Author: webuiltitblog

Last week, a 14 year old student was brutally raped in the boys’ bathroom of her school.  This crime is heinous enough, but what makes it worse is that the alleged perpetrators were two illegal aliens aged 18 and 17, and worse yet, that many news outlets ignored or underreported the story, possibly for political reasons.  The salient facts of this case should make one’s blood boil.  As reported by Fox News, CNN, and various independent news outlets they are as follows:

1. The 18 year-old was from Guatemala.  ICE records show he entered the country illegally in August, 2016.  He was caught by a Border Patrol agent, issued an order to appear before an immigration judge and given a bus ticket to Maryland to join his father.  Classic “catch and release,” as practiced by the Obama Administration.  His court date has not yet been scheduled, some eight months later.  This is outrageous on many levels, but, sadly, it is not uncommon.  According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University there is a backlog of in excess of 500,000 such pending cases nationwide.
2. The 17 year-old was from El Salvador is here illegally.  As I write this, how and when he snuck in is unknown, but it is not significant.  What is significant, is the crime he allegedly committed.
3. The Montgomery County school placed both men in ninth grade classes with 14 year- olds.  School officials stated that their policy has been to place immigrants with language deficiencies with freshmen, rather than with their own age group.  I am not an educator, but I do have common sense, and I can see that this is an ill-advised policy.  Would you want your 14 year-old daughter commingled with 17 and 18 year- old men?   I know local school districts do not have the resources to vett all their students in detail, but at least separate 17 and 18 year-olds from 14 year-olds.

Outrage over the crime has come from many sources.  One parent’s comment was typical, and echoed the opinion of many  others nationwide. “I know that if this country enforced the laws that are already on the books those young men would not have been here and this rape, this horrendous rape, would not have occurred.”  When asked to comment at Tuesday’s press briefing Sean Spicer characterized the crime as “horrendous, horrible and disgusting.”  I think we can all agree with those two sentiments.

CONCLUSION

I believe there are broader aspects of this crime that need to be addressed.  For one thing, it was yet another example of the country’s utter failure to secure its borders and protect its citizens.  I am not talking solely about terrorists.  The problem is far broader.  FBI statistics clearly and conclusively demonstrate that illegals commit a significant number of drug and gang-related crimes, as well as other serious crimes, such as murder, rape, and sex-related crimes.  Our present “catch and release” policy has proven to be an utter failure.  Few illegals bother to show up for their hearings, which may be scheduled months or even years in the future.  Meanwhile, they are scattered all over the country.  We don’t know who they are, where they are, or what they are doing.  I realize that most illegals are law-abiding and contribute to society, but, that said, we are being plagued by the actions of a few.

Last, but certainly not least, I would like to address the mainstream media’s lack of coverage and/or underreporting of this crime.  According to reports by Fox News and various independent outlets, such as Newsbusters.org, neither ABC, NBC or CBS News reported the story Monday or Tuesday on tv, and CNN gave very sparse coverage.  This is despite the fact that Sean Spicer made his above comments at a well-attended White House press briefing.  All three networks did, however, find time to report on fluff pieces, such as (a) a comparison between expensive pasta and cheap pasta, (b) The Bachelor, (c) futuristic cars and (d) a flub on The Wheel of Fortune.

In my opinion, these omissions were not because the story wasn’t newsworthy.  It was politically-motivated.  The story casts the previous administration’s immigration policy in a bad light.  And, the media wonders why most Americans view them as biased and don’t trust them.

If any of you saw the story reported on one of the networks, please comment .  I would like to know.

Chuck Berry is generally recognized as one of the Founding Fathers of Rock ‘n Roll and one of the most versatile and accomplished RR artists ever.  He performed for some 70 years beginning in 1941 as a high school student.  He achieved prominence as a singer, songwriter, musician and performer.  He had many “hit” records, including “Maybelline,” “Johnny B. Goode,” which has autobiographical overtones, “Rock ‘N Roll Music,” and “Old Time Rock ‘N Roll.” But, all that said, perhaps, his greatest legacy was his influence on a plethora of successful performers, such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Beach Boys, Elvis, Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan.

Charles Edward Anderson Berry was born on October 18, 1926 in St. Louis, the fourth of six children.  His family was middle class.  His father was a contractor and a deacon in the local church.  His mother was a public school principal.

Berry exhibited a talent and interest in music at an early age, and in 1941 at the age of 16 he gave his first public performance at his high school.  Unfortunately, he also exhibited another predilection at an early age – crime.  At 17, he was convicted of armed robbery and  sent to the nearby Intermediate Reformatory for Young Men.   At this point, it could have all gone “South” for Berry.  He could have descended into a life of crime, and the history of RR and music, in general, would have been significantly different.  But, Berry appeared to reform himself.  He took up boxing and formed a musical quartet successful enough that authorities allowed it to perform outside the detention facility.  Upon his release in 1947 at the age of 21 he got married and worked in an auto assembly and as a janitor.

In addition, he continued to perform with local bands, such as the Johnnie Johnson Trio.  Berry got his big break in 1955 when Muddy Waters recommended he audition with Leonard Chess of Chess Records in Chicago.  As it happened, Chess thought the R & B market was waning, and he was looking for a new sound.   He loved Berry’s adaptation of a country and western song called “Ida Red,” which Berry recorded for Chess as “Maybelline.”  “Maybelline” sold in excess of one million records and climbed to #1 on Billboard Magazine’s R & B chart.  Berry was on his way.

