Wondering on Wednesday 8/26/26

I've wondered, more than a few times, what it would be like if we treated American citizens the same as we treat undocumented immigrants (see note below). What if the luck of our birth, the fate that made us a citizen, did not protect us from the treatment we give others who aren't so lucky?

In the old days - back when we tended to see the best in others, rather than the worst - we didn't think or worry about it. I never wondered or cared whether the person cleaning the hotel I stayed at was a citizen; I just saw a hard-working person doing a job I wouldn't want. 

When out and about on a drive through the agriculturally rich areas of Central and Upstate New York, I'd see farm workers, and sometimes their living quarters, and maybe wondered if they could be working here illegally, but it didn't bother me; they're doing insanely hard work that I'm grateful for, and glad I don't have to do. 

The vast majority of people I know, and probably the vast majority of people they know, are equally grateful for the efforts of immigrant farm workers, hotel workers, and others, and wouldn't voluntarily take those jobs if they had the chance to.

But now?  After years of having it beaten into our heads that "those people" have invaded our country not just for those backbreaking, low-paying jobs we love having someone else do, but supposedly for snapping up all the houses we can't afford to buy and the benefits we're fortunate enough not to need (and, especially lately, hate providing to the least of our citizens), and even to eat the dogs and cats of Springfield, how do we feel? 

Well, like ICE agents and most members of the current administration, we're encouraged not only to wonder whether but to assume that folks doing the jobs we don't want, speaking a different language, having darker skin, wearing different clothing, and worshipping differently than we do are quite possibly, or even probably, not citizens. And we're encouraged to report them, even without any evidence.

In the government's efforts to rid our country of the "worst of the worst" of the so-called invaders, we've rounded up all kinds of people, including:

• people with tattoos, whether on their faces, arms, hands, or other body parts, including those we've granted asylum because they could be killed in their home countries;

• business owners, particularly those owners of ethnic restaurants;

• people who, years ago, were charged with misdemeanor traffic offenses, including DUI, served their sentences, and have been out of trouble ever since;

• people who, years ago, bounced a check to purchase groceries, were caught and charged with misdemeanors, paid their fine, repaid the shop owner, and have had a completely clean record for all the years since;

• military spouses, the wives and husbands of servicemembers who were promised  that their family members would be safe from immigration action as part of their recruitment; 

• former members of the military who served honorably even though they weren't citizens, who have a clean record since their discharge; and

• people who are reporting as required to immigration appointments.

Are we really better off with those folks in detention, or deported? 

And if we're better off without them here, it's hard not to wonder how much better off we'd be if we got rid of all the birth-lucky bad actors, right? 

Think of how much better America would be:

• Without folks trying to make their dreams come true by operating a little pizza-and-wings joint, or a corner bar, maybe a car detailing place? They're paying their taxes, they're giving jobs to kids who need them, they're providing services that we like and want, but they're gone.

• Without people who choose to decorate their bodies with art we don't like because it's scary, or unattractive, or weird. Gone.

• Without petty offenders - panhandlers, the loosie-sellers, the windshield cleaners, folks who don't license or clean up after their dogs, litterers, speeders, and especially folks driving rolling boomboxes or otherwise violating noise ordinances. Oh - and every single illegal fireworks user, too. Off they go.

• Without first offenders with a conviction for  DWI, a sex offense, a domestic violence charge, a gun law violation, or any kind of fraud? Gone, under cover of darkness, or maybe perp-walked out of their jobs.

• Without people who have served their time and are on parole. When they show up for their check-ins, schedule their trip to a detention center several states away. And those small business owners? Grabbing them as they walk or drive their children to school sends a strong message, for sure.

• Without the worst of the worst in our prisons - the drug dealers, the murderers, the gang members, the sex traffickers - they clearly belong in a bug- and disease-infected prison somewhere, not here in America with free meals, free education, free medical care, free gym memberships, and more. They're the easiest to round up; after all, we know where they are, as opposed to all the hardened criminals ICE *knows* are here but can't locate.

• Without me. That's right: 50 years ago, I accidentally bounced a check ($5, my weekly college allowance). Before that, in seventh grade, I succumbed to peer pressure ("go ahead, Goody-Two-Shoes, your daddy's not watching, just grab it, no one will know"!) on a school trip organized and chaperoned by my Dad, and stole a trinket from a gift shop. (Someone did know, of course, and yes, my punishment at the time seemed much worse than deportation).

Are you already prouder to be an American just reading this, I wonder? 

Are you wondering how hard it would be to make this happen, or how fast we could do it?  And if you're a person of faith, or one who otherwise believes in second chances and redemption, do you wonder where to draw the line? Or, maybe you're wondering what on earth kind of America we'd be if we did this? 

Maybe you're just wondering if I've lost my mind... but here's one more thing to think about. The  administration is now turning its attention to deporting perhaps as many as 200,000 people who came to the US on tourist visas but have since sought asylum here, which elevated my sense of wonder to new heights:

Can you even imagine how wonderful America could be if we could deport every politician who lied to us, the first time they did it?

Drop a comment, and let me know what's on your wondering mind, whether it's about this post or anything else. 

