives’ “tangible solutions for societal ills.” In one long article, he wrote: “By advocating government support of the traditional family unit, a return of the acceptability of the ‘homemaker’ vocation, freedom from oppressive government oversight, moral responsibility, and the revival of religious faith, conservatives provide a working blueprint for a free and prosperous future.” That particular article earned an immediate response from the college president.

About a month ago, Bin Gvir’s wife, Alala, threw him a 50th birthday party. It was a controversial affair, both for its guest list and for its centerpieces - birthday cakes for her ultranationalist husband with golden nooses and guns. On the guest list were fellow senior politicians, far-right activists, and members of the police General Command Staff. Among the far-figures were Yoav Eliasi, the prominent rapper and far-right political activist known as הצל (Ha-Tzel, “The Shadow”), who received an honorary police rank in 2024; Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and Bentzi Gopstein, an acolyte of the late Rabbi Kahane who runs a group opposing intermarriage.

A photo posted on Instagram by Bin-Gvir himself showed that his wife presented him with a large three-tier cake, topped with a golden noose — a reference to the controversial law mandating the death penalty for Palestinian terrorists, something which Bin-Gvir and his Otzma Yehudit party have long championed. (Legislation to that effect was passed by the Knesset in this past March.) A smaller cake carried the inscription Hebrew לפעמום, חלומות מתגשים (lifamim, chalomot mitgashim, meaning “Sometimes, dreams do come true.” This was in obvious reference to the bill approving executions.

In its 78-year history, only 2 people have been legally executed by the state of Israel: Meir Tobianski in 1948 and Adolf Eichmann in 1962. While the death penalty is technically legal for crimes such as treason, genocide, and crimes against humanity, it has not been used since 1962. This new death penalty legislation violates Israel’s basic law. (n.b. Please note that less than a year after his execution, Toblanski was exonerated.

Getting back to the party, the bottom layer of the cake featured two guns pointing at a map of Israel, with Gaza and the West Bank included, representing his divisive firearm policies, which have been greatly loosened during his tenure. The smaller cake - the one presented to the Minister by Mrs. Bin-Gvir, was adorned with the Hebrew expression לפעמום, חלומות מתגשים (lifamim, cholomot mitgashim - “Sometimes, dreams come true”). This, of course, refers to Bin-Gvir’s dream of instituting universal execution for all Palestinians and those he believes are anti-Zionists. Here in the United States, we have many hardcore MAGAites who firmly believe that anyone who does not follow in lockstep with POTUS’ programs, whether it be deportations, the war in Iran, the $1 billion ballroom, or a host of other measures, is simply and purely not a patriotic American.

I myself, regardless of Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, IT, or his henchmen, firmly believe I am both a Zionist when it comes to Israel, and a patriot when it comes to America. The fact that I am by no means in lockstep with the way the current Israeli government is dealing with the Palestinians in Gaza, or the way the regime deals with economics, foreign policy, or a whole host of social/cultural issues, in no way makes me an antisemite or a traitor.

I myself have been a Zionist ever since I first learned the term more than 70 years ago. The fact that I am a practicing Jew, can read, speak, and understand Hebrew with enough proficiency to be able to read Israeli newspapers, watch Israeli movies, and laugh at the jokes of Israeli comedians, should firmly establish my תום לב (tom lev, which is Hebrew for the Latin bona fides). I have lived in Israel, attended Rabbinic School in Jerusalem, and am well-versed in Jewish history from אברהם אבינו (“Our father Abraham”) to גל גדות, (the actress Gal Gadot).

So far as being a “paatriotic American“: by age 12, I had already volunteered for my first presidential campaign (JFK); I got my first job on Capitol Hill as an intern/writer for United States Senator Mike Gravel shortly before my 20th birthday; I managed my first Congressional campaign (in Calfornia’s old 12th Congressional District) by age 24, and served as a vetted/officially approved campaign surrogate for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden from 2008-2020. And somehow, I am not patriotic enough for the likes of Trump, Hegseth, Steven Miller, and the rest of the gang.

Let Netanyahu and Bin-Gvir, Trump, and Hegseth have their irrational dreams. Let them tar those who don’t agree with their personal nightmares. Let’s just make sure that through our actions and our energy, our courage and our strength, we can keep the worst of their fables and concoctions from ever coming true.

Comment 0 Likes

categories / Israel, The Middle East, anti-Semitism

#1,080: Just Say No . . . Again and Again and Again

June 02, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Based on news reports for the latter part of May 2026, POTUS has faced more challenges - and heard the words “NO WAY!” - more than at any time during his second term . . . or perhaps his entire life. Consider that within a span of less than two weeks, his poll numbers have hit a second-term low; a huge political NO. Gas prices are now so high that even his MAGA supporters (whose support for him remains ridiculously high, at 80%) are beginning to gnash their teeth and finding it nigh on impossible to blame the Democrats. Shortly before his 80th birthday, his grip over Republican lawmakers is showing increasing signs of slipping away (a group NO), with Senate Republicans blocking funding for his "White House ballroom" and his notorious $1.8 billion fund aimed at rewarding supporters who claim political persecution by Democrats. And, to end last week, Christopher R. Cooper, a Judge on the Federal District Court in Washington, ordered that the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts remove President Trump’s name from the building’s facade and all official branding, and temporarily blocked the institution from shuttering this summer for renovations. The White House has 2 weeks to remove the signage.

And things keep getting deeper and deeper into negative territory. #47, despite that 80% approval rating among hardcore MAGAites, is losing more and more ground among “Republicans” writ large and Republican-leaning independents, and is losing the gains he generated among Latinos and Black Americans in 2024. Things are going so badly among Congressional Republicans that Speaker Johnson sent the House home after it appeared that enough Republicans would join Democrats to pass a War Powers Resolution - thus putting his war in Iran on political tenterhooks. (BTW: the term tenterhooks comes from the textile industry: a tenter was a wooden frame used in cloth-making to stretch wet fabric tightly using sharp L-shaped hooks so it wouldn't shrink as it dried. Metaphorically, being "stretched" tight on these hooks became synonymous with feeling tense and anxious.)

As the old commercial tag-line went: “BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE!” Over the weekend, POTUS’s stealth 80th birthday celebration, disguised as a 250th anniversary gala, celebrating the nation’s “Quarter Millennial”, collapsed, as entertainers canceled in droves. Originally, POTUS promised that he would replace the entertainers who withdrew, and (as of last night) is proposing to cancel the event entirely. The Atlantic’s David Frum noted:

Trump’s effort to rebrand the semi-quincentennial as the Day of Trump left no time, budget, or effort available for the true purpose of the anniversary. As his own self-celebration has fizzled, a void has opened between the scheduled roster of events and the true purpose and meaning of the solemnity of July 4, 2026. This powerful date will go unmarked by any act of memory worthy of the nation.

Among the groups and solo acts dropping out of the celebration were/are Young MC (whose last big hit was 1989’s rap anthem “Bust a Move”, C+C Music Factory, country singer Martina McBride, and Milli Vanilli (the only Grammy winners forced to return their trophy for fraudulently lip-syncing rather than singing their best-known songs).

As hard as it may be, we really should consider not engaging in schadenfreude (the opposite of empathy): I mean, the bumbling fool has brought it on himself.

The latest, but by no means the greatest, of our Fondling Father’s mind-blowing missteps actually had its genesis back in late February of 2025: legislation that directs the Bureau of Printing and Engraving to design and print a $250.00 bill of legal U.S. tender bearing the image of the nation’s 47th president. In announcing the legislation, South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson said that his bill would also create an exemption to previous 19th-century legislation banning living figures on currency “. . . to allow individuals who have served as President to appear on currency.’

The history of whose portrait is (and has been) engraved on various denominations of American currency (whether federal or state) is both long and fascinating. While most people know that George Washington, our first President, adorns the $1.00 bill, Abraham Lincoln (POTUS 16), the $5.00 biil, Alexander Hamilton (our first Treasury Secretary $10.00, Andrew Jackson (POTUS 7) $20.00, Ulysses S. Grant (POTUS 18) $50.00 and Benjamin Franklin (Statesman) the $100.00 bill, very few can name who adorns the $2.00 bill (Thomas Jefferson), the $5,000.00 (President James Madison), the $10,000.00 (Salmon P. Chase, the 25th Sec. of the Treasury and 6th Chief Justice of SCOTUS), or the $100,000.00 bill (President Woodrow Wilson). The last of these, known as a “gold certificate,” was used only by the Federal Reserve Banks and was never circulated among the general public.

When questioned, POTUS claimed not to be aware of Rep. Wilson’s proposed legislation. When asked last week at a press conference about his thoughts on the proposed $250.00 bill, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters, “I don’t think that there’s anything untoward about having the person who is president of the United States on the 250th anniversary bill.” The secretary also acknowledged that political appointees at the Treasury Department had asked the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to begin preparations for the new currency. As with many, many other things emanating from the Regime White House, the secretary pretends to be unaware that Congress must first approve such a move. It is interesting to note that the White House push to create this new note on the fly, created quite a controversy within the bureau itself last month, its former director, Patricia Solimene (who is against the new bill) was removed from her position and shuffled off to another part of Treasury. In an email Ms. Solimene sent her former colleagues, she declared that the move was not her choice, and that she was leaving “with a heavy heart."

Considering that there are an increasing number of NLTL (“Nothing Left to Lose”) members of the Republican caucus in both the House and Senate, chances are that this move will be resoundingly defeated. Yet another NO loudly landing in the ears of a man for whom it is the worst, most offensive, most ego-deflating two-letter word in the English language.

Let us keep our eyes and ears open in the coming weeks and months. I guarantee you more and more members of Congress, the federal courts, and SCOTUS itself will find reason to use the word NO again and again and again . . .

Build a golden Triumphal arch? NO
$ 1 billion ballroom? NO
$250.00 bill adorned with Its likeness? NO
A law making it necessary for everyone entering the U.S. to pay a $250.00 ‘visa integrity fee?’ NO
Declaring war without the benefit of a Congressional vote? NO
Assigning ICE agents to “protect” American polling places? NO
Giving legal license to POTUS to ignore the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause? NO
Ignore the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment? NO
Arrest and prosecute all those who don’t agree with him? NO

Just say NO . . . again and again and again.

1 Comment 1 Likes

categories / All Politics All the Time, The Regime

#1,079: 160 Days and Counting

May 26, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Yes, I know, 160 days is still a long way off. I will no doubt be writing - and you will hopefully be reading - many more articles, essays, and posts between now and then. and November 3, 2026 . . . the day of our Midterm Elections. To me, being 160 days away is, in the world of elections, sort of like the period of time well before the beginning of Spring Training in baseball; a lot of waiting, contemplating, and prognostication; of exercising and keeping in shape.

This “exercising and keeping in shape” aspect of the next 5 months is, in my politically humble opinion, more important for Democrats than it is for Republicans. How so and why?

