On the Pulse of Morning

Maya Angelou died today and I spent some time mourning her loss and remembering her incredible beauty and piercing mind.
by Charlie Leck

At the first inaugural of President Bill Clinton, Maya Angelou read a poem called On the Pulse of Morning. It was remarkably beautiful in that reading, but I found it delicious and filled with wonder in the times I read it after that. Take a moment or two and read it here and listen to the poet plead with us on behalf of a rock, a river and a tree.

A Rock, A River, A Tree
Hosts to species long since departed,
Marked the mastodon.

The dinosaur, who left dry tokens
Of their sojourn here
On our planet floor,
Any broad alarm of their hastening doom
Is lost in the gloom of dust and ages.

But today, the Rock cries out to us, clearly, forcefully,
Come, you may stand upon my
Back and face your distant destiny,
But seek no haven in my shadow.

I will give you no more hiding place down here.

You, created only a little lower than
The angels, have crouched too long in
The bruising darkness,
Have lain too long
Face down in ignorance.

Your mouths spilling words
Armed for slaughter.

The Rock cries out today, you may stand on me,
But do not hide your face.

Across the wall of the world,
A River sings a beautiful song,
Come rest here by my side.

Each of you a bordered country,
Delicate and strangely made proud,
Yet thrusting perpetually under siege.

Your armed struggles for profit
Have left collars of waste upon
My shore, currents of debris upon my breast.

Yet, today I call you to my riverside,
If you will study war no more. Come,

Clad in peace and I will sing the songs
The Creator gave to me when I and the
Tree and the stone were one.

Before cynicism was a bloody sear across your
Brow and when you yet knew you still
Knew nothing.

The River sings and sings on.

There is a true yearning to respond to
The singing River and the wise Rock.

So say the Asian, the Hispanic, the Jew
The African and Native American, the Sioux,
The Catholic, the Muslim, the French, the Greek
The Irish, the Rabbi, the Priest, the Sheikh,
The Gay, the Straight, the Preacher,
The privileged, the homeless, the Teacher.
They hear. They all hear
The speaking of the Tree.

Today, the first and last of every Tree
Speaks to humankind. Come to me, here beside the River.

Plant yourself beside me, here beside the River.

Each of you, descendant of some passed
On traveller, has been paid for.

You, who gave me my first name, you
Pawnee, Apache and Seneca, you
Cherokee Nation, who rested with me, then
Forced on bloody feet, left me to the employment of
Other seekers--desperate for gain,
Starving for gold.

You, the Turk, the Swede, the German, the Scot ...
You the Ashanti, the Yoruba, the Kru, bought
Sold, stolen, arriving on a nightmare
Praying for a dream.

Here, root yourselves beside me.

I am the Tree planted by the River,
Which will not be moved.

I, the Rock, I the River, I the Tree
I am yours--your Passages have been paid.

Lift up your faces, you have a piercing need
For this bright morning dawning for you.

History, despite its wrenching pain,
Cannot be unlived, and if faced
With courage, need not be lived again.

Lift up your eyes upon
The day breaking for you.

Give birth again
To the dream.

Women, children, men,
Take it into the palms of your hands.

Mold it into the shape of your most
Private need. Sculpt it into
The image of your most public self.
Lift up your hearts
Each new hour holds new chances
For new beginnings.

Do not be wedded forever
To fear, yoked eternally
To brutishness.

The horizon leans forward,
Offering you space to place new steps of change.
Here, on the pulse of this fine day
You may have the courage
To look up and out upon me, the
Rock, the River, the Tree, your country.

No less to Midas than the mendicant.

No less to you now than the mastodon then.

Here on the pulse of this new day
You may have the grace to look up and out
And into your sister's eyes, into
Your brother's face, your country
And say simply
Very simply
With hope
Good morning.

Sleep well, beautiful lady, and now let out to fly the caged bird, if you will.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it,send me an email if you’d like.

Evaluating the Tea Party

Has the Tea Party achieved want it wanted to achieve at this point? Is its success and future dependent on election results in 2014? Or 2016? And, how relevant will the Tea Party be after 2016?
by Charlie Leck

Ross Douthat, a relatively conservative columnist that I have continued to read for the last 15 to 20 years, recently wrote about the current state of the Tea Party. Douthat is bright and he writes extremely well. He’s often helped me patch up some glitches in my political thinking and he has almost single-handedly kept me from falling off the far-left edge. I enjoy his columns.

