Category: Uncategorized

It’s not often that a single person can make a lasting contribution to society, for example, an invention that saves tens of thousands of lives.  Such was the case with Dr. Henry Heimlich, the inventor of the Heimlich Maneuver.  No one knows precisely how many lives the HM has saved.   Most people are cognizant of the HM and its use, but, although the HM was probably his most significant contribution, there was considerably more to his life than that.

Henry Judah Heimlich was born on February 3, 1920 in Wilmington, DE into a family of immigrant Hungarian and Russian Jews.  He graduated from Cornell in 1941, and earned his MD at the Weill Cornell Medical College in 1943.  Interestingly, during his collegiate days he served as a drum major with the Big Red Marching Band.

During WWII he served in the Navy.  For a time, he was attached to a unit of Chinese  guerrillas in the Gobi Desert and Inner Mongolia, of all places.  During this time, he observed many instances of soldiers dying from chest wounds because medics were unable to drain air and blood from the area.  This inspired him to invent, in the early 1960s a valve that could drain the chest and prevent the air and blood from flowing back in, thus enabling a collapsed lung to re-expand.  Use of this Heimlich Chest Drain Valve became standard during the War in Vietnam and in hospital emergency rooms and has saved many lives.

In 1955 he developed a course of treatment for dysphagia, the inability to swallow.  Dysphagia would condemn the patient to a lifetime of drooling and receiving nourishment through a tube implanted into his stomach, not a pleasant existence.  Dr. H figured out how to repair the damaged esophagus using a section of the patient’s stomach.  Although it was later determined that a Romanian surgeon, Dr. Gavriliu, had already been using this technique, it was Dr. H who popularized it in the US.  It has since became known as the Heimlich-Gavriliu Reversed Gastric Tube operation.

Dr. H developed his famous maneuver in 1974 while serving as Director of Surgery at Jewish Hospital in Cincinnati.  According to the NY Times, at that time choking from food particles was the sixth leading cause of death in the US.  Children were particularly vulnerable.  The panicked victim, unable to breath or talk, would gesticulate wildly for assistance.  Often, onlookers would think the person was having a coronary.  It would only take four minutes for the victim to suffer irreversible brain damage due to oxygen starvation.

According to both the American Red Cross and the American Heart Association the standard remedies were either to give the victim a few sharp smacks on the back or to stick a finger down the victim’s throat to try to dislodge the object.  But, often, this would simply push the object further down the throat.  Sometimes, the Good Samaritan would be rewarded with a severely bitten finger as well.  I witnessed an incident like this at a family gathering in the early 1970s.

Dr. H had a different idea.  He felt that there would still be a small reserve of air in the victim’s stomach that could be utilized.  He advocated wrapping one’s arms around the victim from behind, making a fist over the navel and thrusting upward sharply.  If done properly, the object would pop out like a Champaign cork from a bottle.   The medical community and the media largely mocked him and his method, but he persevered.  A demonstration on Johnny Carson on the widely-viewed Tonight Show helped considerably.  Also, rescue reports by lay persons using the HM began to surface, such as that of a five-year old boy who, having seen a demonstration on tv, used the maneuver to save his friend and a restaurant owner who employed it to save a patron.

The medical community was slow to recognize the maneuver.  Many viewed Dr. H as a fraud or charlatan and derided his maneuver, but, as the evidence of saved lived mounted up it became harder and harder to ignore the HM.  Finally, 1n 1986 the AHA relented and replaced back slaps with the HM in its literature as the preferred method of treatment for choking victims.

CONCLUSION

Over the years the HM has become an iconic method for saving choking victims.  It is taught in schools, has been portrayed in movies, appears on posters in restaurants and internet educational videos, and has been embraced by most of the medical profession.  Luminaries such as Halle Berry, Ronald Reagan, Elizabeth Taylor, and many others have recounted tales of its use successfully.  Ironically, Dr. H, himself, had never used the maneuver until earlier this year when he did so to save a woman in his assisted living facility.

Dr. H was married to the former Jane Murray, a daughter of the famous dance instructor, Arthur Murray.  In addition, one of his nephews was the actor/singer Anson Williams, best known for the role of “Potsie” on the popular 1970s tv show Happy Days, which, for you younger readers, starred Ron Howard and Henry Winkler.