Most polls indicate that, unless something totally unknowable and unforeseen occurs between now and November 3, Democrats are going to recapture the House - and perhaps with a Big Blue Wave. Other polls indicate that Democrats might even take back the Senate. Were one or both of these to happen, ranking members of committees would find themselves wielding gavels, setting agendas, and issuing subpoenas.

Were the Democrats to take the House, as an example, the Judiciary Committee would be chaired by Jamie Raskin (MD), Homeland Security by Bennie Thompson (MS), Appropriations by Rosa DeLauro (CT), and Budget by Brendan Boyle (PA) . . . all stalwart institutionalists and excellent legislators. They would each be replacing chairs who have shown themselves to be loyal to #47 first, the institution second, and the people, G-d knows where.

With POTUS’ polling numbers being so abysmally low, and a new scandal seemingly coming to light with each passing hour-and-a-half, it would appear, at first glance, that Democrats are holding the winning hand in the midterms. “Just run against Trump and MAGA,” many proclaim, “that’s the only strategy we need to bump ‘em off!” A strong majority of Democrats and Independents believe that continually reminding American voters about the price of gas and groceries, the illegal war in Iraq, the President’s billion-dollar ballroom and golden “Victory Arch,” his new $1.776 billion “Anti Weaponization Fund”, his family’s crypto ventures, the 3,711 stock trades he has made just this year, and his DOJ’s newly-proposed immunity for himself, his family and their businesses for virtually any past, present or future fiscal crime . . . are easily more than sufficient to make him the lamest of lame ducks. And this is without even getting into the billions of other dollars he has made in violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.

While the above may feel like a brilliant game plan for all those Democrats and Independents who have nothing but disdain and utter contempt for IT, his team of Christian Nationalists and incompetents (as well as all those MAGA-ites who believe his presidency is ordained from on high) cave hanc gravem veritatem (namely, beware of this grave truth): merely running against a president, an administration or a compendium of corruption is not a political strategy . . . it is a public tantrum. Remember, there are still millions upon millions of voters who firmly believe their guy is perfect, brilliant, and the greatest POTUS of all time; who believe every word that comes out of his mouth . . . or insist that anything he says which may seem inconsistent, hyperbolized, or just downright untrue, is a creation of the “faux media.”

In other words, merely repeating ad nauseam the sins of Satan isn’t going to change the minds of his maniacal followers, although a growing number of them seem to be starting to open their eyes to his corruption and frailty (both of the moral and physical sort) without much help from the Democrats. The economy, the price of gas, groceries, and healthcare, the gilding of the Nation’s Capitol at a time of financial insecurity, the churlish Qu'ils mangent de la brioche (“Let them eat cake”), attitude of the nouveau riche is beginning to get under their skin. But is this enough to make them cast a vote for the other side? Or will they simply stay home, wearing their “Make America Great Again” ballcaps and getting their news from OAN and Fox?

Then, too, we are beginning to see an incremental bit of spinal strengthening among Congressional Republicans. POTUS’ Anti Weaponization Fund, by which he could build up his own private army of goons without a shred of governmental oversight, seems to have gotten the goats of a growing handful of senators and representatives . . . many of whom, it need be said, are not running for reelection. Without question, it is getting increasingly difficult for many of these Republicans to imagine campaigning back home; how are they going to respond to their constituents who are so angry with the way things are going? What if they are asked (as they surely shall) if this president, this administration, and this congress really give a termite’s tuchas about them and their well-being? What answers can they possibly give without coming off as being daft, dumb, or just total liars?

While continually dumping on - and revealing the misdeeds of - one’s political opponents may be rewarding, it does not make for a smart campaign strategy. A proper Democratic campaign strategy mixes attacking one’s Republican opposition for their many misdeeds, with a full-throated discussion of what the future can and should be under a Democratic-controlled House and Senate. Our platform must:

Prioritize lowering pocketbook costs,
Strengthening the middle class through job creation and tax reform (that does not just benefit the donor class),
Protecting reproductive rights state-by-state.
Restoring funding for USAID around the world, thus saving millions upon millions of lives.
And the potential list goes on and on . . .

Many remember the Republicans' game plan for the second IT administration; the “Project 2025” blueprint, a 900-page “Mandate for Leadership” published by the Heritage Foundation. This is the plan that aimed to restructure the executive branch, centralize presidential control, and implement a wide range of conservative policies. And by G-d, they have pretty much stuck to it. This is precisely what the Democrats need, not so much as a mandate for taking back the government, but rather as its blueprint for what they seek to accomplish after the midterm elections and heading into 2028.

One challenge Democrats have had since long before I was born is coalescing around a platform that can be, if not unanimously agreed upon by one and all, at least well-thought-out enough to keep the party organization from coming apart at the seams. Will Rogers (1879-1935), in addition to being a legendary vaudeville performer, Broadway actor, and movie star, was also 20th-century America’s greatest and most humorous social/political commentator. His most beloved - and truthful - political quip was “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” Such has ever been the case. In 2026, the party is broadly divided into four main ideological factions, each represented by corresponding congressional caucuses, think tanks, and voter coalitions.

Today, in late May 2026, the party is heavily focused on winning back working-class voters, thus creating an intense debate between progressives pushing for economic populism and moderates prioritizing pragmatic, swing-voter strategies. The 2026 midterm primaries highlight a push for new, often younger, candidates to replace older establishment figures. The key factions are, roughly speaking:

Progressives (Approx. 40% of voters): Often younger and highly educated, this group favors wealth redistribution and strong action on climate and social issues. Prominent figures like Rep. Greg Casar are pushing for an affordability strategy focused on capping costs for child care and housing.
Moderates/Center-Left (New Democrat Coalition): This group focuses on economic growth, cost of living, immigration, and security, seeking to win back swing voters. They argue for a "pragmatic" approach to winning in swing districts.
Economic Populists: A wing pushing for a sharp, left-wing economic message to win back working-class voters, including backing candidates who support Medicare for All and aggressive anti-war stances.
Establishment/Party Leadership: Focuses heavily on "electability," utilizing the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) and "Red to Blue" programs to back preferred candidates in competitive primaries to maximize the chances of retaking the House.

Just last week, hundreds of Democrats - members of Congress, party activists, strategists, and financial backers - gathered in Washington, D.C. for the purpose of shaping the party’s 2026 national policy agenda. In addition to taking shots at POTUS (“The worst president in American history”) and demanding the release of the Epstein Files, most of the speakers focused largely on affordability. House MInority Leader Hakim Jeffries summed up this approach with a concise — and characteristically alliterative — commitment to “costs, care, and combatting corruption.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)., urged Democrats to fight harder for federal investments in childcare, saying Democrats took a “weak and ineffectual” approach on an unsuccessful attempt to enact changes during former President Joe Biden’s administration.

Democrats will be speaking about future legislation on the campaign trail. Many of the proposed bills will be aimed directly at corruption, such as outlawing any member of the legislative, executive, or judicial branch of the federal government from making investments without having a blind trust; voting to overturn “Citizens United” (the Supreme Court’’s 2010 decision which made unlimited amounts of anonymous corporate funding available to political campaigns - note that Hawaii just passed a first-in-the-nation bill targeting that horrendous ruling), and tightening the laws permitting any POTUS with allocating funds via executive order. On the social/economic side, Democrats will be looking at legislation lowering the costs of prescription drugs, restoring healthcare benefits to millions of Americans, and putting back billions of dollars into medical research.

But most importantly, they will be doing this with a positive attitude and outlook.

160 days to go . . .
Copyright©2026 Kurt Franklin Stone

Comment 0 Likes

categories / All Politics All the Time

#1,078: "Perfection is the Enemy of Progress"

May 11, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Francois-Mariet Arouet (Voltaire) 1694-1778

As I sit down to begin writing this blog, America’s midterm elections (Tuesday, November 3, 2026) are 176 days away. Needless to say (or write), even before what looks to be an historic date, scores of votes will have been cast either through surface mail, electronic means, or early visits to the nation’s innumerable local polling sites. (Whether or not some of these sites will host armed ICE agents remains to be seen.)

Keep in mind that depending on the source from which one gleans their political prognostications, the final tally might hand both the U.S. House and Senate over to the Democrats, keep the Senate in Republican hands, or - g-d forbid- be called off due to some utterly fictional “state of emergency.” Such a range of possibilities suggests a pithy truism from the French aphorist and novelist Voltaire: “Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien," generally translated as “The best is the enemy of the good," or, as Sir Winston Spencer Churchill translated it, “Perfection is the enemy of progress.” But more on this later. . .

If recent elections provide teachable moments, one may assume that any Republican loss will be declared the product of base political trickery on the part of the Democrats . . . or that any Republican victory (regardless of margin of said victory) will be declared a "landslide of epic proportions.” Ah, shades of Antonio in Shakespeare’s The Tempest: “The past is prologue,” meaning that history sets the stage for both the present and the future. (BTW, this is the phrase notably inscribed on the National Archives building in Washington, D.C.) For those who might wonder what the oldest government record held in that neoclassical “temple to American history” might be, put on your seatbelt: it is the eerily named Doomsday Book (actually, there are two of ‘em: Little Doomsday and Great Doomsday), which contains a tremendous amount of information about England in the 11th century.

Speaking of “doomsday,” up until less than 2 weeks ago, it looked like the next volume of the ancient text would be written by Republicans facing a congressional bloodletting in the House and perhaps even the Senate. Up until the last days of April, Democrats were feeling increasingly emboldened about taking over control of the House after seeming to have fought the redistricting wars to a draw. In state after state, and lower court after lower court, Republican attempts to rid their states of Black-, Hispanic- or Progressive-leaning congressional and state legislative districts were meeting with nothing but failure. And, in special-election-after-special-election, Democrats were manhandling Republicans for seats in both Congressional and state legislative districts . . . districts which NACHO had handily won in 2024.

But two court rulings — one by the United States Supreme Court (Louisiana v. Callais) and another by Virginia’s top court — and an aggressive new push by red states to carve up congressional maps, have delivered the Republican Party its biggest burst of momentum in many months. Bluntly put, Republicans have roughly 10 more House seats that favor them than they did just 10 days ago, and Democrats are suddenly grappling with a new landscape. And although Democrats are still widely seen as favored to win the House this fall, Republicans face a daunting political climate, saddled with POTUS’ sagging approval ratings, high gas prices, and an unpopular war with Iran. In special elections and last year’s races for governor, Democratic enthusiasm has swamped Republican turnout.

Indeed, the last 10 days have demonstrated the power and speed of the courts to shape the midterms — and the role of judges in the next phase of the redistricting battle. Recent legal actions are underway in Virginia, Tennessee, Florida, Louisiana, and Alabama that could still undo or block some of the potential Republican gains before the fall.

The outcome of the legislative and legal fight, which has unfolded largely beyond the control of American voters, could be highly consequential. No party has made a net gain of more than a dozen House seats in a national election since the wave of 2018.

So, what can those Americans who truly fear a future with a Republican Congress, Senate, governorships, and various state legislatures do? Making financial contributions to Democratic candidates is always a good idea . . . although beyond the means and habit patterns of many.

