"Two Hundred and Fifty Years!"

 Happy Mothers’ Day!

 

Yesterday was the 81^st Anniversary of the unconditional surrender of Germany. That victory was followed by the re-building of Europe, led by the generosity of the United States through the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine.

 

.............................................................................

 

I recognize that Independence Day is almost two months in the future, but I don’t believe it is too early to be thinking of the magnitude of what was created in Philadelphia in 1776. 

 

Two hundred and fifty years is a long time. Two hundred and fifty years from now it will be 2276, a future as unimaginable to us as 2026 would have been to the Founders in 1776. Yet here we are, and with luck and forbearance our great-grandchildrens’ great-grandchildren, and their children and grandchildren, may be around to celebrate the quincentenary of the Declaration of Independence.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Two Hundred and Fifty Years!”

May 9, 2026

 

“Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth.”

                                                                                                                George Washington (1732-1799)

                                                                                                                Letter to James Madison

                                                                                                                March 2, 1788

 

On July 4 we will celebrate the semiquincentennial (250^th anniversary) of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. This is not a celebration of the start of Revolution, which began more than a year earlier in Lexington and Concord. Nor is it to celebrate the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown in 1781. And it is not to commemorate the signing of the Constitution, which occurred in September 1787, nor to mark the ratification of the Bill of Rights by the thirteen states in June 1788. And this year’s festivities are not to memorialize the inauguration of George Washington as the new Nation’s first President in April 1789. 

 

It is the Declaration of Independence we celebrate. It represented the severance of the colonies’ obedience to the British Empire. In a speech at the University of Texas in Austin on April 15, 2026 Justice Clarence Thomas stated: “The Constitution is the means of government; it is the Declaration that announces the ends of government.” Fifty-six delegates from thirteen British colonies put their signatures to a document that terminated the political bonds that had connected them to the British Empire, then the most powerful in the world. In doing so, they pledged to each other “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” Had the Revolution failed, it is likely that all fifty-six would have been hung for treason.

 

The Declaration was unique at the time (and is still so today), in that the delegates believed that “Truths” were “self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Recognizing the wisdom of James Madison, “...if men were angels, no government would be necessary,” the Declaration calls for a government to be established to secure those rights, one created by consent of the governed, and one that “...should not be changed for light and transient Causes.” The bulk of the Declaration is a list grievances, and it ends with the declaration “that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, Free and Independent States.” 

 

Of course, given the time and place, all fifty-six delegates were white men of British heritage. Eight were immigrants, but all from the British Isles. They had an average age of forty-four, which seems young, but average life expectancy at the time was under forty. Nevertheless, there was diversity. Among them were lawyers, planters, doctors, merchants and farmers. They included both slave holders and abolitionists. While most were Protestants, their numbers included two Quakers and a Catholic.

 

From the perspective of 250 years, we can find fault with some of the men, but we should judge those who created this document by the standards of their time, and we should be cognizant of change over time. We should recognize regional differences, that travel was primitive by our standards. For example, in 1776 it took anywhere from two to four weeks to travel from Williamsburg, Virginia to Boston, Massachusetts. The Declaration was drafted by five men from five different colonies: Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, John Adams of Massachusetts, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, Robert Livingston of New York, and Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania. Drafting took weeks and debate was often raucous. 

 

All fifty-six delegates were sons of the Enlightenment, which by the late 18^th Century was in its final innings, with reason and science rejecting blind faith; yet the Founders believed God – not the state – to be guarantor of our unalienable rights. That belief held true for most of our Nation’s existence. In the June 7, 1944 issue of The New York Times (the day after D-Day) the editors wrote of the U.S.: “This nation was born in the only revolution in history made in the name of God.” Belief in a Higher Being persisted over the years. In November 1863, President Abraham Lincoln invoked God in his Gettysburg Address: “...that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” On June 26, 1876, celebrating the Centennial, President Ulysses Grant spoke in Washington: “...acknowledgement should be made to Almighty God for the protection and the bounties which He has vouchsafed to our beloved country.”  President Calvin Coolidge, in speaking on the Nation’s sesquicentennial on July 5, 1926, spoke of the “miracle of the birth of a new nation.” And President Gerald Ford, on the occasion of the Bicentennial Ceremony on July 4, 1976, said: “The Declaration is the Polaris of our political order – the fixed star of freedom. It is impervious to change because it states moral truths that are eternal.”

 

These men and others conceived of and created a government that still stands. It is a government composed of three separate but equal branches, designed to prevent the concentration of power. It is a nation based on law, not men. It is a government that honors individual liberty, values meritocracy, regardless of gender, skin color, or religion. And it is a government accountable to the people.