Note: By 'undocumented,' I mean folks who truly are without any immigrant documentation - no TPS, not visa, no asylum application, and no tax ID number -  as well as those who are visa overstayers, people gainfully employed by American companies who have taxes withheld from their paychecks, people who have scheduled immigration hearings, people who own businesses and are paying their taxes, and so on.

Quick Takes (v76): Old Guard v. Newcomers

Why are people like me so sick and tired of 'politics as usual,' you ask? There are so many reasons, including the one illustrated below.

Connecticut Democrats are being asked, by a millionaire septuagenarian, to vote him through the party primary and let him fight it out in the general election for a 15th term in Congress. 

Why? Because he's been around long enough to be a committee chairman if the Dems manage to not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in November, and actually win the House in the midterms.

Calls for generational change in Connecticut
Connecticut Democrat John B. Larson has been in the House of Representatives for 14 terms. He would like at least two more years, but the race to replace him has become the latest test of the left’s desire for generational change.

Larson faces three challengers today — former Hartford mayor Luke Bronin, Hartford school board member Ruth Fortune and state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest — but Bronin is seen as the candidate with the best chance to upset Larson, who turned 78 last month.

Larson is staking his reelection campaign on his seniority, arguing that it would be foolish for voters to throw away the power that comes with age in the nation’s seniority-driven political system. “If you’re coming to Congress for the first time, you start at the bottom and work your way up,” Larson said this month. “But if you have the opportunity to send someone who’s going to be a chairman, that means your voice in your district is amplified.”

Just imagine how different things could be if people didn't just assume that because they've 'been there, done that' for a long time, they're the better choice to represent their constituents.

Just imagine how different things could be if bright newcomers with ideas that are supported by thousands in their district and millions in their party weren't forced to 'wait their turn' to get the opportunity to make a difference. 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a perfect example of this; she lost a vote to become the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee to an eight-term gentleman from Virginia, Rep. Gerry Connolly, "who has got experience, who is seasoned, who can be trusted, who has a record of productivity," he said after the vote.

Would AOC have been the perfect choice for ranking member? Maybe not. Would giving her the chance have been a mistake? I doubt it. But how long will she or others have to wait to get the experience, become seasoned and trusted, before they get a chance to prove themselves? 

Just imagine how different things could be if everyone who was chosen to serve placed their constituents first, rather than party leadership (or worse, the head of another coequal branch of government), and fought for the things that their district needs, whether it's health insurance, clean water, a chip factory, replacement of aging infrastructure, or brand new infrastructure like rural hospitals and elder care facilities, a modernized airport, data center or yes, even an ICE detention facility, if that's what the people want.

Everyone young or new is not automatically better; everyone old is not automatically worse - this is not about age. Rather, it's about how things change outside the halls and walls of where our elected officials spend their time - on our dime - and how hard it is to get those changes recognized inside those halls and walls. 

There has to be a better way; term limits are a start, of course, but it runs deeper than that, doesn't it? Chime in!

A Day Without Capitalism

 Wth the rise of 'progressive' candidates who are running against - and often defeating - 'traditional' democrats, I think we need to have a conversation about how candidates label themselves, how they're labeled by the media, and how to talk about their ideas for governing.

Here are a few of the up-and-comers who won seats, or won primaries and will battle it out in November's election. And here's your quiz question: which (if any) of the winning candidates named below are actually members of the Democratic Socialists of America?

• NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who won just over 50% of the vote in defeating so-called 'Independent' Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa. 

• Darializa Avila Chevalier (also known as DAC) defeated five-term incumbent Adriano Espaillat in the primary for the NY-13 Congressional district. 

• Brad Lander defeated two-term incumbent Dan Goldman in the primary for the NY-10 Congressional district. 

• Janeese Lewis George won the Democratic primary for mayor of Washington, DC. 

• Nithya Raman was one of the two Democrats advancing to the general election in the race for mayor of Los Angeles. Karen Bass, the incumbent mayor, is the other.

• Dr. Abdul El-Sayed won the Democratic primary for US Senate in Michigan, defeating Rep. Haley Stevens 48.5% to 47.5%. 

• Melat Kiros defeated Rep. Diana DeGette in a primary for Colorado's 1st district. DeGette was first elected to the seat in 1997. 

Given the recent successes of DSA members, democratic socialists, and progressive Democrats, I thought it was important to share this narrative, part of the DSA Program. It's an interesting place to kick off a review of the DSA and its platform.

Imagine taking a day off from work in a future without capitalism.

It might not feel as badly needed as it does now. You enjoy your work; it’s interesting to you, and you’re well trained for it. You work as much as you are able and no more than needed, and you would control your own labor and see it going to good use. It's not just a job to pay the bills.

Speaking of bills; you don't really have them anymore.

You have no debt. You don’t need health insurance. You don’t pay a mortgage or have a landlord, because comfortable housing is a human right. Your retirement is publicly funded. Food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation aren’t for-profit businesses; they are common goods and utilities.

OK, enough about bills. What do you do on your day off? Maybe in the morning, you walk your kids to school, run errands, or go to a doctor’s appointment. In the afternoon, you might play a sport, practice a new skill, read, plan a trip. In the evening, you could meet up with friends or family and eat together, maybe go to the movies or down to the park.