Another suggestion – which costs virtually nothing to accomplish: contact your local election office (they go by different names in different places) and make sure you are still eligible to vote. Please, do not wait until the last minute. With the way things have been going of late, it’s just possible that you could get to the polls and find your right challenged - or what’s even worse - denied. So go online, pick up the phone, send an email, and make sure you’re still on the books. Taking care of this within the next several days will also give you the time you need to locate any documentation you may be lacking. And while you’re at it, please make sure you are set up to receive a sample ballot by surface or email. There is nothing worse than trying to figure out who you’re going to vote for (or where you stand on ballot issues) when you get to the polls. Do your homework before leaving home!

Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (1874-1965)

In doing my prep work for this blog, I’ve found myself thinking a lot about Winston Churchill, who, as mentioned in the second paragraph of this piece, retranslated Voltaire’s “teachable moment” as “Perfection is the enemy of progress.” What does Sir Winston’s quip have to do with the upcoming midterm elections? In a word, plenty.

In most democratically elected systems, political primaries tend to attract candidates from each party’s full spectrum, from farthest right to farthest left, and from single-issue ideologues to their most centrist realists. Problems can occur when enough people vote for (or against), say, a single-issue candidate, thus denying a primary victory to someone who may actually stand a chance of gaining victory in the November general election. We are seeing this political phenomenon across the country in key Senate and House races, where Democratic primary voters are being presented with nominees who are more progressive or moderate than they, the voters, are, and who may have discrete positions that unsettle them. Or, what veteran New York Times opinion writer Frank Bruni refers to as “individual warts that offend them [or] biographies that aren’t to their liking.”

In a recent opinion piece, Bruni cited a couple of these, most notably the Maine Senate race, where Democratic candidate Graham Platner may not stand as good a chance of defeating 6-term incumbent Senator Susan Collins, as would have Governor Janet Mills, who essentially ceded the Democratic nomination to Platner last week. The problem with Platner? About all the voters know about him - and what Republicans will no doubt incessently remind voters about between now and November - are a couple of non-issues: that Platner has never held office before, has a bit of a public temper, once sported a Nazi tattoo (now gone), and has a fondness for “gay” and “gayest” as put-downs, in his not-so-distant past. Collins, on the other hand, will remind voters over and over again that she is a “moderate” Republican who has, from time to time, gone against POTUS. (Actually, Collins’ moderation is more by way of reputation than reality; she has shown herself to be an undependable check on Felon47. The issue here is not whether Platner is perfect; it’s whether or not Mainers are terrified enough of MAGA and the regime to get rid of a senator who possesses neither the guts nor the courage to help save the country by standing up against the worst, most incompetent, most morally and intellectually bankrupt POTUS in history.

It seems to me that in deciding who to cast a primary vote for in the coming weeks, two things are of utmost importance:

Will my candidate be able to defeat the Republican in November, and
Will my candidate successfully call out IT and members of his regime, thus saving the country from grifters and gangsters who make us the laughingstock of the world?

Save perfection for the world-to-come and the 1972 Miami Dolphins. Please, I beg you, in the name of Voltaire and Churchill:

DON’T LET THE PERSUIT OF PERFECTION BE THE ENEMY OF PROGRESS!

1 Comment 0 Likes

categories / All Politics All the Time, The Regime

#1,077: Einstein Was Right About More than Quantum Physics

May 05, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Back on April 15, NACHO (a new nickname meaning “Not a Chance Hormuz Opens,”) sunk about as low as any POTUS has ever done: he blasted Pope Leo, accusing him of “liking crime.” This frontal assault got headlines around the globe. A little more than 2 weeks later, the Holy Father responded by appointing 3 bishops critical of POTUS. Not surprisingly, the pope’s political riposte also garnered headlines from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.

Strangely, an embroglio that should have made headlines was, in the words of Grandpa Doc, “. . . buried beneath the truss ads on page 39.” The issue at hand was an executive order IT had issued just weeks after he returned to office. His order called for a task force within his newly refashioned DOJ to investigate and pursue what his press office called the Biden Justice Department's “aggressive prosecutions” against Christian demonstrators at clinics where abortions were performed but responded “less aggressively” to attacks on Christian pregnancy resource centers (i.e. places that dissuade women from having abortions).

Recently, the White House issued a 200-plus page report about NACHO’s contention. In addition to the matter of the “aggressive prosecutions” of Christians at abortion clinics, the report accused the previous administration of imposing disproportionately heavy fines on several Christian Universities, including Liberty and Grand Canyon, which the Department of Education under Biden - so the recent report stated - had accused of functioning as nothing more than diploma mills. The report further compared this charge with the lower fines against Penn State and Michigan State for cases of sexual. abuse. Unlike last month’s back-and-forth between the White House and Pope Leo, this week’s Biden-Anti-Christian-bias report received far, far less coverage. One of the few places it could be seen, heard, or read was, not surprisingly, on Fox; Their headline ran, DOJ alleges ‘systematic culture’ of anti-Christian bias across federal agencies under Biden.

In the Regime’s report, the term “traditional Christian” is used over and over as it discusses the great need to defend White Christian beliefs. Many of the concerns in this report - abortion, vaccines, LGBTQ rights - are the concerns of conservative white evangelicals who are an important base of support for NACHO. The report also describes White American Christians as being a persecuted minority.

How’s that? Since when are Christians a minority . . . and a persecuted one at that? According to the United States Census website, as I write this sentence, there are precisely 342,473,537 people in the United States. Let’s compare this to the Jews for just a second. According to the Jewish Agency for Israel, the global population of Jews - whether traditional, secular, or merely cultural - is about 7,200,000 living in Israel, and 6.3 million living in the United States. And although I did not major in math, I can easily determine that 6.3 million represents less than 2% (1.18% to be precise) of the American population. How’s that for a tiny minority! And yet, to listen to many MAGAites, there must be at least 35-4million Jewish people in the United States; enough to control Hollywood, the media in general, medicine and all those universities that push the teaching of DEI and all other Marxist corspiracies. And then there are the Muslims. According to the most recent census statistics, there are approximately nearly 4.5 million Muslims in America. This works out to just a little over 1.3% of the U.S. population. And yet, there are any number of prominent Republican politicians – including Speaker Mike Johnson and Texas Senator John Cornyn – who continue sounding the alarm on what they call a growing Sharia law threat in the U.S. Just last February, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government held hearings on the incompatibility of Muslim Sharia and American Constitutional law . . . as if it were a major issue to be concerned with. Hey, in the race for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in Minnesota, former “My Pillow” exec Mike Lindell has vowed that if elected, he will take on satanic statues immediately and will ban Sharia Law on day one. Well, it does serve to distract a percentage of the public away from the Epstein Files saga.

By comparison, according to Pew Research, as of 2024, 62% of U.S. adults identify as Christians (which includes Catholics, all branches of both traditional and primitive Protestantism, Lutheranism, and Pete Hegseth’s Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC) According to the Pew poll the 62% figure represents a decline of 9 percentage points since 2014, and a 16-point drop since 2007. The report ordered up by the Regime at the very beginning of the second go-round essentially serves as a sop to so-called “traditional Christians.” Over and again, the report uses this term in discussing many concerns, such as abortion, vaccines, LGBTQ rights . . . which are precisely the concerns of conservative white evangelicals, who happen to be an important base for NACHO and his Regime.

One need look no farther than the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, who is a loud and proud member of CREC – the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, which is often associated with both Christian Nationalism and what is called “Federal Vision” theology. In addition to their anti-Democratic notions about allowing only 1 vote per household, keeping women out of both the military and the workforce, and working for a post-millennial world, those belonging to CREC churches (there are currently more than 160 of them in the United States) or are self-proclaimed Christian Nationalists or hold to Federal Vision theological principles, truly believe that they are a dangerously persecuted minority.

If you want to know from a member of a religious minority what persecution feels like, just talk to a Jew. Acts of lethal anti-Semitic violence are on the rise in the USA, UK and Australia. It should come as no surprise that even with the war in Iran, an overwhelming percentage of American Jews do not support the Regime. They/we find a haunting, mostly deceptive, under-façade of anti-Semitism beneath all the grammar school-level rhetoric. Our antennae are attuned to both the evil and the silence. We know far better than most that anti-Semitism is, in addition to being the world’s oldest prejudice, the equivalent of ‘moral pornography.’

And here we ask Prof. Einstein to enter the conversation. For as brilliant as he was in the fields of relativity and Quantum Physics, he was equally astute in understanding both politics and the human psyche. For it was Einstein - in one of his most trenchant and understandable moments - taught:

“The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil,
but by those who watch them without doing anything.”

Comment 1 Likes

categories / All Politics All the Time, Religion and Politics

#1,076: First, Do No Harm

April 27, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Our late maternal grandfather, “Grandpa Doc” (James J. Kagan, DPM: 1891-1974) had a story for any event, every occasion. Perhaps that’s where I got it from. One of my favorites dealt with the first Jew being elected POTUS. At the inauguration, a man sitting next to the about-to-be-sworn in president’s mother softly said to her “You must be so terribly proud of your son . . . I cannot imagine the feeling.” The mother turned toward the man, smiled warmly and said: “Most certainly . . . but you should only meet his sister: SHE’S a doctor!”

Although she herself is not Jewish (her husband, Dr. Daniel Schwartz is), there is a much to be proud about Dr. Erica Schwartz who, just last week, was nominated by POTUS to be the new director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). First and foremost there is her extraordinary CV: Dr. Schwartz is a retired rear admiral in the in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps who was Deputy Surgeon General from January 2019 to April 2021, who earned both a BA with a degree in biomedical engineering with a minor in East Asian studies in 1994 from Brown University, as well as an M.D. from the same Ivy League university in 1998. She also earned a Juris Doctor at the University of Maryland and is a member of both the AMA and the District of Columbia Bar. Her medical specialty is occupational and environmental medicine; she is also an expert health policy, pandemic response (including COVID-19 testing sites), and implementing disease surveillance systems (systemic, ongoing processes for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting health data to detect, monitor, and prevent disease outbreaks.

I don’t know about you, but to me, Dr. Schwartz seems to be ideally suited to taking over the CDC. And by the way, unlike her potential boss, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., she is both personally and professionally pro-vaccine. While testifying before a host of House and Senate committees last week, Sec. Kennedy, Jr. was questioned by Rep.. Raul Ruiz, MD (CA-25) in a House hearing: “If Dr. Schwartz is confirmed as CDC director, will you commit on the record to implement whatever vaccine guidance she issues without interference?” The secretary’s response? “Im not going to make that kind of commitment.” Dr. Ruiz, the son of farmworkers who earned an MD, 2 MPHs form Harvard (the first Latino to do so) quickly retorted “Because you probably won’t, you’ll fire her. Like you did with Dr. [Susan] Monarrez, because you will not accept recommendations based on science,”

Although Dr. Schwartz’s nomination has thus far garnered both bi-partisan support and near unanimous plaudits from the scientific/medical communities, there is a deep underlying concern about how Secretary RFK, Jr. will treat her and the obvious differences they share when it comes to the cavernous gap between proven science and political sorcery. Let’s face facts: there is a world of difference between Hippocrates commanding physicians to “First, do no harm,” and the HHS Secretary instructing medical people to “denigrate and deny science."

