On the Killing of Renee Good

As we barrel toward the first anniversary of President Donald Trump’s second term of office, we are in an accelerating downward maelstrom of lawless thuggery.  Although one must pause and say that a full, competent, and impartial investigation into an ICE agent’s January 7th shooting and killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis needs to be completed before accurate conclusions can be drawn, by this time all who care have seen video – which, crucially, as far as I am aware, no one is claiming has been doctored – strongly appearing to indicate that before the shooting, one masked ICE agent forcibly attempted to open Ms. Good’s car door while a second masked ICE agent (the shooter) first inappropriately positioned himself in front of Ms. Good’s vehicle, was then able to successfully move himself to the driver’s side of the vehicle away from any risk of being hit, and then fired at point blank range into Ms. Good through an open driver’s door window.  At the time this is typed, the Trump Regime is spreading fabrications justifying the agents’ actions that are blatantly at odds with the video.  (One can hardly blame them; since they have been able to convince their gullible supporters that the January 6th insurrection at the nation’s Capitol was a patriotic lovefest, it’s clear that these vacuous citizens can be made to believe anything.)  Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem, standing before cameras in her tight little jeans and a ridiculous cowboy hat, was spouting misinformation about the incident seemingly before they got Ms. Good’s body out of the car.  Somebody had to wake Mr. Trump up so he could echo her lies in a social media post.  I have seen reports from credible sources that Vice President J.D. Vance has vociferously defended ICE and criticized Ms. Good.  (I admit that I haven’t heard Mr. Vance’s comments directly; I no longer have the internal fortitude for listening to lying lickspittles.)  We have seen an example of the Trump Administration’s Nazi Sturmabteilung-like activities in full fly.  ICE agents clearly feel unrestrained, empowered by the Regime’s lawless culture.

Ms. Good was a U.S. citizen.  Something the networks we watch have been too politically correct to state directly:  Ms. Good was blonde, white woman in the middle of Minneapolis, Minnesota.  Not that it should matter, but these ICE agents had to recognize that demographically, the chances that she was an illegal alien were miniscule.  It is not hard to conclude that Ms. Good panicked when she was aggressively approached by the masked ICE agents.  Those reading these notes who know me are well aware that I am predominately of ethnic Irish descent and if provoked, my temper can sometimes accelerate … well … rapidly.  If I had a goon trying to rip open my car door, I might well have done exactly what Ms. Good did – actively resist a masked man’s attempt to enter my vehicle.  Even if prior to the confrontation she had been acting in a manner less than supportive of ICE activities, that should not have gotten her killed – not in America. 

Based upon my legal training and high regard for our justice system, in less fraught times I would caution that we should await the outcome of the current investigation of the incident before forming firm conclusions.  Given accounts that the Regime’s FBI has taken over the investigation and shut out local Minnesota investigators, it takes little prescience to predict that the findings rendered will be a complete whitewash of ICE.  There will never be a full, competent, impartial investigation of this incident unless Democrats gain control of either House of Congress in 2026 and thereafter choose to hold hearings. 

Ms. Good was an American citizen who didn’t have to die, killed by American federal officials sponsored by an American Regime that has glorified Ashli Babbitt, the insurrectionist rioter killed during the January 6, 2021, assault as she tried to break into a Congressional Chamber.  That same Cabal is now in the process of canonizing the ICE agent who killed Ms. Good by what was at the very least a questionable use of lethal force — while simultaneously demonizing Ms. Good. 

[An aside:  it’s possible that the shooter agent, whom it has been claimed had recently suffered a physically and emotionally wrenching experience on the job (I believe nothing that the Regime says that cannot be confirmed by credible sources), also reflexively panicked as Ms. Good’s car moved toward him.  If such is indeed the case, one can have personal sympathy for an individual who was perhaps placed back in the field too soon, and whose life – under normal circumstances – would now also be forfeit to the Administration’s propaganda designed, Sturmabteilung-like activities; but as severe as it sounds – we have a family member in law enforcement, and well recognize that in our sheltered lives we have no real understanding of the dangers members of law enforcement face regularly — cops (speaking generically) don’t get the luxury of panicking.  It is part of their job not to panic.] 

Despite the continuing reports of the Regime’s brutal immigration enforcement tactics, had you been feeling pretty safe as an upstanding, likely white, U.S citizen?  Get over it, my friend.  If they are willing to say black is white with regard to this shooting despite the clear videographic evidence, all camouflage of due process under law has been shed.  What do you think they’re going to do if some ICE agent simply decides to shoot you in the face at point-blank range while you’re peacefully protesting in the future against ICE or other Trump activities?

I acknowledge that the occasional references to Nazi Germany in this and recent notes regarding the Trump Administration are provocative; I consider the Regime’s actions to warrant them.  I would suggest – and indeed did so in these pages, at the time – that there were reflections of the mid-1930s Germany becoming ever more apparent in Mr. Trump’s and his minions’ inclinations during the last 18 months of his first term; I would submit that their actions during this go-around have turned those reflections into neon banners.  Too harsh?  Don’t take my word for it.  Read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William Shirer – which I believe is still considered, despite the hundreds of thousands of works completed on the Nazis over the last 80 years, to be the definitive work on Nazi Germany – and decide for yourself.    

This is the point in a note where I would normally indicate that you should exercise your right as an American to peacefully protest.  Today I would qualify that.  Anyone who does elect to protest needs to remain peaceful; otherwise, all is lost practically as well as morally.  But as to whether to protest:  if you have children (or others depending on you) at home as Ms. Good did, and think any protest you might be considering attending will place you in close proximity to ICE or other federal agents, STAY HOME.  Your responsibilities are there.  Teach your children how American Constitutional democracy was intended to work.  Leave the peaceful protesting to geezers like me whom we can afford to lose.

Stay well.              

A Comment about Comments … and Best Wishes!

Notwithstanding the momentous prospects of the new year, let’s start with an administrative note. 

