“Villainous and shameful.”  That characterization of CNN’s performance as moderator for the latest debate among the candidates for the Democratic nomination for president was written, not by President Trump, not by Fox News, and not by a random conservative-leaning political pundit, but by “Rolling Stone.”  The focus was on the question of whether or not Bernie Sanders had said to Elizabeth Warren that a woman could not win a presidential election.  RS, as most of you know, is a far left publication, so the foregoing analysis carries some significance.  Why did the RS reporter say that?  Read on.

Full disclosure, I didn’t watch the debate.  I find them unwatchable.  The candidates don’t discuss the issues in any meaningful way, nor do they differentiate themselves on policy; they spend most of their time attacking President Trump, which I understand, but, after a while, it gets old.  Furthermore, the poor ratings indicate I’m not the only one who feels that way.

Be that as it may, I, like most of you, have seen and heard the salient points of the Sanders-Warren disagreement, which was the primary takeaway from the debate, on multiple news outlets.  To me, there are two key elements to it:

  1.  Did Sanders say it, and
  2. the manner in which CNN’s debate moderator, Abby Phillip, framed the question about it to Sanders and Warren.

As we know, debate moderators have one main job – to be impartial.  Read how Phillip framed the questions to Sanders and Warren, and you tell me whether or not she was impartial.

To Sanders:  “CNN reported yesterday – and [both] Senator Sanders [and] Senator Warren confirmed in a statement – that in 2018 you told her you did not believe that a woman could win the election. Why did you say that?”  This is like the silly and humorous question: “When did you stop beating your wife?”  Obviously, the question was highly prejudicial as Sanders has vehemently denied saying it and there is no definitive evidence he did so.  Phillip should have said: “Did you say that?”  As if that weren’t enough, Phillip compounded her error by asking Warren: “What did you think when Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?”

As support for his strong denial, Sanders pointed out that he had actually urged Warren to run as early as 2016.  In addition, there is a published video in which he stated the opposite, namely, that a woman COULD become president.

According to RS, CNN reporter M. L. Lee broke the story on the evening before the debate.  Supposedly, it was based on “the accounts of four people, two [of which] Warren spoke with directly and two [others who were] familiar with the meeting.”  The trouble is that only Sanders and Warren were in the meeting.  Therefore, it is apparent that all four individuals had the same source – Warren.  CNN is famous (or rather notorious) for this kind of “circular reporting” and innuendos by “anonymous sources,” which never seem to be verified.  (For example, see reports of WMD during the Bush 43 administration and “Russiagate” over the past three years, among many others.)

So, what we have is a basic he said-she said.  Whom should we believe?   Sanders, despite many of his cockamamie political beliefs, strikes me as fairly honest (for a politician).  What you see is what you get.  Warren, on the other hand, has been caught in several disingenuous statements and outright lies.  For example, she has falsely claimed Native American heritage, and she falsely claimed she was fired from a teaching job because she was pregnant.  Moreover, she has tried to hide the fact that her “Medicare for all” plan would necessitate a tax increase on the middle class as well as on the wealthy.

Even the “NY Times” was critical of the name calling and animosity.  Reporters Reid Epstein, Sydney Ember and Alexander Burns said each called the other a “liar,” and opined that the incident has “cast doubt” on whether the two can “unite the Dem Party’s liberal wing.”

Due to the foregoing, absent definitive proof to the contrary, I would have to believe Sanders.  I don’t think it will matter anyway.  Sanders has his hardcore plurality of supporters who will support him to the end, and Warren’s candidacy is fading under the weight of her questionable character.  The latest Real Clear polls report Warren running fourth in New Hampshire, not a good sign as it is a neighboring state to her home state of Massachusetts, and tied for third in Iowa.  Moreover, her funding is drying up.  Sanders is ahead of her in both states and has been raising significant amounts of money.


