May 1, 2018--Jack: Trump Delivers

It felt like forever since I had heard from Jack and so, concerned about him, I called.

"I appreciated your being worried," he said.

"Actually concerned. A little concerned," I said to correct the record.

"It's funny you called. I was just thinking about you."

"Really? What were you thinking?"

"What else do we talk about? Trump."  Without waiting for my reaction, he raced ahead, "I was just watching Morning Joe. Thanks to you I tune them in once in awhile to see what the Commies are up to." He chuckled as if to indicate this wasn't going to be one of his stress-inducing rants.

"I was watching as well," I said, "To get a morning dose of the truth. There's so much spinning."

"From Joe and Mika as well," Jack said, "She's got him totally wimped out. Every day he's sounding more and more like Elizabeth Warren. It's the price of her agreeing to marry him. The next thing you know he'll be wearing an apron."

"Now I see why I resist calling you. If this is a bad time to talk we can . . ."

"It's as good a time as ever. You dropped the dime. So what's on your mind?"

"The last time we talked, in early February, I sensed a little doubt about him. About, as you used to refer to him, 'your boy.' It was when they fired his close aide, Rob Porter after he was caught having lied about abusing his wives. You told me about your growing up, about how your parents . . ."

Softly, he said, "No need to go there again. What's past is . . ."

"I wasn't going there except that I got the impression that you weren't happy that Trump had a spousal abuser working right next to him in the Oval Office because of your own . . ."

"I'd rather talk about Morning Joe."

"OK by me," I said, "I don't have an agenda. I just wanted to check in with you. To see how you are. So, what struck you from this morning's show?"

"Did you see that woman who wrote a book about what she called 'flyover country'?"

"I did," I said, "In fact, I just ordered it, The View from Flyover Country. By Sarah Kendzior. Sounds interesting. Good title."

"It was more what some of Scarborough's panelists had to say."

"I'm listening."

"You remember that book you mentioned to me a couple of years ago, What's the Matter With Kansas? Well, I got it out of the library and actually read it."

"What did you think?"

"You'll probably be surprised that I pretty much agreed with most of it. How conservative politicians in Kansas ignored economic issues like sinking wages and unemployment and fed people there a steady diet of what the writer called cultural issues. Back then, abortion, evolution, and gay marriage. You know I'm a libertarian and believe in all of these things. That government shouldn't say who can and cannot get married and get in the way of a woman wanting to have an abortion."

"I do know that about you. If you weren't that way I wouldn't be able to consider you a friend."

He ignore that and continued, "And then when they got elected, ultraconservatives, now in the majority at the state and federal level in Kansas, ignored people's concerns about those cultural issues and voted for tax cuts and things like that that favored rich people and big corporations. In other words the politicians again screwed the little people."

"And with Trump?"

"Maybe you weren't paying attention to Morning Joe, but that woman Kend-something and the others were saying that Trump also ran on a lot of conservative cultural issues but rather than selling out the people who voted for him he actually delivered. Or is in the process of doing so. And this included Evangelicals who overlooked all his misbehavior because they believed in what he was saying about immigrants and guns and science and Muslims and climate change and transgender people serving in the military." 

Jack continued, "More than anything else getting Gorsuch on the Supreme Court said it all. You would think that people who probably don't even know how many judges there are on the Court wouldn't be so crazed about Gorsuch. Most probably don't even know his name, but they believe he has their interests at heart. And that Trump put him there for them. In other words, unlike in Kansas and elsewhere, Trump is keeping his promises. And at his rallies talks to his people as if he's confiding in them. Paying attention to them and what's on their minds."

"And you mean they're not being screwed by Trump and his appointees? You mean that there is a real benefit to average people from the tax cuts that will add trillions to the debt? That Trump lied to his followers, that he continues to do so by focusing the vast bulk of the tax cuts on the richest 5 percent and the biggest businesses that are already doing very well? That doesn't sound like delivering to me."

"I will concede," Jack said, "that nothing and nobody's perfect but with Trump people feel he's on their side. Including when he creates what his opponents label chaos. He claims that he does this intentionally to shake up the system. To bring about new and better ways to do things. The old ways from traditional welfare kinds of programs to the way diplomacy has been practiced forever have only made things worse."