Most recently he has written this of the Republican establishment and the Tea Party…

“No, the Tea Party has won: There simply isn’t that much difference between an establishment Republican and a Tea Party Republican anymore, and if grass-roots challengers are losing more races it’s because they’ve succeeded in yanking the party far enough to the right that there isn’t any space for them to fill.”

Of course, many observers have been sensing this over the last few years – that is, that the Republican Party has been moving more and more over toward the right ledge (or cliff) of American politics. My most recent thesis, expressed here in several recent blogs, is that the grand old party is being pushed that way by extreme, enormously wealthy advocates of the Tea Party.

So, Douthat builds a case for saying that the Tea Party has lost and they have won in doing that! His May 24th column is well worth reading by both lefties and righties and even switch-hitters.

“This is a useful way to think about Tea Party activism as well. The movement was always essentially right-wing, which is why it was embraced (and, at times, exploited) by the right’s pre-existing network of professionals and pressure groups. But it changed Republican politics precisely because it mobilized Americans who were new to political activism and agitation, and who behaved like people awakened from a slumber to a situation they no longer recognized. Wait, we bailed out Wall Street ... ? Our deficits are ... how big? And this Barack Hussein Obama, where did he come from?”

Is the tea-party movement a correction of a move too close to the center by the Republican Party? It’s an idea worth thinking about.

Douthat says some things, which are difficult for me to accept and stomach, about the far too-leftward leanings of the current President and that the whole episode in American politics that produced him was also a correction of a drift by Democrats toward a cozy centrist relationship with Republicans. He may, I think, be on to something!

The difference, he says, between these leftward Dems and the Tea Party is that the liberals managed to elect a President who would represent them and express both their anger and their message to America. The Tea Party has not yet had that success and now it is just a question about whether they can also elect a president who will represent their angst and dreams – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul or Marco Rubio. Such an achievement would mark the Tea Party as a success even though it will not be able to initiate the far too extreme platform that it supports (but neither could the Democrats on the other extreme). Each of these three potential White House residents would give a slight different interpretation to the success and achievement of the Tea Party movement.

I personally think, and I’ll inject it here as an aside, that the Tea Party by 2016 will have shot the last of its wad and it will diminish to little more than a footnote in the political story of the last decade. At least, I certainly hope so. It would be so good to get back to a slightly right of center political fight against those who are slightly left of center.

Douthat’s closing remarks about a possible Jeb Bush victory intrigue me; for this would be a President with whom I could live without pain, fear and trembling. I don’t want it, but I could live with it.

Whatever happens in 2016, I find myself agreeing with University of Connecticut professor Jelani Cobb who says the Tea Party’s reason to exist will disappear after that presidential election (and a good deal of that lack of a reason to exist will be because Barack Obama, a black man, will no longer be president). Some of this reasoning both angers and frightens me, but I must say that it is likely true.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

The Nation is Going to the Rich Dogs!

I am one Democrat living in a very real and deep fear for the future of our nation. I recently sat my dog down and made him chat with me about this anger and hostility that I’ve got bottled up inside me.
by Charlie Leck

I turned to my dog several times over the last couple of days with questions that have been plaguing me. You must first understand that my dog is a fellow of lofty intelligence. Don’t think of him as a dog! He has more degrees and academic awards hanging around the house than do I. For instance, we have hung his degree from the Animal Humane Society, which is called the Canine Good Citizen Award, right inside the most used entrance to our house so people can see it. It was, perhaps, the most difficult of all his awards and degrees for him to achieve. As a young fellow, while he was working on it, he liked to “cut up” a bit in classes and fool around with the dollies he met there. But, he was just a kid back then. He overcame those bouts of mischievous behavior and it was a proud day when he came home with his grand certification and happily showed it to us. His Read Dog certificate hangs near where I am now pecking out this little blog. He likes this activity because it requires only that he laze around some little kids while they read stories to him. Though the stories are a bit beneath him most of the time (he prefers Russian novels in the original language), he does like the petting that usually comes along with the read. Of course, the document for which both he and we are most proud is his Therapy Dog Degree. That hangs in a most prominent place in mother’s office.

So, where was I? Oh, yes. I was talking with this pal of mine very recently and just put to him the question that has been so troubling me lately.

“Jasper,” I said to him, “why is it that the citizens of this good country are so willing to give up their political voice and power to a small group of super-wealthy citizens and to the giant corporations of the world?”