A succession of hits followed, including “School Days,” “Rock ‘N Roll Music”, “Sweet Little Sixteen” and “Johnny B. Goode,” among others. In addition, he was a big hit on music impresario Alan Freed’s “Biggest Show of Stars” in 1957, and toured with the biggest stars of the day, such as Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, and the Everly Brothers.

In addition to his music, which speaks for itself, Berry was a real “showman.”  His performances included the famous “one-legged hop” and the “duck walk.”  In his words, he would walk “stooping with full bended knees, but with my back and head vertical.”  He perfected this while performing for his family as a child, and they liked it so much he incorporated it into his act.  You might recall the actor Michael J. Fox performed these in the hit film, Back to the Future.

CONCLUSION

As I denoted above, Berry was truly a RR pioneer who was not only one of the most versatile performers ever, but also an influence on countless others who followed.  One would be hard-pressed to name any other performer who combined the talents of writing, singing, performing, and influencing others as well as he did.

Berry was the recipient of countless awards and honorariums.  Also, Rolling Stone Magazine has ranked many of his hits on its list of the “Greatest of All Time,” and he, himself, is ranked among the greatest performing artists of all time.

Perhaps, Berry’s legacy could best be summed up by the following selection of quotes from others in the business:

1.  Elvis – “I just wish I could express my feelings the way Chuck Berry does.”
2. Bruce Springsteen – Chuck Berry was rock’s greatest practitioner, guitarist, and the greatest pure rock ‘ n roll writer who ever lived.”
3. Mick Jagger – “He lit up our teenage years and blew life into our dreams of being musicians and performers.”
4. John Lennon – “If you tried to give rock and roll another name, you might call it ‘Chuck Berry.’ “
5. Robert Christgau (notable rock critic) – the “greatest of the rock and rollers.”
6. Bob Dylan – “The ‘Shakespeare’ of rock ‘n roll.”

Chuck Berry passed away on March 18 at the age of 90.  Rest in peace Chuck.  You will be sorely missed, and your legacy will live as long as rock ‘n roll is played.

Richard Lyon, the first Navy seal to accede to the rank of Admiral, has passed away at the age of 93.  At the time of his death he had the distinction  of being the oldest-serving Navy seal, which had earned him the sobriquet “Bullfrog.”  The term, “Bullfrog” is an honorarium give to the Underwater Demolition Team Seal with the largest amount of cumulative service, regardless of rank.  The label is derived from the traditional depiction of seals as “frogmen” in recruiting posters, movies and books.  The superior “frogman” became known as “Bull Frog.”

Lyon was born on July 14, 1923 in Pasadena, CA.   Like most Seals, he was very athletic.  In fact, he was such a proficient swimmer that he qualified for the 1940 US Olympic swim team.  Unfortunately, as we know, due to the advent of WWII those Olympics were cancelled, and Lyon never got to compete.

Instead, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor Lyon entered the Navy, serving in the Pacific Theatre.  He served in various roles, much of which was and is classified, including that of “Intelligence Officer” (in China).  Following Japan’s surrender Lyon was one of the first American military personnel to enter Japan.

Lyon served some 40 years in the Navy and fought in two wars (Korea as well as WWII).  He retired from the Navy in 1983, but he did not retire from life.  He had a successful business career in retail and finance.  He served two terms as mayor of Oceanside, CA and as a member of various boards of directors.  For recreation, he piloted private planes, body surfed and played golf.  In 2013 he was the recipient of the prestigious Yale University George H. W. Bush Lifetime of Leadership Award.

CONCLUSION

Over the course of his long and distinguished life and career, Lyon earned, perhaps, the greatest award of all – the respect of his peers.  Rear Admiral Tim Szymanski, commander of Naval Special Warfare Command, characterized him as a “legend.”  Said lifelong friend, Kelly Sarber, who first met Lyon as a child through her own father, also a seal: “He reminded me of James Bond.  I never saw him lose his cool. … He was a real class act.”

Lyon passed away on February 3, 2017.  Rest in peace Admiral.  You made your mark and served your country with great distinction.  You will be sorely missed.

Have you ever been curious as to the origin and meaning of your surname?  I have, which led me to write this blog.  The short answer is – surname origins and meanings are complicated, very complicated.  Different cultures around the world have very different traditions with respect to surnames.  In this blog, I have attempted to present the information in an organized and logical way.

Generally, a surname is a family name that is added to one’s given, or first name.  It is given to one’s children and passed to succeeding generations.  In most Western Hemisphere countries, such as the US, the surname, or family name, is the last name.  For example, Lawrence is my given name and Jacob is my surname.  In some countries, such as China and Korea, however, the surname comes before the given name.  To complicate matters further, in most Spanish-speaking countries it is typical for people to retain the surnames of both the mother’s and father’s family, i.e. Jose Rodriquez [Y] Hernandez.  Finally, in some parts of Asia and East Africa surnames are not used at all.  To simplify matters, somewhat I will be discussing customs prevalent in the US and Western Europe unless otherwise specified.

The concept of a surname can be traced back to the Middle Ages.  It had often become confusing when too many people had the same first name in a particular locale.  Thus, John, who was a blacksmith, became John Smith, while John, who made clothes, became John Tailor or Taylor.