I’ve mentioned here several times over the years that I don’t think others can see the Comments I receive to posts; something I haven’t mentioned – and should have quite a while ago — is that even if one is what WordPress calls a “Subscriber” to these pages – i.e., you get post emails, or automatically receive them through your own blog – all Comments I receive back are identified as coming from “Anonymous.”  I can often discern who sent an “Anonymous” comment; just as many times I can’t (not surprisingly, many who read these notes have similar sentiments about the same issues 😉).  A few friends add their first names or initials.  Comments are always welcome; they are always insightful and frequently witty; once in a while – to my mortification – somebody points out that I’m factually off base – truly just makin’ Noise — and I try to correct the errors through a postscript or subsequent post.  Some comments stand by themselves, without need of a response; in other cases, I’d respond, but sometimes hesitate if I don’t know who I’m responding to.  Accordingly, if we personally know each other, feel free to add your initials to your entry if you are comfortable doing so; that’ll be enough for me to know who you are.  If we aren’t personally acquainted, you obviously need do nothing; I appreciate the opportunity that the blog provides me to hear from you.  Either way, the beginning of a new year is a perfect time for me to again note to all who read these notes how tremendously honored I am that you take the time to do so, whether it be to provide you with another perspective or simply because you feel sympathy for TLOML, who has to listen to my observations (a/k/a “rants”) for a lot longer than it takes you to read even the longest ones.  😊 

All the very best!  Into 2026!

The Year of Decision Ahead

No, this will not be our year of decision.  We had our year of decision in 2024, and it appears tenable to maintain, based upon recent credible polls setting forth our citizens’ collective assessment of President Donald Trump’s performance in what has essentially been the first full year of his second term, that a solid majority of us — including a notable segment of lukewarm Trump voters who believed that he would improve their financial circumstances and be judicious in his immigration enforcement – is currently of the persuasion that we fu… er … fouled up.  Knowing what we as a people know today, if a presidential election was held tomorrow, I’m not sure that former Vice President Kamala Harris would beat Mr. Trump – I fear that the prejudices of some against a female candidate of color might, despite everything, still be too strong – but I’d wager that former President Joe Biden would win — that faced with the stark choice of selecting a president either unnervingly infirm or capriciously malevolent, a majority of Americans in the swing states would prefer a grandfather figurehead to what we’ve wrought.  But let’s start with the image I consider the best depiction of what I consider Mr. Trump and his regime to have done to America’s democracy at home and standing around the world during 2025; we’ll talk about what 2026 might hold on the other side.

Batman (1989): Joker Museum Scene

So … on to 2026.  I am not going to try your eyesight by repeating a litany of pontifications I have made before; let’s just look at the record.  Suffice it to say that if, as I believe, it is beyond Mr. Trump’s capacity to radically change his direction in the coming year, we will see more untoward monarchial ostentatiousness and self-aggrandizement, continued blatant disregard for and failure to address the financial stresses of about 80% of Americans (including millions of Trump supporters) (as overall American economic indicators and the financial markets rise, and the fortunes of the top financially secure 20% of Americans continue to multiply), continued brutally-indiscriminate immigration enforcement, continued blatant failure to meaningfully address healthcare access and healthcare cost concerns for millions of Americans (the majority of whom are Trump supporters), continued claims that Americans’ troubles are caused by something President Barack Obama did in 2009 or Mr. Biden did in 2021, continued rigid adherence to unpopular tariff policies and pressure for lower interest rates (which will seemingly collectively increase inflationary pressures on the 80% who are most adversely affected by it), continued purging of federal expertise and resources that it took us over a century to build, continued denial of scientific realities such as vaccine therapies and climate change (leading to outbreaks of diseases seemingly vanquished decades ago and once-in-a-century environmental disasters now occurring annually 😉), increased efforts to manipulate federal statistics that reflect badly on the Administration, increased deployment of National Guard and active U.S. military to locations of increased demonstrations against Administration policies, continued concessions to Middle East nations whose leaders ensure that the Trump Family’s personal financial coffers are enriched, continued erratic foreign policy forays (offending at the same time those Americans who believe in a strategic American foreign policy, and his isolationist MAGA supporters), continued transparent attempts to abandon NATO and Ukraine to Russia (at the same time thereby emboldening acquisitive dictators, offending allies upon whom we rely to aid our defense, those of us at home who believe in a strategic American world presence, and – wait for it – even his isolationist MAGA supporters, whom polls show nonetheless overwhelmingly hate Vladimir Putin), continued pursuit of criminal prosecutions against those he considers his political enemies, continued demonization of those he perceives as his opponents and/or unacceptably unclean (i.e., anybody not white, Christian, and sexually straight) and merciless retribution on those, no matter how previously slavishly supportive of him, whom the President of the United States perceives as being becoming insufficiently loyal.

I know, I know.  Did I really have to remind you?  Didn’t many of us just get done singing, “Silent Night”?

By this time, I’m sure you’ve already thought of several I’ve overlooked.

At one level, you’ve got to give the Bugger credit.  He’s accomplished a lot in a year, hasn’t he?

Let’s look forward. 

In response to my inquiry, the now ever-present “AI Overview” indicates that since 1980, a sitting president’s party has lost an average of 20 seats in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections following his inauguration.  In 2010, the first midterm after Mr. Obama’s inauguration, Democrats lost over 50; in 2018, the first midterm after Mr. Trump’s first inauguration, Republicans lost over 40.  In our increasingly gerrymandered and hyper-toxic political climate – and because I believe that Mr. Trump’s popularity won’t sink much lower; it’s already about down to its unshakeable, rock-hard foundation — it is hard to believe that Republicans will lose as many House seats as they did in 2018.  I have seen credible commentators indicate that House Republicans themselves currently – a huge qualifier – consider 15 to 25 of their members at serious risk of defeat.  At least under the way American democracy has traditionally worked, if Democrats do grasp firm command of the House in 2027, for the last two years of the President’s term they will have the opportunity to politically neutralize him and his minions by passing populist measures that the Administration will reject; if Mr. Trump comes to be seen both as a lame duck generally and a political albatross for Congressional Republicans, they will magically transform from figurative lemmings (who in reality have more sense than they’re given credit for) to rats (who are indeed savvy survivors) fleeing a sinking ship.  (Of course, this is assuming that Congressional Democrats have the political skill to effectively exploit any leverage they acquire.  You can take that one.)

[An aside:  in a note a while back on the most recent NO KINGS rallies, I indicated that Republican U.S. WI Rep. Brian Steil, who represents the Wisconsin First Congressional District, won his 2024 race by 2 points, and suggested that Mr. Steil was clearly politically endangered if there was indeed a “Democratic Wave” in 2026. When looking at the statistics from Mr. Steil’s race, I clearly read the wrong column; he won by 12 points in 2024.  One has to assume that the Democratic Wave would have to be a tsunami for him to lose his seat.  On the other hand, his Republican colleague, U.S. WI Rep. Derrick Van Orden representing the Wisconsin Third Congressional District, did, as I indicated in that same note, win his seat by about 3 points in 2024, and must be feeling a little uneasy at present.]