 

Today, as we remember our Country’s forefathers, belief in God is waning; there is concern that our democratic institutions are failing. Our politicians have become polarized. Our news outlets no longer report dispassionately but rather speak and write passionately in favor of one side or the other. Identity politics have divided us into victims and victimizers, the oppressed and oppressors. Sixty-two years after the Civil Rights Act was passed there are politicians who wield racism as a political tool. And, frighteningly, anti-Semitism is on the rise. There are threats, from both the left and the right, to the principles that infused the fifty-six men who met in Philadelphia 250 years ago to debate their (and our) future.  

 

Yet the draw of the United States remains strong: It is the preferred destination for migrants. Among the world’s major developed nations, its population ranks at the top in terms of diversity. Its universities are among the best in the world. Capitalism allows innovation to soar, productivity to gain, and standards of living to reach heights unimaginable to our forefathers. There is no country in the world with a population over ten million who ranks as high as the U.S. in terms of GDP per capita. Despite political bickering between Parties, and the cynicism and partisanship that that bickering gives birth to, political power has swung back and forth. In the 126 years since 1900, Republicans have served as President for 66 years and Democrats for 60. Democrats have controlled both the House and the Senate more often than Republicans but not by a large margin. Likewise, the Supreme Court has leant both towards conservatives and progressives. This dynamic indicates a country where political change is, in fact, moderate and welcomed – unlike the situations in countries from where migrants emigrate. 

 

The United States is not perfect. It is (and always has been) a work in progress. The challenge, as James Madison warned, is that men are not angels, neither the governed nor governors. It is why individual liberty and limited government, with separation of powers, have been critical to our success; it is why no branch of government should have superiority over another, and why rule of law has prevailed. Despite constant challenges, the architects of the Declaration of Independence produced a document that has guided our country for two and a half centuries. The Declaration set in motion the birth of a nation that is (and has been) exceptional, one unique in the annals of history. Those of us who live here are truly blessed.

"Mission: Preserve the Republic"

 Over the weekend we saw the movie Reagan, with Dennis Quaid playing the title role. It brought back waves of nostalgia for a time and a President so different from what we have and what we are offered. But pining for yesteryear does no one any good. As the saying goes, we must play with the cards we are dealt. Nevertheless, the movie – the first for me in a theater in over five years – is worth seeing. 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Mission: Preserve the Republic”

September 23, 2024

 

Elizabeth Willing Powel: “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”

Benjamin Franklin: “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

                                                                                                      Philadelphia, September 17, 1787

 

That exchange took place 237 years ago outside Independence Hall, where delegates had met to discuss weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation, as they pertained to the central government. It was recorded in the journal of Maryland delegate James McHenry (1753-1816), a journal now in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. (The Articles of Confederation, agreed to in 1777, were replaced a decade later by the United States Constitution, which provided for a stronger central government.)

 

Democrats have seized the expression “save democracy,” which means elect them, not Republicans who they argue would destroy democracy. They express concern of storm troopers led by Donald Trump who they say would tear down our democratic institutions. But might this be an example of projection?

 

Our Founders were concerned about despotism, including what James Madison called “the tyranny of the majority.” So they constructed a Republic, with checks and balances, a federal government with three equal and independent branches – legislative, executive and judicial – to protect the rights of both the majority and the minority. 

 

In a recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, George Washington University law professor Jonathon Turley wrote: “In an October 2020 interview, Harvard law professor Michael Klarman laid out a plan for Democrats should they win the White House and both congressional chambers. They would enact ‘democracy-entrenching legislation.’ But what does that mean? They have called for the elimination of the Electoral College. They want to increase the size of the Supreme Court, and widen the reach of the federal bureaucracy through new administrative agencies. They would give Congress the ability to impose term limits on Supreme Court Justices and have the Court abide by a code of ethics prepared by Congress. Their plans would emasculate the concept of federalism and require amending the Constitution.  

 

On the Republican side, the Heritage Foundation published a 920-page document, reflecting their vision for a second Trump administration, Project 2025. A copy of the plan was brought to the Democrat convention in Chicago where it was presented as a blueprint as to what they claimed Republicans would do: transform the FBI, abolish the Department of Education, dismantle NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association), terminate the legal status of 500,000 “Dreamers,” and curtail women’s rights. Unmentioned was the fact that the Heritage Foundation has, every four years, released a “Mandate for Leadership” since the early 1980s, or the fact that Mr. Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025.