During his round of grilling by various congressional committees for the first time since he came into office, Kennedy strenuously pushed back on Democrats’ assertions that he bore some of the responsibility for the measles outbreak in the U.S., the worst the country has experienced in nearly a half-century. He told members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the outbreak is global, that it started before he took office and that those who were sick were mostly 5 years or older, which meant their parents had decided against vaccination before he was in office. For their part, Republicans mostly praised Secretary Kennedy’s work to urging healthier diets and expanding access to peptides, often unproven compounds that are popular in the wellness industry. I for one find it somewhere between highly ironic and outright daffy that a man like Kennedy, who talks endlessly about healthy (and expensive) diets, should work for the president with the worst possible eating habits of any chief executive in the nation’s history . . . with the possible exception of the 345-pound Wiliam Howard Taft.

Two areas where Felon47, The Brain Worm and their bootlicking toadies have forced dieting on both America and indeed, the entire planet, are in the fields of medical care and research. Since RFK took the helm of HHS in February of last year, his department has shed more than 17,000 jobs according to data from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Figures show that HHS and its four key subagencies - FDA (Food and Drug Administration), NIH National Institutes for Health), CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) and CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) have cut, respectively, 4,332, 4,049, 2889, and 1061 jobs. The single largest job loss by percentage was at the CDC, which managed to fire nearly a quarter of its employees. Professionals estimate that it will take a decade or more to replace these employees with people of similar caliber, and easily a generation to replace their level of experience.

What’s even worse is the amount of money cut from medical research. As of the first of February of this year, more than 7,800 research grants have been terminated or frozen. A majority of these are monies that would normally go to research labs attached to universities. This means that some 25,000 scientists and personnel are gone from agencies and labs that have long made the United States the premiere source of new medicines, medical procedures and new drugs in the world .

This is a subject that is near and dear to my heart. Seeing the devastation being visited upon medical research absolutely infuriates me. You see, for the past 30+ years I have spent the majority of my working hours serving as a member of an Institutional Review Board . . . a group of medical, scientific and academic professionals whose collective job is to oversee clinical research projects with a mind towards making sure that the research is what you might call “clinically kosher” and that the rights of the participants (subjects) involved in the research are protected. Over the years, I have grown to specializing in translating medical terminology into lay English, in order to ensure that participants can understand what they are signing up for. It’s not easy; doctors and scientists speak a unique tongue called “medicalese” . . . whether their native tongue be English, Spanish, French, Chinese, Korean or Hebrew. Of all the many professional fields and pursuits I have engaged in over a long life (actor, political speechwriter, historian, lecturer, congregational rabbi, blogger, and professor), none has been more challenging - or given me greater satisfaction - than working on an IRB. It is the one thing I’ve ever done that gives me the feeling that maybe - just maybe - I’m making a tangible difference in the world.

Getting approval for a new drug, medical procedure or device can be a long and very costly process. First comes the laboratory stage, in which rats, mice, zebrafish, dogs, cats and other animals are kept in a vivarium (an accredited medical research facility designed to house laboratory animals under strictly controlled environmental conditions) where they become the first creatures to undergo preclinical research. After a period of time there will be different study phases, first involving healthy humans then on to randomized, placebo-controlled double-blinded studies and eventually premarketing studies. At each step along the way - which can take years - the various sponsors, labs, investigators and clinical procedures are overseen by both an IRB, and either a Medical Ethics Board or a Data Monitoring Committee. All this costs money . . . a lot of money. Often, the money is provided by a sponsor; frequently by a university grant and, up till recently, from monies budgeted and allocated by the Federal Government. Not all research is intended to make the sponsor a fortune; there are only so many erectile dysfunction medications out there.

When a new medication or procedure hits the headlines, cheers can be heard throughout the medical world. Just this month, three potential “game changers” were announced. The first two are both oncological drugs meant to target one of the most challenging and lethal of all diseases: Metastatic (spreading) Pancreatic Cancer. The first, from Revolution Medicines is an orally administered drug called daraxonrasib. According to Dr. Mark Goldsmith, CEO of Revolution Medicines, its pill (daraxonrasib) has already helped subjects survive an average of 13.2 months after starting treatment, compared to 6.7 months for those receiving standard chemotherapy. The second pancreatic drug (elraglusib) also doubled one-year survival for subjects taking it compared to those getting standard chemotherapy. Elraglusib, produced by Actuate Therapeutics, is given by IV (e.g. through a vein). Without getting overly technical, both drugs treat advanced solid tumors with what are called RAS mutations, controls a sort of “on-off switch” in solid tumors. These drugs turn off the RAS signal, thus blocking, binding and inhibiting oncogenic signaling. So highly thought of are these two drugs that they received “breakthrough therapy designation” (BTD) from the FDA . . . a process designed to expedite the development and review of drugs that are intended to treat a serious condition.

The third game changer is a first-ever gene therapy for the treatment of genetic hearing loss, which was just approved by the FDA under their National Priority Voucher Pegram. For further information, please check out this link.

It’s been a long, long time since Hippocrates (c. 480 BEC - c. 370 BCE) told doctors that the first rule of medicine is “Do no harm.” It seemed to work for a couple of thousands of years. Hippocrates was also, supposedly, the first person to publicly state that diseases were caused naturally, . . . and not because of superstition and gods. Under THE FONDLING FATHER and THE BRAIN WORM, we seem to be moving backwards. In place of striving to first, do no harm, we are causing rises in Measles, Malaria ,and HIV (to name but a few of the most infectious medical monstrosities) in various parts of the world. Many of these reductions are due to the Regime’s disemboweling of USAID around the globe . . . mostly in the name of economic necessity.

Remember, there are a mere 191 days until November 3, 2026: midterm election. And while you’re at it, keep in mind that Hippocrates, the “Father of Medicine” will also be on the ballot.

Πρώτον, μην κάνεις κακό

“First, do no harm”

Copyright©2026 Kurt Franklin Stone

3 Comments 1 Likes

categories / The Regime, Medical Ethics

#1,075: The Latest Example of Chutzpah

April 21, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

I was born in Hollywood (CA) on Sunday, August 21, 1949. 3 weeks and 4 days later (September 25, 1949) ABC became the first network to broadcast The Lone Ranger, starring Clayton Moore as the title character and Jay Silverheels (Harold Jay Smith) as his loyal companion Tonto (Spanish slang for “fooslish,” or “silly.”) The show, an absolute favorite for youngsters like me who were fornuate enough to live in a household with a TV set, ran for 221 episodes - until June 6, 1957. In those days, before he became a mutual funds maven, my father owned a TV store (“Flash Televisions"), which permitted us (my slightly older sister Erica and me) to become fans of one of the earliest of all shows. We became steadfast friends of the Masked Man and his loyal companion, Tonto. We loved their grit, their fearlessness, and their code of honor . . . not to mention that they always captured the bad guys and always preferred to let justice - rather than vengeance - take its course.

When viewed from a distance of some 7 decades, their lives, actions, and Weltanschauung are far more treacly and sincere than what we have become accustomed to - both on celluloid and in reality. And yet, even in 2026, the Lone Ranger, Tonto, and their “gang” of regulars (including Lane Bradford, John Doucette, Bill Ward, Harry Lauter, House Peters, Jr., and Gail Davis) are still solid entertainment. One of the things that gives me the greatest kick out of watching the shows today (it’s on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week on Pluto TV and Roku TV) is where it was originally shot . . . just up what is now called “Valley Circle Blvd” in West Hills, previously “Canoga Park,” and before that “Owensmouth,” the immense tract of land owned by the late movie star Francis (Frantisek) Lederer. Even today, you can see some of the unique rock formations. And, at the very bottom of the hill is the town of Simi Valley, where the remains of the Corriganville Movie Ranch sit; it was, for many decades, a full Western set created by yet another cowboy star, Ray “Crash” Corrigan. All of these are within walking distance of my sister Erica’s home in what is now called "West Hills.”

My other favorite TV show from that era lasted a mere 39 stand-alone episodes: The Honeymooners, starring Jackie Gleason as New York City bus driver Ralph Cramden, Audrey Meadows as his wife Alice, Art Carney as Ralph’s eccentric best friend and neighbor, municipal sewer worker Ed Norton, and Joyce Randolph, Ed’s wife Trixie. It was a simple half-hour comedy with a simple plot-line: Ralph’s dreams of a better life; Ralph and Ed’s crazy schemes to strike it rich, and Ralph’s relationship with Alice. Although each episode ends with Ralph hugging Alice and proclaiming "BABY, YOU’RE THE GREATEST!”, they do have their share of spats. Despite their love, at least once each episode, Ralph waved a fist in Alice’s face and loudly asked, “YOU WANNA GO TO THE MOON, ALICE?” or proclaimed: “ONE OF THESE DAYS . . . POW! RIGHT IN THE KISSER!” The one line that had me rolling on the floor in hysterics each week was when, frustrated to the max, Ralph would bellow out, “I GOT A BIG MOUTH!!!”

Of course, what Ralph was portraying in those moments that got me into hysterics was a burst of what is known as chutzpah . . . Yiddish for “nerve,” “gall,” “brazenness,” or “extreme temerity.” (It never ceases to amaze me how a simple two-syllable word can have so many meanings.) The all-time most famous example of chutzpah is that of the child who murders his parents and then throws himself on the mercy of the court, begging for leniency because he is an orphan. . .

I have the feeling that the above, age-old example of chutzpah - outright nerve - is on the verge of being replaced by America’s “Trinity of delusion”: Trump, Hegseth, and Vance. For in less time than it takes to convince millions of people that they are men of devoutness and faith . . . people whose lives are guided and inspired by the word of G-d, they go to war with the Pope, accuse him of being “soft on crime,” and publicly mistake a verse from the Biblical Book of Ezekiel for a tense, film noir monologue from a Quentin Tarentino film. If that ain’t chutzpah, what in the world is?

Just a week ago, IT, in a lengthy Truth Social post, condemned Pope Leo XIV, calling him “WEAK on Crime,” and “terrible for foreign Policy.” He also claimed that the Pope feared the administration, and that the first U.S.-born pope in history was only selected because “they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump.” POTUS continued his attacks on Pope LEO, subsequently telling reporters that he believes the Pope “likes crime.” During a prayer service this past Saturday in St. Peter’s Basilica, the Pope did not mention POTUS by name, but rather spoke about the “delusion of omnipotence that surrounds us” and how it has destabilized the “balance within the human family.” To say that FELON47’s attacks on Pope Leo for “liking” and being “soft on crime” are not only bizarre, they also show a clear misunderstanding of precisely what his holy mission truly is. And then, to add insult to injury - and piss off millions of Christians of all stripes - POTUS posted an AI-generated image on Truth Social that depicted him in a white robe, appearing as a Jesus-like figure healing a man. After fending off much criticism, he deleted the post, claiming he viewed the image as representing him as a doctor or Red Cross worker. As they say in Latin, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus: “False in one thing, false in everything.”