These are all familiar, everyday activities. A socialist day off could be like any good day now. But what if you were free to spend your time how you like without worrying about cost or dreading going back to work? What if you didn’t have to think about paying rent or loans at the end of the month, or saving for college, or affording groceries?

It’s been said that it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism. But just because it isn’t easy to imagine now doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to make it happen.

Workers deserve more.

Do workers, or does anyone, "deserve" a day without bills, no landlord or mortgage, without needing health insurance, with a publicly funded retirement? 

Is it just me lacking an imagination, or is this 'day without capitalism' something that we should be striving to make happen? Chime in on any of these candidates/races; on the DSA generally; on the challenges facing the Democrats heading into the midterms and beyond, , or anything else that strikes your fancy.

=============

And, as best as I can tell from researching and asking AI,  here are the answers to the quiz at the top of the post:

• NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani is a member of the DSA

• Darializa Avila Chevalier is a member of the DSA and the Democratic Party.

• Brad Lander is not currently a member of the DSA, but he was once; he left following the October 7th attack on Israelis, according to published reports.

• Janeese Lewis George self-describes as a democratic socialist, and was endorsed by the DSA, but does not appear to be a member of the DSA.

• Nithya Raman is a member of the DSA and the Democratic Party. Karen Bass, the incumbent mayor, is not a socialist or a member of the DSA.

• Dr. Abdul El-Sayed is not a member of the DSA and says he believes in 'regulated' capitalism, not socialism. 

• Melat Kiros is a member of the DSA.

How'd you do?

Sunday School 7/19/26: Extra Credit

For your Extra Credit this week, I spent time in the Face the Nation (CBS) classroom, focusing on the election security issues we've been discussing since the FOTUS addressed the nation in a televised and widely streamed chat last week. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) joined Margaret Brennan for a bit; I recapped some of his chat with ABC's Jon Karl in yesterday's Sunday School post. 

Brennan opened this part of the discussion noting that it's "been public for years" that our intelligence folks determined China tried to influence our election by changing what we think, not by hacking or anything like that. She asked Warner, a long-time member of the Senate Intelligence Committee (IC), if it had ever been given any evidence backing up this statement from Trump: 

This evidence shows that the election system we have dangerously exposes – and really exposes like levels never thought possible, to hacking, exploitation and foreign interference. 

"Absolutely not," Warner said, adding that the speech was full of "absurdities and falsehoods," and said that "the only election that Trump is concerned about is 2020. That was the election that his administration was in charge of," and that he "forgets or just omits" Russia. He confirmed the IC hasn't received any report from the administration's analysis of the 2024 election.

 After itemizing moves by the administration, including cutting funding for the Cybersecurity Agency (CISA), abandoning the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), which allows states to share voter information to help identify duplicate registrations, deceased voters, and so on, and tanking the Election Assistance Committee (EAC), Warner said this:

Why is he doing all these things? I believe it's because Donald Trump intends to interfere in this year's elections. He knows, if there is a free and fair election, his policies will be rejected at record levels.

Brennan asked (twice) what Warner meant by interference. 

Whether that takes - I think that what we just saw was, this was the opening shot, the opening shot of trying to undermine Americans' confidence that their vote will be actually counted and mean something... I fear as well that if he tries to pull something that could potentially - he's not ruled out bringing ICE to the polls. He's not even ruled out the idea of trying to bar certain voting machines.

Brennan then turned to CBS News contributors David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, and Chris Krebs, the former director of CISA during the 2020 election cycle. Notably, Krebs was fired by Trump for saying that the 2020 election was secure, and that's where Brennan started this segment, asking if anything he heard from Trump changed his assessment.

Not - not at all. In fact, I would say that it further bolsters my confidence in the security of the 2020 election, between what has been released, disclosed last week, and all the information and the results of court challenges and other things in the intervening six years.

Brennan, noting that Trump was particularly aggressive towards Krebs, asked him to describe "the Chinese role in the 2020 election." He said there was an "honest debate and discussion" about China's intent across the intelligence community.

But ultimately, when it came out in the intelligence community assessment that was released in the spring of 2021, it was that China had a preference, and that they were not in favor of President Trump, but their efforts were principally limited to influencing the American public, seeking to pay journalists, media. But it was an influence effort...

A method, he said, China has been using since the early- or mid-2000s. It's not new, he said; "they did turn up the heat, and they are still doing it today. He said, "we have a significant and serious counterintelligence and counterespionage problem with China." And, responding to Trump saying folks did not disclose anything to him, "or to anyone else" or to Congress, Krebs offered this:

In January of 2020, there was a National Intelligence Community memorandum about the 2020 election that talked about the vulnerabilities we saw on systems and the work we needed to do there, but it also talked about the intent of adversaries. And there were countless memos after that...a lot of these products were in senior executive and policymakers' binders, their intelligence binders every single day. We used those to get out there and talk to the American people. I wrote an op-ed in September of 2020 for the general public that discussed various threat actors, including China. So, I have a hard time believing that it didn't get up into the Oval.