 

None of this is to belittle risks to our government, which is unique in the annals of mankind. Fifty-seven years ago, at his inaugural as California’s Governor, Ronald Reagan stated: “Freedom is a fragile thing, and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction.” Yet threats continue. Sixteen years ago, speaking to a crowd in Columbus, Missouri, Barack Obama proclaimed: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” What did he mean? And now we have the unelected wife of an elected President running a cabinet meeting. Where was his Vice President? Shades of Edith Wilson?

 

Fundamental to our system of government, whether you choose to call it a democracy or a republic, is freedom of expression, with the obvious exceptions of – without cause – yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater, or declaiming in front of the Supreme Court, as did New York’s senior U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer: “I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” In a nation of 330 million people such threats can have unintended consequences, as assassination attempts on Mr. Trump have demonstrated. On the other hand, censorship, whether practiced by the government, as in the Russian collusion story in 2015-2019, or by the media, as in the Hunter Biden laptop story of 2020, is detrimental to inherent freedoms, and thus to the preservation of our democratic republic.

 

The Founders decided on a bicameral legislature so that smaller states would have equal representation in the U.S. Senate, to offset the House of Representatives, which is based on population. The Electoral College, which elects the President, is a combination of the two, being allocated votes equal to its number of Senators and its number of Congressional districts. Keep in mind, in 1787 this reflected magnanimity on the part of Virginia, which was the largest state in the union and home to principal authors of our founding documents – the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and The Federalist Papers. As well, Virginia was home to four of the first five Presidents. If Washington, Jefferson, Madison or Monroe had preferred a pure democracy they could have railroaded one through. 

 

Our form of government has survived a British invasion in 1812-1814 and a Civil War. It has survived the scourge of slavery, years of Jim Crow and reconstruction, a debilitating depression, segregation, and the anti-war protests of the 1960s. It has survived the assassinations of four U.S. Presidents. It went to the aid of Europe in 1917. It saved the world from Nazism and Imperial Japan in the 1940s. It has produced more Nobel and Pulitzer prize-winners than any other nation. Its economy and freedom have been a beacon for the world’s oppressed, drawn by opportunities the Country offers. At its heart are personal, political and economic freedoms. It is a nation that adheres to the lesson of the old Chinese proverb – “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.”

 

Yes, our mission should be to preserve the Republic gifted us. I am not happy in the choices we have for President in 2024. Neither political party seems concerned with our massive debt, which can (and will) destroy our way of life, especially as we face demographic challenges unknown to our forefathers. And I am not happy that both Parties focus on what they can do for us, rather than emphasizing the opportunities free markets offer to those talented, aspirational and diligent. I am not happy when diversity is reserved solely for color, race, sex, or creed, and when it excludes abilities, opinions, and interests.

 

As we head to the polls, we should consider: Which political party is more likely to shrink regulations, limit spending, and stop the dangerous silliness of letting boys compete against girls in school sports? Which party is more likely to give the aspirational opportunity to succeed in the fields of their choice? Neither candidate is one I would choose. Harris is vacuous, either by design or by nature. And I wonder: Who is the “Oz” behind the curtain guiding Mr. Biden, and is there a “Toto” to pull back the drapes? The bombastic Mr. Trump is personally unappealing, but at least we have his four-year record as President, in which he – even though the Country was hit by Covid – performed well. And with mainstream media lined up against him there is little chance of his becoming authoritarian. Preserving our Republic should be our priority.

Thought of the Day - "Bari Weiss and The Fight for the West"

 Sixty years ago tomorrow President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. Most of us remember where we were. I was in a college classroom, when I saw the American flag being lowered to half-mast. It seemed impossible that a young, attractive, vibrant President could be dead. Four of our Presidents have been assassinated, the first three within a traumatic thirty-six-year period: Lincoln in 1865, Garfield in 1881, and McKinley in 1901. 

 

On a cheerier note, we are two days from celebrating Thanksgiving, that special American holiday when the Pilgrims gave thanks to God for having survived their first winter and for the bounty of their harvest. We, too, owe thanks to God for the bounty that is ours, but more important to all those who came before that we might live freely in this exceptional nation.

 

I hope you are able to spend it with family and friends, for they are the glue that secures our civilization. Caroline and I will be at our daughter’s with her family, and with our younger son and his family – twelve in all.

 

Happy Thanksgiving! Sydney

 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Bari Weiss and The Fight for the West”

November 21, 2023

 

“There is no place like this country. And there is no second America to run to if this one fails.”