My research disclosed the following salient points of information:

1. The University of West England conducted a comprehensive study of the history of surnames in Great Britain from the 11th through 19th Centuries.  The survey’s findings were published in the Oxford English Dictionary of Family Names in Britain and Ireland in 2016. Among the major findings:

a. Irish surnames are the oldest in Europe.  The first recorded surname was O Cleirigh.  The death of one Tigherneach Ua O Cleirigh, Lord of Aidhne was recorded in 916.

b. As we know, the Irish commonly use surname prefixes.  These may or may not be attached to the main name.  Thus, we have the surnames “O’Brien” or “MacMillan.”

c.  In England, surnames originated circa 1086 following the Norman Conquest.  Many Normans used a “territorial surname” by simply attaching the prefix “de” to their town of origin in France, for example, Pierre de Lyon.  As one might expect, the trend began among the nobility and gradually spread to other classes.

d.  Many English would employ occupational or territorial surnames, such as John Chandler, John Butcher, John Hill, or John Meadows.

2.  Traditionally, it has been customary for the wife to assume her husband’s surname, but in recent years this custom has been relaxed due to PC.  Occasionally, a wife will not change her name, or, will use both surnames with a hyphen.  According to Wikipedia the first woman in the US to retain her maiden name was one Lucy Stone in 1855.  The best current estimate of wives who take the husband’s surname is 80%.

3.  In the US:

a.  Approximately 50% of the population has one of only 1,700 surnames.  As you could probably guess, Smith is the most common, with about 1%.  Rounding out the top five, in order, are Johnson, Williams, Brown and Jones.

b.  Many names are corruptions of European names due to misspelling, mispronunciation, or other causes during the immigration process.  A common misconception is that these changes typically occurred upon entry at Ellis Island.  Many family legends insist that the clerk gave their ancestor a name based on his home town, (John London), trade (John Baker), or a physical characteristic (John Short).   Possibly, but, in point of fact, these changes could also have and often did occur at the country of origin or at any waypoint.  Consider that the clerk at Ellis Island was working from a passenger list that had been developed at the port of origin.   Also, during the peak of foreign immigration  (1894-1924) about one-third of the immigration inspectors spoke three or more languages.  Furthermore, interpreters were often available as well.  So, although they could have made a copying error, it would have been more likely that the name changes would have occurred elsewhere.

c.  In some cases family members arriving at different times ended up with different spellings of the same surname.  These differences may or may not have been rectified by descendants.  I have personal knowledge of a family situation such as this.

d.  It was common for immigrants to Americanize their names.  Reasons for this included patriotism, a desire to assimilate or a wish to avoid discrimination.  Many immigrants were so happy to be here they wanted a clean break, a fresh start.  One way to accomplish this was to take a new American name or Americanize their original one.  Thus, “Goldschmidt” could become “Goldsmith” or just “Gold.”  Many names, especially Eastern European names, which tended to be long on consonants and short on vowels, were too difficult to pronounce and spell.  This would instantly identify the person as an immigrant and could cause difficulties or embarrassment at work or at the children’s school.  So, a name like Zymancwiecz or Smirnoff could become Zell or Smiley.  Finally, and perhaps most common, was to avoid discrimination.  Virtually all ethnic groups faced discrimination to some degree.  In those pre-PC days, landlords and employers made no secret about discriminating against certain ethnic or religious groups.  Thus John O’Day would become John Day, and Greenbaum might become Green.

e.  Other reasons for incorrect names:  disguising oneself by using a fictitious name or another person’s name; using the name of a step-father instead of biological father, or using a nickname or a maiden name.

4.   Other countries’ customs:

a.  In China, legend has it that the origin of surnames was a decree by Emperor Fu Xi in 2852 BCE.  His purpose was to facilitate census-taking.

b.  In Japan, surnames were uncommon before the 19th century, except among the aristocracy.

c.  Ancient Greeks used identifiers, such as “son of” or clan or descendant identities.  For instance, Alexander the Great was also known as Alexander Heracleides (as a descendant of Heracles).

CONCLUSION

As I said, one’s surname often provides clues as to one’s background or place of origin.  For example, names such as Farmer, Thatcher, or Smith would be strong indications of a forebear’s occupation.  Names such as Glen, Forrest, or Mountain would be obvious indicators of locale.  President Dwight Eisenhower was likely descended from a person whose occupation was an iron cutter in Germany (“Eisen” means iron in German, and “hower” was likely a derivative of “hewer,” which means one who cuts wood, metal  or other materials).

Many people’s surnames are actual cities in Europe or derivatives of such indicating from whence they emigrated. Some names indicate patronage (Hickman, Johnson).  Many Jewish names have biblical or holy references, for example, Cohen, Kagan, Levy, and my own surname, Jacob.  Many Irish or Scotch surnames are derived from their ancestor’s clan (Macdonald, Forbes, etc.).  Many African Americans carry the names of Southern plantation owners.  The immortal Muhammed Ali, a Louisville native, derided his birth surname, Clay, as a “slave name.”  He was probably correct, as the name “Clay” is a prominent name in Kentucky aristocracy.

If nothing else, I hope this blog gets you thinking about the origins and meaning of your own name.  Let me know if you find anything interesting.

President Trump has hit the ground running.  In just two weeks he has already signed a flurry of EOs.  In my opinion, he gets points for decisiveness and for following through on his campaign promises.  Most politicians would have been more deliberate.  Some would not have followed through on their campaign promises at all.   For example, remember Bush 41’s pledge: “Read my lips. No new taxes.”  Or, perhaps you recall Obama’s pledge, “If you like your [health] plan, you can keep it; if you like your doctor you can keep him.”   (I don’t mean those as criticisms of those presidents, per se.  (All politicians obfuscate or lie, at times, to some extent.  That’s why every poll reports them to be so disliked.  I merely present these as examples.)