Brennan, before leaving this topic, said. "As China was described as attempting to influence, it was Iran and Russia, primary actors directly undermining the election in some of those 2020 statements. It sounds like you're saying he didn't read the memo" (emphasis added). Krebs agreed.

Quick Takes (v74): What I'd Ask Todd Blanche

Todd Blanche, a key FOTUS personal attorney (FPA) and current acting Attorney General of the US, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee today as it considers his nomination to lose the 'acting' tag and assume the AG role for real.

I expect he'll get many questions about the Epstein files; that's fine. After all, his predecessor (and fellow FPA) Pam Bondi said all things Epstein were in his portfolio.  And, as we all know, the one thing our highly partisan DC politicians can agree on is that all publicity is good, and asking Epstein questions will guarantee them the attention they crave.

Me? With very few exceptions, I'm much less interested in questions about Epstein (I'll tell you why in another post) than I am in hearing him differentiate his work as an FPA from his work in the DOJ. Here's what I'm interested in as far as Epstein goes:

• The Federal Bureau of Prisons maintains strict rules that generally disqualify sex offenders from serving time in white-collar-crime type 'prison camps. Do you agree with those rules, yes or no?

• You interviewed Ghislaine Maxwell, who had been sentenced to 20 years in prison, for nine hours. Shortly after, she was transferred to a prison camp in Texas, putting her closer to family members. Her transfer appears to go against the rules.

Yes or no, did you promise her a transfer in return for her testimony?

Yes or no, did you ask that she be transferred or considered for transfer?

Yes or no, did you approve her transfer?  If you didn't approve her transfer, who did?

• How many other convicted sex offenders has the DOJ transferred to be closer to their family members?  Were you involved in any of those decisions?

• Yes or no, did you make any promises to Maxwell for her testimony?

• Yes or no, did you have any discussions with the FOTUS in advance of your interview with her? If yes, what was the nature of those discussions?

• Yes or no, have you been involved in any discussions regarding a potential pardon for Maxwell? 

Other questions I'd love to have answered, regarding the FOTUS lawsuit against the IRS:

• Generally speaking, in your current role as Acting AG, who is your client, the United States or the president?

• Do you believe there is enough separation between the president as an individual and the president as head of the Executive Branch - and your boss - that a lawsuit such as his against the IRS can meet the requirement that the plaintiff and defendant must be truly different parties?

Based on your answer to the 'who is your client' question, do you believe it was appropriate to be personally involved in settling the president's IRS lawsuit, yes or no?

Why did you not wait until the Courts determined the legitimacy of the lawsuit before proposing the settlement you did? 

Did you believe, or do you believe, that the fund you proposed to award taxpayer money to people not involved in the settled lawsuit was in the best interests of the United States?

Did you believe, or do you believe, that barring the IRS from completing any open audits, or opening any new audits on taxes filed before May 2026, was in the best interests of the United States?

Would you have approved either settlement provision with any other taxpayers?

• When the president's taxes were leaked by an IRS employee, how many other individual or corporate taxpayers also had their information released - was it hundreds of people? Thousands of people? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands?

Not counting corporate taxpayers, how many of those whose taxes were released, including the president, sued the IRS for the unauthorized disclosure?

How many of those who sued were successful?

And how much money, on average, did each receive as a result?

How many of those suits were you personally involved in?

• Yes or no, are you aware of The Judgment Fund, established by Congress in 1956, to pay people who have successfully sued the government and been awarded a monetary judgment? 

Since that Fund already exists, and doesn't place any cap on payments, why was it necessary to create a special fund as part of the deal with the president?

You have said that the DOJ will not be moving ahead with the so-called 'Anti-Weaponization Fund,' but you've refused to put that in writing. Why is that?

Yes or no, is it your intention to use The Judgment Fund to handle payments to the alleged 'weaponization' victims?   

 If that is the intention, yes or no, will you require that the alleged victims follow the process and obtain a court judgment before releasing any funds?

I would not waste more than a few seconds thanking him for appearing before the Committee before diving into this list, and I'd likely have to reclaim the couple of minutes of my time he would have wasted in his efforts not to answer me. 

And then, hopefully I'd be turning it over to a colleague who'd ask different questions, so the American people can see and hear for themselves how awful a choice he is for this position.

What would you want to ask him? Drop a comment! 

OrangeVerse (LXV): America's 250th Birthday

The weather-delayed main event on July 4th in DC was the detonation and launch of some 850,000 fireworks, the most bigly fireworks display (for entertainment purposes, anyway) in our nation's 250 years, maybe longer. 

Preceding that? A speech by the FOTUS; fortunately, the weather not only delayed his appearance, but shortened it to an almost tolerable 40 minutes, compared to the threatened dictator-like hours-long ramble.

Trump's speech featured heroes, patriotic imagery, and villains. The heroes, which I'll feature in a Sidebar, were impressive. The patriotism and the villains are where I found the poetry. Note that these are all his words, but not all of his words - it's not a transcript. Rather, it's my re-punctuated capture of his main themes.  

Free Verse, 250 Years in the Making

This country is the home of freedom. 

This is the land of liberty, 

and this is a flag

 that's the banner of the most extraordinary, 

most exceptional, most incredible nation 

ever to exist on the face of the earth.