Next in line in the chutzpah parade is the regime’s highest-ranking Catholic: V.P. J.D. Vance, who converted to the religion in 2019, and has a new memoir about that event coming out in June. Recently, the V.P. told a conservative audience at the University of Georgia that the pope was wrong to say that disciples of Christ are “never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs.” Asked about the debate between his boss and the pope at the Athens, Ga., event hosted by the conservative group Turning Point USA, the Veep admonished Leo, saying that if he was “going to opine on matters of theology,” his comments needed to be “anchored in the truth.” You tell me, J.D.: precisely what should a Pope who earned his doctorate in Canon Law (JCD) from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (the Angelicum) in Rome more than 40 years ago be speaking about in public? The St. Thomas soccer team? You, sir, have more chutzpah than the entire cast of Fiddler on the Roof.

Lastly, we have the case of our ultra-chutzpadik Secretary of War, the Hon. Pete Hegseth, who is a member in good standing of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches. CREC is a White, archconservative, Calvinist denomination that emphasizes White nationalist views. The secretary sees the will of G-d in everything we do, in every war we fight, and in every political breath we take. He firmly believes that there should only be one vote per family (the husband); that women should stay home and take care of the family, and that the Bible should be the absolute basis of our every thought, motive, and decision. He has instituted a prayer service at the Pentagon, fired officers who happen to be female or people of color, and declared that Jesus ordained the War in Iran (Operation Epic Fury). How then is it that this man, so very, very steeped in the Bible, does not know the difference between a verse from the Biblical book of Ezekiel (25:17), which deals with G-d’s vengeance against the Philistines, and a blood-curdling monologue delivered by Samuel L. Jackson in Quetin Tarrentino’s savage 1994 crime film Pulp Fiction? Take a look . . .

Chutzpah is not necessarily a bad thing to possess. According to actor Alan Alda (who, although not Jewish, has been happily married to Arlene Weiss for nearly 70 years), “Nothing important was ever accomplished without chutzpah. Columbus had chutzpah. The signers of the Declaration of Independence had chutzpah. Don’t ever aim doubt at yourself. Laugh at yourself, but don’t doubt yourself.” When put this way, I am in total agreement; no actor who ever succeeded was lacking in gall. However, audacity (another way to define chutzpah), when combined with terminal insincerity, malignant narcissism, “know-it-allism,” and raging self-doubt, can and does make for the very last thing you want in your leaders. And that’s precisely what we’ve got in IT, THE GRIM VEEPER, and the TRIPLE SEC OF DEFENSE, not to mention our soon-to-be-shown-the-door FBI director, KEYSTONE KASH Patel. What is most telling are their recent polling numbers:

As of today (April 21, 2026), the Fondling Father’s approval rating hit a new second-term low of 35%. Various polls in mid-April showed his approval ranging from 33% to 41% with disapproval consistently over 55%.
The “Grim Veeper” has seen a steep decline in popularity, described as “historically the worst” for a V.P. at this stage, falling from a net +3 in January 2025 to roughly -18 in April 2026.
The nation’s “Triple Sec of Defense” is currently facing criticism over the war in Iran, and House Democrats have filed articles of impeachment against him earlier this month, alleging unauthorized military action. More than one poll has shown his disapproval rating at a -30 point net unpopularity.
“Keystone Kash’s” numbers have plummeted, especially after the release of a well-researched Atlantic article entitled The FBI Director is MIA. In this rather lengthy piece, staff writer Sarah Fitzpatrick alleges that the director engaged in “excessive drinking” and “unexplained absences” while leading the FBI. Within 72 hours, Patel sued both Fitzpatrick and The Atlantic for $250,000,000 in damages plus any proceeds from the article, claiming defamation of character and malice.

With the way things are going within the regime, I prefer the heroism of the Lone Ranger and Tonto, and the antics of Ralph, Alice, Norton, and Trixie to the lethal level of chutzpah emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

195 days, 16 hours until the midterms . . .

3 Comments 0 Likes

categories / The Regime

#1,074: Oh, and It's Alright, It's Alright, It's Alright

April 12, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

On January 19, 1977, the night before Jimmy Carter took the oath of office, thus becoming America’s 39th President, a strictly A-list pre-inaugural gala was held at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. Among the performers rocking the house were the “alpha and omega” of world-class musical talent: Aretha Franklin and Paul Simon. For her part, Franklin tore the house down with her megawatt version of Irving Berlin’s “God Bless America.” Although Berlin wrote the song way back in 1918, it wasn’t heard in public until Kate Smith sang it on her number one most popular radio show on November 10, 1938. Aretha Franklin’s version had the pre-inaugural crowd jumping, stomping, and sweating.

By comparison, Paul Simon’s choice was a much quieter, more thoughtful, pensive - even prayerful - piece musically based on one of the greatest masterpieces of Baroque music: J.S. Bach’s sacred oratorio St. Matthew’s Passion (part 1, numbers 21 and 23, and part 2, number 54). Simon simply called it American Tune. It began with the words:

Many's the time I've been mistaken
And many times confused
Yes, and I've often felt forsaken
And certainly misused.

Oh, but I'm all right, I'm all right
I'm just weary to my bones
Still, you don't expect to be bright and bon vivant
So far away from home
So far away from home

The song, originally released in November 1973, has been a personal favorite of Simon and his vast fan base ever since. Rolling Stone has rated it as high as #262 on its list of “The 500 Greatest Songs of all time.” (Somewhat ironically, Aretha Franklin’s “Respect” came in at #1.) Upon his induction into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2011, Simon chose "American Tune" as his song of induction.

Much of the power of “American Tune” is in Paul Simon’s voice. It does not ring with the loud anger that runs through our time. His guitar playing, like his voice is deceptively simple but truly complex; you try it. Let’s face it: Bruce Springsteen he is not. Bob Dylan, he is not... and never was. In American Tune, his only real protest song, his voice is mournful, as if unspooling in the candlelight of a day’s end, in the place where a person’s battles give pause until dawn. The song is searing in its tenderness, poetic in its indictment. It is political without being so. And its voices sound like truck drivers or factory workers, men and women who hustle for their daily bread while the world above them, the one of bankers and politicians, spins on indifferently.

For several years, of course, going back to his high school days when he and Art Garfunkel performed as Tom and Jerry, Paul’s voice was counterbalanced by Artie’s soaring, almost angelic, crystaline delivery. It’s hard to believe that at their peak, they were only together for 6 years (1964-1970) - 3 years before Paul wrote American Tune. (For those who have never understood why they broke up so many decades ago, I highly recommend former Los Angeles Times music critic Robert Hilburn’s definitive biography, Paul Simon: The Life. It will tell you all you want to know about 2 of the most successful, essentially private men in the history of the performing arts. This is not to say that they haven’t, very, very occasionally, teamed up for a night on stage. On September 19, 1980, Simon and Garfunkel played before more than half a million people at New York’s Central Park. A love album came out of that historic event; it included what I believe is the only time they performed American Tune together:

Throughout its history, America has refracted its patriotism and its protest in music, including “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” the African American spiritual “Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child,” Billie Holiday’s rendition of “Strange Fruit,” Bob Dylan’s “Blowin’ in the Wind” and Neil Young’s album “Living With War.” Back in 1973, Simon referred to American Tune as “My Nixon impeachment song.” In their book, “Songs of America,” Jon Meacham and Tim McGraw write that American history “is a story of promises made and broken, of reform and reaction — a story fundamentally shaped by the perennial struggle between what Abraham Lincoln called ‘the better angels of our nature’ and our worst impulses… Through all the years of strife, we’ve been shaped not only by our words and our deeds but by our music, by the lyrics and the instrumentals that have carried us through dark days and enabled us to celebrate bright ones.”

In American Tune, Paul Simon is far from sentimental; he is tired but resilient. He writes, When I think of the road we’re traveling on/I wonder what went wrong.” The American dream comes with both disappointment and loss. Each generation endures its sins and crises; its diminishment and cruel realizations. It is the job, though, despite the clamor and politics, that waits at first light with the hope of reward and the fear of resignation. American Tune, like Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (published in 1888), George Orwell’s 1984 (published in 1949) or Sinclair Lewis’ It Can’t Happen Here (1935) American Tune reads like it was written just last week (though Bach composed the music in 1728). It is a tune for the ages; even more about our current demented despot than Tricky Dick more than half a century ago. American Tune is the masterwork of a lyricist/composer on a par with Harold Arlen, the brothers Gershwin, Irving Berlin, Jerome Kern, Richard Rogers, Lorenz Hart, Frank Loesser, Bob Dylan, Carol King, Billy Joel, and Leonard Cohen . . . all of whom, in addition to be musically gifted to the max, happened to be Jewish. In American Tune, Paul Simon figures out how to make prophecy rhyme. He is one who firmly believes that regardless of the crises and fears of today . . . there will, G-d willing, yet be another and brighter tomorrow. Already, we are beginning to see a tightly bound package of evil beginning to unravel. I have to believe this is perfectly in keeping with the plaintive prophecy Simon wrote back in ‘73:

Oh, and it’s alright, it’s all right, it’s all right.

1 Comment 1 Likes

categories / Just Ruminating

#1,073: We Were ALL Slaves in the Land of Egypt

March 29, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

In about 48 hours, Jewish families, friends and communities the world over will begin the celebration of Passover (Pesach). By any stretch of the imagination, it can be both the most enjoyable - and most complex - of all Jewish festivals. And, depending on how good the cooks, chefs, or caterers in your neck of the woods are, it can also be the most delicious. Pesach, of course, commemorates the ancient Hebrews’ exodus from slavery to freedom after being under the thumb of the ancient Egyptians for some 430 years. It can be a rather complex holiday; G-d knows that for some of us, its preparation - the scouring of the kitchen, replacing of the plates, pots, pans, and utensils, the shopping for kosher le pesach (“kosher-for-Passover) foodstuffs - can begin upwards of a week or more before the candles are even lit for the first Seder.

And yet, Passover has a simple yet incredibly seminal message to deliver not just to Jewish folks but to people from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe: to wit, that slavery is a supreme sin, and freedom is the most basic of all human rights. Throughout the haggadah - the booklet used at the Passover Seder - the message “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt’ is repeated in one form or another. It is repeated in both positive and negative forms: to remember and not to forget. This is not some mere suggestion; it is on a par with any of the Divine Commandments (mitzvot) and is the most frequently repeated commandment in the Torah (the Five Books of Moses): 36 times. It is an essential, perhaps the essential value for both Jews and non-Jews alike: to work for justice at all times on behalf of oppressed people, based on the awareness that we were once slaves . . . whether in Egypt, Spain, Turkey, Russia, Iran, the United States, England . . . or anywhere else on the planet.