On the other hand, some commentators and analysts have characterized his actions as rash or not vetted properly.  These critics may have a point, to a degree.  I believe that most of Trump’s EOs will be beneficial to the country, but, in at least one case, I believe he acted somewhat precipitously to his and the country’s detriment.  Below please find my assessment of a few of these orders but, first, a little background.

EOs do not have the force of law.  Only Congress can pass laws.  In theory, their purpose is to enable the executive branch to manage its operation more efficiently.  It’s not always necessary or even advisable for the president to wait for Congress to deliberate over a minor matter.  Many EOs are routine and uncontroversial, for example, JFK’s EO to establish the Peace Corps and LBJ’s EO to appoint the Warren Commission to investigate JFK’s assassination.  Others, such as Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves residing in the Confederacy, and FDR’s decision to inter Japanese-Americans during WWII were more controversial.

Presidents have used EOs since the beginning of the Republic, some often, some seldom.  According to a study published by the American Presidency Project at the University of California, John Adams, James Monroe and James Madison only signed one each, whereas FDR signed the most, 3,721, followed by Woodrow Wilson with 1,803 and Calvin Coolidge with 1,203.  (Of course, FDR was President for 13 years.)

At least in recent times, presidents have often been criticized by the opposition party for many of their EOs.  For example, on a few occasions, Obama was criticized for using EOs to bypass Congress, and a few were overturned by the courts eventually, but he only averaged some 40 EOs a year, about the same as his predecessor, Bush 43.

Back to a few of President Trump’s EOs:

1.  Keystone pipeline –  This  one seems to me to be a “no-brainer.”  It will transport oil from Canada to the Gulf easily, cheaply, and safely.  It will create jobs; it will be environmentally safer then transporting by train or truck; and it will reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  Nevertheless, many environmentalists are opposed to it.
2. Trans Pacific Partnership –  Trump has pulled out of this arrangement, citing it is not in America’s best interests.  I am inclined to agree, but, Democrats and some of the other participants, such as Australia, have expressed displeasure.  Also, this could create a vacuum for China to exploit in the region.
3. Affordable Care Act – There is not much Trump can accomplish in this area by EO, but he will be waiving penalties against those who elect not to pay for insurance and he will allow individual states greater flexibility in administering the ACA.  These actions, though seemingly minor, will put a severe crimp in the ACA or, perhaps, gut it.
4. Abortion – This is an extremely controversial and emotional issue, particularly among women.  According to the latest CBS News poll from January 2017, 75% of Americans are in favor of abortion being available, half of them said “generally” and half favored availability under “stricter limits.”  According to a Quinnipiac University poll at the same period 46% would favor a ban after 20 weeks (so-called “late term abortions”) and 46% would oppose such a ban.  For many, it is the “litmus test” issue.  Many “choosers” are concerned that Trump opposes the Roe v Wade decision and wants to eliminate abortions  entirely for any reason.  I think that’s extreme and a mischaracterization of his position.  In my opinion, it’s more likely that he will seek to limit late term abortions.  Personally, I would be in favor of that as there is strong evidence that late term fetuses are viable outside the womb.  Trump’s opening salvo in this area was to prohibit foreign aid to any non-government organization that is offering abortion counseling or other services in foreign countries, even if abortion is legal in that country.
5. Financial Regulations –  Trump has taken steps to ease the financial constraints on the financial services industry imposed by the Graham-Dodd Act.  The Act was precipitated by the financial crisis of 2008-2009, which almost brought the financial markets to its knees.  But, the Act has proven to be very burdensome, especially to small firms, and memories have faded after eight years.  Hopefully, they won’t go too far the other way.  The financial services industry needs sensible regulation and government oversight to protect investors.
6. The Wall –  Trump has taken initial steps to secure our southern border.  He still insists Mexico will pay for it.  Mexico has adamantly refused.  The most likely outcome is that the US will lay out the money and find a way to charge back Mexico indirectly.  There are various proposals under consideration.  This has been very controversial on many fronts and will no doubt continue as such prospectively.
7. Immigration Restrictions – This has been the most controversial, and I could spend an entire blog on it.  Both sides have valid points.  On balance, I think there is a significant danger in allowing immigrants from locales where proper vetting is not possible.  Just look at  the situations in France, Germany and the UK.  That said, the rollout was mishandled.  Cabinet members, staff, and customs and border personnel were not briefed sufficiently beforehand, which resulted in the chaotic airport scenes we all saw on tv.  Lost in the shuffle are the facts that the seven countries were selected based on recommendations of the Obama Administration and that the ban is temporary until enhanced vetting procedures can be established.  As I write this, a judge has issued a restraining order, which the Administration will likely appeal.  Hopefully, the Administration will learn from this error and do better prospectively.

CONCLUSION

Trump remains a very controversial president.  Most people have very strong opinions towards him, pro or con.  Part of it is because of his unique style and personality.  He is fighting a three-front war – the Democrats, the media, and even some in his own party.  His most virulent enemies do not seem even to want to give him a chance.  He was being criticized before he even took office.  Some have even questioned the validity of the election, itself.

In order to be successful, he must be cognizant of the fact that his enemies will be monitoring his actions very closely and will take every opportunity to pounce on his errors, real or fabricated.  Reporting will often be distorted or even outright false, for example, the charge that he removed MLK’s bust from the White House.

I believe Trump can effect real change if given a fair chance.  Let’s hope he gets it.

As stated in the theme song from her signature hit tv show, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Mary could “turn the world on with her smile.”  As a performer, Mary had it all: she could, sing, dance, and act, and she was drop-dead gorgeous.  In addition, along with her second husband, Grant Tinker, she became a very successful tv executive.

