Author: webuiltitblog

What is behind the media’s and liberals’ obsession with Melania Trump?  What has she done to invoke their extreme mockery and rancor?  Heck if I know.  As far as I can see, her only “crime” was to marry Donald Trump.  Below please find a few examples:

1. After President Trump’s inauguration she was criticized for remaining in NY while he moved into the White House.  In point of fact, she had determined that it would better for her young son to complete the school term in NY, then move to D. C.  To me, prioritizing her son’s interests and well-being like that was good parenting.  No more, no less.
2. Vanity Fair criticized her for “poor fashion choices,” citing the fact that she wore  high heels while touring a hurricane disaster site.  Wow!  Lock her up!
3. Vanity Fair also mocked her launching a campaign against bullying children.  I say, what is wrong with focusing on such an issue, which happens to be one of the chief issues regarding children and which Melania had identified as her “cause” as early  as 2016?  Well, apparently, in the minds of some people (Mika Brzezinski, MSNBC, Jake Tapper, CNN, and Meghan McCain, Fox News, the fact that some of Donald Trump’s tweets are perceived as bullying (though not towards kids) disqualifies Melania from speaking out about the issue.  Moreover, actress Meryl Streep, when questioned about her silence on the issue deflected it with the same skill she routinely demonstrates in her “day” job, acting, retorting “I don’t want to hear about the silence of me.  I want to hear about the silence of Melania Trump.”  In point of fact, we all know that neither Melania nor anyone else for that matter can control the President consistently. Melania has denoted that, on more than one occasion, she has “rebuked” Trump (for his tweets) but “he will do what he wants to do in the end.”  Anyone who knows the President would have to agree.
4. In 2016 the Daily Mail published a blatantly false story alleging that Melania had moonlighted as an escort during her modeling days.  She sued them for $150 million.  The newspaper was forced to apologize and retract the article.
5. Recently, late night entertainer Jimmy Kimmel spent several minutes mocking her accent.  He is not the only person who has done so.  Jimmy, she speaks six languages fluently, and English is not her native tongue.  How many can you speak?
6. The latest and most ridiculous criticism was centered around her absence following a kidney procedure.  The media speculated wildly that she was seriously ill, had a facelift, left the White House, or, perhaps, had been physically abused by the president.  The wild, unsubstantiated speculation continued even after reporter Eamon Javers tweeted that he had seen Melania walking in the White House with some of her aides.  Fake news at its best (or worst).  If it doesn’t fit “the narrative,” ignore it.

It wasn’t until she appeared with the president at a FEMA hurricane briefing that the inane sniping stopped.

Melania Knavs was born on April 26, 1970 in Novo Mesto, Slovenia, which, at the time, was part of Yugoslavia.  Her father managed a car dealership.  Her mother was a patternmaker for a children’s clothing manufacturer.  She has an older sister and an older step-brother whom she has never even met.

Melania began modeling at the age of five years old, and by sixteen she was doing commercials and posing for fashion magazines.  At 18 she signed with a modeling agency in Milan.  Along the way she changed her last name to its German equivalent, Knauss.  In 1995 she met Paolo Zampolli, co-owner of Metropolitan Models and a friend of Trump’s.  At Zampolli’s suggestion she emigrated to NY, where he represented her.  In 1998 she met Trump at a party hosted by Zampolli.  They began to date and were married in 2005.

Melania is the second foreign-born First Lady.  [Who was the first?  See below.]  In addition, she is the first First Lady to be a naturalized citizen and the first whose native language is not English.  As I said above, she is fluent in six languages – Slovene, Serbo-Croatian, French, English, German and Italian.

She has been very supportive of her husband’s political ambitions, even though she is not very comfortable in the limelight.  She told one reporter “I encouraged him because I know what he will do and what he can do for America.  He loves the American people and wants to help them.”

CONCLUSION

Ask yourself, if Melania were a Democrat, if she were not married to Donald Trump, would she be subjected to all of this abuse?  Or, would she be praised for how far she has come in her life.  Her critics should do a little research.  What were the odds that someone born in a small city in Slovenia would become the First lady of the US?  Long enough, that if you had bet a dollar, you would be set for life.

Predictably, all this criticism has produced a backlash.  Remember, she did not seek the limelight.  She was not an experienced politician.  English is not her native language.

One does not campaign to be First Lady.  She gets there by being married to the person who is elected president.  Voters do not consider the “qualifications” of the prospective First Lady (or even the VP, most of the time for that matter).

Therefore, she should be given the benefit of the doubt, not the back of the hand.  The president is fair game.  He sought the limelight.  Melania should be left alone.

Quiz answer:  Louisa Adams, wife of John Quincy Adams, who was born in 1775 in London to an English mother.

D Day. That’s all one has to say. Most everyone knows what it was and what it meant. Just the very name conjures up remembrances and images of one of the bloodiest battles and one of the turning points of WWII. The battle has been memorialized in books and movies, and who can forget the poignant image of countless crosses and Stars of David neatly lined up in military cemeteries in Normandy.

Today, June 6, marks the 74th anniversary of this epic battle. The Allied Forces included 156,000 troops from various countries, including the US, UK, Free France, Canada and Norway, among others, 5,000 ships and landing craft, 11,000 planes, 50,000 land vehicles, and coordinated landings over a 50 mile stretch of beaches code-named Juno, Omaha, Utah, Sword and Gold, truly a massive undertaking. Allied and German casualties have been estimated as high as 20,000 killed, wounded, missing and captured. If you were involved in the actual landing, whether you lived or died was largely a matter of luck and happenstance – two men sitting side-by-side in an LST and the German bullet finds one and not the other. Think about that for a minute.

In addition to the German guns the soldiers had to deal with the rough surf.  Wearing their battle gear made them heavy and unwieldy, and many of them actually drowned.  The movie Saving Private Ryan depicts this grisly scene clearly.