The larger point, in my view, is that it appears that the wealthy and influential Dem Party insiders and major donors, who strongly oppose Sanders’ socialist philosophies and policies, are growing fearful that he could actually win the nomination, and they are attempting to damage him to prevent it.  Many of Sanders’ supporters were convinced their man was denied the nomination unfairly in 2016, and they fear a reprise in 2020.  They were right then, and they’re probably right now.  In 2016 many of them stayed home or voted for Trump or a third party candidate, such as Jill Stein.  They may do the same in 2020.

CNN, living up to its reputation as a virtual extension of the Dem Party, is on board with the plan.  For example, in addition to Phillip, the biased moderator, listen to Van Jones: “There was a banana peel sent out there for Bernie to step on….  I think [he] stepped on it…. [Warren] knocked that moment out of the park.”  For similar comments by other CNN commentators tune into the channel at random any time any day.  There is a feeling in some quarters that CNN’s commentators get their marching orders from Jeff Zucker daily.  If so, this would be an example.

It is also a perfect example of “fake news” for which the liberal media is well known.  No wonder the public hates and mistrusts the media.

It will be very interesting to see how this story develops.  Will the candidates mend their fences and focus on their real enemy, President Trump?  Or, is it a portent of further conflicts as the campaign moves to the primaries phase and the pressure ratchets up?

Here’s a novel idea for the Dems.  How about focusing on the issues that really matter to voters, such as the economy, jobs, infrastructure, healthcare, border security and foreign affairs.  Instead of wasting your time and our money trying to remove Mr. Trump via impeachment, which will never happen, try to do it the tried and true way, by winning an election.



Today, January 15, is the birthday of, in my mind, the greatest civil rights leader in American history.  Of course, I am referring to Martin Luther King, Jr.  As is the case with many of our holidays, we celebrate it on a Monday, the third one in January, rather than on the actual day. This year, it will be celebrated on January 20.

This year will mark the 52nd anniversary of his untimely assassination on April 4, 1968.  Like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 and the assassination of President JFK on November 22, 1963 most  of us will always remember where we were when we heard the horrible news.

For some people, the holiday holds no special meaning; it is just a day off from work, a day to spend with family or friends, part of a long three-day weekend.  For many of us, however, particularly those of us who were alive in the 1950s and 1960s, it is much, much more.

MLK was born on January 15, 1929.  In my opinion, he became the most prominent and influential American civil rights leader in the 1950s and 1960s, if not ever.  MLK was more than just a pastor.  He believed that more could be achieved by civil disobedience and non-violence than by violence.  He preached peaceful disobedience, sit-ins, marches and demonstrations, often in the face of wanton violence and cruelty by the police and others, rather than by rioting.  In this regard, he was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi.  In turn, he inspired many others such as Nelson Mandela and the Black Civil Rights movement in South Africa.

He also recognized the power of the press to bring attention to his cause and influence public opinion. For example, as many as 70 million people around the world witnessed the police brutality inflicted on the peaceful black and white marchers in Selma, Alabama, in March of 1965, including women and children as well as men.  Those images, broadcast live on TV and radio, appalled and disgusted many people and provided an immeasurable boost to the public awareness of the injustices being visited upon blacks in the South. These events were captured dramatically and realistically in the 2014 movie, “Selma,” which featured David Oyelowo as MLK.  If you haven’t seen it, I recommend it.

Unlike any other African American leaders before or since, he had the ability to unite, rather than divide.  Although he was criticized by some of the more militant civil rights leaders of the time, such as Stokely Carmichael, he commanded the support and respect of a large majority of blacks and many whites as well. In that regard, he was similar to Mandela.

After his death, despite the urgings of some civil rights leaders who wanted to continue MLK’s philosophy, more militant African American leaders, such as Mr. Carmichael, came into prominence. There was rioting in over 100 US cities, and a slew of violent incidents at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago in front of the national press and millions of Americans, which many believe swung the 1968 presidential election  to Richard Nixon.  The Civil Rights movement was changed forever.