                                                                                Bari Weiss (1984-)

                                                                                Speech, Federalist Society’s Barbara K. Olson’s Memorial Lecture

                                                                                November 13, 2023

 

Civilizations may be compared, but they are not comparable. Freedom, equal rights, rule of law, living standards, property rights vary considerably among cultures. None is perfect, as man is not perfect. But the West, as defined as Australasia, Europe, and North America[1], has provided the fairest system and the best opportunities for the aspirant, which is why so many have chosen to immigrate to those nations. The West traces its origins to classical Greece and ancient Rome. Judaism is often cited as the first monotheistic religion.[2] And Christianity was birthed in the eastern Mediterranean basin. Over a 2,300-year period, Homer, Virgil, Dante, Chaucer, Montaigne, and others gave voice to the West’s culture. It was enhanced by the Enlightenment (1585-1815), with individuals like Shakespeare, Locke, Adam Smith, Rousseau and founding fathers of the United States: Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. Novelists like Jane Austen, George Eliot, Charles Dickens, and scientists like Charles Darwin and Marie Curie added to its stature, as did artists like Michelangelo, Titian, and Rembrandt; and composers like Mozart and Beethoven. 

 

The West is not just a physical place. It was (and is) an idea – here in the United States it was (and is) an experiment in self-government, embedded in a melting pot of free people. Today, we who live in the West are beneficiaries of three thousand years of Western culture. We are fortunate to live in countries with the greatest individual freedom and the highest standards of living. We thank those who came before us, who fought and persevered for our liberties. Yet it has become popular, in recent times, to denigrate the West, to focus on its weaknesses, mistakes, and limitations, and not on its strengths and its slow move toward equality, justice, and fairness – to sublimate the individual to the group with which he or she identifies.

 

…………………………………………………..

 

Bari Weiss defends the West. She is remarkable – a journalist, writer, and editor, who describes herself as a “liberal uncomfortable with the excesses of left-wing culture...a left-leaning centrist.” However, Vanity Affairdescribed her as a provocateur and other publications claim she is a conservative. From my perspective, she is commonsensical.

 

She is the founder of The Free Press and hosts the podcast Honestly. She is young, a 2007 graduate of Columbia University, first hired as a Bartley Fellow that same year by The Wall Street Journal. The next year she became a Dorot Fellow in Jerusalem. She worked at The Wall Street Journal until 2017 when she was hired by The New York Times. In 2020 she penned a public resignation letter to the publisher, Mr. A.G. Sulzberger. She wrote of a new consensus having emerged in the press, “…especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.”

 

But it is her November 13 speech at the Federalist Society’s Barbara K. Olson’s Memorial Lecture that demands focus. Her subject was the fight for the West: “You Are the Last Line of Defense.”[3] The speech should be read in its entirety, but it is worth reviewing. She spoke of the “civilization war we are in” – including an ongoing war against Islamic terrorism. Barbara Olson, on American Airlines flight 77 that slammed into the Pentagon, was murdered by al-Qaeda on September 11, 2001. Twenty-two years later, on the morning of Shabbat, Hamas terrorists, in “a scene from the history of the Nazi Holocaust,” raped, mutilated, and butchered 1,200 Israelis. She drew attention to differences in reaction to the two events. Twenty-two years ago the world was horrified. On October 8, people took to the streets. They “rejoiced on the streets of Berlin and London and Toronto and New York.” “The social justice crowd,” she said, “– the crowd who has tried to convince us that words are violence – insisted that actual violence was actually a necessity.” She spoke of university presidents who, lucidly (and correctly) condemned George Floyd’s killing, now “offered silence or mealy-mouthed pablum about how the situation is tragic and ‘complex.’” 

 

She spoke of how antisemitism has moved “from the shameful fringe into the public square.” But, as she noted, it is not just about Jews: “It is an early warning system that society itself is breaking down.” She argued that we have lost the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil and that we have replaced ideas with identity, debate with denunciation, and “the rule of law with the fury of the mob.” She spoke of how this inverted worldview swallowed “all the crucial sense-making institutions of American life:” universities, media, cultural institutions, major corporations, high schools and elementary schools. It is a world view that “measures fairness by equality of outcome rather than opportunity.” Merit, hard work, aspiration, talent take a back seat to “unearned privilege.” In Gaza today, Israel and the Jews are “powerful and successful…, so they are bad; Hamas is weak and coded as people of color, so they are good.”

 

“So,” she asks, “what do we do?” Her answer: First, “we must recover our ability to look and discern.” We must distinguish between good and bad, between just and unjust. We must remember that it is “human beings – not cultures – [that] are created equal.” Second, the law must be enforced: “Everyone needs equal protection, not only of the law, but from forces of chaos and violence.” Third, double standards regarding free speech, especially at universities, must be eliminated. For too long, they have played favorites “based on the speech they prefer, and the racial group hierarchies they’ve established.” And fourth, she said you must “accept that you are the last line of defense and fight, fight, fight.” It is, she added, “time to defend our values – the values that have made this country the freest, most tolerant society in the history of the world – without hesitation or apology.