If you were lucky enough to survive the landing, you became a “sitting duck” on the beach. Then, if you managed to fight your way off the beach you had to charge into several thousand heavily-armed German troops, which were placed strategically in fortified bunkers. Once you fought your way past those, you were ready to commence the real battle to liberate France. Keep in mind, many of these soldiers were just kids as young as 17 and, no doubt, scared s***less.

Planning for the operation began as early as 1943. Russia, one of our allies at the time (“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”) had been lobbying strongly for a second front to alleviate some of the pressure from the Russian Front. Military leaders on both sides recognized the significance of a second front and expected the Allies to attempt to open one at some point. The question was where and when. The Allies were not prepared to attempt such a massive landing until early 1944 primarily because they needed time to build up levels of men and material. Remember, the Allies were fighting in the Mediterranean and North Africa as well. Plus, the US was involved in the Pacific War against the Japanese. Finally, the British’s fighting capacity had been severely damaged in the debacle at Dunkirk in 1940.  Only a remarkable evacuation, aided by thousands of civilian small boats, prevented the Germans from capturing or destroying their entire army on the beach.

The Operation was code-named Operation Overlord. The landing, itself, was code-named Operation Neptune. General Eisenhower was in charge. Indeed, he was in charge of the entire Atlantic Theatre. As the story goes, when he was put in charge his orders were very simple – “Win the War.” No confusion; no limited rules of engagement, which hampered us in Viet Nam and other future conflicts.  “Just win, baby.”

The Allies considered four possible landing sites: Brittany, Cotentin Peninsula, Pas de Calais and Normandy. The first two were eliminated primarily because they were located on peninsulas, which would have afforded very narrow fronts that would have enabled the Germans to trap the soldiers in a counterattack. That left Normandy and Calais. Once the Allies decided on Normandy there were many attempts to deceive the Germans into thinking the landings would be at Calais. Historical evidence indicates that the Germans thought Calais the most likely site anyway, possibly because it was closer to England, but both sites were heavily fortified. Indeed, the Germans had planned to fortify the entire coast from Norway to Spain, a so-called “Atlantic Wall.”  This would have included concrete emplacements, barbed wire, booby traps, mines, the removal of ground cover, and, of course, troops and armored equipment. Luckily for us, these fortifications were never completed. Interestingly, although most of the German High Command viewed Calais as the most likely landing site, General Rommel, perhaps the best general on either side, surmised correctly that it would likely be at Normandy.
Accordingly, he increased fortifications in the area, but, luckily for us he was out of favor for political reasons, so some key elements of his plans for defending the area were ignored or overruled. Most notably, some panzer divisions, which he had wanted to place in the Normandy area were, instead, retained in and around Paris.

In addition, the German Army was stretched very thinly. Much of its manpower was committed to the Eastern Front and had been depleted by heavy casualties after five years’ of fighting. Finally, it was relying on captured equipment, which was not of high quality.

One of the biggest unknowns, and one that the Allies could not control, was the weather. Due to the complexity of the operation conditions had to be just so, including the tides, phases of the moon and the time of day. Only a few days of a given month satisfied all criteria. For example, a full moon was preferred to provide maximum illumination for the pilots. Remember, instrumentation then was not what it is now.

Additionally, dawn, which was between low and high tide, was the preferred time of day. That way, as the high tide came in it would carry the LSTs farther in on the beach, and the men could spot obstacles, such as land mines, more easily. High winds, heavy seas and low cloud cover were not favorable. The planners were determined to wait for a day with ideal weather conditions so as to maximize the chances of success for a very risky and dangerous mission. In fact, the operation was postponed several times before June 6.

As we know, the operation was a success. Some of the major reasons for this were:
1. The aforementioned missions to deceive the Germans forced them to spread their defenses over a wide area.
2. The “Atlantic Wall” was only about 20% complete.
3. The Allies achieved air superiority quickly.
4. Much of the transportation infrastructure in France had been damaged by Allied bombings and the French resistance, which hampered the Germans’ ability to move men and material.
5. The German high command was disorganized and indecisive.

CONCLUSION

If, as many historians believe, winning WWII was one America’s greatest achievements, then it can be argued that D Day was one of our greatest victories. Certainly, its success shortened the war in Europe and, in the process, saved countless lives (combatants and non-combatants alike).

It’s a shame that, with the passage of time, there are so few veterans of this battle still alive.  Even the youngest ones are in their 90s.

In WWII we had a clear-cut goal, win the war; the nation was united in support of the war, our government and our troops; we knew who the enemy was; we knew the Axis Powers were evil (Hitler, in particular, was one of the most despicable men ever to walk the face of the earth.); and there was no holding back. Sadly, we have never had such clarity of purpose again, and, perhaps, we never will.

First, let’s deal with the “500 pound gorilla” in the room.  I will stipulate that, on a personal basis, there is a lot to dislike about President Trump.  He can be inappropriate, arrogant and boorish.  His off-the-cuff tweets can and have been offensive to some.  Sometimes, he will say things tongue-in-check that are meant to be facetious that some people will take literally and misinterpret as offensive and inappropriate.  He definitely rubs some people the wrong way.  All that said, I will repeat what I and many others have been saying since Mr. Trump first declared his candidacy.  PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT HE DOES, NOT WHAT HE SAYS.

With respect to the upcoming mid-term elections the first thing one must realize is I A A T E.  It’s all about the economy.  History shows that most of the time, absent an existential external threat people vote their pocketbooks.  To quote the late Casey Stengel “you could look it up.”  The oft-used expression “are you better or worse off today than you were four years ago” resonates today as well as it did when it was first uttered by Candidate Ronald Reagan in 1984.

So, let’s analyze President Trump’s record with respect to the economy.

Unemployment/Job Creation – According to USA Today and other sources the May unemployment rate declined to 3.8%, a level not seen since 1969.  When Mr. Trump took office the rate was 4.8%.  Moreover, USA Today cited the BLS report for May that the economy added 223,000 jobs in the month.