He was the recipient of many awards, such as the prestigious Albert Lasker Public Service Award for developing “a simple, practical, cost-free solution to a life-threatening emergency, requiring neither great strength, special equipment or elaborate training.”  He also authored several books and was a popular guest on tv where he would often demonstrate his maneuver.  As he told a reporter for Omni Magazine in 1983 “I can do more toward saving lives in three minutes on television than I could do all my life in the operating room.”

Dr. H passed away on December 17 at the age of 96.  He impacted tens of thousands of lives and will continue to do so forever.  He will be sorely missed.

Hunger does not take a day off.  It does not take a vacation.  It is omnipresent.  If you are struggling to put food on the table, it a 24-7 proposition.

Thanks to modern technology, the US produces considerably more food than its population, as a whole, needs.  Indeed, it exports much of its excess food.  So, paradoxically, why do so many Americans constantly struggle to get enough food?  Why is there this sizeable disconnect?   Well, for one thing, we waste tremendous amounts of it.  Think of how much food you throw out on a daily basis.  Think how much food restaurants throw out. We order oversized portions and extra dishes and don’t finish them.  Big eyes, small stomachs. Remember, that your parents used to exhort you to “eat everything on your plate” by telling you that “people are starving in China?”  Well, add to that the fact that people are starving right here in the US.

Statistics vary from year to year and from study to study, but roughly one of seven households (that’s roughly 40 million people, folks), suffer from what the USDA euphemistically calls “food insecurity,” or the “lack of access, at times, to enough food for all household members.”  Leave it to the government to come up with such a term.

When one hears about food insecurity, one conjures up visions of Appalachia or the rural South.  The fact of the matter is that studies show that food insecurity is present, to some degree, in virtually every county in the country.   Other findings (some of which may surprise you, others, not):

1. The federal government spends some $50 billion annually on various food programs.  The largest and best known of these is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as “food stamps.”  That is a huge amount, but hunger has persisted at fairly consistent levels from year to year.  Why?   It is either insufficient or, more likely, a lot of it is being wasted somehow.
2. The states with the highest incidence are Mississippi and Arkansas with 21%.  North Dakota has the lowest at 8%.
3. The rate is substantially higher in households headed up by a single parent, male or female, a Hispanic or an African American.  There are many reasons for this, but that analysis is beyond the scope of this blog.
4.  Obviously hunger generally goes hand-in-hand with poverty, but, according to a 2012 study by the UCLA Center for Health Policy some middle class families also suffer from food insecurity.
5. Poor people are often unable to purchase enough food, and government programs can be insufficient, so despite the excess mentioned above, they go hungry.  For example, some 20 million school children receive free or reduced-price lunch in school, but less than half of them get breakfast at home, or, even lunch, during school vacations.  The plight of children can be illustrated further by the fact that almost one-half of the participants in SNAP are under 18.
6. Sadly, various studies have shown that these children have a higher incidence of physical and psychological problems due to malnutrition.  They tend to get sick more often, and their illnesses linger longer.   Additionally, they do not relate as well to their peers, nor do as well academically.  In my opinion, the plight of these children is the most unfortunate aspect of this situation, as they are merely victims of the circumstances of their birth.  Moreover, they will have a considerable uphill battle to succeed in life.
7. The elderly (over 65) have a higher incidence of food insecurity.  According to Meals on Wheels, the highest incidence is found in Mississippi, Arkansas, New Mexico and Texas.  This affects the elderly physically, emotionally, and psychologically.
8. Generally, minority groups have a higher incidence that whites.
9. Rural locales have a substantially higher incidence that urban.  This is primarily because rural areas generally have a higher incidence of poverty and also may not have as much access to food due to distance from stores and lack of transportation.  Suburban areas have the lowest incidence.
10. Examples of other factors contributing to a family’s hunger would include loss of a job, a sudden serious illness, or the death of the primary bread winner.  A substantial number of families live paycheck to paycheck and have minimal savings, which makes them particularly vulnerable to the above situations.

Hunger in the US was an issue from the very beginning.  Back in the 17th Century the early colonists faced a constant battle to obtain enough food.  Sometimes, Native Americans helped them through the rough winters, but many settlers literally starved.  Whole colonies, failing to adapt, were abandoned.

Eventually, however, the colonists did adapt, and by the 19th Century hunger was not common.  There was a plethora of productive land relative to the sparse population.  Jobs were generally available, and people looked out for each other, ensuring that the truly needy rarely starved.  This changed radically during the Great Depression.  The high unemployment rate (up to 25% in 1932) and “dust bowl” years’ crop failures have been well-documented.