MLK came into prominence in 1955 when he led a bus boycott, peacefully, in Montgomery, Alabama.  The boycott had been fueled by the famous Rosa Parks incident in which she had refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white person.  She was arrested on December 1. (Most people don’t know that earlier that year in March a similar incident had occurred, also in Montgomery, involving Claudette Colvin, a black girl who had also refused to give up her seat to a white man.  However, that case did not receive the same notoriety.  Civil rights lawyers declined to pursue it because Colvin was 15, unmarried and pregnant. They chose to wait for a case with a more favorable fact pattern, and they were proven to be right.)

Later, MLK became the leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and remained so until his death. He applied his non-violence philosophy to protests in Selma, Ala., St. Augustine, FL, and the March on Washington, D. C., among others. He made it a policy never to endorse a particular political party or candidate. He believed he could be more effective if he were neutral and not beholden to anyone.  Furthermore, in his view, neither party was all bad, and neither one was perfect.  In his words, “[t]hey both have weaknesses.”

Perhaps, MLK’s signature moment occurred during the famous March on Washington in August 1963.  Ironically, MLK was not the primary organizer of the March.  That was Bayard Rustin, a colleague.  The primary purpose of the March was to dramatize the plight of blacks in the South.  Civil rights leaders, including Roy Wilkins, NAACP, Whitney Young, National Urban League, A. Philip Randolph, Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, John Lewis, SNCC, James Farmer CORE, and MLK, wanted to bring awareness of these issues right to the seat of the Federal government.  More than 250,000 people of all ethnicities and colors attended.  MLK was one of several speakers, and he only spoke for 17 minutes.  But, his “I Have a Dream” speech became one of the most famous speeches ever.  The March, in general, and MLK’s speech, in particular, are credited with bringing civil rights to the political forefront and facilitating the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Some little-known facts about MLK:

1. His birth name was Michael King, Jr., after his father.  In 1931 his father changed his own name to Martin Luther King, after the German theologian, Martin Luther, whom he admired.  At the same time, he changed his son’s name.

2. In 1958 MLK was stabbed in the chest after a speech by a woman who had been stalking him, and he nearly died.

3. The FBI began tapping MLK’s telephone as early as 1963.  Robert Kennedy, who was Attorney General at the time and who is viewed as a staunch supporter of civil rights, in general, and MLK, in particular, authorized the tapping.

4. MLK won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 at the age of 35, the youngest age ever at the time.

5. MLK won a Grammy Award in 1971, posthumously.  It should be noted that he won it, not because he displayed a great singing voice, but for a “Spoken Word Album,” “Why I Oppose the War in Vietnam.”  In addition, he won countless other awards and was awarded some 50 honorary degrees from various colleges and universities.

6. The US Treasury has announced that it will be redesigning the $5 bill.  It will still feature Abraham Lincoln on the obverse, or front, side, but the reverse, or back, side will feature depictions of events that have occurred at the Lincoln Memorial, including MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech.

7. Even though MLK was one of the great public speakers of his time, inexplicably, he got a “C” in a public speaking course at the seminary.  (Kind of like a baseball scout saying Babe Ruth can hit “a little bit.”)

8. MLK is one of three individuals and the only native-born American to have a holiday named after him.  In case you’re wondering, the others are George Washington (born in the COLONY of Virginia), and Christopher Columbus.

Some MLK quotes to ponder:

1. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
2. “The time is always right to do what is right.”
3. “We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”
4. “Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that.  Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.”
5. “Free at last. Free at last. Thank God almighty, we are free at last.”
6. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”


Today, there is much division among African Americans as well as their leaders.  Some are moderate and want to work within the system; others are more militant.  Many of the leaders have their own agendas and look for any excuse to foment distrust and discord.  I believe that these “race hustlers,” and we all know who they are, do more harm than good, but that is a subject for another blog.

In my opinion, we have made much progress in the area of civil rights.          For example, we have elected an African American president (twice); an African American sits on the Supreme Court; and African Americans hold and have held positions of prominence in every field of endeavor, including business, entertainment, sports, and the military.  But, still, it is a work in progress.  We can do more.