Unemployment is even shrinking among traditionally hardcore unemployed groups.  For example, the same report revealed that unemployment among AAs had declined to 5.9%, the lowest percentage ever recorded.  The rate for Hispanics declined to 4.9%; for teens, 12.8%.  Reporting in CNNMoney, Nathaniel Meyerson disclosed that the unemployment gap between whites and AAs had shrunk dramatically, and year over year wages were 2.7% higher, a modest increase, to be sure, but better than before.

Moreover, Meyerson characterized the economy as “strong” with a “tight labor market.”  He added that “job openings were at a record high, and businesses were hungry for workers.”

Regarding job growth Josh Wright, chief economist at the software company iCMS, stated that employers are “digging deeper into the pool of [the] unemployed.”  He added, “the US economy has an incredible head of steam.”

Tempering all this good news somewhat, the same USA Today article denoted that the “labor force participation rate,” the percentage of Americans working or looking for work, declined to 62.7%, and cautioned that if the economy’s growth (2.3% in 2017) were to continue to accelerate, inflation could become an issue.  However, I don’t believe inflation is a cause for concern right now, and I should like to denote that we should expect the labor force to decline prospectively as baby boomers retire.

One final point, the areas of greatest growth have been in the blue collar, working class fields of construction, manufacturing and healthcare. Thus, the greatest benefit has been going to the very constituency that Mr. Trump’s critics have been maintaining his policies would hurt.

Stock Market – According to Market Watch the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 32% during 2017.  On January  20, 2017, when Mr. Trump took office it stood at 19,805.  Yesterday, it closed at 24,843.

What is the significance of this for the country?  First of all, some 43 million households, most of them consisting of working class people, own one or more IRAs or other retirement accounts.  So, those results are relevant to the abovementioned “Are you better or worse off…” question.

Secondly, the stock market is a leading economic indicator. Therefore, the investment community is betting on a further improvement in the economy. As the late president JFK famously intoned, “a rising tide lifts all boats.” One could question whether or not this level of optimism is due solely to President Trump’s policies, but, in my opinion he should get the lion’s share of the credit.  You know that if the economic results were different he would get the blame.

Tax Reform – President Trump and his supporters have been extolling the benefits of his tax reform package for months, and his critics have been doing their best to discredit it as a huge giveaway for the rich.  For example, Nancy Pelosi famously, or, perhaps, infamously, denigrated the $1,000 bonuses some employers had paid to their workers as “crumbs.”  This quote illustrated how insensitive and out of touch the Dem leadership is, and I believe Dem candidates will regret it in November.

I urge you not to believe the critics.  By now, many of you have seen tangible evidence of its effect in the form of higher take home pay, a better job, and/or an increase in your retirement accounts.  What amounts to “crumbs” for Ms. Pelosi amounts to real money to most of us.

Perhaps, the most significant part of his tax package was the reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% (with a special lower rate for repatriated funds).  A recent World Economic Forum survey identified high tax rates as the most problematic factor in doing business.  (One does not have to be a tax expert to realize this, just have common sense.)

I expressed my opinion of the tax package in an earlier blog, and there is no need to repeat myself now. However, an objective person would have to concede that the early returns have been very positive.  Many international companies have announced their intention to repatriate profits currently being held in foreign locations to avoid the onerous 35% corporate tax rate. The Business Insider characterized this as a “tidal wave of internationally-held cash.” According to Citigroup this amounts to some $2.5 trillion. Goldman Sachs estimates that approximately $250 billion of that amount is likely to be repatriated to take advantage of the lower tax rate.

The expectation is that this cash will be used to (a) reinvest in the business, (b) increase employment, (c) pay bonuses, and/or (d) buy back company stock.  Any of these would have a beneficial effect on the economy. Indeed, several major corporations have already weighed in.

For example, Apple, which has reported it has some $250 billion stashed overseas, announced it expects to repatriate most of those funds, expand its physical plant and create 20,000 new jobs; AT&T has paid $1,000 bonuses to in excess of 200,000 employees and pledged to invest $1 billion domestically; Comcast also paid $1,000 bonuses and announced it intends to invest “in excess of $50 billion” on infrastructure over the next five years; Fifth Third BankCorp and Wells Fargo announced they will increase their minimum wage to $15. Workers should already be seeing the benefits of the reduced tax rates for individuals in their paychecks.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, I believe any objective person would conclude that “Trumpenomics” has been very beneficial to the country.  After all, who wouldn’t be pleased to have a better job and more money in their pocket. Yes, I wish Mr. Trump’s personality were more “presidential,” but assuming you can’t have both, which would you want?

Please answer the following question:  If you had to choose a surgeon to save your life, would you select a nice, polite, professional-appearing doctor who is an average surgeon or a nasty, arrogant, SOB who is an exceptional surgeon?

I think the answer is obvious.  Trump haters, like, for example, the shrill far left harpies on The View, CNN, and MSNBC, (and we all know who they are) should take a figurative “chill pill” and enjoy the fruits of his policies.

And, please, leave his family alone.  Families should be out of bounds, especially children.  You wouldn’t have countenanced criticism of Chelsea, Melania or Sasha.

From time to time, I receive requests from one of my readers for a blog on a specific topic.  I am only too happy to oblige.  So, Rich, thanks for the suggestion, and this one’s for you.

Some of you may be familiar with Hedy Lamarr as an old-time actress.  Indeed, she was a sensation in Germany in the early and mid-1930’s and a moderately successful actress in Hollywood from the late 1930’s until 1958, performing in some 30 movies.  Most of them were rather pedestrian.  Perhaps, the best known in the US were Boom Town, with Clark Gable, and Sampson and Delilah, with Victor Mature.  Ironically, she turned down the Ingrid Bergman role in Casablanca, which might have made her a big star.  But, in reality, acting was not Hedy’s greatest contribution to society.  Her greatest success came as an inventor.