Things improved during the post-WWII years, but hunger was “rediscovered” in the 1960s.  The so-called War on Poverty/Hunger became a popular political issue, spurred on by Presidents Johnson and Nixon and Congressmen, such as Senators Robert Kennedy and Joseph S. Clark, Jr.  The government began to fund various programs, but unfortunately, little has changed in 50 years.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, this high incidence of hunger and poverty in the midst of all this country’s riches is a national embarrassment.  It should be very disturbing to all reasonable Americans.   Incidentally, I’m talking about the truly needy here, not those who are “gaming” the system.

Equally confounding is the fact that 50 years of government programs have not alleviated the problem appreciably.  Many people feel that these programs have exhibited significant waste and inefficiency, and, logically, it is hard to argue with that point.   But, that doesn’t mean we should just throw up our hands and give up.  If the problem were easy to solve it would have been already.

One obvious solution would be to provide more jobs.  I’m not talking about minimum wage jobs.  In many cases, minimum wage jobs provide less money than government assistance.  I am talking about jobs in which one can earn a living wage and are located where the needy ones live.  This will not be an easy task, since many of the unemployed may not have the skills or training needed for the jobs that are available.  In any event, this cannot be accomplished overnight.  I don’t know exactly how we can accomplish it, but I fervently hope that the politicians can figure it out.

The first step to solving this or any problem is to recognize that one exists.  I think this problem could use a higher profile.  The various politicians, action groups, media outlets, and celebrities who have a big profile and influence need to focus on it.

There seems to be little doubt that the US is and has been under cyber attack by certain  foreign powers.  This seems to be one of the few issues upon which Dems and the GOP can agree.  Recently, concerns and calls for action have been issued from such varied sources as Republican Senators Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham, and John McCain, Democratic Senators Chuck Schumer and Jack Reed, the FBI, the CIA and DHS.  I agree that the US has been victimized by cyber attacks for several years, and the danger is potentially existential.  Among the primary perpetrators have been China, Russia and North Korea, a rogues’ gallery if there ever was.

What I find particularly disturbing is that these cyber attacks are just becoming publicized as a major issue now.  Why has there not been any significant attention to this matter before?  In particular, why has the Obama Administration not been more proactive?  The overwhelming evidence is it has been downplaying the matter significantly, much as it has done regarding ISIS.  The question is, why?  An oversight?  Incompetence?  A desire not to ruffle feathers?  Your guess is as good as mine.

A variety of news outlets, such as the NY Times, the World Tribune and the Free Beacon, to name a few, have been denoting that the President underestimated the extent and effect of these attacks.  For example, they report that he has rejected numerous recommendations from various military, intelligence and security advisors to respond aggressively.   Rather than consider one of a wide variety of actions ranging from diplomatic initiatives to economic sanctions he has delayed taking any action or even speaking out until now.   Moreover, they add that he has even steadfastly refused to characterize them as “attacks,” preferring to employ softer descriptions, such as “vandalism,” or “penetrations.”

The Times and the Tribune have both reported that Obama, responding to the suspicions regarding the election and under pressure from Congress, has finally authorized a full and complete investigation into the possible Russian involvement in the 2016 election.  That’s fine, but as I said the problem is far more broad and has been going on for years.

I agree with the various congressmen and security and intelligence agencies who have been calling for a thorough investigation of the rash of cyber attacks.  I do not, however, think the focus of this investigation should be aimed at the 2016 Presidential election, as some have suggested.  The problem is considerably more pervasive and significant than that.  As I said, the US has been victimized by cyber attacks repeatedly in the last several years.  For example, China’s attack on the Federal Office of Personnel Management and North Korea’s attack on SONY have been well documented.  News outlets, such as the Beacon have reported that China’s attack affected some 22 million personal records of federal employees, much of it of a highly sensitive nature.

Democrats’ attempts to concentrate on Russia’s possibly influencing the election through cyber attack smack of political opportunism.  Once again, they are coming across as sore losers trying every which way to overturn the will of the people in a free and fair election.  First, it was alleged there were unspecified “irregularities” in the voting.  When that vague assertion failed to “stick,” they demanded recounts in various states.   The recounts, which have cost significant time and money, have not come close to changing the results in any state.  If anything, they have resulted in slightly more votes for Trump (e.g. some 100 votes in Wisconsin).  Next, they  blamed FBI Director Comey and his email investigation.  Now that those have failed to bear fruit they are claiming that Russia influenced the election because it wanted Trump to win.