"I will agree with some of that. Especially that big government and big government programs haven't been that effective. I know about federal education programs and most of them haven't produced positive results."

"That's the understatement of the year," Jack said. "But my best case is what might be happening in Korea. Even you have written about how if things work out Trump will be entitled to a lot of credit. Minimally by scaring everyone who thinks he's crazy and if they don't make a deal he'll nuke them. That seems to have gotten Kim's attention."

"I did write about that and if things in fact do get better I'll be happy to see the credit shared. But that's about it. The rest of his agenda is either going nowhere or has already collapsed. Like making life better for working people--a majority of whom voted for him. The economy is growing but not at above-expected rates and people are not seeing a whole lot of additional money in their paychecks. So much so that Republicans are no longer running around patting themselves on their backs for passing that tax bill. So the one thing they accomplished is blowing up in their faces."

"Some of this may be true," Jack said, "But, I remind you, a good third of the population cares more about guns and abortion and being able to pray where and when they want, and, for those people, Trump is delivering."

"God help us," I muttered under my breath.

January 30, 2018--November 6, 2018

It's not too early to mark this date on your calendar. 

It's midterm Election Day and on that date there is one thing, actually the only thing we can do to begin the process to remove Donald Trump from the presidency. 

And thus it is the most important day in decades. 

Forget fantasies that the Robert Mueller investigation and eventual report will bring that about. No matter what he finds Republicans until January 1, 2019 will control the House of Representatives where Impeachment must originate and there is no way, even if Mueller has Trump on tape and plays the tape of Trump directing Michael Flynn and his sons to lie to the FBI and Congress, it will not matter to Trump's followers or GOP lawmakers. They will see those tapes as fabricated by the FBI just the way they believe TV feeds of the landing on the moon were shot on a Hollywood sound stage.

They will claim it is fake news, that a conspiracy within the FBI, CIA, and Department of Justice is responsible for the findings and thus should not to be taken seriously. 

Democrats will attempt to keep the process going, so will most of the media, but at most it will be a 10-day story with business returning to usual as the public quickly becomes bored with the whole thing. It will be right in the middle of the football season and what can one expect.

Only Trump's rock-solid 30 percent of the population will remain on the alert. These are the most conspiratorial-minded of Americans, the least informed, the most paranoid. As crazy as they may be, combined with the billionaire GOP donors they control the Republican party and House members especially are in thrall to them.

But unless Republican House members are trounced in November, which at the moment seems possible--but just possible--we will not have just two more years of Trump but a total of six more.

So we need to get activated right now. 

We need to volunteer to work for our local Democratic committees. Especially in the purple or swing states. We need to pay particular attention to House members, all of whom are up for reelection with the exception of the growing number, mainly Republicans, who have already announced they will not be seeking reelection. 

And it is essential that we contribute and raise money to fund the cost of campaigns for Congress. Someone, all of us, need to chip in to offset the tens of millions the Koch Brothers are already making available to GOP candidates. And who, as a result, after the election, will be owned by the Kochs.

There is the cliche that an occasional election is the most consequential of our lifetimes. Most times it isn't. This time it may be true.

Koch Brothers

January 19, 2018--Rx Trump: GirthGate

Donald Trump finally had a physical and the results are more or less known. More or less because there is already chatter that he and his doctor are not telling the truth about the results. 

Two things--

In spite of what the doctor said, his LDL, "bad cholesterol" numbers are sky high and suggest he has not insignificant heart disease.

And he is borderline obese, which is not good for the health of his heart, especially in combination with the LDL numbers and lack of exercise. Riding around in a golf cart doesn't qualify as exercise.

Take a look at this picture from two weeks ago. Does it suggest that Trump is only, as White House doctor Ronny Jackson claims, 10 to 15 pounds overweight? I'd say, it's more likely 50 pounds. Some are criticizing the doctor for fibbing about the president's actual weight. Skeptics are calling it Girthism or, I prefer my name for this--GirthGate.

In other words the president could be a ticking time bomb. Maybe in a bipartisan gesture presidential candidate Oprah Winfrey could help him out with a gift membership to Weight Watchers. 