Mary Tyler Moore was born on December 29, 1936 in Brooklyn, NY.  She was the oldest of three children.  Both of her siblings died at young ages.  When Mary was eight the family moved to Los Angeles, so her father could find work.

As a youngster, Mary wanted to become a dancer.  Indeed, her first job in show business was as a dancing elf in tv commercials for Hotpoint appliances, which sponsored the popular tv show, Ozzie and Harriet.  She was 17 and married.  The sponsor terminated her when she became pregnant, and she “showed” through her elf costume.

In the following few years Mary’s career was rather pedestrian.  She tried modeling and acting with limited success.  One noteworthy incident involved the comedian, Danny Thomas.  Thomas had a popular comedy tv show, Make Room for Daddy.  She tried out unsuccessfully for the part of Thomas’ daughter.  Later, Thomas quipped “she missed [getting the part] by a nose…no daughter of mine could ever have a nose that small.”

One success was landing the role of the receptionist on the detective series, Richard Diamond, Private Detective.  I actually remember that show.  Mary’s face was never seen.  Viewers heard her voice and saw those gorgeous legs.  In addition, she guest-starred on various tv shows, such as 77 Sunset Strip, Wanted: Dead or Alive, and Hawaiian Eye.

Mary’s big break came in 1961.  Despite being a relative unknown, comedian Carl Reiner tabbed her to co-star alongside Dick Van Dyke in a series he was producing based on his own career as a comedy writer.  Co-Producer Danny Thomas had remembered the “girl with three names” that he had rejected years earlier and pushed her for the part.  Both she and the show were huge successes.   Mary’s fresh-faced, girl-next-door beauty and energetic comedy style made her an international star.  I remember that, primarily because of Mary, the show was “must see” tv in our fraternity house in the mid-1960s.  When she accepted her first Emmy for the show, Mary famously and modestly quipped “I know this will never happen again.”  Luckily, her talent far exceeded her prognosticating skills.

For Mary, the best was yet to come.  In 1970 she became the star of her own show.  The Mary Tyler Moore Show was about a single woman seeking to “make it on her own,” a risky and risqué undertaking in 1970.  Mary pulled it off.  The show was a huge hit, and both Mary and her character became groundbreaking inspirations to women everywhere.  In fact, the show yielded spin-off vehicles for three of the show’s supporting actors Valerie Harper, Ed Asner, and Cloris Leachman.

Later, Mary branched out into stage and film.  Her biggest Broadway play was opposite James Naughton in Whose Life Is It Anyway.  In addition, she appeared in several films during her career.  Her most noteworthy was Ordinary People in which she played a serious role, that of a grieving mother unable to cope with the tragic death of one of her sons, and for which she earned an Oscar nomination.

In my opinion, the crowning achievement of her career was MTM Enterprises, which she founded with Grant Tinker, her husband at the time.  MTM produced many successful tv shows, such as The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Rhoda, Lou Grant, The Bob Newhart Show, and Hill Street Blues.  In addition, it developed its own record label.

CONCLUSION

In addition to her stellar show business career Mary was very active in philanthropy.  For instance, she was the International Chairman of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and a strong animal rights activist.  She was a longtime supporter of the ASPCA and a co-founder of Broadway Barks, an annual animal adopt-a-thon held in NYC.

Mary’s life was not without its tragedies.  She suffered from diabetes and alcoholism.  As I said, both of her siblings died at early ages. Furthermore, her only son, Richard, died from an accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound.  She dealt with these tragedies openly and honestly, and she persevered.

Mary earned many individual honors.  She received six Emmy Awards, a special Tony Award, was inducted into the Television Hall of Fame in 1986, and received a Lifetime Achievement Award in Comedy in 1987.

However, I concur with her husband, Dr. Robert Levine who stated that her most enduring legacy will be her inspiration and influence, through both her personal life and in the characters she portrayed, on other female performers as well as working mothers and single moms.  He characterized her as “fearless, determined and willful,” yet “kind, genuine, approachable, honest, and humble.”  Yes, Mary was more than just a pretty face with an arresting smile.  Much, much more.

Mary passed away last week from complications of pneumonia at the age of 80.  Rest in peace, Mary.  You will be sorely missed.

From time to time, one of my readers requests me to write a posting on a particular topic.  In this case, the requestor and I share a strong passion on this controversial issue.  So, Dr. AF this blog is for you.

Currently, one of the hot topics in the world is Palestinian statehood.  The prevailing opinion among world leaders seems to be that the formation of a Palestinian state, even if it were imposed by outside powers, would be a panacea for the conflicts in the Middle East between Israel and its Arab neighbors.  I believe that this is simplistic and fallacious, as I will show below.

This week, representatives of some 70 countries have been attending a peace summit in Paris dealing with this very issue.  Significantly, neither Israel nor the Palestinians has sent a representative, although the Palestinians’ points of view are being amply represented by various supporters.  Not one participant has supported Israel, although the UK  tried to strike a somewhat sensible tone by questioning the wisdom of holding the conference mere days before the change in power in the US.  For this, it was heavily criticized. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu correctly labeled the conference as “biased against Israel.”  He characterized it as a “rigged conference, rigged by the Palestinians with French [support] to adopt anti-Israel stances.”  I heartily agree.

It is also clear to me that the tone of this conference is blatantly anti-Semitic.  The attendees, while excoriating Israel for establishing settlements on the West Bank, have conveniently ignored the ongoing Arab terrorist activities and human rights atrocities.  Historically, Jews have had very few friends, and at the present time, thanks to the Obama-Kerry dynamic duo, they really don’t have any reliable allies.    On the other hand, the Arabs have many supporters.  Why is that?  The answer is OIL.  The Arabs have it; the world needs it.  That, my friends, is the crux of the matter.