One can speculate whether and to what extent MLK’s assassination changed the course of history.  In my opinion, had MLK lived, the Civil Rights Movement would have been considerably different over the last 50 years, more peaceful and less divisive, with better results.  Furthermore, his assassination had a significant impact, not only on the history of the civil rights movement, but also on the overall history of the country, itself.  I hope and believe that eventually a moderate leader will emerge and bridge the gap as MLK did half a century ago.

So, as you enjoy the holiday in whatever manner you choose, I ask you to reflect for a moment on where we are as a nation regarding civil rights, where we want to go and how we get there.


By now, most of us are all too familiar with the story.  We have read the news accounts and seen the horrific pictures.  The destruction is on a magnitude so great that the mind cannot wrap itself around it.  It is so extensive that it is difficult even to ascertain and comprehend reliable estimates.  Most of the damage has been concentrated in the southeast portion of the country in the states of New South Wales and Victoria.  That includes some of the most heavily populated areas and the major cities of Sydney and Melbourne.

Vox News has estimated that at least 25 persons have been killed and some 2,000 homes have been destroyed.  Moreover, the smoke from the fires represents a considerable health hazard.  For example, Vox reported that in nearby Sydney breathing the smoke is equivalent to smoking 37 cigarettes.

Vox has estimated that up to 15.6 million acres of bushland have been destroyed and one billion animals killed.  Those are unfathomable numbers.   For example, to put it in some perspective, 15.6 million acres exceeds the area of the entire state of West Virginia!  Can you imagine an entire state being destroyed by wildfires in less than four months?  Can you imagine ONE BILLION animals killed?

As horrific as that is, it may very well be an underestimation of the damage to the area affected.  There is no accurate way to measure the long-term damage to the area’s ecosystem resulting from the destruction of insects and other microscopic creatures, which, ecologists say play a vital role.  Moreover, many of the organisms that managed to escape the fire will eventually perish due to the destruction of their natural environment and/or other organisms upon which they rely for food, shelter and water.

Furthermore, Australia is home to some of the world’s most unique creatures, many of which, such as kangaroos, wallabies, and koalas, are not found anywhere else.  If these species were to be wiped out by these fires they would become extinct, which would be a tragedy in and of itself.  Some of these animals are familiar to us, such as kangaroos, koalas, wallabies, and various other marsupials (basically, animals that are only partially developed when born and thus are carried in their mother’s pouch until they are fully developed).  However, there are dozens of others, which few people outside of Australia are aware of, but whose continued existence is just as vital,  For example, are you familiar with or have you even heard of the potoroo or the frilled-neck lizard?  Probably not.  You might find it worthwhile to “google” them, as I did, and educate yourself.

So, what caused these devastating fires?  Could they recur, or is this year a “one-off?”   Good questions,.  Read on for the answers.

Based on news reports from various sources, such as Vox News and CBS, among others, it appears that the wildfires resulted from a “perfect storm” of negative factors, such as:

  1. Hot, dry weather.  High temperatures, dry weather and brisk winds are typical in Australia during the summer, but this year those conditions have been very extreme.  Australia has been in the midst of its hottest and driest year on record.  Triple digit temperatures have not been uncommon in many parts of the country, including the areas most afflicted.  Also, human activity, such as carelessness and arson, or natural occurrences, such as lightning have played a role.
  2.  Changing weather patterns.  Some have blamed climate change even though, according to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the country’s average temperature has only increased one degree Celsius over the past 100 years.  I know climate change is a very controversial and contentious topic.  I decline to debate it here.  You can decide its effect on these fires for yourself.  The ABM also reported that although rainfall has increased in the north, it has decreased in the southeast where the fires are concentrated.  In addition, Australia has been in a three-year drought.  Even the annual monsoons have played a role.  They commenced later than usual in 2019, which resulted in the accumulation of more heat in some parts of the country.
  3.  The fire season.  It is becoming longer and more dangerous.   We all know that the ecosystem depends on fires, to some extent.  Fires enable many organisms to clear decay, germinate and recycle nutrients.  But, the extreme weather has led to more and more extreme fires.