In the meantime, what's one-heartbeat-away-from-the-presidency Mike Pence up to these days? In addition to standing behind Trump, nodding and smiling. That should tell us something about his boss's true medical condition. 

I hear he's staying away from carbs and working out.

Then there is the senility test. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Trump took. It takes 15 minutes to administer, not the half hour they claimed. Unless Trump needed the extra time in pursuit of a perfect score--30 out of 30.

Speaking of mental tests, we had a wonderful Aunt Madeline who was a great character, but during the last years of her life was in and out of hospitals. Occasionally, to take a brief break from the rest of her life.

One time when helping her check into Beth Israel in New York City they gave her a cognitive test to see, at her age, if she was showing signs of dementia. Among other things they asked her to repeat "Car, cat, tree."

She was great at that and everything else. She more than had all her marbles.

"Car, cat, tree," she said over and over again. Not because she was senile and thus repeating herself, but to show them and Rona and me how good her mind still was.

They also asked her to reverse it--"Tree, cat, car." 

"No problem," she said before rattling it off. Again repeatedly, grinning proudly. 

That became a mantra. Whenever one of us would forget a name or an event from years ago, rather than being frustrated we'd chant, "Car, cat, tree" to show we were OK. Still do even though she's no longer with us.

This reminded me of the test Trump asked to take to counter the assertion in the Michael Wolff book, Fire and Fury, that Trump is losing it. Or, has already lost it.

They also asked Trump to repeat car, cat, tree as well as take a paper and pencil test. Below is a sample. It's self explanatory.

What do you think? Is this the kind of test to use to see if our commander-in-chief is fit for office? That he should be trusted with the nuclear codes?

Or is it more appropriate to see if a first grader is fit for promotion to the second grade?

On the other hand, I do want my president to know his hippos.

January 18, 2018--Ab-Normalizing

A number of friends have been accusing me of "normalizing" Donald Trump and thereby enhancing his legitimacy both as a person and president. By doing this, they say, I am tacitly accepting his election.

Though I am not quite sure I understand all that they mean, I do know they are angry with me because they feel I am treating him as if he were a normal person, rather than the embodiment of evil. That by doing so I am elevating his status as a human being and thereby contributing to enhancing his power. They would rather me consider him abnormal, an aberration not worthy of serious regard much less acknowledging his humanity.

I am sure there is some truth in these friends' disappointment in me.

But I also know there is significant danger in not acknowledging  Donald Trump's connection to the human race. To not have to deal with who he in all his maddening complexity. Dehumanizing him makes it easier to reject his very being. To be able to simply write him off. And thus delegitimatize him as president and as a human being in ways similar to how he attempted to denigrate Barak Obama.

I think we know enough about human nature to agree that few of us live in a pure state. We are all a mix of contradictions that coexist within us. Most of us, under the right conditions, are capable of acts of self-sacrifice as well as unspeakable violence. There is a struggle within us, Lincoln noted, between "the better angels of our nature" and the dark forces that pull us in the opposite direction

Aeschylus and Shakespeare would be eager to chime in. 

To bring us to a better place, to move beyond dealing in caricatures, we would do well to resist inappropriate normalizing while equally avoiding the impulse to ab-normalize. To impute evil motives to those with whom we disagree and against whom we struggle. To do the opposite of normalization.  

In the current political climate, this will require setting aside some of our anger and fear so we can better understand, with all their own human contradictions, why those who support of Donald Trump are so fervent. 

By now many of my friends feel they understand enough. Even too much. But to them it's simple--he and his supporters are racists and misogynists. Ask no more. Say no more.

I get that but think there is more to consider, including perhaps things about which we can find ways to talk. This is urgent as our fate as a democracy may depend on being able to do that.

Lincoln's First Inauguration 

January 15, 2018--Davos

Donald Trump is going next week to the meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. 

This is to say the least a little surprising because the people who attend are for the most part the kind of "globalists" he and his base of supporters abhor.

But treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin has his boss's back. He claims those who show up are not elitists but, according to a report in the New York Times, more akin to "Average Joes."