That theory is illogical and preposterous on its face, and no reliable evidence supporting it has come to light.   Why would Putin want Trump to win?   Based upon Clinton’s record as Secretary of State and her avowed determination to continue Obama’s soft foreign policies, it is logical to conclude that, if anything, Trump would be more aggressive toward Russia.  Don’t be fooled by his criticism of NATO and its members.  I view that as merely a “negotiation” to get them to pay their fair share of expenses.  That’s how Trump operates.  Everything is a negotiation.

In my view, it is more likely that Russia’s motive in releasing emails damaging to the Dems was (1) Putin’s antipathy toward Obama/Clinton, (2) it was able to “hack” them, and/or (3) it couldn’t pass up an opportunity to disrupt the election.  Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright has supported this last supposition, opining that Putin’s objective was “to create doubt about the validity of the …election results, and make us seem hypocritical when we question the conduct of elections in other countries.”

Incidentally, isn’t it curious how the only emails released were those involving Clinton, Podesta and the DNC.  Could it be because they were connected to Clinton’s inadequately secured server and therefore, easily “hackable?”   Hmm.  You decide.  Makes one wonder, though, who else could have been “hacking” into Clinton’s server and what information they could have obtained..

CONCLUSION

As I said, let’s not lose sight of the bigger picture.  We are losing the very critical cyber war.  If we don’t take prompt and decisive action these attacks will continue and intensify.  What’s next?  Our financial markets, our power grids?  We are exposed, and it is long past time to act.

John Glenn was truly an American hero.  We don’t have many of these nowadays, and I am not using that designation lightly.  Most of you probably know that he was one of the seven original Mercury astronauts (Can you name the others?  See below.), and the first American to orbit the earth.  But there was considerably more to the life of John Glenn.  Read on.

John Herschel Glenn, Jr. was born on July 21, 1921 in Cambridge, Ohio.  Glenn was in his senior year of college (at Muskingum College in New  Concord, OH) when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December, 1941.  He immediately left school without completing his studies to enlist in Army Air Corps, as it was then called.

Upon completion of his training he became a pilot and flew 59 combat missions in the South Pacific.  After WWII he became a flight instructor.  During the Korean Conflict he flew 63 additional combat missions.  As an illustration of the ferocity of air combat, on two occasions Glenn returned to base with over 250 bullet holes in his aircraft.  On some of those missions he was wingman for another famous pilot, who also played a little baseball – Theodore Samuel (Ted) Williams.   Glenn was the recipient of numerous medals and awards in recognition of his extraordinary service in two wars.

Later, he became a test pilot, setting the transcontinental speed record, and amassed some 9,000 hours of flying time, including some 3,000 hours in jets.  When NASA began recruiting experienced pilots for its astronaut program, Glenn was among the select few who were chosen.  One of his tasks was to help design the space capsule, itself.  In 1959 he was one of the seven that NASA selected as the first generation astronauts.  The others were Alan Shepard, who made the first flight, a suborbital mission, Scott Carpenter, Gus Grissom, Gordon Cooper, Wally Schirra, and Deke Slayton.  The group was immortalized in the Thomas Wolfe book, The Right Stuff, which was later made into a movie.  Ed Harris played Glenn.  Glenn often said the astronauts were not particularly fond of the book or the movie, but I must say I enjoyed both.

After being the backup pilot on the first two missions, Glenn was selected to man the first mission to actually orbit the earth.  He circled the globe three times in a flight that lasted five hours.  It was the height of the Cold War, and the Russians had already beaten us into space.  They had launched an unmanned satellite in 1957, (Sputnik) and later followed it up with the first manned flight.  We needed a successful flight desperately to demonstrate that we, too, could put a man into space and alleviate some of the panic at being so far behind the Russians in the space race.

I remember listening to Glenn’s flight on the radio in school.  It was very nerve-wracking.  There was no guarantee of success.  Upon his return, Glenn was hailed as a hero.   When reporters asked him if he was afraid (during the flight), he replied: “If you are talking about fear that overcomes what you are supposed to do, no.  You’ve trained very hard for those flights.”  He met with President Kennedy and over time became a personal friend of the Kennedy family.  In addition, he received the ultimate reward for heroes – a ticker-tape parade through the Canyon of Heroes in NYC.