Furthermore, there  are various long-term consequences of these wildfires.

  1.  Australia’s biodiversity.  I have already touched on this, but I believe it bears further discussion.  Due to its isolation Australia has evolved into one of the most biodiverse ecosystems in the world.  Ecologists estimate that there are some 250 species of mammals that are unique to Australia.   Its ecosystem is fragile.  Maru Saunders, an ecologist at the University of New England in Australia has opined that the forests contain “hundreds of different species that rely on each other.  And if you lose one, it is like [losing] a link in a chain, you then lose the others that it is connected to.”   As an example, Saunders cites insects.  Although they’re largely invisible (out of sight, out of mind) she considers them to be “absolutely critical” to the functioning of an ecosystem.” They build ecosystems from the ground up.  They decompose decaying matter, aerate the soil and pollinate the plants, which, in turn, helps to develop and nurture the forests.
  2.  The smoke.  The smoke from the fires constitutes a serious health hazard in and of itself.  It is an irritant that exacerbates respiratory illnesses and heart problems.  According to the EPA it contains very fine particles that can lodge in one’s lungs or bloodstream.  It can lead to burning eyes, runny noses, bronchitis, and a myriad of other heart, lung and respiratory diseases.  If you think the effects of the smoke will be limited to Australia, think again.  The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has reported that the smoke from these fires has begun to circumnavigate the globe.  Already, prevailing winds have pushed it as far as South America.
  3.   Mental health.  According to Vox studies have found that following a major disaster the survivors normally exhibit a 5% to 15% increase in the incidence of mental health problems.  This is brought on by the stress of loss of property, pets and, most importantly, loss of life of loved ones.  This is very insidious, because, as we know, often these conditions are not recognized and treated in a timely fashion.


So, what can we do, other than the obvious of extinguishing the fires?  In the short term, there have been reports of assistance from firefighters and persons with emergency response training from other countries, and Australia’s national government is providing assistance.  Donations to wildlife and relief charities are also helpful.

But, long term solutions  are also needed to prevent a recurrence of this level of devastation.  Otherwise, I fear we will be facing the same situation again and again.  In the meantime, I, like most of you, will be following the situation carefully and praying for a prompt and positive resolution.

I am not an expert in ecology or the environment by any means, but I hope that experts are working on the problem  I would welcome any suggestions from you, the reader.


As long-time readers know, this has been a featured topic.

According to Wikipedia, January 1, New Years Day, is the most celebrated holiday worldwide. Many historically-significant events have occurred on this date as well as on other dates during the month. Please see below.

1/1/1502 – Portuguese explorers, led by Pedro Alvarez Cabral, landed in present-day Brazil. They named the location Rio de Janeiro (River of January).

1/1/1660 – Samuel Pepys commenced his famous diary, which was to become a definitive chronicle of life in late 17th century London. Famous events described in it include The Great Plague of 1664-1665, which wiped out roughly one-fourth of London’s population, and the Great Fire of 1666, which destroyed much of the city.

1/1/1776 – George Washington unveiled the first national flag, aka the Grand Union Flag.

1/1/1863 – President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed the slaves in the Confederacy.

1/1/1892 – Ellis Island opened. Over 20 million immigrants were processed there between 1892 and 1954 when it closed.

1/1/1901 – The British Commonwealth of Australia was founded.

1/1/1959 – Fidel Castro seized control of Cuba.

1/1/1999 – The currency, the Euro, was born.

1/3/1924 – Howard Carter, British Egyptologist, discovered the burial site of Egyptian King Tut.

1/3/1959 – Alaska became the 49th state of the US.

1/7/1714 – British inventor, Henry Mill, received a patent for the typewriter.

1/8/1815 – The Battle of New Orleans, which many historians consider among the most significant in US history, commenced. The outnumbered and outgunned Americans, under the command of Andrew Jackson, defeated the British.

1/10/1863 – The first underground railroad, appropriately called “The Underground,” commenced operation in London.