All that said, we’re back to the First Negotiation Strategy Commandment:  Always assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much about the given circumstances as you do.

Mr. Trump and his people can read polls.  That’s why at least the initial pivotal decisions next year will be theirs, not ours.  The President’s advisors could attempt to correct course — try to get Mr. Trump to act less … Trump-like.  (There is an eon of time before the midterms, as the late Marquette University Basketball Coach Al McGuire might say; President George H. W. Bush’s popularity was over 50% exactly one year before the 1992 election, and he still lost.  Popularity can just as readily go up as down.)  I am pretty sure that they are too smart for that.  Although Mr. Trump could be saved from his ways in spite of himself – e.g., the economy could inexplicably improve for the financially stressed 80%, or he could get credit for reducing Americans healthcare concerns because enough House Republicans, to save their own political skins and despite Mr. Trump, work with House Democrats to restore Affordable Care Act subsidies — it is blatantly obvious to all with the IQ of a rock that Mr. Trump is viscerally incapable of changing his ways.  So unless Mr. Trump receives unexpected political gifts that he doesn’t himself earn, one can seemingly confidently assume that the President’s advisors recognize that if they hope to stave off a Democratic House takeover in 2027, they will need to go on the offensive with division, distraction, intimidation, and lies:

  • Assume that there will be fears expressed in each of the districts currently represented by politically imperiled Congressional Republicans that a male highschooler transitioning to female is considering joining their girls high school basketball team.  It won’t matter that the young person may have no more interest in hitting nor ability to hit a free throw than I do.
  • Assume that the Haitians in Springfield, OH, will be claimed to be resuming their diet of cats and dogs, joined by Somalis in Minneapolis.
  • Assume that mountains of federal largesse will suddenly be voted by the Republican Congress for these imperiled Republicans’ districts.
  • Assume that every murder in a “Blue City” will be reported endlessly in alt-right media following the event – the more heinous the act, the longer the coverage.  They’ll get bonus points if the murder is committed by an immigrant or a person of color.
  • Assume that unprecedented amounts of campaign contributions will shower upon these 25 districts.
  • Assume an exponential increase of baseless claims of potential voter fraud.
  • Assume an aggressive effort to purge certain liberal-profile voters from critical districts’ registered rolls.
  • Assume unprecedented voter intimidation tactics; specifically, assume that ICE will make clear its intent to be in as close a proximity to polling places of heavily Latino swing districts as the law will allow – and that ICE will be stopping all of Latin descent to check their identifications as they attempt to enter and/or exit the polling place perimeter.
  • Assume lawsuits seeking to limit the times and places that voters can cast their ballots.
  • Assume that those who follow alt-right media will continue to live in their own alternate reality.  We have Fox News Channel on our cable package.  Although I can’t stomach it, TLOML will occasionally switch over when CNN is broadcasting an event or major story which tends to reflect badly on the Regime.  Fox is NEVER covering it, at least while she is tuned in. 

If as of the beginning of October, 2026, credible polls indicate that the above and like efforts seem unlikely to prevent a Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives, expect:

  • An October surprise.  It could involve foreign policy, but more likely a bribe like a $250 “Trump 250Th Bonus” to every American.
  • That the Regime will at least consider establishing a pretext to declare Martial Law and suspend elections.

Expecting a more comforting message as we begin the New Year?  In what I hope is one of the few areas I share with Mr. Trump, you can’t say that I didn’t let you know what I was thinking.  😉 The religious days of the Holidays are over.  The maxim, “Forewarned is forearmed,” is so common that it isn’t even attributed to anybody.  (I actually checked.)  While I have faith that the Almighty has provided many ways to achieve tranquility in the next life, I would submit that He (using a male pronoun for a genderless being) leaves it up to us to maintain – always peacefully — our tranquility in this one (although I do have faith that He’ll give us a little help if we ask for it 😊).  Fortunately, as citizens of the United States of America, we still retain peaceful means to maintain the rights that the Founding Fathers envisioned for us a quarter of a millennium ago.  I do believe that Americans who embrace the message of Thomas Jefferson – that all of us of every persuasion should have an equal opportunity to have a say in our nation’s future, and contribute to and be part of the promise of America – can make a comeback this year.  So be ready for anything, and make your voice heard throughout the coming year.  I do believe that such will make a difference – if in no other way, through the reinforcement of others.  There is strength in numbers. 

So maybe we do have decisions to make about what we do this year, after all.  There is comfort in that. 

Happy New Year.

A Rare Second Holiday Post

So today, I was out on a non-Holiday errand, and the person working with me asked me cheerily, “Are you ready for Christmas?”  I replied the way I have a hundred times over the years to the same question we all often hear:  “I’m always ready for Christmas.  I’m ready for next year’s Christmas the day after Christmas.  It’s because every year TLOML does all the work to make our celebration great – all the thinking, all the planning, all the cooking, all the preparing.  I stay out of her way.”

Although your household may allocate Holiday preparation responsibilities more evenly than we do – although in our household’s case, our celebrations are always festive and thoughtful because TLOML does it all, and I stay out of her way – there is frequently one person, often but not always Mom or Grandma, who is primarily responsible for the warmth of a Holiday gathering.  If you are that person, WE ALL THANK YOU.  If you’re not that person – and we all know who we are 😉 — make sure that you let the family member or friend who has done the lion’s share of the work to make your Holiday gathering special know that you appreciate what s/he has done.

Have a wonderful time.

What Makes … a Christian?

One of the advantages of my consciously stepping back from a day-to-day focus on the machinations of the Trump Administration is that it has enabled me to read across a wider gamut of my long-term mental reading checklist.  Over the last couple of months – entirely by coincidence; no Armageddon in mind 😊 – I happened to pick up a series of volumes addressing when and by whom the Christian Gospels were written – which in fact is a story of how Christianity evolved in the decades after the Lord’s death.  I had been intending to work a number of those volumes’ authors’ premises into this Christmas message.

As I labored to blend what I had said in the past with what I had recently learned, the result was becoming unduly long and unwieldy (I know, I know – it’s never seemed to bother me before. 😉)  Even so, it seemed best to return to a discussion of these authors’ assertions at some point in the near future, with a suitable introductory warning for those that have no interest.  In the meantime, some of you who might be willing to wade through that post when it is published can consider it a Holiday gift from the Noise that you will have no need to determine whether you have the sufficient internal fortitude to take it on until after the Holidays. 