They quote him--"I didn't realize that it was the global elite. I don't think it's a hangout for globalists." 

On that basis alone, if he is sincere and thus that ignorant about some of the forces that shape the world's and America's economy, he should be summarily fired. How can a U.S. secretary of the treasury be so, how to put this, out to lunch? Or, out shopping with his wife?

For example, though neither Trump nor Mnuchin will have to reach into there own pockets to pay the $70,000 for a ticket--we the taxpayers will--this smacks of elite to me.

It does allow participants to hobnob with the likes of Bill Gates and the IMF's Christine Lagarde (assuming she's not in jail) and of course other pundits such as Bono, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Shakira.

Here, though, is my favorite part of the Davos schedule--

To help people keep their heads screwed on straight, to have the semblance of an authentic experience, to quote the Times, "for more interactive entertainment, one popular event is the simulation of a refugee's experience [where] attendees crawl on their hands and knees to better understand what it's like to evade an advancing army."

When I read this to Rona, she cried, "NOOOO. Please, tell me it isn't true!"

Sorry girl, but I checked other sources and it appears to be true, though I doubt Mnuchin and Trump will get down for that.   

January 12, 2018--Trump 2018 Removal Act

Earlier this week, Donald Trump flew to Nashville to visit Andrew Jackson's nearby home, the Hermitage, to honor him by, among other things, placing a wreath on his tomb.

Though Trump doesn't read and knows nothing verifiable about American history, including the American presidency, a large portrait of the 7th president is currently on prominent display in the Oval Office.

Why might that be? Not because Jackson owned about 200 slaves (though that per se would not repel Trump) but because he was the first president to be widely regarded by "ordinary" people. Trump views himself that way. There is his base that he spends all day pandering to, which was on vivid display yesterday.

It began in the morning. The House of Representatives was scheduled to vote on an extension of the FISA act, legislation that was first approved in 1978 to allow intelligence-gathering agencies to spy on foreign nationals as well as American citizens who might represent terrorist threats. 

Libertarians such as Senator Rand Paul had proposed an amendment that would require that a FISA court, more than at present, be required to authorize in advance any domestic spying.

Paul was on Morning Joe a few hours before the vote, seemingly to explain his amendment but, as it turned out, to seek and secure Trump's support. Seemingly as a non sequitur, unprompted, he went into a passionate attack on the FBI who, he falsely claimed, was working to "bring down" the president.

When I wondered out loud why the senator switched subjects, Rona patted me on the arm and as if to humor me and with a sigh, said, "Of course to suck up to Trump in order to secure his support."

"Rand Paul?" I asked, still naively, "The same person Trump mocked and destroyed during the 2016 Republican primary season?"

Rona just looked over at me as if I were born yesterday.

Needless to say, waffling back and forth all day, Trump came down to oppose the Paul amendment after an hour earlier endorsing it.

So much for attempting to suck up to and relate transactually to our president.

More of Trump playing to his base was on disgraceful display later in the day.

At a bipartisan meeting in the Oval Office about legislation that would provide some additional support for the Wall along the border with Mexico in trade for Congress's approval for a path to citizenship for 800,000 stateless DACA young people, Trump met with six congressional leaders, seemingly to wrap up final details.

Appearing to be unmotivated, almost like a non sequitur of his own, Trump began to ruminate about immigration writ larger, asking why we accept immigrants and refugees from places such as Haiti, El Salvador, and Africa. 

From "shithole countries" like these.

After this outrageousness, Republicans offered their usual tepid response, mainly mild forms of faux incredulity (they too worry about the power of Trump's base--perhaps 30 percent of America's adults) while most others expressed genuine outrage.

Has Trump finally crossed the line that many of us have been waiting for for more than two years, a line that will finally bring him down? 

Even in my hopeful naïvety, I was skeptical. Trump critics were not surprised by his ignorance and racism. We have come to expect it and have been rendered exhausted by it. Perhaps even inured.  

As someone yesterday evening was quoted as saying, it was another example of Trump seeking to "make America white again."

That caused me to think more about Trump's visit to Andrew Jackson's home and grave. 