 

And we're doing better now than 

we've ever done before.

No people have done more good, 

shown more courage, 

made more progress, 

righted more injustice or 

achieved more greatness 

than you, 

the American people.

For 250 years, the United 

States of America has been 

the hope, the promise, the light, and the glory 

among all of the 

nations of the world. 

All over the world 

they try and be like us. 

Nobody can be like us. 

Here on our National Mall, we're celebrating 

freedom's triumph over tyranny, 

liberty's conquest over oppression

 and the enduring victory of 

the American spirit 

from the July 4th, 1776 to July 4th, 2026. 

Big dates. That's big dates. Two big ones.

And tonight our country

is stronger, freer, richer, safer, 

and prouder than ever before.

But it all started 

with the miracle of history that lives 

forever in the heart of every single patriot.

In Philadelphia, our founding fathers 

summoned the courage of giants 

and the wisdom of centuries 

to boldly proclaim these timeless truths. 

They declared that all men are created equal.

That they are endowed with sacred, 

unalienable rights by the hand of our creator.

And that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

In signing their names to the roster of freedom, 

those 56 patriots put everything at risk, 

stepped onto the stage of destiny and 

seized a victory for the ages. 

And that's what it was. 

And this is an evening for the ages, 

I believe. This is something very special. 

This is bigger than if we didn't have the lightning blaring. 

We had lightning blaring, but this is bigger. 

Little more inconvenient, but it's bigger. 

I think in its own way 

it's more beautiful.

From the beginning, 

we were a nation that lived 

by the motto victory or death, 

and live free or die.

One out of every 100 

Americans gave their lives 

in the fight for independence 

to remind us of who these heroes were 

and what they gave us.

 These are the real flags.

These are flags that have seen a lot. 

These were the Stars and Stripes 

that flew triumphant when the British waved 

the white flag of surrender at Yorktown. 

That was a big surrender. 

Nobody thought that was possible.

They were the greatest power of the world,

and they surrendered, and that was the beginning.

Ever since, the entire world has been on notice

 that Americans will never let anyone 

take our freedom away. 

Won't happen.

And all these talks 

from the communists, 

they haven't got a chance. 

Not even a chance.

We don't want 

communists 

in our country.

Never worked, 

and it never will work. 

Americans must never forget 

that we are a historic and

 heroic people with a 

heroic spirit and a 

heroic purpose 

on this beautiful 

earth of ours.

We are 

made 

of the 

courage 

and the fire 

and the flesh 

and the blood 

of the best and 

the bravest people

this world has ever 

produced. 

Our founders not only won 

our liberty, they secured it 

with the most righteous 

political document

 ever conceived. It's called the 

Constitution of the United States. 

Very special.

And it's 

because of their 

genius that we remain

 the finest people on the planet 

after 250 years.

Unlike so many 

others in the world, 

in this country, 

we have freedom of speech, 

freedom of religion, 

equal justice under the law, 

although I wasn't treated that well, 

but we won't get into that.

 And the right to keep and bear arms. 

And for the almost six years 

that I was president,

I guarded very, 

very powerfully 

your Second Amendment, 

and they didn't do a thing to it, 

and it was not easy. 

But we guard your 

Second Amendment. 

We guard it very, very 

strongly and cautiously.

Across the generations 

Americans have 

fought, 

bled 

and 

died 

not just to secure 

those rights, 

but to expand them 

to citizens 

of every 

race, 

religion, 

color 

and creed 

because we 

are one people. 

We are 

one family.

And as our 

Declaration of Independence 

tells us, we are all made 

in the image of 

one Almighty God.

And a communist 

will never say that. 

Americans expanded

the blessings of freedom, 

and we have never stopped expanding 

our ambitions and our dreams. 

We had the American dream. 

We never had the American dream, 

however, like we have it right now. 

The American dream is 

back, very strong, 

beautiful.

Our rise

 to being the world's strongest 

and most powerful nation was no accident 

of history. We rebuilt our military in my first term. 

We use it a little bit in our... Well, actually, I should say 

third term, but I won't do that 

because I don't want any controversy.

But we use it and 

we've had tremendous success. 

You look at Venezuela,

 you look at Iran, 

we wiped it out, 

wiped out their military.

Americans 

crossed the Great Plains, 

scaled the Rockies, we just tamed 

the wilderness and conquered the frontier 

and built the empire, it's called the Empire of Liberty. 

We laid down the railroads, raised up the skyscrapers, 

those beautiful skyscrapers and dug out the Panama Canal, 

considered the eighth wonder of the world, 

which everyone said was an impossible thing to do. 

And by the way, 38,000 Americans died to

give us one of the greatest engineering feats of all time

 the Panama Canal.

This was the unstoppable spirit that created the world's

most powerful industries and built 

the strongest military anyone had ever seen. 

And today, it is stronger and more powerful than

 it ever was before.

Americans won the West and built

the modern world because America 

is a nation of winners. 

And today our country is winning again, 

and we're winning like never before.

America is back,

 and we want to 

keep America great. 

And we will do so by approving the Save America Act, 

which means all voters must show voter ID. 