His face showed clearly that this was an interrogative that he has spent some time thinking about and about which he is nearly as dumbfounded and confused as am I. His head tilted and bobbed from side to side as I posed the query. He gave a snort of dismay and shook his head vigorously, the metal license tag and medal of rabies certification, hanging together on his collar, clanging away as he did. The look of disgust on his face was like nothing I had ever seen before.

“Maybe,” I stumblingly said to him, “we should start by trying to understand the difference between an oligarchy and a plutocracy. Could we start there?”

The dog sat up at that point and shook his head vigorously and I could see the excitement in his eyes and his tail began wagging with significant speed. Together, we chatted about the two forms of societal ordering and structuring of government power that now threaten the United States of America.

An oligarchy must be understood as a form of government slightly different than a plutocracy.

Pluto remains a literary hero for my dog and, therefore, he wanted to talk about that societal system first. My dog explained to me that the term itself comes from the Greek ploutus, which means wealth, and kratos, which is power and dominion. Quite simply put, we are talking about government commanded by the wealthy even though these citizens might not have a consistent political philosophy or manner of governing. In the minds of modern societies the term is generally th0ught of in the pejorative sense because plutocratic rule is usually assumed by the wealthy in rather clandestine or fraudulent manners.

I was impressed, at this point, that my dog understood such terms as pejorative.

To get serous again, we both could sense the growing fear in the nation that the wealthy are moving toward assuming such power and control over the wheels of government. My dog growled rather fiercely when I used the word SCOTUS.

“Easy, boy! What’s the problem anyway?”

Well, my dog knew very well about the recent actions of SCOTUS (the Supreme Court of the United States). “Citizens United” was not a new term for him and he was able to break down for me the essence of the SCOTUS decision that allows unlimited forms of political spending by both corporations and the wealthiest of individuals.

“If my dog can figure it out,” I thought to myself, “why the hell can’t so many of the citizens of the country?”

“Even a dumb dog,” he said to me, “would understand how seriously this decision has destroyed the sense of political equality that individuals formerly sensed and in which they took great pride.”

“Yes, indeed!” I agreed aloud with him. “I no longer can be confident that I am politically equal to any other citizen in the country. The sense that one man equals one vote is no longer anything that I take for granted. Under the decisions of SCOTUS, I no longer have that confidence and certainty.”

“Yup,” he replied, imitating Scoopy Doo, one of his favorite television cartoon characters. “Yup! Yup! Yup!”

“If someone had told me, forty years ago,” I said to him as I shook my head, “that this nation would be on a downhill runaway toward becoming a plutocracy, I never would have believed it.”

He shook his head vigorously and shrugged his shoulders in absolute dismay. We both sat in silence until he broke it with a question.

“Should we talk about an oligarchy and what that is? That’s also from the Greek, isn’t it?”

He sat very attentively as I explained that it was, and that oligos meant “the few” and that arko was “to rule or command.”

“Yes,” he said, with a strong sense of agitation in his voice, “and it is what our founding fathers expressly wanted to avoid. The establishment of a Republic, where each and every citizen would be represented by someone elected by the people, was the government of choice by our founders.”

I nodded as he spoke. He deserved all his degrees. He was one bright fellow.

“Why then,” I began with such a deep sense of loathing and bemoaning, “had SCOTUS delivered such singular power and influence to the richest of the rich?”

In reply, my dog could only growl and show his teeth, deeply angry over the seeming demise of the Republic under the watch of the current Supreme Court.

“I’ve got to work in the yard this morning,” I said to him, standing up and stirring somewhat, “do you want to go outside with me.”

He leaped for joy. His tail wagged furiously and he began bouncing about the kitchen. I pulled off my good Cutter & Buck shirt and pulled on my new, black Bernie Sanders for President t-shirt that had just arrived in the mail. Better for yard work, I thought. The dog noticed.

“Bernie is the only one making sense these days,” my dog growled out. “Bernie and that woman from Massachusetts.”

“Yup,” I replied, and headed toward the yard. My big, black dog bounded on ahead of me. He looked back at me and shouted.

“I wonder if they could run together and get elected!”

“Who?”

“You know! Bernie and that woman?”

My dog was onto something; or, he was on something!

  

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Ordinary Grace

William Kent Krueger has spun his best yarn yet in his highly praised book, Ordinary Grace.
by Charlie Leck

“It seems to me that when you look back at a life, yours or another’s, what you see is a path that weaves into and out of deep shadow. So much is lost… So what I recall of that last summer in New Bremen is a construct both of what stands in the light and what I imagine in the dark where I cannot see.” [from the Epilogue in Ordinary Grace]

A Lutheran Pastor I knew – a man I respected about as much as any man I knew on earth – introduced me to William Kent Krueger. It was twenty years ago or so. He called him Kent. I had chatted with the pastor about a book by Krueger that I’d just read, telling him how much I’d enjoyed it.