A second major reason I decided to defer a major discussion is that my recent reading has arguably increased my knowledge without markedly altering my own fundamental beliefs expressed here in earlier notes.  What follows are excerpts from a post that I have published here in 2023 and 2024, including the “preliminary note.”  Since the edits I’ve made from the earlier Holiday posts in no way alter its substance, I am going to take the liberty of not indicating them.  May you have wonderful and blessed Holidays with family and friends.          

[A preliminary note:  my comments below will undoubtedly reflect my Roman Catholic training, and may not relate exactly to all Christian faiths.]

As Christmas is upon us, I’ve reflected upon what I think makes … a Christian.  Traditional Christian theology holds that Jesus of Nazareth was God made man, conceived in the womb of a virgin without sin, who came into the world to teach us an affirmative life of love (as a complement rather than as a contradiction to Judaic law, which I understand tends to focus on prohibitions), and willingly died as a sacrifice to God the Father as expiation for the sins of humankind.  His themes as recorded in the Gospels – what Christians call, “the Good News” — are compelling but relatively few.  What theologians have erected upon them over the last two millennia can be likened to an exponentially mushrooming coral reef. 

I’m pretty confident that the hierarchy of my Roman Catholic Church would take significant issue with some of what follows; they might well consider me a fallen-away Catholic, perhaps even a fallen-away Christian.  That’s as may be.  One tenet that I am confident that religious scholars of most if not all faiths agree upon:  each of us is responsible for his/her own soul.  I personally would add another tenet, with which many of these worthies might not agree:  That those of us who claim to believe in Him can, at best, only do what we have faith He wants.  During the last 60 years – let alone the last 2000 years — there have been Popes who have had such different theological emphases that such differences have seemed to come precariously close to differences in kind.  I don’t see how those of us with no claim to infallibility can expect to have any greater degree of enlightenment or unanimity.

The strictest view of Christianity is that followed by those who rigidly adhere to all of the dictates of the hierarchy of their given Christian Church.  (Some – including Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson – maintain that they are following the Bible’s precepts.  I respectfully disagree.  The Bible can be cited for just about anything anybody wants.  It’s a Church’s elders who decide which of the Bible’s passages will be emphasized, which ignored.)  From the Roman Catholic perspective, strict Catholics would be those whose beliefs include, as the Church hierarchy declares:  that the physical expression of homosexual love is a sin; that Mary, the Mother of Jesus – for whom I have the deepest reverence — was not only a virgin when the Lord was conceived in her womb, but was ever-virgin (i.e., never engaged in sexual relations despite the fact that she was a married woman); that women are inherently unqualified to be priests; and that it is a sin to fail to attend Mass on the Church’s designated Holy Days of Obligation.

Abiding by a set of such rules is the correct approach for some.  Everyone finds spiritual solace in his or her own way.  Not all can be as unquestioning of church elders’ pronouncements.

A second, less formalistic view holds that Jesus is the Son of God, but that the Lord’s fundamental message focused little on legalisms and mostly on love.  Jesus did seemingly pay lesser heed to ritualistic observance of religious rules:  “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites!  You lock the kingdom of heaven before human beings.”  (Matthews 23: 13); “Who among you, if your son or ox falls into a cistern, would not [despite Judaic law] immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?”  (Luke 14: 5).  This at first does appear to provide a theological safety net for those reluctant to abide by rigid dictates; that said, the core of the Lord’s teaching, while simple, is in fact exceedingly challenging in our competitive, materialistic (capitalistic? 😉 ) culture:  “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.  This is the greatest and the first commandment.  The second is like it:  You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  (Matthew 22: 37 – 39); “[L]ove your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.  To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic.  Give to everyone who asks of you, and from the one who takes what is yours do not demand it back.  Do to others as you would have them do to you.”  (Luke 6: 27-31); “[I]t is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 19: 24).  Finally, when one analyzes it perhaps the most perilous line in all of Scripture, recited by rote by millions of Christians every day:  “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us [Emphasis added].”

If you’re shifting a bit in your chair as you’re reminded of these, you’re not alone.  These teachings are something to strive for – while setting an unnerving standard.

Finally:  Does one have to believe that Jesus was God in order to be considered a Christian?  I suspect that the hierarchy of every Christian denomination would answer resoundingly in the affirmative, many presumably quoting John 14: 6:  “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.’ [Emphasis Added].”  Put aside the fact that biblical scholars agree that John was the last Gospel written, and that John reports Jesus as affirmatively declaring his divinity in a manner that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, written closer in time to Jesus’ life, fail to record.  (I think biblical scholars also agree that none of the Gospels were written by the men to whom they are respectively attributed.)  Even so:  Is the way to salvation only through Him, or can it be through living His message (whether or not one is even aware that it was His message)?  Have the deceased human beings who have lived existences of caring and giving  — among them, Jews, Muslims, those subscribing to Eastern faiths, indigenous peoples around the world, and those who follow no specific faith – been condemned because they have/had either never heard of Jesus or do/did not accept his divinity?

I reject the notion that a loving God could be so harsh to so many of the creatures He has brought forth. 

At the same time, we are all in need forgiveness.  Our faith lies in the confidence that the Almighty will look past our transgressions if we try hard enough.

“But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’  … [T]hey went away one by one, beginning with the elders.  So he was left alone with the woman before him.  Then Jesus … said to her, ‘Woman, where are they?  Has no one condemned you?’  She replied, “No one, sir.’  Then Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn you.  Go, and from now on sin no more.’”  (John 8: 7 – 11).

Not sinning in the future is probably not a realistic expectation for most of us; trying to live a more giving life perhaps is.  So to all Christians – which I would submit includes all of those of any or no faith who are trying to live in accordance with the principles the Lord set forth:

Merry Christmas and a Blessed New Year.

Ketchup on Vichyssoise

May the Chair grant me a moment of personal privilege?

You know, I’d like to like exotic fish dishes and French cuisine; I really would.  (Doesn’t it make you feel classy to say words like, “Vichyssoise”?)  I just don’t.  I like hot dogs with ketchup, steak, pizza, Wisconsin fish fries, and scrambled eggs with bacon (crispy) and hash browns (well done).  I just do.