All voters must provide a little thing called proof of citizenship.

And there will be no mail-in ballots, 

except for illness, disability, 

military deployment or travel.

And you won't have 

cheating on the elections anymore. 

It's very simple. 

Together, 

we are also reasserting the truth

that American strength and power is not 

something to be ashamed of. It is something that we 

are very, very proud of. This country has been

 the greatest force for peace 

and justice on earth. 

In the last century, we defeated tyrants, 

demolished evil and saved freedom again and again and again.

So, ladies and gentlemen,

these are the fighters and the banners 

of the greatest generation. 

They are the greatest generation. 

I hate to admit that, but they are. 

They saved the world and they made 

America very, very proud. 

We are very proud of you here us all. 

And after we vanquished fascism, 

Americans stood against the evil of communism in the Cold War. 

And as I said last night at the beautiful Mount Rushmore,

what a beautiful place where 

Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt loomed 

over my shoulder as I spoke.

 America will never be a communist country. 

Won't happen. Communism is a loser and it always will be.

The communist system is

the opposite of the American system

 and the communist system has never worked. 

Our warriors did not fight communism 

on battlefields across the world only to have that menace 

rear its ugly head right back here in America. 

We're not going to let it happen. 

We like to stop a threat like that immediately 

and before it begins. 

It's like a cancer. 

You got to cut it out. You got to cut it out fast. 

Congratulations and thank you

for being here very much. 

And from the now safe and beautiful capital of Washington. 

Think of it. Washington DC, our capital. 

Our capital is now safe, gleaming and beautiful again. 

It's safe again.

Went from a very unsafe place two years ago 

to one of the safest cities in the country 

and one of the most beautiful 

to the gleaming waters of the Gulf of America.

 

There is no challenge Americans cannot overcome. 

There is no place we cannot go. 

There is no goal we cannot reach and 

there is nothing that Americans cannot do. 

And we're proving that right now. 

Our stock market is the strongest it's ever been. 

We have $19.2 trillion being invested in our country, 

which is six times more than ever happened before. 

We're building more factories in the United States t

han ever before. Everyone's 401(k)s 

are at the highest number they've ever been.

And more people are working today in the United States 

than any time in the history of our country. 

But in this country, 

we can achieve the wildest 

and most impossible dreams. 

And no dream in history

 is bigger or more incredible 

than the one that started on July 4th, 1776. 

The war for independence was launched

 by minutemen, farmers, blacksmens, tradesmen 

who took up their muskets against

 the mightiest army on earth, 

most powerful army and 

unbeatable army until they met us. 

No one made them do it. 

They fought because they knew 

that a free people must have a free country over 250 years. 

The world has seen the great empires, vast kingdoms, 

mighty nations and terrible tyrants. 

They came and they went. 

But after two and a half centuries, 

this American republic still stands tall and strong 

and we love each other. 

That show tonight, you heard it was over and what happened? 

You came back. 

And this American flag still waves 

proud and free and beautiful. 

We have thrived and flourished 

because our founders were great. 

Our cause was just 

our people are brave. 

Our culture is exceptional 

and our destiny is written 

by God. 

And as we can see here tonight,
after 250 years, the spirit of 1776 still lives within us all. 

It still roars in the hearts of our nation's capital.

It still burns in the heart of every patriot,

thunders through every city and town and

 it still lights the entire world 

with the glow of American liberty. 

And there is nothing like that. 

At 250 years old, we may be the oldest 

constitutional republic on earth, 

but our country is just getting started 

because the best is yet to come. 

On this 250th 4th of July

we declared just as they did 

two and a half centuries ago 

that for our country and for our children 

and for the cause of liberty, 

we are going to take our country to new levels,

to levels not reached. 

We're going to make it bigger, better, stronger, 

and we're going to love it even more.

Four Former Presidents on America at 250

In my post on Independence Day, I offered some thoughts on our country's semiquincentennial; here's a snippet.

I believe in our founding principles of equality and the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. I believe we are a nation of immigrants. That includes my ancestor who came over on the Mayflower and the rest who started our various family lines here, and in my opinion, we need to remain one going forward. We are a nation of resisters, too, and need to remain one.

I believe we can continue our experiment and grow our nation, and that someone, somehow, will rise to the occasion, motivate all of us to become better Americans, and bring us back from what so often feels like the brink of disaster, if "man is indeed the rational, moral creature, capable of self-control for the greater good," as most thought in 1776, and as I remember most did in 1976 when I graduated high school.

In today's post, I've pulled together excerpts from the statements shared by our four former presidents, folks who fought for and gained the Oval Office, and who tried to lead us forward to what our founders envisioned - a more perfect union. I've linked their full statements as well, and yes, I'll do a deeper dive into the current president's thoughts in a separate post. 

First up? Bill Clinton. This excerpt follows comments on some of the day's hot topics, including ICE, war, the weaponization of the government, our history being rewritten, and what he calls "socialism for the super-rich."

Our Founders were wise when they gave us our mission to form a more perfect union.  They knew America would never be perfect but could always be better. That’s what they meant by “more perfect.”  We’ve done that by being courageous enough to acknowledge our flaws and missteps—and then bold enough to leave them behind for brighter tomorrows.