“Kent?”

“William,” I replied. “William Kent Krueger.”

“I know him well,” the short, white-haired, fragile-looking cleric said. “We call him Kent.”

A few weeks later, at an affair in the Minnesota town of St. Peter, the pastor introduced me to Mr. Krueger and I shook his hand and told him I enjoyed the book I’d read. He replied with something humorous and that was about all there is to this little preamble to my blog.

“Read more,” he said to me that day. “I could use the money!”

Well, I have. I’ve read a number of his mysteries set in Minnesota locations and I’ve found them interesting enough, but I’ve never found them so rewarding that I would proudly recommend them, without exception, to others. Until now!

Over the last few days I read Krueger’s latest novel, Ordinary Grace. It’s one that has earned him lots of acclaim and awards. The Edgar Award (for best novel) is probably the most prestigious of these honors. The distinguished author, Dennis Lehane, said of it: “It’s pitch-perfect! I love this book!”

I’ve gotten to it on the late side – after thousands and thousands of other people have already read it. It’s a New York Times bestseller. And the Huffington Post praised it long ago as a “once in a blue moon” book.

Let me say it plainly and without hesitation: This is a terrific book! It held my rapt attention from beginning to end. I fell in love with the characters and found myself going back to read paragraphs that I’d already read because I found them intriguingly beautiful and I just plain wanted to read them again.

The cast of characters in this story is just wonderful. I haven’t encountered anything quite like it since I read the glorious work by Chad Harbach, The Art of Fielding.

I have not read all of Krueger’s works, but I can’t imagine that this one is not his finest writing achievement.

The book is about the summer of 1961 and it is set in a Minnesota town built on the plane along the shores of the murky Minnesota River. The central characters are two young boys who are the sons of very devoted, kind and intelligent Methodist minister. The reader meets a host of wonderful characters who are residents of this town. Some of them are complex and some of them are down-home simple. All of them are beautifully described and delectably interesting.

The story that drives the book is compelling and even remarkable. I hesitate to call this a mystery because I don’t want to limit this book to that genre. It is really quite a remarkable work of literature and it needs to be given that respect.

It’s all pretty-much-too-much death and far too much murder for a small and peaceful community. Neighbors are dragged into complexities that they simply never could have imagined they’d encounter. A labyrinthine Methodist pastor tries to help the townsfolk make sense of the chaos and he succeeds only to a certain point. However, his two very young sons take the explanation of the whole mess to a much deeper level and, through them, we tangle with some of the most important and complex questions of truth and justice.

You will meet at least a dozen characters in this novel that you will find very real and with whom you’ll identify in a pretty personal and meaningful manner. That’s what real good novels do to you. They introduce you to new friends and acquaintances who become real parts of your life and who you remember for a long, long time.

The last book I recommended to you so highly was The Art of Fielding and now I come to you and recommend this one just as highly. You will find Ordinary Grace no ordinary book and you will be pleased you encountered it. If you’re from Minnesota this book is a “must read.” If you’re from someplace else, this book is an “absolute must read.”

My last comment is that Mr. Krueger knows Minnesota. In all his books that I’ve read, he’s proven to be a man familiar with nearly every corner and curve of the state.

If you haven’t, read this book and tell me what you think of it.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Miss Me?

I’ve ignored this blog for a longer time than I like.

by Charlie Leck

I’m sorry I’ve been away from this blog for so long. I’ve got excuses; however, I must admit I’ve broken my own rules about not writing on a regular basis. I try very hard not to let the space between blogs exceed four days.

For the last week, however, I was busy reading the draft of a novel that a friend has written and commenting on that work for her. It all took longer than I expected.

And then I turned to read William Kent Krueger’s most recent book, Ordinary Grace. This is a work many friends have recommended. I’m finishing it up now and I’ll try to blog about it within a day.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Look of U.S. Senate Will Change

The United States Senate has been controlled by the Democrats. The Republicans earnestly want to change that. If it is changed, it will be a nightmare for President Obama. Here are the odds and the current talk in the nation’s capital.
by Charlie Leck

The current U.S. Senate has 53Democratic senators and there are two independences (who normally caucus with the Democrats). That leaves 45 Republicans of various political leanings. The Republicans dearly want to take control of the Senate and they need to win six seats to do that. That’s a tough assignment, but I think it is possible for the GOP to do it.