In the 1970s Glenn went into politics.  He served in the US Senate representing Ohio as a Democrat for 24 years.  Not surprisingly, he became one of the Senate’s experts on nuclear weaponry and a staunch advocate of nonproliferation.  He was the principle author of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978.  In 1976 he was one of the candidates for vice president, and in 1984 he ran for the presidency, losing to Walter Mondale, who, in turn, went on to resounding defeat by Ronald Reagan.

CONCLUSION

In 1998 at the age of 77 Glenn capped off his distinguished career by returning to space as a payload specialist on the Space Shuttle.  In the process, he became the oldest person to fly in space, a record he still holds.  His mission was to document the effects of space on geriatrics, which he did.

Glenn was married to his high school sweetheart for 74 years.  He had two children and two grandchildren.  His boyhood home has been restored and is now an historic house museum and education center.  Even at home, he was a hero.

Rest in peace, John.  We will miss you.

As I write this, Keith Ellison is generally considered to be the frontrunner to be the next Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.  Keith Ellison?!  Really!  Have the Dems taken leave of their senses?  Surely there must be a better choice.

Students of politics and history know that generally there has been a natural ebb and flow with respect to the popularity of the Republican and Democratic parties.  One year, you’re up; the next year you’re down.   Four short years ago, it was the GOP that was in disarray.  Romney, running arguably the worst Presidential campaign in my lifetime, had just lost a very winnable election to President Obama.  Furthermore, there was no obvious successor to run in 2016, and, besides, it seemed likely that Hillary Clinton would defeat whomever the GOP might nominate.  In addition, the demographics of the country were shifting in favor of the Dems.  Some overly giddy DEM-leaning political analysts were even predicting the demise of the GOP as a major party.

Well, as is usually the case, the pendulum has swung.  In the wake of Donald Trump’s surprise victory, the GOP now controls the Presidency, both house of Congress and a large majority of state governorships and legislatures.

Now, it is the Dems who are in disarray, who desperately need to regroup under new, responsible leadership.   They need to rebuild and expand their base.  They need leadership that will unite the party, leadership that will appeal to all the disparate wings of the party, as well as independents, many of whom tend to lean toward the Dems.  They need a centrist.  With this backdrop, what are the Dems about to do?  Exactly the wrong thing.  It is likely that they will elect as their next DNC a radical leftwing anti-Semite with deep ties to the radical Muslim community who has long been a supporter of none other than Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam Party.   Apparently, Ellison has the backing of leading Dems, such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, and the only thing standing in his way is the proviso that he resign his seat in the House.

Most of you probably do not know much about Keith Ellison.  He was born on August 4, 1963 in Detroit.  He was raised Roman Catholic, but at some point, he converted to Islam.  He is from a family of achievers.  He has four brothers.  One became a doctor; the others, like Keith, are attorneys.  Good for them.

Keith entered politics in 2002 when he was elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives as a Democrat.  He was re-elected in 2004 with 84% of the vote.  He was elected to the US House of Representatives in 2006.  As one of only two Muslims in Congress he is known as a strong and vociferous advocate of Muslim causes as well as other liberal causes, such as LGBT rights, abortion and gun control.  Some, me included, would label his political views as “extreme.”  He has publicly defended Farrakhan, stating he is not an anti-Semite.  The radical Muslim group, CAIR, has been a strong supporter and campaign contributor.  Additionally, he has a reputation for being radically anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.  For example, in 2010 he stated that US foreign policy is being “governed” by Israel.   Many see this criticism of Israel as code for anti-Semitism as well (much like in the 1950s when Southerners spoke of “states’ rights” as code for segregation).

Ellison has drawn criticism from various sources, not all of them GOP supporters.  For example, Alan Dershowitz, renowned attorney and Dem supporter, was quoted as saying “It is hard to imagine a worse candidate.  [He] represents the extreme, when the party – if it is to win again – must move to the center…”  Also, Haim Saban, a prominent Dem donor, recently speaking at the Brookings Institute’s Saban Forum, stated “If you go back to his positions, his papers, his speeches, the way he has voted, he is clearly an anti-Semite and anti-Israel individual.”  These opinions and mine and many others’ are supported by CNN, which recently published a review of his past public statements and positions.  Of course, Ellison has issued denials, but one can judge for oneself.