Hedwig Eva Maria Kessler was born on November 14, 1914 in Vienna.  Her family was well-to-do.  Her father was a director of a bank, and her mother was a pianist.  Both of her parents were of Jewish ancestry, but Hedy’s mother had converted to Catholicism, and Hedy was raised as a Christian.

As a child, Hedy was drawn to movies.  As a teenager she dropped out of school to pursue a career as an actress.  She performed in a few German productions.  Her most notable role was in the movie entitled Ecstasy (1933), in which she appeared totally nude.  Needless to say, that was extremely shocking in 1933.  It made her world famous, and brought her to the attention of MGM’s chief, Louis B. Mayer, who promptly signed her to a contract.  It was Mayer who changed her last name to Lamarr, supposedly in honor of silent film star Barbara La Marr.

Hedy made her US debut in 1938 and, over the next 20 years, she appeared in some 25 movies, but few of them were successful and resonate at all today.  She had a reputation of being, as she, herself, put it, “difficult.”  The renowned costume designer, Edith Head, considered her one of the most problematic actresses she had to work with in her long and distinguished career.

Many considered her to be among the most beautiful actresses of her era.  Supposedly, in the 1940s her profile was the most frequently requested by women who were having plastic surgery.  Unfortunately, her great beauty did not translate into professional success.  After WWII her career began to wane.  In 1958 she retired from acting.

Hedy was married six times and bore three children – two sons and one daughter.  Her first husband was Friedrich Mandl, a wealthy arms merchant and manufacturer whom she married in 1933.  They were an unlikely pair on many levels – (1) their respective occupations had little in common, (2) their wide age gap, (she was 18; he was 33.), but most of all, (3) Mandl’s close association with Benito Mussolini and Adolph Hitler.  I don’t know what they thought of her Jewish heritage or what she thought of their Fascism.

In any event, Hedy soon became very unhappy in her marriage.  Mandl was very overbearing and kept her a virtual prisoner in his castle.  As Hedy recalled “I knew very soon that I could never be an actress while I was his wife….  He was the absolute monarch in [our] marriage…. I was like a doll.  I was like a thing, some object of art, which had to be guarded – and imprisoned- having no mind, no life of its own.”  Wow!  Eventually, she ran away disguising herself as her maid.  She fled to Paris and, eventually emigrated to the US.  She became a naturalized citizen in 1953.

Being a woman, she was considered to be an unlikely inventor in those years, and her ideas were dismissed by the contemporary scientific community.  The thinking of the day was how could a woman, and a beautiful one at that, possibly make a meaningful contribution to science.  During WWII she applied for membership in the National Inventors’ Council.  A few of its members dismissively suggested she could be more useful selling war bonds.  In other words, “Go away.  Don’t bother us.  Leave the science to the men.”

As I said, her bigger and more enduring contribution to society was as an inventor. What was the genesis of her ideas?   Perhaps, it was from being around her arms dealer husband, but, more likely she just had a natural gift for it.  Think about it.  She had no formal training.  Essentially, she was self-taught.  She loved to tinker in her spare time.   Two of her early inventions were an improved traffic light and a tablet that would fizz and dissolve in water.  Sound familiar?  Alka Seltzer, anyone?

During WWII she came up with a military application that could have been very useful to the Navy.  Radio-controlled torpedoes, which were a new and effective weapon, were prone to jamming.  Hedy and an associate, composer George Antheil, had the idea for a frequency-hopping signal that would render the torpedoes virtually impervious to jamming.  They even patented it.  However, the Navy expressed no interest.  Probably, they didn’t trust something developed by “outsiders.”  Too bad.  It could very likely have been useful.  As a footnote to this story, the Navy did commence using a version of their invention in the early 1960s.

Incredibly, the principles of this technology contributed to the development of Wi-Fi, cell phones, and Bluetooth.  All this, from an amateur with no formal training who just liked to “tinker.”  Unfortunately, Lamarr and Antheil did not profit from this as their patent had expired.

CONCLUSION

The later years of Hedy’s life were, to put it mildly, not kind to her.

1. She was arrested for shoplifting twice – in LA and later in Florida.
2. She became estranged from her sons.
3. She became addicted to pills.
4. In a vain attempt to maintain her renowned beauty she turned to plastic  surgery, but the results were, in the words of Wikipedia, “disastrous.”
5. Hedy valued her privacy.  She lived in virtual exclusion.  Her only means of communication with the outside world was by telephone.  Consequently, she lamented that the 1974 comedy, Blazing Saddles, in which producer Mel Brooks created a character named “Hedley Lamarr” had severely infringed on her privacy.  Brooks, who reportedly was a big fan of Lamarr’s claimed he had done it as an homage to Lamarr and that she Lamarr “never got the joke.”  Nevertheless, the studio issued an apology and settled out of court.

As sometimes happens, recognition came belatedly.

1. In 1960 she was honored with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
2. In 1997 she received an award from the Electronic Frontier Foundation for her work in spread-spectrum technology.
3. In 2008 the lives of Lamarr and Antheil were featured in an off-Broadway play entitled Frequency Hopping.
4. In 2010 The New York Public Library exhibit, Thirty Years of Photography, featured a topless Hedy Lamarr, circa 1930.
5. In 2011 the Science Channel featured Lamarr’s and Antheil’s frequency-hopping spread spectrum invention in one of its programs.
6. According to actress, Anne Hathaway, who played the “Catwoman” in the 2012 movie, The Dark Knight Rises, her character was based on Lamarr.
7. Hedy was inducted into the National Inventors’ Hall of Fame, posthumously, in 2014.

Hedy passed away on January 19, 2000 in Casselberry, FL.

,

It’s on.  It’s off.  It’s on again.