And whether the more than 8 million people who just yesterday attended “No Kings” rallies in the 50 states knew it or not, our gathering, sign-waving, singing, and protesting was, as we would say in Hebrew, zecher le'yetziat Mitzraim: “a remembrance of our going forth from Egypt” . . . both a literal remembrance from the past, and a figurative spur for the future. The gathering Annie, Nurit, and I attended yesterday in Coral Springs along University Drive was incredibly energizing. Annie carried a placard emblazoned with the words “Peaceful Protest is a Right (along with a red-white-and-blue hand giving the two-finger “peace” sign); Nurit wore a black T-shirt with a melting ice cube that she had designed; mine had the immortal hope of the late Rep. John Lewis: “Redeem the Soul of America.”

Over the past several decades, some fundamentalist Christians have begun hosting Passover meals at their churches. To them, it is a means of bringing the flock closer to Jesus, who, as the Christian Bible tells us, celebrated Pesach with his disciples during the Last Supper, which occurred immediately prior to his crucifixion. As a Jewish person, he would have quite obviously followed the tradition of commemorating the Exodus. To many Christians, Jesus is seen as the unblemished “Lamb of G-d,” the broken Afikomen symbolizing his body, and the third of the four cups of wine (the Cup of Redemption) representing his blood.

Although the Jewish and Christian interpretations of that Passover Seder may differ, the underlying message of that seder itself has not: the universal need and necessity of all people working towards the redemption of those who are enslaved - whether in body, mind, spirit, or soul. At this season, in which Jewish people observe Passover and Christians celebrate Easter, I get more questions about the nature of Judaism than at any other time of the year. What follows is both a brief explanation of the nature of Jews and Judaism, and a prayer for better understanding. I came across this piece some time ago, and have no idea who its author is . . . but THANK YOU:

Judaism is a religion. But it is not only a religion. And you don’t need to believe in G-d to be Jewish. You don’t have to daven mincha (pray the afternoon service) or keep a kosher home or light candles on Shabbat (Sabbath) or study Torah or face Jerusalem to pray.

Because Judaism is also a peoplehood. A memory. A language that echoes even when we don’t speak it. A rhythm that pulses even when we don’t keep time with it.

Israel is our source and where we took root - not just a place on a map, but a landscape of story. It lives in the names we carry, in the lullabies we don’t remember learning, in the way certain words catch in our throats. It lives in ancient coins with Hebrew inscriptions pulled from the earth, in shards of pottery, in prayers pressed into stone, in arguments that never really end.

We are a people — magnificent, far-flung people — from the steppes of Russia to a shtetl in Poland, from the deserts of sub-Saharan Africa to the highlands near Addis Ababa, from Kaifeng to Cordoba, from Baghdad to London, from Casablanca to Brooklyn, from Buenos Aires to Berlin, from a crowded table at Russ & Daughters to a quiet apartment overlooking the Western Wall.

We have lived everywhere. We sound different. We look different. We practice differently. We vote differently. We argue differently. We disagree — loudly, sometimes painfully — because that is what living people do.

But beneath all of that, there is a through-line.

We have been cast out. We have been othered. We have been translated and mistranslated, renamed and erased, and rediscovered. We have learned how to live between worlds — sometimes by choice, often not. We are, many of us, a little like mermaids — fluent in more than one element, never fully belonging to just one.

We are survivors. But survival is not the whole story. We build. We write. We joke. We argue. We fall in love. We make art out of exile. We make meaning out of rupture. We take what is broken and we do something with it. And we don’t need anyone to tell us who we are — or what defines us. Because there is no single answer. There never was.

There are Jews who find God in the silence of early morning prayer.

And Jews who find meaning in protest, in justice, in repair.

And Jews who find themselves in food, in family, in language, in memory.

And Jews who are still searching, still questioning, still unsure — and that, too, is part of it.

We don’t need anyone to tell us who is a “good Jew” or a “bad Jew” or how to be a Jew correctly.

We have our own moral compasses.

They are not identical. They were never meant to be.

And maybe that’s the point.

A people that has crossed deserts and oceans, survived empires and expulsions, argued across centuries, and still shows up to the table — however we define it — is not fragile.

We are complicated. We are contradictory. We are alive.

And we are still here.

Wishing one and all a meaningful Passover and an Easter that both restores and reenergizes. Remember, we are here, together in partnership: divinity with humanity; those who pray right to left with those whose devotionals move from left to right; those who were once enslaved with those who are still bound in the shackles of subjugation.

May we always remember the lesson of Egypt . . . May we never forget the power we have when we all work together.

1 Comment 0 Likes

categories / Religion and Politics, anti-Semitism

#1,072: The Pentagon’s Holy Warrior

March 23, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Last week, this blog gave prominence to the first American writer to be awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature: Sinclair Lewis. This week, let’s give a slightly less effusive shout-out to an even more prolific author with a somewhat similar name . . . who never won a Nobel Prize: Upton Sinclair. Sinclair (1878-1968) was best known for his 1906 epic polemic on the meatpacking industry, The Jungle (which writer Jack London referred to as “The Uncle Tom’s Cabin of wage slavery”). But Upton was far, far more than a mere novelist and short story writer; he was a polemicist for socialism, healthcare, temperance, free speech, and workers’ rights, and a fiery political candidate, who once ran for governor of California on his own EPIC (“End Poverty in California”) ticket. He lost that race, due mainly to MGM, which flooded its theatres with what today we’d call “mocumentaries.” These slickly produced shorts showed hundreds of thousands of "hoboes” streaming into the Golden State atop hundreds of railroad cars in anticipation of Sinclair winning the governorship and giving them tons of free goodies. It didn’t help Sinclair’s campaign that Louis B. Mayer, producer and cofounder of the giant studio, was also a staunch conservative who happened to chair the California Republican Party.

When it came to sheer productivity, Upton Sinclair beat out Sinclair Lewis by miles and miles: Lewis published 23 novels over a period of 39 years, while Sinclair authored 87 novels over a period of 81 years . . . not to mention works of non-fiction, plays, and treatises on subjects ranging from diet and religion to economic interpretation. To my way of thinking (and reading), Upton Sinclair’s very greatest accomplishment was his 11-volume Lanny Budd series of political/historical novels written between 1940 and 1953. The series features a central character named Lanny Budd, who is the son of an American arms manufacturer. He is portrayed as holding the confidence of world leaders, and not simply witnessing events; most often, he is propelling them. As a sophisticated socialite who mingles easily with people from all cultures and socioeconomic classes, Lanny was, for his time, the antithesis of the stereotyped "Ugly American." Novelist Sinclair placed Lanny Budd within the important political events in the United States, Europe, and North Africa in the first half of the 20th century.

Sinclair’s eye for - and understanding of - high-stakes, history-making politics and the real protagonists and antagonists who shaped the period between pre-WWI and early McCarthyism is second to none . . . and in so many, many prophetic ways:

Lanny, in his role as FDR’s P.A. (“Personal Agent"), enters the personal political circles of both Mussolini and Hitler (as well as Goebels, Himmler and the rest of the European Fascist hierarchy. Posing as an international arts expert (which, in reality, he is), he has a front-row seat.
He comes to understand that what keeps dangerous dictators in power is that these autocrats surround themselves with men whose only requirement is that they be totally loyal to - and unquestioning of - their leader.
He learns that there is a vast difference between a “free” and a “bought” or “purchased” press.
He comes to recognize that the most immoral of tyrants use the language of religion to capture the approval of the masses . . . despite being both terribly irreligious and grossly immoral themselves. Indeed, in volume 10 (One Clear Call, 1948), in blowing off steam about Mussolini, Lanny quotes Antonio in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice:
The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

OK. As much as I love and am awestruck by the brilliance of the Lanny Budd series of novels, this week’s blog really isn’t about Upton Sinclair. Rather, it is about the haunting, disturbing similarities Lanny Budd discovered among Fascistic regimes in the 1930s and 40s in Europe, and what is going on before our very eyes in 2020s America. It should be obvious that just as Hitler and Mussolini looked for and demanded nothing more, and nothing less, than total loyalty for those under them, so too does our current regime here in the U.S. Then, too, the underpinnings of religious millennialism have changed barely a whit. Hitler promised a Reich that would last for a thousand years; so too does He Who is Addicted to Gold Leaf promise an administration that will never require another election. And they, too, clothe their most misguided, inhumane, brain-dead policies in the name of Jesus and a much-promised “second coming” of the Messiah.

Sec Def Pete Hegseth - White Christian Warrior

If this sounds like something more out of the Feudal Dark Ages than modern 21st-century America, you are correct. We are closer to medieval times than is comfortable to admit. Without bringing up “Mr. Big” (A.K.A. Boss Greed), let’s hone in on one of his most loyal of loyalists: that mindless moral monster, Pete Hegseth, our current Sec. Def . . . who wants the press to refer to him as the “Secretary of War.” Hegseth is a Princeton graduate with a Master’s in Public Policy from Harvard (he reportedly returned his degree, writing “Return to Sender” on it in protest of the university’s offering classes in critical race theory), and a major in the United States Army. He also worked for Fox News for 10 years (2014-2024) as a regular contributor. Hegseth is a dyed-in-the-wool White Christian Nationalist who firmly believes that the U.S. is a Christian nation. He wears his faith on his body through the numerous tattoos he wears, including a Jerusalem Cross (a religious symbol tied to the Crusades) and the term Deus Vult (Latin for G-d wills it). He is tied to the highly patriarchal CREC (Council of Reformed Evangelical Churches) that staunchly holds, among other things, that women cannot serve in leadership, that homosexuality should be criminalized, and that the 19th Amendment (which gave women the right to vote) should be overturned.

To be perfectly frank, before last week, only a small percentage of the American public - outside of those who follow politics closely - knew thing one about Hegseth’s religious worldview, beliefs, or practices. What, if anything, they knew was that he sports a lot of body ink and is (he claims) a recovering alcoholic. That changed just last week when, standing in the Pentagon, Hegseth issued a call to the American people for a specific kind of wartime prayer: Every day, on bended knee, with your family, in your churches, in the name of Jesus Christ. . . . “ As New York Times journalists Greg Jaffe and Elizabeth Dias noted somewhat dryly in their article about Hegseth’s call to prayer, “At a time when the U.S. and Israeli militaries are dropping thousands of bombs on a majority-Shiite Muslim nation, the explicitly Christian nature of Mr. Hegseth’s call stood out.” In an earlier interview with CBS News’s “60 Minutes,” the Holy Warrior said: “Our capabilities are better. Our will is better. Our troops are better . . . The providence of our almighty God is there protecting those troops . . . “ Before the attack on Iran, Hegseth launched an effort to “make the Chaplain corps great again.” (Military chaplains are supposed to minister to all religions, but Hegseth wants to rewrite their manual to reinsert more God and rely less on secular language.)