1/10/1920 – The League of Nations was born. It was doomed to failure because the US never joined.

1/10/1946 – The first meeting of the United Nations took place in London.

1/11/1964 – The US Surgeon General issued the controversial report stating that smoking cigarettes may be hazardous to one’s health.

1/12/1932 – Hattie Caraway of Arkansas became the first female US Senator, filling the remainder of her late husband’s term.

1/15/1870 – The first use of a donkey to symbolize the Democratic Party appeared as a cartoon in Harpers Weekly.

1/19/1966 – Indira Gandhi became the first female Prime Minister of India. Later, she was assassinated by one of her own bodyguards.

1/19/1983 – Klaus Barbie, aka the “Butcher of Lyon,” was arrested in Bolivia. Eventually, he was extradited to France. He was tried and convicted of war crimes and died in prison.

1/21/1793 – Following the French Revolution King Louis XVI was guillotined.

1/22/1901 – England’s Queen Victoria died after a 64-year reign, the longest in British history at the time.

1/22/1973 – Abortion became legal in the US.

1/24/1965 – Winston Churchill, arguably England’s greatest prime minister ever, died.

1/24/1972 – A WWII Japanese soldier, who had been hiding on Guam not realizing the War was long since over, was discovered.

1/27/1945 – The Russian Army liberated Auschwitz.

1/27/1973 – Representatives of the US and North Vietnam signed a treaty ending the Vietnamese War.

1/28/1935 – Iceland became the first country to legalize abortion.

1/28/1986 – The Space Shuttle Challenger exploded, killing all aboard, including Christa McAuliffe, a teacher, who was slated to be the first “ordinary” citizen in space.

1/29/1919 – Prohibition was ratified. The unintended consequence of this ill-advised constitutional amendment was the substantial growth of organized crime, which was only too happy to provide illegal alcoholic beverages to a thirsty populace. The amendment was repealed on December 5, 1933.

1/31/1943 – The German Army surrendered at Stalingrad in what was generally considered to be the turning point in the European Theatre of WWII.

Birthdays: Paul Revere, 1/1/1735; Betsy Ross, 1/1/1752; Louis Braille, invented the reading system for blind people, 1/4/1809; Joan of Arc, 1/6/1412; Millard Fillmore, 13th President, 1/7/1800; Elvis Presley, 1/8/1935; Richard Nixon, 37th President, 1/9/1913; Alexander Hamilton, 1/11/1755; John Hancock, 1/12/1737; Benedict Arnold, 1/14/1741; Albert Schweitzer, 1/14/1875; Martin Luther King, 1/15/1929; Andre Michelin, pioneered the use of pneumatic tires on cars, 1/16/1853; Benjamin Franklyn, 1/17/1706; Muhammad Ali, 1/17/1942; Robert E. Lee, 1/19/1807; Edgar Allen Poe,1/19/1809; Ethan Allen, 1/21/1738; Douglas MacArthur, 1/26/1880; Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, 1/27/1756; William McKinley, 25th President, 1/29/1843; Franklyn Delano Roosevelt, 32nd President, 1/30/1882; Jackie Robinson, 1/31/1919.


“We will find you, [and] we will eliminate you.”  So said President Trump to Islamic terrorists.  As evidenced by the recent drone strike killing Qassim Soleimani, Mr. Trump is a man of his word.   (Note: as a bonus, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran’s PME militia, was also killed.)

Not surprisingly, reaction, for the most part, has fallen along party lines.  Dems and Trump haters are labeling the action as an “assassination,” with the implication that it was unjustified, contrary to established US foreign policy, and, perhaps, illegal.  In addition, many of them have characterized it as “senseless, shortsighted, and irresponsible.”  They are figuratively wringing their hands over what Iran may do to retaliate.  Their fear is that we have irritated the Iranian leadership unnecessarily, and they will retaliate.

Also, they worry that Iraq may kick out our troops in retaliation.  I say, fine, let them.  Our troops there have a huge target on their backs and no clear mission.  It’s time to leave anyway.