The Korean Summit, including the US, SOKO and NOKO, is scheduled for June 12 in Singapore.  Despite all the rhetoric, it was never really cancelled.   White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders’ disclosure that an advance team is still planning to travel to Singapore to “make arrangements” should tell you all you need to know.

I maintain Mr. Trump’s “cancellation” was just a way of posturing, part of the negotiations.  It was intended to show Kim that, if Mr. Trump thinks the US is being “played” he is perfectly willing to walk away.  As anyone who has negotiated any kind of deal – a house, a car or a business arrangement – knows, the first rule of a successful negotiation is to convince the other side that you are willing to walk away.    (Incidentally, Messrs. Obama and Kerry would have been advised to employ that strategy when negotiating the Iran nuke deal.  If so, they likely would have gotten a more reasonable deal.)

Anyone paying attention during the presidential campaign would remember Mr. Trump’s constant railing about poor deals made by previous administrations and his claim that he could and would negotiate better ones.  This is consistent with his negotiating style.  Whether or not one likes Mr. Trump’s politics, there is no doubt that he knows how to negotiate a deal.

I find the Dems’ and the mainstream media’s attitude toward this summit most amusing and disingenuous.  Their criticisms have been oxymoronic.  Prior to its being announced they were criticizing Mr. Trump for his open hostility toward Kim, i. e. accusing him of antagonizing a leader who was “clearly unbalanced” and who controlled a nuclear arsenal and referring to him derisively as “little rocket man.”

When the summit was first announced they were critical once again.  The general theme was Mr. Trump was being “played.”  He was being suckered into affording Kim an exalted status he did not deserve.  He was creating false hope for SOKO and the US.   What made him think he could succeed where others had failed for over 60 years.  Mr. Trump, for his part, was consistently even-keeled.  His standard assessment of the summit’s prospects has been variations of “we’ll see.”  Typically, he would balance the “carrot” of the summit with the “stick” of dire consequences that the US could and would visit upon NOKO if it failed to come to pass.  As a footnote, along the way, NOKO unilaterally released three hostages, unharmed, and destroyed at least one of its nuclear sites.

At the Olympics they fawned over Kim’s younger sister, Kim-Yo Jong, as if she were an international celebrity, while, at the same time, being overly critical of Ivanka Trump.  They lost sight of the fact that Kim is a blood relative of the leader of one of the most brutal dictatorships in modern times while Ivanka is the daughter of the president.  Would the press have been as critical of Chelsea Clinton or Sasha or Malia Obama?  I doubt it.

When Mr. Trump announced he was cancelling the summit he was criticized again.  One common theme was he had “counted his chickens before they hatched.”  The far left harpies on The View gleefully decried that he would no longer be in line for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Ha.  Ha.  Too bad.  It was as if these critics were rooting against the US just so that Mr. Trump could fail.

Well, “surprise, surprise” as the late Jim Nabors used to say.  Yesterday, SOKO’s Moon Jae-in and NOKO’s Kim Jong In had their own “impromptu” summit meeting, reportedly at Kim’s request.  Both leaders announced it was very productive, and they repeated their oft-stated wish for a “nuclear-free Korean peninsula.”  Furthermore, they agreed to maintain open lines of communication and meet “frequently,” prospectively.  It is clear that both are highly motivated to hold the summit, as scheduled.

Furthermore, NOKO has issued a press release that Kim is ready to talk to Mr. Trump “at any time.”  Even Aljazeera, definitely not a pro-US media outlet, had something positive to say, quoting Kim as saying the summit could “end decades of war.”

CONCLUSION

How can any objective person think a Korean summit is a bad idea?  I have always believed that even enemies need to maintain lines of communication.  Even at the height of the “Cold War,” for instance, we always had “back channel” communications with Russia.  Talking is always better than fighting.

I think it is clear that, at the moment, the leaders of both Koreas, particularly Kim, are highly motivated to work out some kind of deal.  Perhaps, Mr. Trump’s tough, no-nonsense stance regarding ISIS, the Iran Deal and other matters has laid the groundwork for Kim’s newfound willingness to talk.  Perhaps, China has been pressuring him.  Perhaps, conditions in NOKO are more intolerable than we know.   In any case, as we know, in life timing is everything.  Strike while the iron is hot.  Use any cliché you like.  Perhaps, now the time is right for peace in Korea.

My message to the Dems and the mainstream media is simply put aside your antagonism for Mr. Trump and support the peace effort.  You can’t have it both ways.  You can’t criticize Mr. Trump for (1) antagonizing Kim, (2) agreeing to a summit, (3) cancelling the summit, and then (4) reinstating it.  Once again, you are on the wrong side of an issue on the eve of an election.

Yes, the summit can still be derailed, or it may not be successful.  Lots of things can go wrong.  But, for the first time, we have a real chance for peace in Korea.  Like Mr. Trump says: “We’ll see.”

This weekend, millions of Americans will celebrate Memorial Day. To many of them MD is merely a day off from work, a day to gather with friends and relatives, watch sports, barbecue, or maybe go away for a mini-vacation. But, how many of us actually stop and ponder the meaning of MD? What does it mean? What is its derivation? Well, I’m glad you asked. Read on.

According to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs the purpose of MD is to honor veterans who have died in the service of their country. (Some people confuse it with Veterans’ Day, celebrated in November, which is to honor LIVING veterans for their service.) MD is celebrated on the final Monday in May, which this year is May 28. It has also evolved into the unofficial start of summer and Opening Day for beaches, pools and vacation homes.

The original name for MD was “Decoration Day.” The custom of decorating soldiers’ graves with flowers is centuries old. Its origins are murky, but after the Civil War it became customary to “decorate” soldiers’ graves with flowers as a way to honor those who had died in that war.