That’s the lesson of our first 250 years: we can always do better. In how we treat one another, in person and online; in building a better future for ourselves, our families, and our communities; and in standing up, showing up, and speaking out for our democracy.

There is still nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what’s right with America. We see it in the people lining up to vote, no matter how hard some may try to prevent them. We see it in those bringing groceries to their neighbors, donating to charities in record numbers, and serving their country and communities in countless ways. And we see it in the immigrants eager to bring their talents, hard work, and dreams to our country.

So today, celebrate the miracle that has brought us this far. I know I will, because I love my country so much. Then tomorrow, wake up, and ask yourself what part you will play to keep making our union more perfect by keeping our country in the future business. We owe that much to those who struggled and sacrificed to bring us this far, and to our children and grandchildren who soon will inherit that future.

Next? George W. Bush. His thoughts were released in a question-and-answer form, with the questions designed to elicit positive responses - and there is nothing wrong with taking a purely optimistic outlook on where we are today. 

What unites our country as we celebrate 250 years?  I view the freedoms that we cherish, the freedom to worship the way you want to worship, the freedom for the press to hold the powerful to account, the freedom to vote, the freedom to realize dreams as values that can unite us as we head for the next 250 years.

What gives you hope for our next 250 years? One of the facets of our society that is overlooked too often is the fact that there are many people, particularly the young, who are willing to help a neighbor in need, who man homeless shelters or help with soup kitchens without the government telling them to do so. They’re motivated by love of their fellow citizens. It is what I call the “armies of compassion.” I’m pleased to report the “armies of compassion” remain strong today, and so long as they do remain strong, I’m very optimistic about the future of the next generation.

What will our future success require? The next 250 years require Americans to be citizens, not spectators. [It] requires Americans to take an active interest in the health and welfare of our country and the communities in which they live, the schools, and the churches. It requires Americans to vote, to be involved in the democratic process. You may not like the outcomes of the elections, but one should focus on the fact that the capacity to vote to determine our country’s future is a powerful freedom, which we should honor.

Next? Barack Obama. This excerpt followed his thoughts on the Declaration of Independence, born of revolution, and its promises to the people of equality, freedom, and our rights.

It had not been done before, and the success of this experiment was never a given. In forming our union, the founders fell terribly short of the Declaration's promise, leaving slavery intact, allowing states to restrict the franchise to white men who owned property, but in drafting a constitution and a bill of rights, they did have the foresight to provide us with a framework that allows each generation to make our union more perfect.

And over more than two centuries, through petitions and protests, marches and strikes, moral appeals from the pulpit and conversations at the family dinner table, men and women from all walks of life of every color, every faith, and every region took up the cause of democracy and made it their own, until "We the people" came to include not just some of us, but all of us.

Now we can't get complacent - we still have so much work to do to protect our democracy and build a future that is more equitable for all.

Finally, Joe Biden. After musing on founding the country on an idea, rather than things like geography or ethnicity - and how that's what makes America exceptional - he noted that over the course of our history, we've had to keep choosing the idea over all other options, and how that remains our obligation.

There’s nothing guaranteed about our democracy. We have to fight for it, defend it, and earn it. Over and over, year after year. That’s not a burden. That’s what it means to be an American. 

250 years in, we still haven’t fully lived up to those words in the Declaration. But we’ve never walked away from them, and this July 4, I hope all of us can commit to one thing: that we never will. I don’t believe we’re as divided as we’re told we are. I’ve bet my whole life on the American people, and I’m not stopping now.

Happy 250th birthday, America. Our story isn’t finished. Let’s keep writing it together.

In my opinion, each of the messages hit the mark; the former presidents all called on us to recognize where we started, where we are, what it took to get here, and that we can't stop trying to achieve what the founders envisioned when they declared our independence.

What do you think? Did they get it right? Drop a comment.

Contemplating the United States at 250

At what ended up being my only 'real' graduation in June 1976, I received a certificate - and the first $100 bill I'd ever seen - from the local American Legion for being the 'best' or 'one of the best' history students in my class. I was proud, my Dad being my history teacher and all - and also shocked, as I had no idea it was coming. 

I share my graduation story not to toot my own horn; rather, I admit that, like many people, I've forgotten more of our country's history than I remember. How bad are things? 

According to a Cato Institute poll, "nearly half (46%) of Americans don’t know what America’s 250th anniversary commemorates. A little more than half (53%) correctly answered that it was the adoption of the Declaration of Independence." 

That's why it was so much fun to stumble on the Time Magazine Special 1776 Issue tucked in with some of my Dad's papers. According to Henry Grunwald, then Time's managing editor, the issue was "an attempt to reconstruct, with the tools of both history and journalism, and in our distinctive newsmagazine format, at least part of the life and soul of the events that gave birth to our nation." The issue was dated July 4, 1776.

Here are a few examples of what it covered.