Among other disturbing things that Jackson was responsible for was the infamous Indian Removal Act of 1830 that required native people, to leave our then western territories and relocate west of the Mississippi. Some tribes did so "voluntarily," others needed to be "removed" forcefully along the Trail of Tears.

This is what Trump is up to and why he admires Jackson so much--Trump too wants to see the removal of millions of Americans along a contemporary trail of tears. El Saladorians back to El Salvador, Hatians back to their island, Africans back to Africa, Muslims back to their countries.

One thing they have in common--they are all people of color. "What can't we admit more Norwegians, white-supremacist Trump opined wistfully.

If he didn't cross the line yesterday maybe he inched closer to it. Mueller is thankfully lurking while cravenly GOP members in Congress aren't.

October 16, 2017--Whatever Happened to ISIS?

It wasn't very long ago that ISIS or ISIL or the Islamic State caused widespread fear in the Middle East and the West. Very much including in the United States.

Almost daily, for many months, ISIS would release a video of the hideous torture and beheading of captured Americans, Europeans, and Muslims. The map of the area showed ISIS's metastasis occurring as more and more territory fell before its brutal, seemingly unstoppable anschluss.

As recently as 2014, ISIS declared itself a caliphate. Which meant that they claimed religious, political, and military authority over all Muslims. All Muslins worldwide. In the region (beginning in expanding parts of Iraq and Syria) with visions of taking over all of the Middle East and ultimately at least as much of Africa and Europe as the previous caliphate of the 7th through 15th centuries occupied.

This terrifying aspiration did not seem far fetched. 

The Iraqis, torn by internal strife between the Shia majority and the Sunnis (who joined ISIS in large numbers), the Iraqi government and military felt powerless to resist. Syria was torn by a hopeless civil war and resisted becoming involved; and no one in the West, including the United States during the last years of the Obama administration, had a response that felt credible. 

And then there were the Russians who saw this divisiveness and chaos as an opportunity to exert influence and even dominance.

But then toward the end of the Obama years and continued and expanded during the early months of the Trump administration--yes, that administration--the U.S. military did two things that appear to have been decisive--somehow after more than a decade of frustration, we were able to train elements of the Iraqi army to actually fight effectively and supplied close-in tactical air support as they took on the previously unvanquished ISIS fighters. 

Slowly the map of the area controlled viciously by ISIS began to contract. As recently as last week the last of their caliphate strongholds, Hawija, fell to the Iraqis. Thousands while retreating were killed and then, rather than dying a martyrs' death, other thousands surrendered, mainly to Kurdish forces who have been in the mix as critical fighters.

A few things--

First--ISIS will continue to inspire and take credit for individual acts of terrorism. As hideous as this it, it's not a caliphate.

Then--though Donald Trump has a checklist of Obama initiatives and achievements that he has made his agenda--to obliterate Obama's political and historical existence is what more than anything else guides Trump. But in spite of this, in regard to ISIS, his military people saw an effective strategy and Trump doubled-down on it. Soon he will be all over Twitter and the media taking credit for "defeating" ISIS. What he boasted during the election campaign.

He is entitled to some of that credit. This is culminating on his, forgive me, watch. Maybe, doubtful, but maybe he will learn something from this--about the big things (war and peace) he might act more moderately than what many are fearing. North Korea a case in point?

Last--seemingly hopeless situations can at times resolve themselves. 

Hawija

February 24, 2017--Jack, On Immigrants

"So tell me what you and your friends would do about the more than 10 million illegal immigrants."

It was the morning after the Trump administration unveiled a new executive order that outlined plans to round up and deport millions of undocumented workers and their families and Jack was sounding excited.

Before I could respond, he continued, "My boy was back on his heels last week what with the Flynn fiasco, Kellyanne Conway, and that press conference. But with this he's back. And the general he appointed to replace that crazy Flynn is everyone's favorite. Even your crowd's."

"Well I do agree about General McMaster but about the immigration executive order, I'm not so sure."

"Perfect bleeding heart material for you liberals. Feeling sorry for all those displaced Latin Americans. See, I didn't say 'Mexicans.'" I sensed that made him feel good about himself. "But we've got a lot of problems and needs of our own not to have to worry too much about them."