In fact, I seemingly mostly like the food that President Donald Trump is reported to like.

That said, I don’t see a need to rename New York City’s Le Bernardin, “IHOP Bernardin,” or Chicago’s Le Bouchon, “McDonald’s Bouchon.”

You know, I’d like to have a broader taste in music.  I’d like to like opera.  I just don’t – they’re literally not speaking my language.  I’d like to like classical music – I even put it on for a while, while I exercised, thinking it would grow on me – but it didn’t and I don’t.  I know millions of Americans like country music; I don’t like twang, and don’t get excited about the fact that you hankered to be a cowboy, your woman left you, your truck broke down, and your dog died.  I don’t like rap music, and am pretty sure that I wouldn’t be that moved by your message even if I could make out a single word of you’re saying.  I’m a Beatles Baby Boomer.  I like soft rock, Muzak, and now in my later years – wait for it – Frank and Tony Bennett.  I just do.

That doesn’t mean that I see a need to rename the Metropolitan Opera House, “The Metropolitan Easy Listenin’ Opera House,” or The Grand Ole Opry, “The Deuter Grand Ole Opry,” or Rapper Jay-Z’s 40/40 Club – I bet you’re impressed I have even heard of Jay-Z – “Sinatra’s 40/40.”

You know where I’m going with this.  Although there are occasions for formal dress and for cargo pants, they don’t belong together.  “The Donald Trump and The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts”?  Putting aside the fact that there are too many “The’s” there, you’ve got to know your place, man.  Even I know that you don’t dump ketchup on fine French cuisine. 

Mr. Trump continues to revert.  He has spent his entire adult life putting his name on buildings, seemingly thinking it will bring him immortality — that it’ll mean that we’ll have to remember him when he’s gone — that he won’t simply … disappear.  This fear, this preservation instinct, is arguably becoming more acute as he manifestly physically degrades and his popularity plummets.

I’ve obviously just taken your time not with a matter of personal privilege, but rather of personal pique, clearly not even remotely related to the areas in which the President poses a true threat to our democracy and those around the world.  Even so, Mr. Trump either doesn’t realize – or more likely, refuses to admit to himself – that if our American way of life survives his presidency, before the end of the next President’s first month in office, his name will be stricken from all federal buildings, as were those of the discredited Pharaohs of ancient Egypt.

I Was Actually …

Last night, I did something I almost never do now, to protect my sanity and psychological equilibrium:  I actually watched President Donald Trump speak.

Notwithstanding my recent forbearance, I, as you, have seen him speak many times.  Many times, I have been infuriated.  Many times, I have been terrified.  Many times, I have been both.

Last night was different.

As a political junkie, I have been watching Presidents speak for over 60 years.  Some have been soaring orators; others, not so much.  I have always rated Mr. Trump a compelling if offensive speaker.  Even so, his speech last night was, without doubt, the worst Presidential Address I have ever seen.  He was the quintessential crazy geezer spouting nonsense as everyone tries to edge away.  (I get it; at least you didn’t have to tell me; but I’m not president. 😉)  It was … awful.

His “I’m the best, Biden’s the worst, everything I’ve done is good, everything Biden and the radical left has done is bad, this is the greatest anyone has ever seen, this was the worst anyone has ever seen, nobody could believe how great I’ve done” schtick has, until now, been wildly annoying fabrication; this time, it seemed a pathetic careen between delusion and desperation.

I’m the only one either of us know who is enough of an idiot to admit that recently something I said has come back and resonated with me 😉, but it did.  In a post about a month ago speculating on Mr. Trump’s ultimate intentions for his Administration, I indicated, “His 2024 campaign was about avoiding jail, making money, and retribution.”  The significance of that observation, if true, didn’t strike me until later.  All his 2024 campaign may have been about for him was avoiding jail, making money, and retribution.  Winning was the thing – his goal would be accomplished the day he won — not governing.  While winning undoubtedly is the primary thing – and worrying secondarily about what they’re going to do if they win – is probably true for all major party presidential candidates, I would suggest that for Mr. Trump, winning was the only thing.  Granting that he has genuine feelings about a few policy issues – he hates immigrants of color, and loves tariffs, tax cuts, and low interest rates – inflation (now “affordability,” the new buzz word) – the key concern for the decisive segment of voters that put him over the top in 2024 — was just a talking point to him, and he neither knows nor cares what to do about it.  Anyone who takes a high school economics class will tell you that tariffs and lower interest rates spur inflation, not squash it, and if our experience through Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Mr. Trump has proven anything, it’s that cutting tax rates the way they did helps the rich a lot, while the relative pennies that trickle to those of lesser means haven’t come close to counteracting the crippling economic disparity we have seen rise among our people over the last 45 years.  When Mr. Trump won, those who voted for him for help on economic issues expected him to help them.  For him, when he won, he was done.  

An aside, regarding Mr. Trump’s announcement of a $1776 “Warrior Dividend” for, in the President’s words, “every soldier.”  In the short time before I turned the TV off, I saw one liberal pundit applaud the move.  On a substantive basis, I absolutely support the initiative.  (An aside within an aside, from anyone who has taken a sixth grade civics class:  “Doesn’t Congress have to approve this ‘Warrior Dividend?’  Answer:  Yes; but will any politician from either party running for reelection vote against it?  You take that one.)  That said, Mr. Trump does nothing that he doesn’t think will benefit him.  What I see is White House unease that given the wildly misguided, condescending session Mr. Trump and his moronic Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, recently had with our military’s top officers, and the Administration’s blowing up tiny boats in international waters that many military legal experts have called war crimes – potentially wantonly exposing soldiers who follow those and like orders to later prosecution – the military no longer trusts its the Commander-in-Chief and will not necessarily follow him down questionable paths.  He’s trying to buy back its loyalty. 

I expected to end last evening infuriated or terrified, perhaps both.  There were instead instances at which I laughed out loud at the patent buffoonery, the rapid-fire, scatter-shot, oblivious carnival barker delivery.  Not in any way discounting the fact that he remains the most powerful human on earth, or that he has and certainly will continue to try to subvert our democracy for his own gain, I was saddened for those financially stressed Americans who placed their faith in him.  For him, I was actually … embarrassed.

On the National Guardsmen Shooting and Its Aftermath

[Note:  “Guardsmen” is considered a gender-neutral term by the military, and will be so used here.]