 

……………………………………………..

 

Our democratic system is fragile. It is one that has, historically, welcomed criticism. However, there are those who, in the pursuit of personal power, would destroy what time, “blood, sweat, and tears,” and ideals have created. President Reagan used to warn that democracy was always one generation away from failing. On September 17, 1787, in response to a question by Elizabeth Willing Powel as to what the Constitutional Convention had created, the 81-year-old Benjamin Franklin, replied: “A Republic, if you can keep it.” Our system of government, born in the Age of Enlightenment, is a political manifestation of Western civilization and its values. Threats to it by those ignorant of history are real, especially when those threats come draped in the language of social justice. We must respond affirmatively to Franklin’s assertion. Bari Weiss is doing her part to keep alive the ethics and standards that the West gifted us. We must do our part.  

 

---

---

[1] In defining the West, some include western Russia, along with Central and South America. 

[2] Others claim the first monotheistic religion was Zoroastrianism in Persia.

[3] Her speech: https://www.thefp.com/p/you-are-the-last-line-of-defense

 

"Threat to Democracy"

 There are many things that need concern us. One, that gets little attention from mainstream media, is the decline in population among Western nations. A recent report from the Gatestone Institute, pointed out that more children are born in Nigeria each year than in Europe, which has more than three times the population. In fact, the number of babies born in Nigeria each year is roughly equal to the number born each year in Europe and the United States.

 

While these statistics will not affect people my age, the world our grandchildren and great grandchildren inherit will be markedly different than what we have known. Will it be better or worse? No one knows, but it is food for thought.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Threat to Democracy”

September 26, 2022

 

“…the only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough

to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well

enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over its government.”

                                                                                                                                Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945)

                                                                                                                                Radio “fireside chat”

                                                                                                                                April 14, 1938

 

Accusations of “threats to democracy,” are being tossed around with the abandon of rolls being thrown at a Drones Club dinner. This has especially been true from the “anointed” left toward their conservative opponents. They see a fascist behind every Republican. “With…democracy itself in the balance…” wrote Sara Burnett and John Hanna of the Associated Press in a recent article on Governor’s races taking on new prominence. CNN’s S.E. (Sarah Elizabeth) Cupp recently wrote of the ascendancy of right wing nationalism and “in some cases fascism,” in which she grouped Donald Trump with Jair Bolsonaro and Viktor Orban, and Liz Truss with Marine Le Pen. Hillary Clinton recently compared a Trump campaign event in Ohio to a Nazi rally, I guess “deplorables” wasn’t strong enough.

 

Catchy slogans are ubiquitous in politics. Most, unsurprisingly, have a positive slant: “Why not the best?” – Carter in ’76; “Morning in America!” – Reagan in ’80. A few carry an accusatory tone: “It’s the economy, stupid!” – Clinton in ‘92. Others are egotistical: “We are the ones we have been waiting for!” – Obama in 2008. And then there was Trump’s upbeat slogan in 2016, “Make America great again,” which Democrats, using the acronym “MAGA,” have turned into a pejorative in 2022.

 

Like the Left’s call for net-zero-emissions (which in reality is a regressive tax), the words “Republicans represent a threat to democracy” serve as a red herring, to detract from real issues, like inflation, the economy, immigration, jobs, crime, school choice, and the student mental health crisis. Yet democracy is fragile, so should be watched and handled with care. Our Constitution provides for a government based on the rule of law, with checks and balances cast in three co-equal branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The purpose – to make it difficult for any individual to wrest control. As early as September 1787, Benjamin Franklin allegedly responded to a query about the new government, that it was “a Republic, if you can keep it.”  In the same year, in “Federalist 26,” Alexander Hamilton addressed the debate between legislative power and individual liberty. In the 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville saw the threat of tyranny from unchecked demands of individuals and groups. A Civil War was fought in the early 1860s to combat slavery, but also to preserve the union. The American political system is not supposed to be efficient. It is designed for debate and collaboration, aimed at reaching a consensus. While advocacy is expected from political parties, constraints on government are critical for continued individual liberty.

 

To associate the Republican Party with fascism is absurd. Granted, there are extremists in the Republican Party, just as there are extremists in the Democrat Party. But in neither case do they constitute a majority. Michigan Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene may not seem, to most of us, to reflect American values, but they do represent distinct voices within America. 