"Well, they're here and for the most part are hard working and law-abiding. I just read that the crime rate among undocumented people is actually lower than among citizens."

"Probably from your New York Times. But aren't they all doing illegal things? I mean, just being in the country without documents or visas is itself illegal."

"So you'd round up everyone? Even the so-called Dreamers? Young people who were brought to America when they were very young children?"

"Maybe not them and as I understand it for some time at least the Trump immigration police will leave them alone."

"Just send their parents back?" I hope he heard my sarcasm.

"You know your American history."

"And?"

"And wasn't it true that when your grandparents as well as mine came to America, because they didn't have the money, many left family members behind? Isn't that a version of the same thing? Isn't it in the nature of immigration itself?"

"I'll have to think about that some more. But it is true that for almost everyone--though they faced a lot of discrimination--they had legal status. They in most cases were sort of welcomed here as laborers, to build railroads, or settle and work on farms in the Midwest."

"Don't we have a guest worker program here that allows people to legally cross borders so they can work on farms and restaurants?"

"We do," I acknowledged.

"But we're getting sidetracked," Jack said. "I come back to my initial question--what would you do about the millions and millions of illegal immigrants? And I should remind you that your president Obama was the deporter-in-chief. He rounded up and sent back about two and a half million. More in total than all his predecessors combined."

"That's true but he didn't do it in the same kind of mean-spirited way. Unlike your president." It upset me that I was beginning to sound like Jack.

"Sure, Obama didn't publicize it because he didn't want to get legal Hispanic-Americans all upset. He wanted their votes. And pretty much got them."

"Can we forget Obama? Trump is now our president, so let's limit ourselves to what he's doing. Not much good as I see things."

"So you're Ok with all the illegals living here, sending their kids to our schools and hospitals, and . . ."

"The evidence is overwhelming that from an economic point of view, from a cost-benefit perspective, immigrants, even undocumented ones, contribute more that they get in government services. In other words, in bottom line terms, we get more in return than we pay out. Also, most of the unassimilated immigrants do work that, forgive the expression, real Americans don't want. Like a lot of the restaurant and field work. How many Americans do you know who want to wash dishes, cut lawns, or pick lettuce?"

Jack was silent so I said, "I take that to mean you don't know too many field hands who are citizens."

"Up here plenty of the farmers are Mainers. But to tell you the truth there are also a lot of Hispanic agricultural workers. Again, we keep getting off the subject. So let me try again--what would you do about the millions of illegals? Just let them be? Make them all citizens?"

"First of all, can you find another name for them. 'Illegals' sounds really nasty."

"Let me come at this another way. You live half the year in New York City, right?"

"Right, but where are you going with this?"

"You're a so-called sanctuary city, right?"

"Right. But again?"

"Which means that you don't cooperate with federal immigration enforcement people."

"Not entirely true because if an undocumented person commits a felony in most cases they do get turned over to the ICE people."

"But basically, if they obey the law, illegals, sorry, illegal immigrants, can stay in the city as long as they want, get drivers licenses, have any kind of job, etcetera."

"Basically true. And most New Yorkers are fine with that. In fact, we feel good about being welcoming and tolerant."

"We're not talking abut refugees, right, but people who came here or overstayed their visas to live and work?"

"Again, I don't have all day so can you get to your point because it feels as if you're building up to some revelation."

"I'll cut to the chase."

"At last." I was feeling exasperated with Jack. I liked him better when he didn't call so much. I did have things I wanted to get to and he has the ability to get under my skin.

"You have any immigrants living in your building?"

"I haven't checked but I assume so."

"They'd have to be rich ones, right, considering how much apartments sell for?"

"That's true," I admitted.

"So you're OK with where you're living?"

"Pretty much."

"It doesn't disturb you that your place isn't diverse?"

"What do you mean by that?"

"That everyone, I assume, is pretty much like you? All rich and . . . "

"There are some who have lived here for decades, before prices shot through the roof, and they are more modest than most of the rest of us. And again, your point is?"

"That you live pretty isolated from your typical illegal immigrant. My guess is, and it's an easy one, that you don't have any Mexicans who snuck across the border living in your building."