Several cities claim to be the birthplace of MD. Warrenton, Va. claims that the first CW soldier’s grave was decorated there in 1861. Women began decorating soldiers’ graves in Savannah, Ga. as early as 1862. Boalsburg, Pa. and Charleston, SC, among others, have also made claims. NY became the first state to recognize MD as an official holiday in 1873. In 1966 President Lyndon Johnson declared Waterloo, NY to be the official birthplace of MD.

The basis of Waterloo’s claim is that in 1865 a group of locals, including a pharmacist, Henry Welles, General John Murray, a CW hero, and a group of other veterans, simply marched to the local cemeteries and decorated the soldiers’ graves with flowers. What gave Waterloo an edge in the birthplace battle was that Murray was an acquaintance of General John Logan, the general who issued “Logan’s Order, ” the proclamation that declared “Decoration Day” should be celebrated annually nationwide.

At first, MD was celebrated on May 30 every year. The date seems somewhat arbitrary as it was not the anniversary of any famous battle or military event. Perhaps, it was chosen simply because flowers with which the graves are decorated are in bloom and plentiful at that particular time of the year. The name, “Decoration Day” was gradually replaced by MD beginning in 1882, and in 1887 MD became the official name. In 1968 the Congress moved the holiday to the last Monday in May. This annoyed many traditionalists, but the lure of a three-day weekend overcame any objections, and the Monday date has prevailed.

There are some MD traditions worth noting:

1. Flying the flag at half-staff.

Most of the time one will see the flag flown at half-staff all day; however, technically, this is not proper. The flag should be raised to the top and then lowered to half-staff. This is intended to honor those who have died for their country. At noon, the flag is to be raised again to full staff, where it remains for the rest of the day. This is to recognize that the deceased veterans’ sacrifices were not in vain.

2. Poppies.

Poppies have become the official flower of remembrance, declared as such by the American Legion in 1920. This is derived from WWI and the Battle of Ypres (English pronunciation is “Wipers.”). Apparently, a proliferation of poppies grew on that battlefield around soldiers’ graves. These poppies were featured in a famous poem by Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae called “In Flanders Fields.” This poem caught people’s imagination and popularized the custom.

3. Sporting Events.

No American holiday celebration would be complete without a sports connection. MD has the Indianapolis 500 and the Memorial golf tournament, among others. Also, until recently there was the traditional Memorial Day baseball doubleheader. Alas, due to economics, scheduled holiday baseball doubleheaders are all but extinct.

CONCLUSION

I hope the foregoing has increased your understanding and appreciation of MD. As a veteran, myself, I find it most gratifying that, in recent years, most Americans have come to recognize and appreciate the service and sacrifice of our country’s veterans. I can remember a time (the Vietnam War period) when it wasn’t so.

So, whatever you do this weekend, however you celebrate, try to pause for a moment in honor of the many veterans who have given their lives so that the rest of us could enjoy the freedoms we sometimes take for granted.

What has happened to the Democratic Party?  In my opinion, the broad “new deal” coalition of labor, ethnics, minorities, other disadvantaged persons, liberals and even some moderates forged by FDR during the 1930s in the depths of the Great Depression is transforming before our very eyes.  Today, the Party of FDR, JFK and LBJ is virtually unrecognizable.

For example:

1.  The party has moved so far to the “left” that it is alienating many moderates and independent voters.  This was evidenced in the 2016 election by Mr. Trump’s victories in states such as Wisconsin and Michigan.
2. Some of the Party’s most visible spokespersons are politicians such as Corey Booker, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders, who, although very popular, is not really even a Democrat, but an out and out socialist.  They and others have been pulling the Party’s leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to the left with them.
3. Some of the policies they have been espousing, such as open borders, universally free healthcare, cradle to grave government assistance, and free college education for everyone may sound appealing to some, but they are ill-advised and irresponsible on many levels, have not worked in other countries, would destroy the middle class and bankrupt the country.
4. Many of the Dems still refuse to believe that they lost in 2016 legitimately.  Even 18 months later they are still focused on Russian election tampering and collusion with the Trump campaign.  They refuse to admit they lost because the GOP had a better candidate and most Americans were just fed up with the same old, same old in Washington.  Their primary campaign issue for 2018 is negativity: Trump is a bad guy.  He is a racist, a misogynist.  We hate him.  We want to impeach him.  They will need more than that to win back Congress in 2018 and the presidency in 2020.
5. This month is the anniversary of the commencement of the Mueller investigation.  Whether you love or hate President Trump you have to admit that the Mueller investigation has not turned up even a smidgeon of collusion or obstruction on the part of Mr. Trump or his campaign.  And, this is despite having spent millions of dollars, conducting over 100 interviews, examining millions of documents and diverting the country’s attention away from more important matters.  In addition, the objectivity of the investigators and the investigation, itself, has been, to say the least, highly questionable.  Instead, we have found evidence of improper, if not illegal, acts by Democrats and their supporters, for instance, leaking confidential information and entrapment on the part of FBI agents (Stroh, Comey and others), compiling and pushing an unverified, if not downright false, dossier on Mr. Trump that was compiled by the Clinton campaign, “trumping up” phony evidence to obtain a FISA warrant, engaging in illegal wiretapping, and placing an undercover agent within the Trump campaign.  One could legitimately make the case that Messrs. Trump, Jr., Papadopoulos and Carter were “set up” with respect to their infamous meetings and information provided.  This week, even the NY Times was forced to concur, opining that “a year and a half later, no public evidence has surfaced connecting Mr. Trump’s advisors to the hacking or linking Mr. Trump, himself, to the Russian government ‘s disruptive efforts.”  You know it must have killed them to admit and publish that.
6. Somehow, the Party has been maneuvered into defending the heinous MS-13 gang as well as other criminal illegal aliens.  In addition, their open border stance and support of sanctuary cities have given many people the distinct impression that they prefer the rights of illegal aliens to those of US citizens.  I and many others believe their preference for the rights of illegal aliens is designed to develop a new constituency of voters, prospectively.
7. MS-13 is one of, if not the, most vicious gangs in the world.  They don’t just kill people.  They chop them up with machetes.  They dismember them.  They torture.  They gang rape.  And, they do it to the victims’ extended family members as well.  They are the worst of the worst.  And they have been increasingly active in the US.
8. Surprise!  Surprise!   Some members sneak in hidden among other refugees and asylum seekers.  Kids, no more than ten or eleven are recruited or coerced to join.  Mr. Trump’s border security policy attempts to keep them out.  The Dems’ open border policy makes it easy for them to enter.  The crowning blow came this week when Mr. Trump specifically referred to MS-13 members as “animals.”  Based on their abovementioned acts this is hard to dispute.  I think most Americans would agree with that characterization.  But, not the NY Times and Washington Post, which either carelessly or deliberately misquoted Mr. Trump to make it appear that he characterized all immigrants as “animals.”  Also, various Dem politicians and supporters piled on.  For example, Anna Navarro compared Mr. Trump to Nazis and former slave owners.  Nancy Pelosi defended MS-13 members , lecturing us that “we are all God’s children,” and we should “respect the dignity of every person.”  Incidentally, it was the same Anna Navarro who during the 2016 campaign referred to candidate Trump as “an animal.  Apologies to animals.”  Regardless of one’s opinion of President Trump or his choice of words, the Dems are definitely on the wrong side of this issue.
9. Congressman Al Green (D-TX) is still aggressively pushing impeachment, like a modern-day Don Quixote.  Mr. Green should review the constitution.   Its definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is fairly flexible (Gerald Ford once famously said it is whatever the Congress decides it to be at a particular point in time.), but it definitely does not include personal dislike or disagreement.