CONCLUSION

Reasonable people can debate the appropriateness and veracity of Ellison’s opinions and whether or not he has modified or reformed them, but that is not the point.  The point is whether or not a politician who holds and espouses those radical beliefs is the right person to be the DNC.  Can such a person be a unifier?  Should he be the “face” of the Party?  As I said above, can he appeal to all the disparate factions of the party as well as to independents, many of whom tend to lean toward the Democratic Party?

I say, no!  All that said, if the Dems want to “shoot themselves in the foot” they can be my guest.

Today, December 7, marks the 75th anniversary of one of the most heinous, despicable acts in modern history.  As President Roosevelt forecast, December 7, 1941 is truly a date has lived in infamy.  It is one of those dates we can never forget.  It is burned into our very souls.  Mention that date to a person of a certain age and their reaction will be akin to later generations’ reaction to November 22, 1963 or September 11, 2001. Most any person over the age of five on those dates remembers where he was, what he was doing and how he felt when he heard the news. Those are dates that had a profound effect on our lives both individually and collectively.

On December 6, 1941 America was still working its way out of the Great Depression, which began in 1929 with the stock market crash. Unemployment was at 9.9%, not good, but a significant improvement from the peak of 25% in 1932. Americans were not thinking about war. After all, we had just fought the “Great War,” (the “war to end wars”). Sure, there was a war waging in Europe, but we were not involved directly. We had no boots on the ground, and we had a vast ocean between us and them. Most Americans were focused on their own lives, not on world events. America was in full isolationist mode. All that was about to change suddenly, violently, tragically and irrevocably.

We all know what happened on December 7, 1941. We know that the Japanese executed a devastating surprise attack on our naval base at Pearl Harbor that precipitated our involvement in WWII. Approximately, 3,500 lives were lost, civilian as well as military, along with most of our Pacific Fleet and airplanes. America switched immediately from peacetime mode to wartime mode. Patriotism and nationalism abounded. The “greatest generation” was on the march.

As we all know, America recovered to win the war after four years of intense and costly fighting. Consequently, there is no need for me to rehash those events.  The Pacific War has been the subject of numerous books, movies, and tv productions.  The central theme of this blog will focus on the events that led up to the war with Japan.

Every war has its immediate cause and its underlying causes. The attack on Pearl Harbor was the immediate cause. But, what were the underlying causes? What would make Japan start a war that it had virtually no chance of winning? Glad you asked. Read on.

Many, if not most, historians maintain that the US actually provoked Japan into starting the war, although we did not intend for them to devastate our naval fleet in the fashion they did.  Over the course of the 1930’s we took various actions that, in reality, left Japan no choice, to wit:

1. The US was providing assistance to the Chinese who were at war with Japan. This included providing airplane pilots, armaments and other supplies and materials. Japan had been at war with China since the 1930’s. Its extreme brutality was exemplified by the Nanking Massacre, aka the Rape of Nanking, which began in December 1937. In a six-week period over 300,000 Chinese civilians were murdered, and there was widespread raping and looting. This shocking brutality was a portent of the Pacific War.
2. Along with the British and the Dutch the military was actively planning prospective military operations against the Japanese in the Far East to counter its aggression.
3. Japan had few natural resources of its own; it needed to import raw materials, such as coal, iron, oil, rubber and bauxite, from the US and other countries in Southeast Asia to fuel its burgeoning industries. In the late 1930’s the US began to severely limit its access to these materials by enforcing sanctions, limits and embargoes. This aided the British and the Dutch, who were concerned about Japan’s aggressive behavior in the Far East, but it provoked the Japanese.
4. Thus, one can view the attack on Pearl Harbor, not as an isolated event, but rather as the last act in a long line of connected ones.

Many historians believe that FDR provoked Japan intentionally, because he wanted to go to war against the Axis Powers, and the American people were decidedly against doing so. Before you scoff at that notion, consider that we have fought other wars following provocations that may or may not have been fabricated. For example:

1. The Spanish-American War in 1898 began when the battleship Maine was blown up in Havana harbor under mysterious circumstances. 75% of her crew was killed. “Remember the Maine” became the signature battle cry of that war. There is evidence that suggests that the Maine was not blown up by the Spanish, but may have blown up by accident or been sabotaged to provide a pretext for us to enter that war.
2. The legal basis for commencing the Vietnam War was the Gulf of Tonkin incidents of August 2 and 4, 1964. A US destroyer, the USS Maddox, exchanged fire with North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf, which is off the coast of Vietnam. As a result Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized President Johnson to assist any Southeast Asian country that was being jeopardized by “communist aggression.” Johnson was only too eager to do so. It was later determined that some key facts, such as who fired first, are in dispute.
3. President Bush, 43, “sold” the Iraq War to the American people by asserting there was “proof” that Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction.” Such weapons have never been found.