 

Democrats have divided Republicans into many “Trumpers” and few “non-Trumpers.” But the truth is more complicated. Most Republicans believe in the sanctity of an individual who is responsible and accountable. They believe in conserving what has worked in our culture, while welcoming change that improves people’s lives. In terms of change, they are gradualists, not revolutionaries. Economically, they believe in free-market capitalism with limited regulation and favor progressive taxes that are not secretly regressive, like those imposed by limiting energy production or promoting gambling. They believe choice in schools should not be limited to the wealthy. They believe that respect for our borders is necessary, and that a strong military is required. They believe in the rule of law, not men. They believe we are all equal in our rights as citizens, but recognize we are not equal in our abilities and aspirations. Many of us liked much of what Trump accomplished, while disliking his character. But of this, I feel certain, he was never a “threat to democracy.” He was watched too closely and too critically.  Unarmed protesters invading the Capitol was wrong, and Trump was wrong not to call them off. But if armed capitol police had been there in force and done their job, the rioters would have been stopped before they entered the Capitol. If this had been a dangerous insurrection, why did the Dow Jones Industrial Averages, a barometer of such activity, rise modestly on January 6, 7, and 8? Regardless, Republican Vice President Michael Pence acceded to the law. 

 

Threats to democracy occur when individuals or parties seize the reins of government and use their power, with the backing of the media, to destroy opponents. Combatting that trend, Alan Dershowitz, a liberal Democrat has been willing to accept conservative Republicans as clients when he believes their rights are in jeopardy. He recently wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that it is wrong for Biden administration officials “to abuse the law, particularly the criminal justice system, against our political opponents.” 

  

There is much that concerns me, such as the Left’s threats to do away with the Senate filibuster and expand the Supreme Court. I worry about political and “woke” indoctrination, along with the elevation of victimhood, in our schools and colleges. I worry about the subordination of our Judeo-Christian values to some relative moral standard. I worry – but have no answers – about bureaucrats’ self interest in supporting the Party that assures their continued employment. I worry about unscrupulous politicians colluding with independent agencies to pursue personal and Party agendas, such as we saw with Lois Lerner and the IRS in 2015, and in the Department of Justice today, where, like the Soviet’s Laventiy Beria, New York’s Attorney General Letitia James first named the suspect, then searched for the crime.

 

But I am not seriously concerned about a “threat to democracy.” The hyperbolic words reflect the partisanship of our time. While I am not so naïve as to expect I will ever read unbiased newspapers or watch cable or network news that gives equal airtime to each side, I do not worry about democracy, so long as the Washington Post and the New York Post publish what they each claim to be news, and as long as Fox News, CNN, and PBS promote their versions of events. We are free to read and watch what we choose. We are divided, but we have not yet been rendered asunder. 

 

As long as we remember FDR’s words in the rubric that heads this essay, and recall Lincoln’s words at Gettysburg in late 1863, that we are “a government of the people, by the people and for the people,” our nation will remain free and democratic, even when diffuse and spirited.

"Freedom is not Easy"

 Today, Democrats will be out in force reminding us of the disgraceful events of a year ago. Ironically, Trump has become Democrats’ biggest asset, just as he has become Republicans’ biggest liability, as we head toward November’s mid-term elections. Democrats will claim he represents the Republican Party. It will be a message their allies in mainstream media will deliver with persistence and glee. It will be the main item in their playbook, to help retain the House and the Senate. But, as can be seen by Senator Schumer’s attempt to do away with the filibuster, it will have nothing to do with democracy.

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Freedom is Not Easy”

January 6, 2022

 

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little

temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

                                                                                                              Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

                                                                                                              Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, 1791

 

Many believe democracy is threatened. Those on the left cite the narcissistic and dreaded Donald Trump as the instigator of the January 6 protest that devolved into a disgraceful, though unarmed, attack on the Capitol. Those on the right, like me, bring up cancelled conservative speakers on college campuses, property-destroying riots and rising murder rates in cities across the nation, lockdowns and mandates relative to COVID, and a “wokeness,” which redacts speech, expurgates books, and removes art that is not grounded in race-and-gender consciousness. But perhaps both sides are mistaken? Perhaps democracy is stronger than we believe? Perhaps it can withstand these assaults? But both sides owe the public apologies.

 

The one-year anniversary of the January 6 riot has filled the media with reports on the “insurrection” that failed. Of course, it did. The protesters were unorganized and unarmed. They had no acknowledged leader on their march to the Capitol. In fact, members of ANTIFA accompanied the Trump supporters. The Capitol police, oddly, were unprepared, even though the march was widely publicized. The protesters did not have the military behind them, nor did they have media support. One person was shot, and that was a female, a veteran, who was shot by an unnamed member of the Capitol police. In fact, the cynic in me whispers that the episode has been welcomed by progressives, as it manifested proof (in their minds) of their claimed autocracy of Donald Trump and his supporters.