CONCLUSION

The sad irony is that if the Dems were so inclined there are legitimate issues they could exploit and campaign on.  For example, many Americans are concerned about healthcare and gun violence.

Historically, the party in power normally loses seats in the off-year midterm elections.  The question is how many seats will the GOP lose and will they still retain a majority.  The GOP has several accomplishments it could campaign on, such as the improving economy, low unemployment (historically low in the case of AAs), tax cut, defeating ISIS, NOKO talks, but they have to articulate them effectively.

The mainstream media would have us believe that a “blue wave” will sweep the country in November.  I have my doubts.  Let’s not forget that some of the Dems running for re-election are in “red” states that Mr. Trump won handily in 2016.  Personally, I think the results will be closer than most people think, and if the Dems don’t change their strategy they could be in for a big disappointment.

As the whole world knows, the royal wedding between Price Harry, aka Prince Henry of Wales, the second son of Charles, Prince of Wales and Diana, Princess of Wales, and Meghan Markle will take place tomorrow, Saturday, at 12:00 pm London time at St. George Chapel at Windsor Castle.  Probably, much, if not most, of the civilized world will be glued to their tv sets so as not to miss even the most insignificant part of the nuptials.

For the most part, I have not been a big fan of the Royal family’s comings and goings.  I have nothing against most of them, personally.  My main interest in the Royals has been the manner in which they have impacted history, particularly the more notable rulers, such as King Henry VIII and Queens Elizabeth and Victoria, to name a few.   As for the rest of it, for example, their exalted and privileged status and station in life due to an accident of birth, the overly lavish lifestyle, the celebrity status, all the pomp and circumstance and suffocating protocols and etiquette, I just don’t see the relevance in the 21st century.  In short, to me they are an anachronism.

All that said, I am interested in the Royal Wedding because of Meghan Markel.  I enjoyed watching her performances on the TV hit series, Suits (2011-2018), and I am intrigued by the fact that she is a “commoner” (Incidentally, I really hate that term.  It conjures up class distinctions and tells you all you need to know about monarchies and why they’re passe.), an American, and a person of “mixed race heritage” as Wikipedia so delicately puts it,  As most of you know by now, she will be the second American and the first person of “mixed race heritage” to marry into the British royal family.

So, who is Meghan Markel, and how did she get to where she is?  Glad you asked.  Read on.

Meghan Markel was born on August 4, 1981 in Los Angeles.  Her father is Caucasian and, interestingly, according to Wikipedia, is a distant relative of England’s King Edward, III.  Her father was in the entertainment business peripherally.  He was a lighting director in daytime TV and actually won a Daytime Emmy.  Her mom, an African American, was a social worker and yoga instructor.  They divorced when Meghan was six.

She graduated from Northwestern University in 2003 with a degree in international studies and theatre. She married Trevor Engelson in 2011.  They divorced in 2013.

Meghan is more than merely an actress, although that is how she is best known.  To put it bluntly, before Suits, however, her acting career was mostly nondescript.  It consisted of small, forgettable roles in forgotten movies and single-episode appearances on tv series.  For example, in 2005’s movie A Lot Like Love she played a “passenger on a plane.”

In her other endeavors, Meghan was a counsellor for “One Young World,” an international charity that advocates gender equality and derides “modern-day slavery.”  In addition, she was founder and editor-in-chief of The Tig, a lifestyle website.  Furthermore, in partnership with Reitmans, a Canadian clothing company, she distributed a line of women’s fashion work wear.