On the other hand, Trump supporters have generally applauded the action.  They view this action as a justified killing within the context of the ongoing war on terror in retaliation for the many acts of terrorism Soleimani has perpetrated over the last 20+ years.  Furthermore, they are in accord with Mr. Trump’s assertion that he is not seeking a regime change in Iran, and the action was taken not to start a war with Iran, but to prevent one.  They recognize that Iran and its allies hate America and Americans, always have, always will, regardless of what we do.

Anyone who has followed developments in the Middle East for the last 70 years knows that.  Moreover, anyone who knows their history knows that appeasing a bully has never worked.  (See Europe of the 1930s.)

At the very least, a very bad man and chief provocateur has been taken off the board.   Also, let’s remember that Soleimani was not a head of state; he was an enemy combatant, a terrorist mastermind responsible for an untold number of deaths, both Americans and non-Americans.  To me, enemy combatants and terrorist leaders are fair game.

Anyone who harbors any doubts that Soleimani’s killing was justified should research his exploits, as I did.  He was the commander of Iran’s notorious Quds Force.  As such, he was responsible for planning and orchestrating numerous terrorist attacks over the past 20+ years, which have resulted in the murdering of thousands of innocent people, including Americans.  A recent sampling of these include rocket attacks on Saudi oil facilities, oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, and US consulates in Baghdad and Basra as well as terror attacks outside the region.

It can be argued that he was more powerful and dangerous than even bin Laden.  Many observers believe he was the second most powerful person in Iran and the most powerful Muslim general in the entire region.  He had a strong network of proxies at his disposal in various other countries besides Iran, such as Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.  Moreover, he had the full support of a powerful state, Iran, at his disposal.

Apparently, Mr. Trump was relying on ample evidence supplied by US intelligence agencies that Soleimani was planning a major attack against American personnel overseas and, possibly, against America, itself.  A State Department official spokesperson described the attacks as “imminent.”  I find it ironic that the same critics who have been criticizing him for not listening to these intelligence agencies in the past are now criticizing him for doing so.  They want it both ways.

According to published reports in “The Telegraph” the Administration was aware of “clear threats” against Americans.  US national security advisor Robert O’Brien added that Soleimani had been travelling to Syria, Iraq  and other Middle East locales organizing such terrorist attacks.

Some random quotes and opinions:

  1.  Senator and Dem presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, Rep Ilhan Omar, and Senator Chris Murphy were among those who  characterized the killing derisively as an “assassination.”
  2. Presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg countered that that description was “outrageous.”  Soleimani, he said, “had an awful lot of American blood on his hands,” and “the US had a ‘right’ and an ‘obligation’ to pursue [him].
  3.  Noted Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz opined that it was a “lawful, proportional, preemptive military action.”  He characterized Soleimani as a “combatant enemy who had killed and was planning to kill Americans.”
  4.  Senator Rand Paul viewed the action as an “assassination” and cautioned that “one of the unintended consequences [could] be war with Iran.”
  5. Senator Tom Cotton, who had actually served in Iraq, said Soleimani “got what he richly deserved,” and the hundreds of Americans for whose death he was responsible, got “justice.”
  6. Rep Seth Moulton, an Iraq War veteran and a harsh critic of Mr. Trump’s described Soleimani as “an enemy of the US with American blood on his hands.”


So, how will Iran respond?  Will they bluster and threaten? Will they foment “protests,” in the streets, posturing against the “imperialist Great Satan” for the benefit of the tv cameras?   Will they launch additional rocket attacks in the area?   Will they attempt terror attacks in the US and elsewhere through their various proxies?  Probably, any and all of the above.

But, it has already been doing those things, and, as noted in the “Washington Post,” maybe, just maybe, Iran’s leadership will now realize that they are better off negotiating than fighting.  Its economy is in a shambles due to the economic sanctions the US has levied.  Additionally, according to “The Telegraph” there is a faction within the country that feared Soleimani as a “loose cannon,” and is not as upset at his demise as we think.