Doubling down on the outrageous recent UN resolution that condemned Israeli settlements in the disputed area, the representatives have resolved that Israel should retreat to its 1967 borders as a basis for meaningful negotiations, which, they claim,  would enable the two sides to reach an agreement on a lasting peace.  If only the Palestinians could have their own land, they say, then all conflicts would magically disappear.

I say, that conclusion is simplistic and demonstrates profound ignorance of some 5,000 years of mutual mistrust and Palestinian animus towards the Jews.  Does anyone in their right mind seriously think that would end ME conflicts?   In my opinion, no.  Consider:

1.  I believe that although most Arabs in the area are in favor of a peaceful solution, anyone who has been paying attention knows that the Arab terrorist elements among them do not under any circumstances.  If the Palestinians ended up with 99% of the disputed land, and they would still want the other 1%.
2. No peace treaty would be possible unless the Palestinians recognize Israel as a legitimate State, which they have continually refused to do.
3. The Palestinians have rejected many opportunities for peace in the last 70 years, and the terrorist elements have intimidated the moderate majority with violence and/or threats (see Anwar Sadat).
4. The Palestinians have consistently refused to talk directly with the Israelis.  Remember, they don’t recognize Israel as a State.  Instead they engage in diplomatic end-runs through the UN or conferences like the current one in Paris.  Those tactics hinder the process immeasurably.
5. For various reasons, religious, political and security, the Israelis would never give up the West Bank or East Jerusalem, which is where the  Palestinians insist on establishing their state.  Those areas are the holiest of holies to Jews.  To give them up and risk the Arabs denying access or, even worse, destroying them, is unacceptable.  Any Israeli politician who were to do so would be committing political suicide.  As far as security, would you like a hostile neighbor on your doorstep?  Remember how the US reacted to Russian missiles in Cuba in 1962?  I don’t think so.
6. The Arabs have steadfastly refused to recognize the State of Israel nor acknowledged its very right to exist.
7. Iranian leadership, among others, has vowed to destroy, Israel and soon, I predict, will have the nuclear capacity to do it.

These seemingly insoluble issues would have to be resolved before any meaningful, lasting peace could be achieved, and by the participants, themselves, not by an outside party.

In order to appreciate the situation fully, one must be cognizant of the history of the region.  It has been characterized by deep hatred, mistrust and violence for over 5,000 years.  Control has been passed violently from one power to  another.  In the years immediately preceding WWI the region was part of the Ottoman Empire.  After the War the League of Nations gave mandates to England and France to divide up the empire and create various states.  For example, France got Syria (which also included present-day Lebanon) and England got Palestine (which included present-day Jordan and Israel).  In 1917 England issued the infamous Balfour Declaration, which, among other things, declared support for a Jewish homeland.

This incensed Arab leaders in the region who had supported the British against the Turks in the War based on the promise of autonomy in the region.  (The Balfour Declaration created other problems which have persisted to this day.  For instance, it mixed Shia and Sunni Muslims, who loath each other, together in Iraq, and it failed to establish a separate homeland for the Kurds, but that is a separate subject outside the scope of this blog).

The situation in Palestine came to a head in 1948 when Israel, with the approval of the UN, became a nation.   Israel and its neighbors have been in a perpetual state of conflict ever since with no end in sight.

CONCLUSION

French President Holland had the temerity to warn incoming US president Trump against taking any “improvised” or “destabilizing actions” after he becomes president.  That is really humorous.  Like Trump is really going to listen to Holland!

Trump has consistently expressed strong support for Israel.  Whereas Obama-Kerry have actually condemned the establishment of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, Trump strongly supports them.  In addition, he has expressed a desire to move the US  embassy to Jerusalem.   Provocative?  Perhaps, but it would be a very strong signal of support and could even be interpreted as recognition of  Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Mr. Trump knows Israel is the US’s only reliable ally in the region.  Therefore, we need them almost as much as they need us.  Among other things, it is the only counterweight to Iran.  Now that Iran is on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power (thank you Obama-Kerry), it has designs on taking over the entire region.  That would be a geo-political disaster.  Israel is the only country with the means and the will to oppose it.

It is a misnomer that Israelis do not want peace.  Of course, they do.  All the polls have consistently said so.  Few sane people would prefer war to peace.  The sticking point is that few trust the Palestinians’ sincerity for reasons discussed above.  Impossible?  No, of course not.  After all, the IRA and the UK have made peace.   Very difficult?  Extremely challenging?  Most certainly.  But, it can only happen if and when both sides want it, and any lasting peace would have to be agreed upon by the parties involved directly, not one imposed by a third party.

Friday, January 20, 2017 is Inauguration Day (“ID”).  At noon, Donald Trump will take the oath of office and officially become the 45th President of the United States.  ID embodies one of the unique principles upon which the US was founded and still operates, the peaceful and orderly transfer of power.  Throughout history, most other countries have marked transfers of power by revolutions, assassinations, or power struggles consummated behind the scenes.  One day, Mr. X is in power; the next day, suddenly, Mr. Y has taken over.   Not so in the US.  Historically, regardless of how contentious and bitter the presidential campaign, Americans have accepted the results and moved forward.   Despite the words and actions of a small minority to date, I hope and expect the same this time.