In his 2020 book American Crusade, Hegseth wrote that the U.S. faces a “crusade moment” that echoes the 11th-century Christian invasion of the Holy Land. Islamists, according to the then-future Secretary, are enabled by American “leftists” against God-fearing White Christian Americans. I don’t know about you, but this kind of myopic religious bigotry sets my blood to boiling. There are so many millions upon millions of people in America who neither pray in the name of Jesus, kneel when they pray, nor are actively cheering on any kind of Second Coming. To achieve “Armageddon” (derived from the Hebrew Har Megiddo,, meaning, simply, “Hill of Megiddo) means, among other things, that all the Jews in the world must be removed to the Holy Land (the State of Israel) where they will be given the choice of either accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior collectively, or going up in a ball fire. Sorry, but that’s not in my game plan . . . not by a long shot.

On the March 20, 2026, broadcast episode of The Last Word, MS NOW’s Lawrence O’Donnell gave a scathing rebuttal to what Hegseth had said earlier in the day. In part, O’Donnell, himself raised as a Catholic altar boy, said: Hegseth doesn't want the prayers of the vice president's wife because she is not and never has been Christian, and Pete Hegseth doesn't want the prayers of two of the three officials who testified to the House Intelligence Committee today about the worldwide threat assessment because Donald Trump's FBI director and Donald Trump's director of national intelligence are not Christian. And so they will never join together to pray on bended knee, in the name of Jesus Christ, to win the war that they could not defend.”

How many more reasons do American voters need in order to flip the House, Senate, and both state and municipal legislative bodies this coming November? Yes, I know there is quite a bit of concern about citizens having the ballot ripped from their hands because they cannot locate – or pay for – their original birth certificates, wedding licenses, or passports. But we can win this thing and begin the process of throwing the bums out, and then restoring and rebuilding our Democratic Republic which, for nearly 250 years, has been the marvel of the world.

BTW: Are you attending a “No Kings” rally this Saturday? If you’re interested, check out this link, type in your zip code or city name on the top left corner of the interactive map of the USA, and find out where there’s one in your neck of the woods. The sight of tens of millions of Americans marching down the streets of cities from Bangor, Maine to Escondido, California, will rattle our Fondling Father so badly that he will likely have an accident in public . . . whew!

It is indeed a very holy act to fight against a very unholy war.

And when you get some free time, get to know Lanny Budd!

Comment 1 Likes

categories / The Regime, The Coming Autocracy

#1,071: Sinclair Lewis: Nobel Prize Laureate, American Prophet

March 15, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

In 1930, Harry Sinclair Lewis (1885-1951) became the first of 14 Americans to win the Nobel Prize in literature. Born in the tiny town of Sauk Centre, Minnesota, the son Dr. E.J. Lewis and his wife Emma Kermott Lewis, young Harry, known variously as “Hal and “Red” (for his generally untamed mop of red hair), earned his B.A. at Yale in 1908, and then moved to New York, where he became a book editor and writer of dozens of mostly unread short stories and several long-forgotten novels such a Our Mr. Wren: Adventures of a Romantic Gentleman (1914) and 1917’s The Job, his first overtly political novel - and first to be purchased by the film industry. Even with his relative success, he wondered if he would ever be able to stop editing and earn a living as a full-time author.

His dream was answered in 1920, when the then-tiny firm Harcourt Brace & Howe published Lewis’s Main Street. It would quickly become a publishing phenomenon, the best-selling novel of 1921; indeed, it was the best-selling novel of the 20th century up to that time. What makes this all the more unique is that Main Street is relentlessly cynical in dealing with its subject: small-town America. In the then 35-year-old Lewis’s first great satire, “Gopher Prairie,” the smallish Minnesota town where all the action takes place, is a substitute for the author’s real hometown, Sauk Centre.

Main Street follows the story of Carol Milford, an idealistic and ambitious young woman from Mankato, Minnesota. After completing her education and working briefly as a librarian in Saint Paul, Carol marries Will Kennicott, a small-town doctor. The couple moves to Will's hometown of Gopher Prairie, which, as noted above, is a fictional rural community modeled on Lewis's own hometown.

Upon arriving in Gopher Prairie, Carol is immediately struck by the town's lack of culture and aesthetic charm. Determined to bring about change, she launches various initiatives to improve the town's appearance and cultural offerings. Her efforts, however, are met with resistance and ridicule from the conservative locals. Carol finds herself increasingly at odds with the narrow-mindedness and provincialism of small-town life.
Frustrated by her inability to bring about meaningful change and feeling stifled by the town's conformity, Carol eventually leaves Will and moves to Washington, DC, to work as a government clerk during World War I. After some time away, she returns to her husband. Though she failed to achieve her lofty goals of transforming Gopher Prairie, Carol maintains her ideals and refuses to surrender to the small-town mentality surrounding her.

Lewis’s literary talents and ear for how small-town, Midwestern Americans really sound, are on full display in Main Street. Although widely praised by the most prominent literary reviewers in America, it did have its detractors. Believe it or not, Main Street was actually banned by the public library in Alexandria, Minnesota, due to what his hometown Sauk Centre Herald called “its “unflattering portrayal of small-town life.” What the editorial writer of the Herald was mistaking for Lewis’s “unflattering portrait” was actually something that would run through most of his remaining novels: a critique of American complacency and conformity.

When given the chance to respond to The Herald’s skewering of Main Street, Lewis wrote a surprisingly mild and didactic essay. In it, he supposedly wrote (for it can no longer be found on the Internet) by way of explanation:

“I love America; I don’t always like America.”

(We’ll get back to Sinclair Lewis toward the end of the blog . . . )

Lewis’s reflection - whether he actually wrote it or not - is well worth commenting upon.

I think tons of sensible people can agree that one need not like everything America does or proclaims to be considered either a patriot or “lover of America.” Then too, we do have a sizeable minority here in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave who would loudly disagree. Their love and loyalty appear to be to a single man with a single plan, no matter how erratic, volatile, or inconsistent it may be. I couldn’t disagree more. Let me share with you some of the things I absolutely love about America:

I love that the Declaration of Independence, largely the creation of an aristocratic Southern slave owner, begins with the words “We THE PEOPLE.”
I love that America’s greatest president, Abraham Lincoln, was also the most down-to-earth of all our 47 chief executives.
I love that our Constitution created and mandated three coequal branches of government so that ultimate power should rest with the people.
I love that Presidents Ulysses S. Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson saw fit to preserve, protect, and defend our national treasures by enacting, respectively, the Yellowstone National Park Protection Act (1872), the Antiquities Act (1906), and the Organic Act, which created the National Park Service (1916).
I love that for so many decades, America kept its gates wide open for immigrants to enter, either through Ellis Island (and earlier Castle Garden) to make better lives for themselves and their progeny. (Interestingly, both sides of our family came to America before there was an Ellis Island or Castle Garden. My father’s side entered through Baltimore Harbor, remaining in that city for several generations; my mother’s side likely through Canada, where they settled down (ironically) in St. Paul, Minnesota . . . not too far from Lewis’s Sauk Center.)
I love that President John F. Kennedy created the Peace Corps, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and NASA.
I love that America led the battle to save the world from 3 of history’s worst, most diabolical dictators in the 1940s.
I love that in America, when things get as dark, desperate, and depressing as they seem they can, the people tend to gather, garner strength, and get back to work to make things happen. Case in point: since the nation’s chief Ninnyhammer (that’s “moron” in Elizabethan English) returned to office on January 20, 2025, Democrats are 28-0 in taking back Republican-held seats in state legislatures . . . some in districts that our Favorite Fapdoodle won by 10 or more points in 2024.

Then there are things I don’t like about America:

I don’t at all like the growing number of people who accept as gospel such conspiratorial notions that White Christians are in far greater danger than Jews; that millions of illegal immigrants are collecting hundreds of billions of dollars in “freebies,” or casting millions upon millions of illegal votes for Democrats.
I don’t at all like that a small handful of multi-billionaires are buying up the nation’s media so they can skew the truth about virtually everything.
I don’t like that every couple of decades, Americans are convinced that the lion’s share of our economic, cultural, or political difficulties is the fault of immigrants . . . thereby demanding that the gates be shut.
I don’t like that, with few exceptions, members of one political party refuse to speak out against a leader who is obviously in the throes of dementia and urge - let alone even suggest - that the 25th Amendment be put into use.
I don’t like that the sole requirement for service in the current POTUS’ administration is absolute loyalty to him.
I don’t like that America has turned its collective back on the planet’s poorest, hungriest, sickest, and most endangered human beings all for the - supposed - sake of “Making America Great Again.”
I don’t like that people without a shred of professional knowledge have been put in charge of critical, heretofore essential, bureaus and offices to convince people that vaccines cause autism, that raw milk isn’t dangerous, or that alternative energy sources cause cancer.
I really don’t like that so many people online refer to our former FLOTUS, Michelle Obama, as “Big Mike,” and claim she is a transvestite. Yes, we have a First Amendment guaranteeing their right to free speech, but whatever happened to not making a complete jackass out of oneself in public? Oh well, I guess it’s likely due to the Internet’s relative anonymity.
And yet, I can still say with a straight face and a loving heart that I love America.

Now back to Sinclair Lewis . . .

Main Street changed Sinclair Lewis’ life in many ways. First, it gave him his first taste of real money. When the first royalty checks started rolling in, he realized that it would now be possible for him to become a full-time novelist. His agent quickly sold the rights for a stage adaptation to be written. On October 5, 1921, a four-act play debuted at Broadway’s National Theatre. Although it only ran for 86 performances (not a bad run by 1920s standards), Main Street received fine reviews. His agent also sold rights to the newly formed Warner Bros. Starring such stars of the day as Florence Vidor and Noah Berry, and future stars Monte Blue and Alan Hale, it became Warner’s first full-length feature film, and garnered awards for Best Film, Best Actor, and Best Actress for August 1921.

Over the next 7 years, Sinclair Lewis produced 4 additional literary masterpieces, all of which were bestsellers turned into major motion pictures:

1922: Babbitt
1925: Arrowsmith
1927: Elmer Gantry
1929 Dodsworth.

All these novels dealt with aspects of American life, ranging from small-town America and medicine to religious fraud and extra-marital romance. Each benefited from Lewis’s satiric skills, his knack for creating memorable, believable characters, and his felicitous gift of having these characters put words into his pen, rather than he putting words into their mouths.