Iran’s leadership should realize that a direct, full-fledged war against the US is not in their best interests.  Surely, their economy, their infrastructure, and their military would suffer major damage.  The US has given them the “stick;” now, maybe, it’s time for the “carrot.”

In my opinion, like any other bully they only understand and respect force.  We simply had to push back sooner or later.  Now, they realize that unlike his predecessor, President Trump is a man of his word.  No phony “red lines” here.  Deep inside, they know that we can and will hit them anytime, anywhere.  In fact, Mr. Trump has stated that he already has a slew of possible targets picked out.   We have demonstrated that we can attack them without boots on the ground, without any loss of American lives.  Let them cower in their huts, so to speak.


All right.  Enough impeachment talk already. Time for a change of pace.  How about a………..quiz?!

By now, you all know the rules. No peeking at the internet. No consulting with “Alexa” or  “Siri.” Good luck.

1.  Switzerland borders each of the following countries, EXCEPT: (a) France, (b) Liechtenstein, (c) Greece, (d) Italy

2. Mt. Rushmore is located in which state? (a) North Dakota, (b) South Dakota, (c) Montana, (d) Wisconsin

3. The Amazon River borders each of the following countries, EXCEPT: (a) Peru, (b) Ecuador, (c) Brazil, (d) Argentina

4. There are 49 landlocked countries around the world (a surprisingly high number), including all off the following, EXCEPT (a) Bolivia, (b) Paraguay, (c) Serbia, (d) Croatia.

5. Pikes Peak is located in which state? (a) Colorado, (b) Kansas, (c) Arizona, (d) Nebraska.

6.  The Himalayan Mountains are located in each of the following countries, EXCEPT: (a) India, (b) China, (c) Bangladesh, (d) Afghanistan

7. The Rhine River runs through each of the following countries, EXCEPT: (a) Switzerland, (b) Italy, (c) Lichtenstein, (d) France.

8. The capital of Washington is (a) Spokane, (b) Seattle, (c) Washington City, (d) Olympia.

9. The largest country in Central America in area is (a) Nicaragua, (b) Mexico, (c) Honduras, (d) Brazil.

10. Each of the following rivers runs through Pittsburgh EXCEPT: (a) Monongahela, (b) Ohio, (c) Mississippi, (d) Allegheny.

11. Japan consists of some 6,000 islands, but only four main ones. The most northern of the four is (a) Honshu, (b) Hokkaido, (c) Kyushu, (d) Shikkou

12. Each of the following is one of the Baltic States, EXCEPT: (a) Latvia, (b) Finland, (c) Estonia, (d) Lithuania

13. The largest country in the European Union is (a) Spain, (b) Germany, (c) UK, (d) France.

14. Which of the following is NOT part of Great Britain? (a) Scotland, (b) Wales, (c) England, (d) Northern Ireland.

15. Central America consists of seven countries, including all of the following, EXCEPT (a) Mexico, (b) Costa Rica, (c) Panama, (d) Belize.

16. The Four Corners borders each of the following states, EXCEPT: (a) Arizona, (b) Colorado, (c) Nevada, (d) Utah.

17. Russia, borders the most countries, eleven, including each of the following, EXCEPT: (a) Poland, (b) Finland, (c) Latvia, (d) Turkey.

18. The largest border between two countries is (a) Russia-China, (b) Russia-Kazakhstan, (c) Argentina-Chile, (d) US-Canada?

19. The Appalachian Trail passes through 14 states, including each of the following, EXCEPT: (a) Georgia, (b) North Carolina, (c) South Carolina, (d) New York.

20. The largest country in Africa by area is (a) Egypt, (b) Sudan, (c) South Africa, (d) Algeria.

ANSWERS: 1.(c); 2.(b); 3.(d); 4.(d); 5. a); 6.(c); 7.(b); 8.(d); 9.(a); 10. (c); 11.(b); 12.(b); 13.(d); 14.(d); 15.(a); 16.(c); 17.(d); 18.(d); 19.(c); 20.(d)

Well, there you have it. How did you do?