"Could be."

"And so this subject for you is pretty theoretical because the only illegals you maybe encounter are working in restaurants, cleaning up after you're finished with dinner?"

"Could be." I was starting to feel defensive.

"I'll bet you don't wake up in the morning and meet any in your elevator when you're heading out for breakfast. Except if someone is renovating their apartment and some of the illegal construction workers are around."

"Could be."

"How would you feel if somehow one morning you woke up and half the apartments in your building were occupied by Guatemalan or Syrian refugees?"

"That is . . . ," I sputtered.

"Go on. You can say it. You'd hate it."

"I don't know. This is all so crazy."

"But it's not theoretical to people here in Lewiston, Maine, where more than 5,000 refugees have been relocated. Altogether, including the refugees, there are only about 35,000 living in Lewiston. Some for generations. They wake up in the morning and see their neighborhoods and downtown turning into Somali enclaves. Ask them, from your Manhattan sanctuary, how they feel about that. And these are good people. But it's not how most want to live."

"But other places like Buffalo, New York, seem to be welcoming refugees and undocumented people because they contribute to their economy. Things are pretty bleak up there and new arrivals rent places, do the work that a lot of local people don't want to do, and buy things from Buffalo merchants. So it appears that it's good all around."

"I read about that too. In your Sunday Times, and I get it. But in just as many places, again like Lewiston, nobody asked the local people what they wanted. Refugees from Somalia just began to show up with the assistance of the U.S. government."

"I can understand that. I want us to be welcoming but local people should have a say in relocation programs. And I'll concede that refugees are not the same as undocumented people."

"As long as they don't move into you building."

I was out of gas and didn't respond.

"I hear you, you've got other things to do. I'll call you next week."

I said to myself, "If you must."

Somalis In Lewiston Maine

November 3, 2016--Endorsement for President

It has not been my tradition here to endorse candidates, but this time I am moved to make an exception--

I am endorsing No-One for president.

I have been voting since 1960 and was excited to pull the lever for John F. Kennedy. Then, in 1964 I felt good enough about the Lyndon Johnson of the Civil Rights Acts and Great Society to vote for him. Next, I believed that Hubert Humphrey would finally bring an end to the war in Vietnam and I picked him over Nixon, who won and when he ran for reelection I thought that George McGovern would prove to be a credible alternative.

Next came Carter versus Ford--two good men--and subsequently Ronald Reagan, who ran first against Carter and then the acceptable Fritz Mondale. Reagan was not someone I wanted to vote for but compared to Carter, who was a failure, Reagan had a few good qualities and proved to be a transformative president. How many would like to have him to vote for this year?

George H.W. Bush was credible as was his opponent, Michael Dukakis. So I was able to feel decent about the choices and did not have a problem voting.

Then came Bill Clinton who had well-qualified opponents in both Bush and then Dole. After Clinton there was George W. Bush and his attractive opponents, Al Gore and John Kerry. Both times I voted with a measure of enthusiasm and belief though my candidates lost.

Finally there was the hopeful Barack Obama and his two well-regarded opponents, John McCain and Mitt Romney.

And now we have Hillary Clinton and, god-help-us, Donald Trump. Two of the worst aspirants to the presidency ever.

Hillary is a deeply compromised candidate from a family of grifters that includes her and in 30+ years of various forms of public service has done a lot but accomplished little. Actually, her record is mainly made up of failed efforts during her tenure as secretary of state. Think Russia, Egypt, Libya, Syria. She promises to be a business-as-usual president at a time when the system needs a good shaking up.

Then there is the much worse Donald Trump, a charlatan whose greatest accomplishments were hosting a successful reality TV show and branding for cash his name globally. This alone should disqualify him but then there is the misogyny, racism, Islamophobia, and . . .

Both candidates inspire little hope, in fact both are divisive, surrounded by haters of two unique types, and could easily wind up indicted, impeached, and jailed before the end of a first term.

The only thing I care about that distinguishes them can be summed up in two words--"Supreme" and "Court."

For that reason, though I am endorsing no-one, I will force myself to vote for Clinton.