So, if FDR did, in fact, goad Japan into attacking us so that we could enter the war against the Axis Powers, it would not have been the only time the US Government used that tactic. In the 1950’s the renowned historian Harry Elmer Barnes (who, ironically, later lost much of his credibility by becoming a vociferous denier of the Holocaust) published a series of essays describing the various ways in which the US Government goaded the Japanese into starting a war it could not win and manipulated American public opinion. After the war, Secretary of War Henry Stimson admitted that “we needed the Japanese to commit the first overt act.”

CONCLUSION

Most historians agree that even the Japanese leadership in the 1930’s knew it could not win a prolonged war with the US. The US was vastly superior in terms of men, material and resources, and eventually, it would wear down the Japanese. That, in fact, is precisely what happened. In 1941 the die was cast when a more militant, nationalistic government came into power headed by Emperor Hirohito and Prime Minister Hideki Tojo. They spent several months planning the pre-emptive strike.  In his best selling book Killing the Rising Sun, Bill O’Reilly denoted that the Japanese sought to imbed spies into the Hawaiian civilian population to gather intelligence.  O’Reilly quoted one senior officer who found out that his Japanese gardener was actually a colonial in the Japanese army.

Many historians believe that the Japanese hierarchy was emboldened, in part, by the successful surprise attack on the Russians in 1905 led by then-Admiral Tojo during the Russo-Japanese War.   It had worked once; why not again?  Their intention was to neutralize American naval power in the Pacific so that it would be unable to block Japan’s aggression in Southeast Asia. They determined that Sunday would be the best day of the week to attack. They also weighed the advantages and disadvantages of attacking the fleet in the harbor or at sea before settling on the attack in the harbor. Although the battleships were sitting ducks in the more shallow harbor, Admiral Chester Nimitz denoted later that one crucial advantage to the US was that we were able to raze several of them later and return them to active duty.

Despite its years of provocations, the US was ill-prepared for an attack.  In addition, we had failed to confront the Japanese directly earlier when they could have been dealt with more easily. So, instead of fighting a small war in the 1930s we ended up fighting a world war just a few years later.

One could argue that there are strong parallels between then and now with respect to ISIS and other terrorist groups.  Once again, we failed to deal with the problem when it was small; once again most of the country is very reluctant to get involved in “other people’s problems;” and, in my opinion, once again we will end up fighting a much larger and more costly war as a result.  History, when ignored, does tend to repeat itself.

Ultimately, the Japanese underestimated the US. Their leaders knew we were in isolationist mode. They did not think we had the “stomach” to fight a prolonged, brutal war. Also, they knew we would be fighting the Germans and Italians as well. Furthermore, they figured that with our Pacific Fleet decimated, if not destroyed, we would be unable or unwilling to counter their aggression in the Far East. The Far East was their end game for reasons discussed above; they were not interested in attacking the US mainland, although much of the US civilian population feared that they would.

Obviously they were wrong. They were not the first enemy to underestimate the US, and they likely will not be the last.

Summing up Castro’s life in a short blog is an extremely difficult task.  There have been many books written about the man, yet I will attempt to limit my comments to 1,000 words or less.

Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz was one of those rare persons who could be identified solely by his first name.  Say the word “Fidel,” and everyone immediately knows about whom you are talking.  He was one of the most divisive and controversial figures in my lifetime.  Love him or hate him.  There was no middle ground.  His supporters, mostly communists or socialists, looked up to him as a strong leader who “stuck it” to the big bad USA.   His detractors, who were far more numerous, viewed him as a brutal, repressive dictator, and habitual violator of human rights who brooked no dissent, destroyed his country’s economy, and forced thousands of Cubans to flee the country to avoid death or imprisonment.  There are thousands of exiles and their descendants who are overjoyed  at his demise.

Castro was born on August 13, 1926 on a sugar cane farm in the Cuban province of Oriente.  His father was a financially-successful planter; his mother was a household servant and his father’s mistress.  Fidel had six siblings.  He was baptized into the Catholic church and attended a series of schools.  However, he had little interest in academics, and focused primarily on sports.