• New Yorkers tearing down a statue of King George III on horseback, cutting off (and shooting) his head, and carrying it off, after having heard a reading of the Declaration of Independence; the statue was later used to make ammunition for the war effort. Resistance? Yeah, it's in our blood.
• A discussion of who in each state is allowed to vote, or more importantly, who isn't, including variables such as no Papists (Maryland) or Jews (NY), people who don't own property (12 states), or people who couldn't afford to pay for the privilege. That last part, having to pay to vote? Discouraged then, and illegal now, with poll taxes banned, even as we look at 'unofficially' implementing some if the Save America Act becomes law.
• Thomas Paine's condemnation of King George as "the greatest enemy this continent hath," echoed today by the varied condemnations coming directly from the White House almost daily, and from each party's followers to the other's, as the need arises.
• Some background on John Hancock, owner of the largest and most prominent signature on the Declaration; he was "one of the richest men in the Colonies and one of those most adored by the crowds. He is also one of the vainest." Remind you of anyone these days, a man with a giant signature, tons of wealth (growing every day), and so vain he had his name slapped on a living memorial to another person? 
• How the states created their own constitutions, filled with similarities - and differences, too. That continues today; regulation, taxation, education, social benefits, wages and pensions, and more are handled differently. Heck, in some states individuals can collect a bounty for spying on, and telling on, their neighbors, something that would never happen in other states.
• Concerns about the young nation's finances, including the shocking $15,000,000 debt of the Continental Congress; a trade deficit with England - and a trade surplus with the rest of the world; concerns about whether economic independence could be achieved without establishing a 'manufacturing society;' and the threats from inflation, caused in part by the costs of war. Is this "like Deja vu all over again," as Yogi Berra said? 
• Smallpox and whether or not inoculating soldiers was a good idea. Boston's leading physician, we're told, thought that inoculation was an 'infatuation' and a 'heathen' treatment. General Washington banned inoculation of soldiers (even as he ordered it for his wife) out of respect for the differing opinions of the states; he even threatened officers who chose inoculation for themselves with being "cashiered and turned out of the Army...as an enemy and traitor to his country." Again, we're seeing history repeat itself, with a ban on flu vaccines for the Hegseth army, until a major outbreak forced the shots to be restarted. 

In the closing essay, titled 'The Future of the Experiment,' there's a discussion of whether the states, "separated, moreover, not only by miles, but also by religion, customs, habits, and temperaments" can hold together; these differences, as well as history showing how hard it is to keep a vast empire together, were "already raising the specter of civil war - or wars - if the British presence is removed." The essay continued, 

Adding to the fear of anarchy is the fact that there are some Americans who oppose all central governments, even their own, and who view the Declaration of Independence as a declaration not against Britain alone, but against all large governments. Unity, for them, is a means and not an end...

Aside from all the military, political and economic problems, Americans must ask an equally important question: Is independence really justified? Are the principles, the view of man, underlying last week's Declaration valid, and can a commonwealth based on them endure?

...Perhaps the greatest peril to the future of the American experiment is that contending groups, properly encouraged to strive for their self-interest, will do so with such heedless vengeance that the needs of society as a whole will be forgotten.

The essayist concludes by posing a key question: Is independence justified - and will it work? Here's the answer:

The delegates in Philadelphia, and most of their fellow citizens, would answer yes - if man is indeed the rational, moral creature, capable of self-control for the greater good, that the Americans of 1776 believe him to be.

Fast-forward from the bicentennial year's look at 1776 to today, when we celebrate our nation's semiquincentennial in what feels like a deeply divided country, including over whether we even have anything to celebrate. 

People put so much time and effort into 'defining' things, whether it's trying to label 'the other side' or label each side's respective ideas. People argue daily about who is a 'real American,' who is a 'patriot,' and who is a 'threat to our very existence.' People gleefully report each other to law enforcement, to people's employers, or they dox them, causing all kinds of trouble, simply because they can't stand hearing another voice. I've been reported at least twice for social media activity.

There's an almost feral desire among political parties to cement their power and tighten their grip on whatever slice of the government they hold, regardless of how that impacts the country. Don't believe me? We have a president - right now - calling for changes that he thinks will ensure his party will be in power for the next American century, and that's not all that's going on. 

And yet? I love this country, even if I'm often driven nuts by the people in charge exercising power not theirs, those who refuse to exercise the power they have, and anyone who refuses to allow me the power I have as a citizen. 

I love this country, even if many of my fellow citizens - politicians, media people, influencers, and yes, people I'm acquainted with - think I can't possibly love America because I don't agree with them.

I believe in our founding principles of equality and the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. I believe we are a nation of immigrants. That includes my ancestor who came over on the Mayflower and the rest who started our various family lines here, and in my opinion, we need to remain one going forward. We are a nation of resisters, too, and need to remain one.

I believe we can continue our experiment and grow our nation, and that someone, somehow, will rise to the occasion, motivate all of us to become better Americans, and bring us back from what so often feels like the brink of disaster, if "man is indeed the rational, moral creature, capable of self-control for the greater good," as most thought in 1776, and as I remember most did in 1976 when I graduated high school.

Perhaps Thomas Paine had the right idea back then?

In the Progress of Politics as in the common occurrences of Life we are not only apt to forget the ground we have traveled over, but frequently neglect to gather up experience as we go.

In our 250th year and beyond, let's remember to do that, and to do it together.