 

This is not to support the rioters, but criticism should always be placed in perspective. Nevertheless, the cause of the riot was the refusal by Mr. Trump to accept the results of the 2020 election. The fact that Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton, refused to accept the results of the 2016 election – and, in fact, initiated a four-year investigation of an alleged (and false) collusion between Mr. Trump and Russia – did not justify the January 6 protest. Democracy is fragile and rests on a foundation of custom, continuity and good will. Country before party should always be the message, and compromise should always be the method. It was what allowed President Reagan and Speaker Tip O’Neill to pass legislation in the 1980s, and it is what allowed Bill Clinton and Speaker Newt Gingrich to do the same in the 1990s. 

 

Republicans, to be successful, must rise above the mendacity of current day politics, (as should Democrats, but for that I will let someone else speak). I believe Republicans can succeed, and Mr. Trump could play a role, if he chooses. He must, however, endorse conservative beliefs: support for the Constitution, individual liberty, separation of powers, limited government, rule of law, fiscal responsibility, free markets, strong defense, legal immigration through secure borders, an enduring moral code, human dignity, and constraint, both in government and in individual behavior. If Mr. Trump cannot envision playing within those confines, he should pass the baton to a new generation, which, given both his age and his character, I hope he does. He should rest on his accomplishments as President: an economy that brought minority employment to levels never before seen, energy independence, vaccines developed at “warp speed” and the Abraham Accords, which have given the Middle East its best chance for peace in generations.

 

Freedom is not easy; it requires responsibility and accountability. It means some succeed and others fail. It requires a recognition that while we are all equal in our rights as citizens and before the law, we are not all equal in ability or perseverance; so, while opportunities for success should be equal, outcomes will never be. Political success in a free society requires the spirit of compromise – that the tug-of-war between permanence and change must be reconciled through debate and cooperation.

 

Yet, in this winter of our discontent, we have reason for hope – the possibility for a spring of more optimistic days. People are exhausted by political extremism and by unending mandates regarding a disease that is becoming endemic. They are worn out by sanctimonious politicians pontificating to small but noisy segments of their constituencies. They are tired of the negativism expressed by those who condemn our history, tear down our statues and insult our character. They are fed up with academic deans who refuse to allow contrary opinions to be expressed on their campuses, and by teachers’ unions who put students last. They are drained by those who predict dire consequences for our planet if we don’t buy electric vehicles. They are annoyed by those who tell us that gender is a choice, not a biological determinant. And they are wearied by not being able to speak freely, to laugh, to enjoy life, away from the wokeness of today’s illiberal, bullying progressives.

 

The spirit of independence, which takes commitment and builds character, runs freely through the American people. We see it every day, in Americans across this land. But there will always be those who want to wrest it from us. When people in other places lose their freedom, it is to America they turn. Should we lose our liberty, whether from the right or the left, to whom would we turn? Where would we go? Freedom is hard work; it is worth preserving.

"Anger"

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Anger”

August 4, 2020

 

“Anger dwells only in the bosom of fools.”

                                                                                                Aristotle (385BC-323BC)

 

Anger has been a constant in American politics since the beginning. On July 11, 1804, a long and bitter feud between Vice President Aaron Burr and former Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton ended in the latter’s death by gunshot on a field in Weehawken, New Jersey. On February 6, 1858, as the House of Representatives debated the Kansas Territory’s pro-slavery Lecompton Constitution, Pennsylvania’s Republican Galusha Grow and South Carolina Democrat Laurence Keitt traded insults and then blows. On March 1, 1954 four Puerto Rican nationalists in the visitors’ gallery unfurled a Puerto Rican flag and opened fire on members of Congress, wounding five. When heated political dialogue becomes angry words (or worse), the nation loses. The 1960s were angry years, fed by opponents and proponents of Civil Rights and an unpopular war in Southeast Asia. We are living through another period where anger has become pervasive and political extremism has made the middle way a difficult passage.

 

We are in a summer of discontent, made inhospitable by Covid-19, an economic depression and unprecedented hatred for the President of the United States. Political extremism has always been around, but usually on the fringes. Joseph McCarthy, George Wallace and Lester Maddox once represented right-wing extremists, just as Henry Wallace and George McGovern did on the left. (George Wallace and Maddox were both Democrats, but extreme rightwing in their views). However, they were all marginalized by the far larger center-right and center-left parts of their respective Parties. That is no longer the case. Bernie Sanders, an avowed Socialist, is contributing to the Democrat platform. Like a mutating cell infected with a virus, the country has been dividing and separating, creating extremists on both ends.