Some fun facts regarding the royal couple nuptials, most of which those of you who are ardent “royal watchers” probably already know:

1. Harry and Meghan met on a blind date.
2. The Saturday wedding is a break with tradition in that such events have usually been held on a weekday.  Traditionally, the weekday wedding days have been designated as “Bank holidays,” but this Saturday has not.
3. In a nice gesture, the royal couple has requested that, in lieu of traditional gifts, guests should make donations to one of various designated charities.
4. Due to Meghan’s father’s illness Price Charles will walk her down the aisle.
5. Prince William will be the best man.  The couple has selected the children of various friends and relatives to act as pages and bridesmaids.
6. Due to the small venue, the guest list will be limited to 600, roughly 1/3 of the number, for instance, that attended the wedding of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip in 1947.  These are people who have a “close” and “direct” relationship with the couple.  In addition, since Harry is “merely” 6th in the line of succession to the throne, protocol dictated that it was not required to invite political leaders and Heads of State, and so most of them were omitted.
7. Since Harry is one of the six persons in the line of succession both Queen Elizabeth and the Church had to give their approvals, which they did.  In case you’re interested, the Church no longer denies permission to a divorced person with a living spouse.  Meghan was baptized into the Church in March and is in the process of becoming a British citizen.  It has not been determined if she will retain her US citizenship.
8. It is estimated that the wedding will cost 500,000 pounds (approximately $673,000), which, thankfully, will be covered by the Royal Family.
9. In addition to the reception for those attending the ceremony there will be a larger one for family and other close friends and a carriage procession, which will be viewed by selected people.

CONCLUSION

This will be a real rarity for all you “royal watchers,” many of whom will rise in the wee hours tomorrow so as not to miss anything.  Others may watch bits and pieces, here and there.  Still others will take a “bah humbug” approach and watch reruns or old movies.

Finally, for those of you that are interested, some etiquette tips for the guests courtesy of Town and Country and its panel of etiquette experts:

1. One expert advises ladies to cover their heads; another one said “hats are encouraged, but not required.”  Good luck with that.
2. Ladies, no bare legs.
3. Heels should be moderate, but not too high.
4. Don’t wear white.
5. Many men will wear a “morning suit” whatever that is, but if not, a conservative suit, grey or navy, would be appropriate.  Avoid garish waistcoats or accessories.
6. Bow and curtsy properly.

So, now you can eagerly watch for etiquette faux pas.  Enjoy the show.

Today, May 14, is a “red-letter day” for the State of Israel and its supporters.  First of all, it marks the 70th anniversary of Israeli Independence Day, formally known as the “Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel.”  (The equivalent date on the Hebrew calendar, 5 Iyar, was celebrated throughout Israel as Independence Day last month.)  Secondly, today the US embassy officially relocated from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The US embassy relocation was a long time coming.  To paraphrase President Trump, a very staunch supporter who, make no mistake about it, was the driving force behind the move, every country has the right to designate its capital city, and foreign embassies should be located in the capital city.  In reality, Jerusalem is and has been the real capital of Israel, so the US is merely recognizing reality.  Every other President promised to relocate the embassy, but it was President Trump who delivered.

Critics will wring their hands and complain that it hurts the peace process, but, in truth, the peace process between the Jews and the Arabs in the region has been languishing for years.  Some would characterize it as DOA.  Animosities go back thousands of years.  Hardliners like Iran have denied Israel’s very right to exist and have vowed to crush it.  For all intents and purposes, a constant state of war has existed between Israel and most of its neighbors for the entirety of its existence.  President Trump has reaffirmed the US’s commitment to the peace process, and I believe him.  Today’s Hamas-inspired violence was unfortunate, but it fell far short of the chaos and mayhem that some had predicted.

The birth of the State of Israel can be traced to the Zionist movement of the late 19th Century.   Two of the early leaders of this movement were Theodore Hertzl and Chaim Weizmann.  The Zionists’ goal was to re-establish a Jewish state in the land area that is now the State of Israel.

It picked up steam following WW1.  The Middle East had been part of the Ottoman Empire.  After their defeat, the British took control of the area.  The Brits issued the controversial Balfour Declaration, named for Foreign Secretary Alfred Balfour, which among other things, called for the establishment of a home for the Jews in Palestine.  That gave Zionists hope.  A land of their own free from the scourge of anti-Semitism.

The problem was, the Declaration was vague on details, and it may have contradicted certain promises the Brits had made to Arab chieftains in exchange for their support against the Turks in WW1.  Also, there was a large majority of Arabs living in the area who wanted no part of a Jewish state.  The powers that be essentially “kicked the can down the road.”

The situation simmered until after WWII when, in response to increasing violence the Brits dumped the matter into the hands of the UN.  The UN passed a resolution to partition Palestine, as it was called, into three areas – an Arab state, a Jewish state and a “Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem.”  The Jewish state was to receive some 56% of the area’s landmass.

Unlike the Arabs, the Jews were willing to accept the terms of the resolution, except for the borders.  The Arabs wanted all of the area and were willing and eager to take it by force.  Consequently, the Jewish leader, David Ben-Gurion, famously stated that if the Arabs would not agree to the borders neither would the Jews. “Why should we obligate ourselves to accept boundaries that, in any case, the Arabs don’t accept?”  If Israel won a war, he said, it would keep whatever additional land it captured.  When the dust had settled, Israel was in control of an additional 60% of the land that the UN resolution had originally awarded to the Arabs.

Meanwhile, on May 14, 1948 Israel issued a declaration establishing itself as a Jewish state.  There was some discussion regarding the name of the state.  Some of the other names considered besides “Israel” were “Ziona,” “Ivriya,” and “Herzliya.”  “Israel” was Ben-Gurion’s choice, and I believe it was a good one.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, the State of Israel has much to be proud of.  As stated above, it had to fight for its very existence against very long odds.  Furthermore, it has had to maintain a constant state of vigilance and fight several wars and skirmishes just to survive.  According to an editorial in the National Catholic Reporter it is “an event to celebrate in a part of the world where democracy remains rare,” (I would say, “unique.”)

Israel’s only reliable ally over the past 70 years has been the US, although I believe that some Administrations have been less supportive than others.  The US was the first country to recognize Israel as a state.  (It took President Truman about 11 hours to do so.)  In return, Israel has been the US’s only consistent and reliable ally in the region.

I maintain that Jews should be very proud of this country.  Even non-Jews should admire its ability and determination to continue to survive in a hostile world.

70 years!  Congratulations, Israel!  Well done!