16 Competitive Senate Chairs
There are sixteen races that should be watched in November’s election. Can the Republicans will five or six of them? Here are the Democratic seats that are, in my opinion, at serious risk.

Alaska:                         Mark Begich is the Democratic incumbent. Many call it a toss-up!
                                        I think Begich will survive in this race. Will his opponent be that woman --
                                        you know, THAT woman?

Arkansas:                    Democrat Mark Pryor will likely lose this race (gain of 1 for GOP)

Colorado:                    Democrat Mark Udall will prevail strongly.

Georgia:                       Saxby Chambliss, the Republican, is retiring. An interesting race to watch!
                                        But, in the end, I think the Republicans will prevail.
                                        The candidates for this race have not yet been chosen and so there is some
                                        hope that the GOP will err here in who they choose.

Iowa:                             Tom Harkin, the Democratic, is stepping down; nevertheless, I think dems
needn’t worry! I give this one to the Democrats.

Kentucky:                    Mitch McConnell is in a tight, tight race here and the Democrats need a
                                        spectacular turnout. If they get it, I think the Democratic challenger will win
                                        here. (If so, we are back to no change in the Senate count)

Louisiana:                  Mary Landrieu is the Democratic incumbent. Can she hold the seat?
                                        I think she will lose it by a wide margin. (Republican get 1 new seat!)

Maine:                          There is only a question is Maine because the current Senator, Sue Collins,
                                        is stepping down. That opens the race a little but this is a safe, blue state.

Michigan:                    Generally, this is a Democratic state and the incumbent Carl Levin will have
                                        a close one here, but I think he will win it. He’ll need money and help.

Minnesota:                 I’m amused that some are calling it close. I think Senator Franken will win
                                        by at least 5 percentage points.

Montana:                     The GOP will gain a new seat here by winning by a large margin and turning
                                        the state to their control. (GOP is up 2 seats!)

New Hampshire:      Incumbent Democrat Jeanne Shaheen will hold this state for the her party
                                        and win easily.

North Carolina:         Boy, everyone will be watching this one and it will go to the wire. Democrats
must have a huge turnout here – huge. There will be some big money spent
here because a win would put the GOP up by 3 seats toward the 6 they want.

Oregon:                        The pros are calling this a competitive state. I don’t believe it. Jeff Merkely
and the Dems will win this one easily.

South Dakota:            This seat in the Senate is current occupied by a Democrat (Tim Johnson), but
the Republicans will win it going away with around 90 percent of the vote.
And that gets the Republicans up to 4 new Senate seats.

Virginia:                       Mark Warner is the U.S. Senator from Virginia and he’s a Democrat. The
Republicans are eyeing this seat but they won’t win it. Dems will win easily.

West Virginia:           Here comes the Republicans 5th new seat in the Senate. Incumbent Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democrat, will lose here to a state that has really moved toward the Tea Party.

If the above scenario is accurate, we’ll see an evenly split senate next year with 50 Republican senators, 48 Democrat senators and 2 independents who will generally side with Democrats on issues. If I’m wrong about Kentucky, the Republicans will take over control of the U.S. Senate. Of course, I could be wrong about North Carolina and it might go to the Democrats. And, I may also be wrong about Georgia which could elect a Democrat with a big, big turnout of voters.

The President of the United States should prepare for more nightmares!

You can see how this will be a very close battle for the control of the U.S. Senate. Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina and Iowa will be watched very, very closely. And, a lot of big money will be spent in those states. There is a big stake in this for the Koch Brothers and they will unload huge bag-fulls of money in those states. The super-rich will be big players in this election.

It’s not the way the American democracy is supposed to work, but there you are. If you get a weird Supreme Court together, anything can happen – and it did!

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

SCOTUS on Public Prayer

I was remarkably disappointed with the decision of the Supreme Court, revealed this past Monday, about prayer before public meetings. It is not a crucial matter, but it is offensive. Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent is remarkable in its wisdom and clarity.
by Charlie Leck

I should profess, definitively, that I am a follower of that rapscallion liberal who wandered the hills and villages of Galilee a couple thousand years ago, contending that he knew the what-of and the where-as and the of-alls about the Creator God. If one must be a follower – and I feel I must – there is no better lord to sidle on up to – or of whom to take heed. His calling is not easy and I stumble so frequently in my attempts to obey him that I might not appear to be attentive to him at all. He seems often to ask outrageous things of me; and the responsibilities he places on me appear always more cumbersome and weighty than these old legs can bear.