 

Anger is defined as strong feelings of annoyance, displeasure and hostility. Anger can be a positive force when used with deliberation. Colin Powell once said, “Get mad, then get over it.” It is when anger emanate from hatred and its manifestations devolve into violence that should concern us. The killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25^th spawned understandable protests across the United States, but which rose to incoherent violence in some cities and the rebirth of the Black Lives Matter and Antifa movements. Corporations, schools and colleges were quick to demonstrate their “wokeness.” What that exactly meant is of less interest to them than in how they are perceived. If you aren’t “woke,” you are racist. The lockdown of the economy in response to COVID-19 has made inner cities tinder boxes, with demonstrators protesting government edicts that violate rights to assemble, especially in places of worship. 

 

While rioters call for defunding police, murder rates in the Country’s fifty largest cities have risen 24% through July. Disrespect for law enforcement has abetted property destruction. A July 27 editorial in the Wall Street Journal headlined “A Weekend of Urban Anarchy,” spoke to assaults on public and private property in the cities of Seattle; Portland, Oregon, Louisville, Kentucky; New York; Atlanta, and Baltimore. “Lawlessness begets lawlessness, and in recent weeks we’ve seen reports of vigilantes and far-right activists joining the melee from Richmond to Philadelphia. Local officials are allowing this to happen, and the more it is indulged the worse it is likely to get.” Legal restrictions imposed by the Seattle City Council banning the use of pepper spray caused Carmen Best, Chief of the Seattle Police Department to issue a statement in which she said that in order to protect her officers, she would have an “adjusted deployment” in response to any demonstrations that threaten private property.  She would not place her officers at risk, with them unable to respond.

 

Second quarter GDP numbers showed a preliminary decrease of 32.9% (down 9.5% from the same quarter a year ago), the worst quarterly GDP report on record. Fear of COVID-19 had employed government politicians and bureaucrats order businesses to close, creating unemployment; they urged people to stay home, regardless of economic costs. Their actions were supported by employed media workers. If we persist on this path, more lives will be destroyed, perhaps not by the coronavirus, but by poverty, isolation, bankruptcies, increased drug usage and suicide. Ironically, one of the worst performing sectors during the quarter was the health industry, led by a halt in elective surgeries, fewer cancer screens and less heart monitoring. Government spending cannot make up the difference. No federal or state agency can replicate the efficiency of the free market, comprised of billions of decisions by millions of people. As a nation, we should ensure that the most vulnerable are protected from COVID-19, while encouraging the rest to act responsibly and allow the economy to recover. It is little wonder that the response to the virus, which has been largely political, has given rise to frustration, leading to anger.

 

Mainstream media would have us believe that this anger is the fault of the mercurial Mr. Trump, but, in truth, it did not begin with him. The “Billy Goat” behavior of President Clinton angered those who felt he had tarnished the Presidency. The invasion of Iraq by President George W. Bush was based on allegations that Saddam Hussein harbored weapons of mass destruction. When no such weapons were found, opponents became angered. The IRS targeting of conservatives, lies about Benghazi, Fast and Furious and cash sent to Iran were scandals that enveloped the Obama Administration and angered those who felt they had been snookered. Nevertheless, the vitriol then did not reach levels seen today.

 

Anger is a tool of the inarticulate and bubbles to the surface when reason is absent. Hatred for Donald Trump is ubiquitous; his personality and his promise to “drain the swamp” that links lobbyists to government employees has led to anger towards him. Hatred for those whose political opinions do not coincide with ours has led to anger toward our neighbors. Hatred for our Country is a consequence of dubious claims that “systemic” racism is rampant in the United States.

 

Lost in this anger is an appreciation for how rare is the freedom that was the promise of our Founders more than two centuries ago. As a nation, we are a work-in-progress, but the foundation on which our liberties are built is solid, if we can keep them, as Benjamin Franklin admonished. While some are born into wealthy, two-parent loving families and others have obstacles to overcome, every person born in this Country is privileged. Where else in the world would one have equivalent opportunities?

 

The purpose of government is not to give everyone an easy life. It is to provide the infrastructure that keeps people safe from enemies without and oppressors within – safe to be free and independent, to enact and execute laws that protect property and persons, to ensure against those who misuse power, whether political or economic and to give each person the opportunity through education to improve their lot. Education is the crucible where ideas germinate and tolerance is formed. As former U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R- UT) wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal, “Restoring intellectual honesty to our universities is key to rebuilding credibility in the expert class.” So true. Let calm replace anger, so Aristotle’s fool gains wisdom.