And of course, in 1930, Lewis was awarded the Nobel Prize. In his presentation speech on December 10, 1930, Erik Alex Karlfeldt, Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, noted the wonderful irony that the first American writer to win this most prestigious of prizes should come from a part of the United States that had long been the home to more Swedish “contacts” than anywhere else in the New World. Karlfeldt (who himself would be awarded the Nobel Prize for literature the next year) concluded his address with the words: " You have a special recommendation to Swedish hearts. You were born among our countrymen in America, and you have mentioned them in friendly terms in your renowned books. We are glad to see you here today and glad that our nation has a laurel of its own to bestow on you. And now I ask you to descend with me and receive it from the hand of our King.” (Sinclair Lewis on the right in the photo, holding his Nobel plaque)

In all, Sinclair Lewis wrote 24 novels; the last of which, World So Wide, was published posthumously in 1951. Of his 2 dozen novels, 17 are still in print . . . a truly remarkable accomplishment. To my way of thinking, the most important (though not the best) of the group) is his 1935 dystopian fantasy, It Can’t Happen Here. ( I wrote about this novel in a blog back on July 2, 2012, entitled Buzz Windrip is Alive and Well.) The work is difficult to read in the age of MAGA. It predicts the takeover of America by a demagogue named Berzelius “Buzz” Windrip, who is elected POTUS, after fomenting fear and promising drastic economic and social reforms while promoting a return to patriotism and "traditional" values. Doremus Jessup, a small-town newspaper editor, witnesses and writes about all of this as Windrip defeats FDR in the presidential election and then quickly turns America into an authoritarian state. The new president’s personal troops are called “The Corpos,” who make sure that everything works just the way the new despot, Buzz, wants it to. Doremus Jessup’s moral courage and resistance to the Corpos offer a sobering reflection on the cost of complacency and the importance of vigilance. Here, 90 years after its publication, is Sinclair Lewis’s prophecy . . . unless we all act more like Doremus and less like Buzz we are big, big, big trouble..

I URGE YOU TO READ THIS UNFORGETTABLE BOOK.
Remember: you can love America without always liking her. . .

1 Comment 1 Likes

#1,070: Pain and Pleasure, Peril and Purim

March 02, 2026 / Kurt F. Stone

Netanyahu, Trump and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

As I begin typing this blog, it is nearly 7:30, the evening of Saturday, February 28, 2026. The Jewish sabbath has just concluded; a new week begins. This past shabbat was named Shabbat Zachor, the “Sabbath of Remembrance.” It always comes just before the Jewish holiday Purim, a celebration which, when all is said and done, is the most uniquely, lightheartedly enjoyable - and slightly bizarre - of all Jewish observances. Its uniqueness stems largely from the fact that on this holiday we read (or chant) the book of Esther . . . the only book in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible or Old Testament) that does not explicitly mention G-d by name; it is lighthearted, because one of the few commandments associated with the holiday is that one must become intoxicated enough so as to be unable to distinguish between Barukh Mordechai (“Blessed be Mordechai . . . the hero of the story) and Arur Haman . . . “(Cursed be Haman” . . . the wicked villain of the tale). It is also quite bizarre, for reasons which shall soon come into focus.

This year. there is an extreme irony attached to the celebration.

Without going into great detail, the story of Purim takes place in the kingdom of Shushan, (Persia) Its king, Achashverosh, likely the historic Xerxes I (“Artaxerxes”) a fairly simple-minded, slightly arrogant leader, gave over the running of his kingdom to his prime minister, one Haman, an Agagite (meaning either a literal descendant of the biblical “Agag” [King of the brutal Amalekites) or a symbolic term for an extreme antisemite), and about as wicked a fellow as ever lived . . . either in reality or world literature. As with most ancient myths, the thoroughly wicked Haman, at story’s end, is hung . . . along with his 10 sons. It is, of course, a chilling aural coincidence that the name of the modern-day version of a Persian (Iranian) madman who was “taken out” just 48 hours prior to Purim, should have been named Khamenei, sounding oh-so-similar to Haman. (The meanings are totally different: Khamenei, in Farsi, means, simply “from Khamene”, which is a village in the East-Iranian province of Azerbaijan, while Haman is an ancient Hebrew word meaning, quite correctly, either “noise,” “tumult” or “destruction.”

The hero and heroine of the Purim tale are the Jewish Mordechai (possibly a stand-in for the mythic Babylonian Marduk), and his cousin/adopted daughter Estayr, whose Jewish name is Hadassah (Hebrew for “Myrtle”). Estayr is likely a takeoff on “Aphrodite”, the Greek goddess of love. Estayr becomes King Achashverosh’s queen; unbeknownst to him, she is Jewish. Then all hell breaks out; Haman ha-Rasha (“The wicked Haman”) seeks to kill all the Jews. But in the end, everything works out well: Haman and his 10 sons are hanged and they all live happily ever after . . . And indeed, in the centuries following the establishment of the Persian Empire and King Cyrus the Great’s rule, Jews lived there for more than 2,700 years. It was a time marked both by sporadic expulsions, forced conversions to Islam and pogroms against the Jewish community, as well as by long periods of peaceful coexistence. (The best, most readable book I know on the subject is Rabbi Raphael Harris’ History of the Jews of Persia; it makes a great read.)

The bomb blast that took the lives of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and many of Iran’s top leaders should cause both feelings of joy and relief. I am sure we all remember how we felt when we saw those pictures of President Barack Obama and members of his team sitting hunched over a computer screen watching the assassination of Osama bin Laden at bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan in May 1, 2011. It felt like a gigantic MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike; the end of a wicked life and hopefully the beginning of something far less fraught with danger and destruction. But of course, politics being what was and still is, that feeling didn’t last too long. Within 7 months, then reality TV star Donald Trump was back to attacking Barack Obama . . . the man he’d spent the previous several years proclaiming was a native Kenyan - and therefore illegally occupying the office of the presidency.:

“In order to get elected, Barack Obama will start a war with Iran.” Donald Trump, Nov. 29, 2011.
“Barack Obama will attack Iran to get re-elected”, Donald Trump, Jan. 7, 2012.
“Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin - watch for him to launch a strike on Libya or Iran. He is desperate.” Donald Trump, Oct. 9, 2012.
“I predict President Obama will at some point start a war with Iran in order to save face!” Donald Trump, Sept. 16, 2013.
“Remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of his inability to negotiate properly - not skilled.” Donald Trump, Nov. 11, 2013.

This, coming from a man who launched an airstrike - along with Israel - against Iran when his approval rating was somewhere between 34% and 40%, and that of P.M. Netanyahu’s most recent numbers show that 44% of the total sample supports direct military involvement in a potential US attack on Iran, while 50% support participating only if Israel is first attacked by Iran. Are we supposed to believe that neither man had anything other than what’s best for their respective countries, the Middle East, Europe and the rest of the world in launching “Operation Epic Fury?” Just how gullible do they think we are?

Some of us remember that back on June 25 of last year, the White House issued an official release which quoted the Fondling Father saying “Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term! The devastating US strike on Fordo [one of Iran’s major nuclear facilities] destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable. We assess [sic] that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years.” And yet, just prior to this newest attack, POTUS, in an 8-minute video shared on Truth Social, justified the bombing raid by warning that the Iranians were just a few days away from having the ability to shoot and land nuclear missiles at the United States. Just last week (February 23) ITs special envoy (and fellow billionaire real estate developer) Steve Witkoff told writers at The Hill that Iran “. . . is a week away” from developing nuclear bomb making material through uranium enrichment. He told the journalists that Iran’s enrichment level “has reached 60%.”

The White House has also declared that the reason for airstrikes was to get rid of the terrorist regime that has inflicted so much pain, torture and murder upon its civilian population. In other words, even if the regime wasn’t that close to restarting their nuclear bomb-making program, we would go after them in order to take them out, so as to give everyday Iranians the ability to take to the streets and effect regime change. Some of us remember back to November 1956 when the Eisenhower Administration, working in tandem with Radio Free Europe, urged the Hungarian people to rise up and rebel against the Soviets. It took Russia precisely one week to put down that rebellion. One wonders what will happen in Iran. Remember: regime change is as rare and difficult as an unassisted triple-play in baseball (there have been precisely 15 in all MLB history, making it even rarer than a perfect game). There is also the unofficial “Pottery Barn Rule” with regards to one country (or coalition) seeking regime change in another country: “You break it, you buy it.”

There are those who believe (I am one of them) that the reason for the current airstrike is neither getting rid of Iran’s nuclear arsenal, nor freeing the Irani people from the iron-gloved theocracy that has held them in thrall for close to a half-century; rather, its purpose is likely to unglue American voters’ attention (and indeed the rest of the civilized planet’s) from the Epstein Files . . . which could easily make Watergate and the Teapot Dome scandals look like mere fraternity pranks by comparison. Then too, the White House is scared witless about the upcoming midterm elections; when weighed against current polling, they could lose their political shirt . . . and socks, shoes and britches . . . thus creating a situation in which the Democrats control the gavels, subpoenas. and debates over future Supreme Court nominees. And don’t rule out the fact that war always brings tremendous profits to weapons’ manufacturers . . . most of whom are heavy contributors to 47 and his fellow Maga-ites.

As glad as I am that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (as well as Ali Shamkhani [Secretary of Iran’s Defense Council], Abdolrahim Mousavi [chief of staff or Iran’s armed forces], Aziz Nasirzadeh [Iran’s minister of defense] and Mohammad Pakpour (commander-in-chief of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps [IRGCL]) were all taken out in a massive blast on Khamenei’s compound, I cannot – and will not – praise the American regime for its strategic brilliance or long-term objective. We are, I fear, about to enter another ‘endless war’ ala Iraq, Afghanistan or Viet Nam. I will not suddenly believe that IT has, overnight, become the best friend Israel has ever had or that he loves the Jews more than life itself. Where and what is the endgame? Is this war nothing more, nothing less than a case of “Wag the Dog”? And why oh why didn’t a single member of the regime show up on a single one of yesterday’s Sunday talk shows to discuss this historic event?

An afterthought that may well become an entire blog essay one of these days:

On this issue, like so many, many others, it seems incomprehensible how some people (most frequently MAGA-ites) generally proclaim absolute knowledge and fealty about and towards anything and everything POTUS does or says (despite their limited level of education or understanding), while another faction (frequently more progressive and generally better educated) are on the other side of the fence. There is a possible answer for this which emanates from the world of Political Psychology (a field which has fascinated me for more than a half century) which attempts to explain this phenomenon. It is called the Dunning Kruger Effect. Originally researched by political psychologists David Dunning, PhD, and Justin Kruger, PhD at Cornell in 1999, it explains what is called cognitive bias, an umbrella term used to describe an error in reasoning or flaw in judgement. It holds that people with limited knowledge or competence in a specific domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence, while experts underestimate theirs. That is why writers/academics like me are often taken to task by people who get their news from conservative social media, who accuse me of not knowing thing one about politics, history, economics or anything beyond a few verses of the Hebrew Bible. It also explains why a person like me, who has immersed himself into such varied fields as history, political science (both its practice and the psychology,behind it) as well as medicine, ancient languages and world literature, often feels inadequate.

To be perfectly honest ITs taking us into war took me by surprise. I thought he and his herd paid more attention to polling numbers . . . especially those showing that less than 24 hours ago, just one in four Americans support the regime’s ongoing strikes on Iran . . . (this according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released yesterday). Perhaps he was talked into it by Bibi Netanyahu, who, unlike POTUS, has read the Book of Esther, and wants to make a lot of noise, inflict a lot of pain, and celebrate Purim with a bang.

I’m sure Def. Sec. Pete Hegseth will be delighted with the drinking part of the celebration . . .

4 Comments 0 Likes

categories / All Politics All the Time, The Middle East, The Regime