With all of the recent controversy regarding the Trump Administration’s repeated striking of an allegedly drug-running boat in the South Caribbean Sea on September 2, the shootings of National Guardsmen U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, in Washington, D.C. on the day before Thanksgiving have more or less dropped off the news feeds I see.  All are aware that Specialist Beckstrom has died.  As this is typed, Sgt. Wolfe is reportedly improving despite grievous wounds. 

I haven’t forgotten.  These shootings continue to resonate with me with a force that I now generally only feel as deeply – a sad reflection of the desensitization seeping into me in our violence-riven society — when hearing of school shootings.

But I’m not only heartbroken.  I’m livid.

Because it was so unnecessary.  Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe didn’t have to be there.  They could have been home celebrating Thanksgiving with their families.

I consider two men responsible for their deaths:  Afghani Refugee Rahmanullah Lakanwal; and President Donald Trump.

Make no mistake:  Mr. Lakanwal – given the apparently indisputable evidence that he was the perpetrator — pulled the trigger.  It makes no difference that he may have saved American lives through his service in Afghanistan, or that he and some similarly-situated Afghanis may not have received as much federal assimilation assistance upon arrival here as might have been preferable, or that he fell prey to radicalization after arriving in this country, or noting any other explanation some rationalizer might attempt to dream up.  He killed Specialist Beckstrom.  He irrevocably altered Sgt. Wolfe’s life.  Assuming that he is found guilty of the shootings after a fair trial according him all the rights to which he is entitled under the United States Constitution, Mr. Lakanwal deserves whatever sentence he receives; if the death penalty is legally rendered, I won’t lose any sleep over it.

That said, I was surprised to see Administration officials so quickly embrace the phrase, “targeted shooting,” to describe Mr. Lakanwal’s act – not because it wasn’t accurate, but because it so clearly was – and as such, a damning indictment of Mr. Trump.  Under any reasonable assessment, National Guardsmen – tragically for them, in the persons of Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe – were Mr. Lakanwal’s targets.  Given the President’s ballyhooed deployment of National Guard to our nation’s capital, media reports of the areas they patrolled, and some simple reconnaissance, any unbalanced individual with much less than Mr. Lakanwal’s military background could easily project when and where Guardsmen would be.  These two Guardsmen, walking at midday on a highly-traveled city street blocks from the White House with no indication of imminent danger, were no match for someone with Mr. Lakanwal’s training and experience. 

Mr. Lakanwal simply shot the targets set up for him by Donald Trump.       

Too harsh, you say?  Consider the untaken alternatives:  Mr. Lakanwal undoubtedly had hundreds of people in sight between the time he set out that day and the time he opened fire on the Guardsmen.  One might surmise that at some point before the incident he had one or more D.C. police officers within easy range, who would have been no more prepared for his sudden assault than the Guardsmen were.  He passed them all up to target members of the American military — who were only on that street because they were ordered to take part in what the Trump Administration has called “a crackdown on crime” – i.e., to participate in a quintessentially local law enforcement activity outside their traditional mission as part of an Administration public relations stunt which obviously has as its primary purposes the intimidation of its political opponents and scoring propaganda points with its gullible MAGA base.

So, what of this sacrifice of these two young people who had volunteered to serve their country?

Well, that’s Show Biz.

I would wager that in stationing Guardsmen in “Blue Cities” – largely against the wishes of local officials — Mr. Trump has been hoping for an incident in which cameras caught protestors behaving aggressively toward Guardsmen.  I do not believe that he wanted or intended as tragic a result as has occurred – any more than a tavern patron who has had too many drinks wants or intends any automobile accident deaths that s/he ultimately causes – but anyone with the sense God gave a goose could anticipate that what did happen, might happen.  In fact, on November 26th, the New York Times quoted a California National Guardsman indicating, “he and his commanders worried that [their assignment to patrol Los Angeles] ‘increased our risk of us shooting civilians or civilians taking shots at us.’”  In the same piece, the Times recorded that last August, Guard commanders involved in its Capital deployments issued communications “… warn[ng] that troops were in a ‘heightened threat environment’ … that ‘nefarious threat actors engaging in grievance based violence, and those inspired by foreign terrorist organizations’ might view the mission ‘as a target of opportunity’ … and that the mission ‘presents an opportunity for criminals, violent extremists, issue motivated groups and lone actors to advance their interests.’”  The inherent risk was blatantly obvious.  The President and his cohort just didn’t, and don’t, give a damn.

In the days after the incident, I saw reports indicating:

Item:  Trump Administration claimed that Mr. Lakanwal was never vetted by the Biden Administration before being allowed to enter the country.  This has now been debunked by so many sources – including sources that indicate that Mr. Lakanwal’s latest clearance came this spring, from the Trump Administration – that I don’t know if the Regime is still spouting this; of course, anything is possible from an organization that loudly continued to repeat a uniformly-debunked lie about Springfield, OH, Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs.

Item:  The Trump Administration has halted the processing of immigration requests from anyone from Afghanistan.  It’s not unreasonable to assume that many of these applicants are seeking refuge after aiding our efforts against the Taliban.  I have seen reports that since returning to power, the Taliban has brutally persecuted those Afghanis suspected of assisting us.  The Trump Administration halt is a monstrous overreaction to the evil act of one radicalized Afghani, which could well have fatal consequences for thousands of our Afghani associates ultimately abandoned as an outcome of a wrongheaded withdrawal agreement negotiated by the first Trump Administration.     

Item:  The Trump administration vowed to conduct a sweeping re-examination of “every Green Card” held not only by all Afghanis already admitted to our country but also those held by nationals from almost a score of other Middle Eastern, African and South American countries which the Regime has subjected to a travel ban.  I know – I’m wasting my typing and your eyesight to point out that there is no logical link between a tragically-radicalized Afghani and thousands of other immigrants from across the world legally here under other programs.  Given the “Ready, Fire, Aim,” Nazi Sturmabteilung approach the Regime has taken to immigration enforcement, perhaps thousands of unquestionably innocent people will be caught up in this surge.  To state the obvious:  if it proceeds with such an examination, the Regime will simply have used this incident as a pretext for indulging its racial, religious, and political biases.