It might surprise most of you that the Constitution is mostly silent as to the particulars of the inauguration process. It specifies the date and language of the oath.  Other than that, everything else that occurs on that date is based on tradition and custom.  Many of these date to George Washington’s initial inauguration in 1789.

According to the Constitution the oath is “I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”  Some historical accounts report that Washington added the words “so help me God” at the end of the oath.  Most presidents have sworn or affirmed on a Bible, but this not required and some have used other books.  For example, John Quincy Adams used a book of laws; Franklyn Pierce used a law book; and Lyndon Johnson used a Catholic missal.

Below please find some inaugural facts and traditions:

1. George Washington took the oath of office for his first term on April 30, 1789 at Federal Hall in NYC.  The building still stands today at the same site.  At the time, NYC was the nation’s capital.  There was not a lot of pomp and circumstance, just some rounds of ceremonial cannon fire and the ringing of church bells.  The oath of office was administered by the Chancellor of NY, Robert Livingston.  Afterwards, Washington remarked ” I walk on untrodden ground.”
2. Since then, with few exceptions, such as that for Lyndon Johnson after JFK’s assassination, the oaths of office have been administered by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.  You may recall that Federal Judge Sarah Hughes administered the oath to Johnson on board Air Force One.  (Time was of the essence, and Hughes happened to be available.  The situation was dire.  The nation needed a president to provide continuity of leadership to the country and the rest of the world.)
3. From 1793 through 1933 inaugurations were held on March 4 (or, March 5 if the 4th fell on a Sunday).  From 1937 to the present, it has been held on January 20 (or 21).
4. The 1793 and 1797 inaugurations were held at Congress Hall in Philadelphia, which was then the nation’s capital.
5. Thomas Jefferson was the first president to be sworn in in Washington, D.C. in 1801 at the Capitol Building.  In 1805 he rode on horseback from the Capitol to the White House.  Along the way, some cheering people joined him spontaneously.  That was the beginning of what became the inaugural parade.  Over the years, Washington’s simple ceremony has expanded to a multi-day event including balls, luncheons, speeches, parties, a national prayer service, entertainment, and national tv coverage.
6. Since 1937, the procedure has been for the incoming vp to take his oath of office at the same ceremony immediately before the president takes his.  Prior to 1937 the vp took his oath in the Senate chamber.  The vp oath is identical to the one taken by Congressmen and other government officers.
7. Attendance is open to the public.  In addition, it is customary for former presidents, members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices, high-ranking military personnel, Medal of Honor recipients, and other dignitaries to attend.  For various reasons former presidents John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson and Richard Nixon did not attend their successors’ inaugurations.  This year some government officials have indicated they will not attend as a protest.
8. Some presidents have used the selection of parade participants as a way to make political statements.  For, example, in 1865 Abraham Lincoln invited AA’s to participate for the first time.  The 1917 parade included women for the first time, and in 2009 Barack Obama included openly lesbians and gays.
9. Since 1824, with few exceptions, the inauguration ceremonies have been held outside the Capitol Building in one of the porticos.  For example, in 1945 FDR’s was moved because of WWII.  Taft’s (1909) and Reagan’s (1985) were moved inside because of inclement weather.  DC can be cold and/or snowy in January.  Historically, the average temperature on January 20 has been 37 degrees.  In 1985 the temperature was -2 degrees.  Factor in blustery winds, and you can see the hazard.   Tragically, in 1841, for instance, William Henry Harrison developed pneumonia following his inaugural.  In those pre-antibiotics days, pneumonia was often fatal.  Harrison died after just one month in office, giving him the dubious record of being the shortest tenured president.
10. As one might expect, security is a critical issue.  All the alphabet agencies – DHS, FBI, Secret Service, Capitol Police, Metro Police and the various Armed Forces – are involved.  Obviously, the inauguration makes a very tempting target for terrorists.
11. Presidential medals are produced and distributed as souvenirs.  Typically, gold and silver medals are given to government officials, and bronze medals are for public consumption.
12. Normally, there is a plethora of quality entertainment, but this year many “A-listers” have declined to participate.  Rumor has it that some are protesting Mr. Trump’s victory, while others have been intimidated by real or perceived threats of retaliation by the Hollywood powers-that-be or their fan base.  For example, just today, it was announced that Broadway star Jennifer Holiday was backing out citing disapproval of her fan base.

CONCLUSION

Traditionally, the quadrennial Presidential Inauguration has been a celebration of democracy in action.  Regardless of political philosophy or party affiliation most everyone unites behind the new president.  The new president enjoys a “honeymoon period” until reality inevitably sets in for some people.

This year, however, there has been more animosity than usual.  Many hardcore liberals refuse to give Trump the benefit of the doubt.  They have been criticizing him for things he might do or not do even before he takes the oath of office.   Some government officials have indicated they will not attend the inaugural, in protest.

These people have just been unable to accept the results of the election.  First, there were accusations of “voting irregularities,” whatever that means.  Then, there were claims that the Russians “hacked” some voting machines.  Then, people blamed FBI Director, Jim Comey for the way he handled the FBI’s report on Clinton’s emails.  The media and even some Republicans have perpetuated these claims.  Some people continue to refuse to believe that Trump won fair and square.  Through it all, not one shred of evidence of voting irregularities or undue influence has come to the fore.  These “election deniers” are simply diminishing both themselves and the country.

Monday, January 16, we will celebrate Martin Luther King’s birthday. For some people the day 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. He became the most prominent and influential American civil rights leader in the 1950s and 1960s, maybe 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 violence and cruelty by the police and others, rather than rioting. In this regard, he was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi. In turn, he inspired others such as 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, 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.