Precisely because I am his follower, I do not believe the Supreme Court of the United States ruled correctly on Monday when they said it is proper to allow prayer before public, government meetings (Town of Greece v. Galloway). These are those kinds of public prayers of which my lord spoke unfavorably. I oppose such praying if it is going to make uncomfortable and agitated those who choose not to follow the paths of the one I follow.

The highest court should probably have given some serious consideration to the expressed feelings of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. During a debate about the Virginia Bill for Religious Liberty, Madison spoke against including the name of “Jesus Christ” in the text’s preamble.

“The better proof of reverence for that holy name would be not to profane it by making it a topic of legislative discussion.”

Such is the kind of discussion that takes place regularly before the town council of the City of Greece, New York.

I feel pained every time I hear a prayer at meetings of clubs and associations I attend, when those prayers call upon the name of my own lord. It is not fair to those who have chosen a different direction or purpose in their faith. My own lord, of whose feelings I am intimately aware, was always offended himself by such public prayer.

“But our town is Christian!” Such was the cry of the people of Greece, NY.

James Madison was speaking of Catholic priests in the founding days of our nation when he said…

“To say that his principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the veil at once and exhibit in its native deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers, or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.”

Oh, my! The man could really write.

And my lord said to me, just yesterday as we walked along the Mall…

“When you pray, please do not be like the hypocrites. You know them! They love to pray in the synagogues and they like to stand on the street corners so they may be seen by all.”

He chuckled to himself and he shook his head mildly. He put an arm around me and continued.

“Now, when you pray, go into your very inner room, and close the door, and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father will consider it a matter between the two of you and he will pay you heed. And do not pray as the show-offs do, using meaningless and rote expressions. They must think they will be heard because they use so many words. And when you come out again, into the light, you will know that our Father has heard you.”

Then, he led me on, pointing up into the sky at the migrating flocks that traveled north. We could hear them cackling and quacking loudly. He chuckled.

“It is the sound of the street corner preachers, no?”

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

A Pointer Toward Understanding the Ukraine Dilemma!

Thomas L. Friendman’s column, It’s Not Just About Obama, is an extraordinary explanation of the dilemma the U.S. is in over the Ukraine affair!
by Charlie Leck

It would be very difficult to get most unreasonable people (and I am thinking here of the critters who say they are Tea Partiers and the majority of the very right wing Republicans) to read a very reasonable and sensible column by Thomas L. Friedman that pretty well explains why America is in a tough spot when it comes to the question of a confrontation with Russia over its actions in the Ukraine.

In case I’m incorrect, here’s where you right-wingers can find the Friedman column, It’s Not Just About Obama!

Friedman has spent some time thinking about this one and this is a brilliant column that both justly criticizes President Obama and also expresses an understanding of the predicament the President is in at this particular time in American history.

“Most presidents make their name in foreign policy by taking on strong enemies; but most of what threatens global stability today are crumbling states. Exactly how many can we rescue at one time? I’d love to help Ukrainian reformers build a functioning democracy, but the reason that is so daunting a task is because their own politicians wasted two decades looting their own country, so the leverage required to foster change — $30 billion in bailout funds — is now massive.” [Thomas L. Friedman, NY Times]

America is simply in a predicament at the moment. Our big stick isn’t very big right now. Most of that can be blamed on the multi-trillions of dollars we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade and a half. Even our current financial recovery is going through a slightly shaking spell right at the moment. Some of that can be blamed on a far too conservative Republican Party that is not willing to raise more money to set the ship of state on better waters. But again, not all the blame can be laid there either.

But, there is no reason for me to go on and on when Friedman has so precisely painted the picture in explaining the squeeze that the President is currently in. He doesn’t at all give the President a free pass on this one and he clearly explains why some of the blame is in the White House; but, by no means, is President Obama to take all the blame for this predicament.

The sad thing is that I know my progressive and moderate friends will read this Friedman column, but the ones who really need to read it – the more conservative and even right wing Republicans – are not going to.

Our political antagonisms in this nation – on both sides, now – are causing us terrible problems and weakening our image among the world’s nations. This emboldens nations like the Soviet Union.

If ever in our history there was an occasion when the parties needed to work together, it is precisely right now. That may sound like hyperbole, but I don’t believe it is.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.