Item:  That the Trump Administration is looking into the possibility of deporting Mr. Lakanwal’s family.  (Any competent criminal investigation will certainly explore whether others were aware of or complicit in Mr. Lakanwal’s act.  If there is evidence of others’ culpability, either within or outside Mr. Lakanwal’s family, those whose guilt can be established should be criminally tried and appropriately sentenced, not deported.)  Absent sufficient evidence of culpability of specific members of Mr. Lakanwal’s family members, deporting the innocents as a consequence of this incident is every bit as conceptually constitutionally sound as, say … holding Mr. Trump’s wife and children liable for the $88 million he owes E. Jean Carroll for sexual assault and defamation.

These measures, if carried out, smack of fascism – demonizing “others” for political gain with literally no factual foundation.

Are we done?  Not quite yet.  Let’s consider a potentially even more dire consequence of the assault upon Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe:  that patrolling Guardsmen begin to view those walking around them as potential enemies – an approach necessary in foreign war zones, but frighteningly fraught on American soil (while at the same time seemingly becoming understandable).  (If you were a Guardsman, wouldn’t this incident make you view those moving around you with greater suspicion?)  Recall that the Times piece cited above quoted a Guardsman observing that the deployments increased the “risk of us shooting civilians.”     

Let’s end this overly-long rant with the most idiotic irony:  Mr. Trump’s announcement that given the shooting, he intends to deploy an additional 500 National Guardsmen to D.C.  One just has to sit back, pause, and blink before continuing.  As noted above, the pretext for this Administration grandstand is a “crackdown” on what let’s call, for purposes of this note, “commonplace” crime in D.C.  If the shooting of Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe was indeed a shooting targeted at U.S. military – a rare point of agreement between the Noise and the Regime – it wasn’t even the type of “crime” that the deployment was intended to address.  Not only that:  I have seen reports that prior to embarking on his mission, Mr. Lakanwal was living in Washington state, not D.C. – so he could not conceivably even have been among the D.C. criminal element that Mr. Trump was intending to confront through the deployment.  If Guardsmen hadn’t been in D.C., there certainly wouldn’t have been as many or arguably as vulnerable military targets in the city as Mr. Trump’s order provided to Mr. Lakanwal.  Because of the President’s order, Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe were in place to be shot while taking part in maneuvers beyond the proper military purview by a malign operator who wasn’t covered by the Regime’s expressed mission.  So, explain to me the logic of adding 500 additional targets to an already target-rich environment for deranged individuals in our gun-obsessed environment because of a heinous incident that wasn’t within the mission’s scope committed by somebody who wasn’t from D.C.

On the day they were shot, Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe’s ages averaged to 22 – which, in turn, is only half of the average age of our three children.  These two young victims enlisted to serve their country – something I never did.  They had their whole lives in front of them.  They deserved a Commander in Chief worthy of them.  Theirs, and perhaps the lives of thousands of innocent immigrants, have been irrevocably altered — in sacrifice to a propaganda stunt. 

There is an episode of The West Wing in which Martin Sheen’s fictional President Bartlet makes a wrong decision, and a number of U.S. service members are killed as a result.  The episode – among the most poignant in a series that all who read these notes know that I consider the best television program in history – ends with Mr. Sheen’s Bartlet standing on the tarmac at the military airport where the deceased service members’ bodies have been flown back to the states.  Mr. Sheen is a great actor, and even without seeing the episode one can imagine the agony he shows as Bartlet as the caskets, draped in flags, are solemnly marched, one by one, by pristinely-uniformed, white-gloved honor guards, from the aircraft to where the President stands, with a brief pause in front of him, and then moved to a waiting inner chamber.

Mr. Trump is a father.  I wonder:  Does he ever think about the damage and destruction he has done to so many lives and careers with his deranged, malicious, shock-jock, made-for-TV machinations?  In what is probably the most awful suggestion I have ever made about Mr. Trump in all the years I have been posting in these pages:  He doesn’t.      

I pray that Specialist Beckstrom can rest in peace.

On Blowing Up Boats

What with Holiday preparations, general affairs (we’ve had A LOT of snow early in the winter in Madison), and working on another, still-unfinished post, I haven’t previously expounded – perhaps “ranted” would be a more apt description — on President Donald Trump’s Administration’s blowing up of allegedly drug-running boats in international waters.  What has caused me to take your time here is an observation that seems to me to be the most critical facet – and potentially the most supportive aspect for the preservation of our democracy – of the possible ramifications of the Regime’s launching of four strikes on a boat on September 2, 2025.  (I believe that it is undisputed that two occupants of the boat survived the first strike, but were killed in the second.  Two subsequent strikes – apparently to completely obliterate the vessel itself – followed.)  I feel it is appropriate to note that potentially supportive aspect here because it occurred to me before I saw any media commentator make it.

However, let’s first – as a client of mine used to say decades ago when reviewing the progress of an ongoing negotiation – review the bidding regarding these operations.

The Administration claims that its actions are justified because we are at “war” with “narco-terrorists.”  Note how skillfully Mr. Trump and his minions have moved the goal posts:  it seems that the majority of commentators feel obligated to start their commentaries regarding these actions with the proviso, “assuming we are at war.”  These talking heads might as well say, “Well, assuming Siamese cats are tigers …”  The Administration’s whole premise is absurd.  [The justification for the last two strikes on the boat on September 2 makes one blink:  “We had to make sure that the boat could no longer be used [as an instrument of war] against us.”  What?  Relative to our U.S. Naval strength, the boat was a canoe.  This is akin to calling a contest between the Los Angeles Dodgers and a West Madison Little League team, “a baseball game.”  We are not at war.   

Next.  The United States certainly has the right to use legitimate means to limit illicit drug smuggling into our country.  These Regime activities glaringly fail the legitimacy test.  First, as far as I know, no satisfactory evidence has been given that any specific struck boat was actually carrying drugs.  One of the primary premises of this nation is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.  Where did that go?  U.S. KY Sen. Rand Paul has noted statistics indicating that over the years our U.S. Coast Guard interceptions of suspected trafficking vessels have failed to discover drugs 25% of the time – from which one could infer that perhaps 20 of the 80 killed in these strikes have been innocent.  [I heard one pundit suggest a particularly sad nuance:  that cartels may be requiring otherwise law-abiding individuals to undertake drug runs upon threat that their loved ones will otherwise be tortured or killed.  (Such a scenario seems increasingly credible given the cartels’ now-understandable concern about the risk that the Regime’s actions pose to their personnel.)  Although these coerced individuals would, if apprehended, be guilty of drug smuggling, under such pressure either you or I would undertake these missions.]  Second, subject to your correction, I do not believe that drug trafficking offenses are generally characterized as capital crimes under U.S. law.  Mr. Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are bullies who clearly just enjoy beating up on the weak and pandering their manhood to the gullible MAGA base.  Whether those operating these struck boats have been guilty or innocent, with every strike the Regime is arguably in violation of international law.