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 Nelson 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. 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 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 most famous 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 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 denoted 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.”
6. 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 Willie Mays can hit “a little bit.”)
7. 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. “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.”

CONCLUSION

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

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 47 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 civil rights leader will emerge and bridge the gap as MLK did half a century ago.

Despite the title, this blog is not about black IBM or Apple computers.

In the early years of the space program, before the advent of computers, NASA employed humans to calculate, by hand, the complicated mathematical data required for successful space missions, such as orbit trajectories, wind tunnel resistance, and re-entry angles.  The persons who accomplished these tasks were known as “computers.”   They were aptly named, as they performed tasks that are now handled by modern computers.

Virtually all of them were women, and many of them were black.  Simply put, in the 1940s and 1950s computer work was considered “women’s work.”  The men were engineers; the women were computers.  Three of these pioneers were African American – Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson.  They are featured in the current movie “Hidden Figures.”  As Johnson put it in a recent interview, it was a time “when the computer wore a skirt.”  Their story deals not only with the American space program, but also it illustrates the various social issues of the time.

Beginning in the 1940s NASA and its predecessor, NACA, began to seek out black women to work as computers in the nascent space program.  As portrayed in “Hidden Figures”  these black women were college educated and highly skilled mathematicians, but, nevertheless, they were subject to all the “Jim Crow” laws and customs of the day in Virginia.  For example, they had to work in a segregated area, eat at a segregated table,  use a “colored ” bathroom, and find segregated housing.   The movie vividly portrays how Johnson had to virtually run a mile from her desk to the nearest “colored” women’s bathroom to relieve herself.  This may seem a bit “over the top” to us in today’s world,  but it was an accurate illustration of life in the 1950s in the South and one of the subplots that makes the movie so poignant and realistic.

As many of you know, the 1950s and early 1960s was the height of the “Cold War” with Russia.  Communists were the arch enemy.  Americans were constantly living with the prospect of nuclear holocaust.  Space and the need to control it were viewed as critical elements in this war.  And beginning with the launch of Sputnik in October, 1957 the Russians were perceived to be far ahead of us in that area.  That was incredulous and unacceptable to us.  We were playing “catch up,” and we didn’t like it.  Most of us are familiar with the names of the astronauts, particularly John Glenn, Alan Shepard and Neil Armstrong, and we are cognizant of the collective efforts and accomplishments of the NASA engineers.  But, in their own way, the computers were just as crucial as them to our ultimate success in the space program.

Katherine Coleman Goble Johnson was born on August 26, 1918 in White Sulphur Springs, WVA.  She married twice, raised three children, and has six grandchildren and eleven great-grandchildren.  Among her many accomplishments in the space program:

1.  She calculated the trajectory for Alan Shepard’s suborbital flight.  Years later, Johnson said “you tell me when you want it and where you want it [the capsule] to land, and I’ll…tell you when to take off.  That was my forte.”
2. At John Glenn’s specific request, she verified the IBM computer’s data for his flight.  Glenn did not fully trust the nascent computer technology, and he would not fly until she verified its calculations.  Supposedly, he told the powers that be “get ‘the girl’ [Johnson] to do it….if she says they’re [the numbers] good, you know, I’m good to go…”  Note: the moniker “girl” was not meant to be derogatory.  Everyone called all the women “girls.”  The irony is delicious.  The hero astronaut and future US senator put his life in the hands of a black woman who had to run a mile to go to the bathroom.
3. She calculated the trajectory for the moon landing.
4. During her distinguished career, she co-authored some 26 scientific papers.
5. She was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2015.

She is portrayed in the film by Taraji P. Henson.

Dorothy Vaughan was born on September 20, 1910 in Kansas City, MO.  She earned a BA in math at Wilberforce University in 1929 at the age of 19.  She taught school until 1943 when she began a 28-year career at Langley Research Center.  She focused on flight path technology.  Her major accomplishments included:

1. Computer coding and programming using FORTRAN, which she mostly taught herself in her spare time.  Eventually, she taught many others.
2. She became one of the few female supervisors at NACA, and the first black one.  In a sign of the times, she actually had to function as the de facto supervisor for many years before being granted the title officially.
3. As supervisor, she continually fought with the powers that be for the betterment of “her girls.”  Regarding her experiences, she later remarked “I changed what I could, and what I couldn’t, I endured.”

Vaughan retired from NASA in 1971 at the age of 60.  She died in 2008 at the age of 98.  She is portrayed in the film by Octavia Spencer.

Mary Winston Jackson was born on April 9, 1921 in Hampton, VA.  She earned a BA in math and physical science from Hampton Institute in 1942.  She began her career at NASA in 1951 as a computer, but, after taking several engineering courses, she became an aerospace engineer, a singular feat for a black female at that time.  To do so, she had to obtain a judge’s order to allow her to attend a segregated high school.  During her career she authored or co-authored several technical papers for NASA.

CONCLUSION

Females have made many significant contributions to their respective countries’ space programs.  For example, as of last July 60 of the 537 astronauts have been female.  The first female astronaut was a Russian, Valentina Tereshkova in 1963.  The first American female was Sally Ride in 1983.  Forty-five of the 60 have been Americans.

The abilities and accomplishments of the female computers should not be trivialized.  In this era of using computers to calculate even the most mundane mathematical functions it is difficult for us to appreciate the skill that was required to calculate complex orbits and trajectories, and often under severe time constraints.  Without them, the more famous astronauts and engineers could not possibly have succeeded, and the moon landing could not have occurred.