Let’s step back a minute.  I can’t resist.

As all who care are aware, in November six Congressional Democrats with military or national security backgrounds released a video in which they advised our current members of the military that they had the right to disobey “unlawful orders.”  Mr. Trump quickly fired back with posts on his social network proclaiming that the members’ behavior was “seditious behavior, punishable by death,” indicated that these members should be arrested and tried, and forwarded a post asserting that the members should be hanged.  Aside from the fact that Mr. Trump’s accusations were wholly baseless, the depth of irony of such declarations, coming from a man who lied about losing an election and incited a seditious attack on our nation’s Capitol, is literally nauseating.

As this is typed, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth are in the process of shifting all of the responsibility for the second strike on the boat in the September 2 incident — the strike that killed the two individuals who survived the first strike – to Adm. Frank Bradley (who is currently reported to have ordered the second strike after Mr. Hegseth, apparently undisputedly, had given the order to “Kill Them All” before the first strike) – while disingenuously appearing to support the Admiral’s action.  Such is obviously a despicable abdication of responsibility.  Former President Harry Truman – who coined our most pithy, well-known description of presidential responsibility, “The Buck Stops Here” – must be rolling over in his grave.  (Of course, Mr. Truman, a man of rectitude, has probably already figuratively drilled at least halfway to China beneath his gravestone throughout the Trump presidencies; this latest outrage has probably just made him spin a little faster.)

I haven’t done any research on Adm. Bradley; I have no idea whether he was by nature a willing participant in this operation or merely acting as a reluctantly-obedient subordinate when he ordered the second strike (if he indeed did).  If there is any substance to the opinions being voiced by military legal experts seemingly across the political media spectrum – and even accepting the baseless premise that we are at war with drug cartels (see; even I’m doing it 😉) – there may well be grounds warranting the Admiral’s placement under court martial for a war crime (as well as the personnel who actually executed the strike).  A vital reminder:  all the evidence is almost certainly not yet in, and the Admiral is scheduled to meet with members of Congress today in confidential sessions.  That said, if he and his involved subordinates do suffer severe consequences for the actions they took on September 2 – while at the same time the Trump Administration seeks to exonerate Mr. Hegseth and distance Mr. Trump from the incident – I would submit that the incident potentially provides a silver – nay, gold – lining for the preservation of our democracy:  by their unscrupulous, gutless behavior, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth will have alienated the entire American military.

If in the future Mr. Trump or Mr. Hegseth orders military personnel to move against peaceful American protestors – recall that Mark Esper, the last Secretary of Defense in the first Trump Administration, related in his memoir, A Sacred Oath, that when demonstrators protested in Washington, D.C., after the murder of George Floyd, Mr. Trump asked authorities, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” — do you think they’ll obey the order?  Would you?

The most instructive aspect of this incident will be how Mr. Trump reacts.  It was clear from the day Mr. Trump nominated Mr. Hegseth that he was an atrociously stupid choice as Secretary of Defense.  However, when challenged, the President ALWAYS doubles down, considers admission of mistake an indication of weakness, pushes through – and with his core supporters, it has worked for the last decade.  I wonder how such an approach will work with the military, which has maintained a fiercely nonpartisan tradition – while being acutely aware of its own position and prerogatives –throughout this country’s existence.  I was never in the military, so anything I venture is obviously the broadest speculation; but one can question how much support Mr. Trump will retain with the military if he reflexively clings to and protects Mr. Hegseth.

You can’t be a dictator without controlling your citizenry.  You can’t control your citizenry without a military that obeys you.

I am well aware that my notes of optimism in recent posts are no more than slivers of reassurance in an era of tragedy.  Still, they’re better than nothing.

Stay well – and for those in the north, stay warm.   😊

On American Kindness: Redux

[While there is currently so much in our national and global situation to concern us, it seems fitting at this Holiday to republish a note I posted some years ago about the help TLOML and I received on a dangerously cold night in Milwaukee — from an elderly African American gentleman who was, demographically, probably a traditional Democrat and from young Caucasian auto mechanics, at least one of whom, demographically, probably voted for President Donald Trump – as a reminder that most of our people have good in them.  May you and your loved ones have a warm and healthy Thanksgiving.]

Over the weekend, we were in Milwaukee for a family gathering, and our fairly new Prius was struck, opening a gash on the left rear side that we were pretty sure when we discovered it was at an angle such that wind shear would cause some of the rear fender to rip off if we tried to drive back to Madison without having it attended to.  (No note was left.)  From an engine standpoint, the car was completely drivable.  We were able to make an appointment at a nearby service center (more on the shop below), and at a few minutes past 5 on a Friday night, set off to drive about 4 miles in significant winds and bitter, bitter cold with the dark coming on.

We didn’t make it.  About half way to the shop, we heard a bang and realized that part of the fender had flipped back due to the wind.  We pulled over in the now almost-dark to retrieve what had come loose, cars moving around us, fairly concerned about what we were going to do.

A van slowly pulled up behind us and stopped.  Its motor kept running, its headlights stayed on, and its emergency flashers came on.  An African-American gentleman, in his mid-50’s – warm, friendly, reassuring — got out of the van, came up, and — with cars continuously going by us and in temperatures and wind cold enough to numb your bare hands in a couple of minutes — helped us put the pieces temporarily back in place, and with duct tape he provided, we got the fender patched sufficiently so we could finish the drive.  Then we exchanged names, we thanked him – I don’t think it was possible for us to thank him profusely enough – shook hands, and … he bid us good night, and went on his way.

Got to the service center.  The shop is for engine repair, not body work, but the rep and a couple of the technicians came over and when they heard that our goal was simply to make the car secure enough to get back to Madison, they said they thought they could attach a couple of fasteners that would hold the left rear together, and told us to go to dinner (we had family with us in another car) and come back in about an hour. 

When we got back, the car looked like it had a few stitches, and was clearly sturdy enough for us to get it home.  We asked what we owed; we heard:  One of the guys had some time.  No charge.  Glad we could help.

For those of us that tend to focus on the seemingly paralyzing political acrimony we have at home and the serious issues we face here and internationally, it’s good to recall:  There exists, as there always has, a good will, a kindness, a generosity of deed and spirit in America.