Fidel’s revolutionary bent manifested itself at an early age.  At 19 he attended the University of Havana to study law, but he spent most of his time and energy on student activist activities and causes.  In particular, he spoke out repeatedly against “US imperialism” and then Cuban dictator Ramon Grau.

In the early 1950’s he became more violent.  He joined leftist rebellions in the Dominican Republic and Colombia.  In addition, he led an unsuccessful attack on a Cuban army barracks.  He was caught and spent a year in prison.  Following his release he went to Mexico where, along with his brother, Raul, and Che Guevara, he formed the revolutionary group the 26th of July Movement.  This was the group that he led in the revolution to overthrow the government of the dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959.

The US had supported Batista.  Even though he was a brutal dictator he protected US business interests in Cuba and provided political stability to the region.  His defeat was a significant blow economically and geo-politically.  Castro wasted no time in showing his true colors.  In 1960 he nationalized the US oil refineries and expropriated virtually all US businesses in Cuba.  In September of that year he spoke at the UN, where he delivered a 4 1/2 hour speech railing against the US and its “imperialism.”  In April, 1961 he made the obvious official by declaring Cuba a socialist state and aligning with the Soviet Union.  Thus, the US was faced with the terrifying prospect of a socialist state allied with the Soviet Union only 90 miles from Florida.

The US tried everything it could to oust Castro.  Trade embargoes proved to be ineffective as Cuba was able to trade with other communist states.  We backed the ill-advised and ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion in which nearly all 1,350 invaders were either killed or captured.  We even tried to assassinate Castro, to no avail.   Then, Castro’s actions almost led to disaster for the entire world.  In October, 1962 we discovered that the Soviets were installing offensive missiles with nuclear capability in Cuba.  This precipitated a crisis, which almost culminated in a nuclear war between Russia and the US.  Such a war could easily have escalated into a global conflict.  Finally, President Kennedy, in his finest hour as president, faced down the Soviets and the crisis was averted.  Eventually, like all other communists/socialist states, Cuba’s economy could not sustain itself.  It began to self-destruct.  The collapse of Russia’s economy in 1991 and its resultant impact on Cuba was the final straw.

Castro was a thorn in our side for nearly 60 years.  The mere presence of a communist state 90 miles from Florida was bad enough by itself.  It was a constant reminder of the US’s inability to secure its own region.  In addition, Castro continually fomented and supported revolution in other countries in Latin America, such as Venezuela and Argentina (the Falkland Islands).

Castro passed away on November 25.  At the time of his death he had ceded power to Raul, due to ill health, so it remains to be seen what immediate changes will occur.  Nevertheless, for Cuba and Cubans, the ultimate symbol of repression is gone.

CONCLUSION

Some interesting factoids regarding Castro:

1. He was an avid sports fan, especially baseball.  He fancied himself a capable pitcher.  He would sometimes insert himself into a winter league game to pitch.  Obviously, neither the umpires nor the other players would object.
2. He required very little sleep.  He would often work until 3-4:00 a.m.  He had a habit of scheduling meetings at that late hour to gain an advantage, believing that the other person would be tired and not at their sharpest.
3. His favorite writer was Ernest Hemingway, who had lived at written for a time in Cuba.

Florence Agnes Henderson’s entertainment career lasted six decades.  This versatile performer could sing, dance and act with aplomb.  She starred on Broadway, in the movies, and on tv.  For good measure she hosted her own talk show (The Florence Henderson Show), cooking show (Who’s Cooking with Florence Henderson), appeared frequently as a substitute host and guest on many talk and reality shows (among then the Tonight Show after Jack Paar and before Johnny Carson), as a tv spokesperson for products such as Wesson Oil, Polident, and Pepsi, and performed on Dancing with the Stars.

Despite that extensive resume, however, she is best remembered for one role – her five-year stint as “Carol Brady” on the hit tv show The Brady Bunch.  “Carol” was the wise, calming character on the show (almost like Robert Young on the 1950’s show Father Knows Best).   I dare say many of you “grew up” with the show and may now watch it with your kids.

In a twist of irony that could only occur in the entertainment business, initially, Henderson was not particularly interested in pursuing the role.  As an established star on Broadway, she was reluctant to accept a role in a tv show and uproot her family.  The producers then offered the part to Shirley Jones, but after she turned it down Henderson relented.  The show, which featured a blended family with six children, was very successful. It ran for 117 episodes from 1969 – 1974.  Its greatest success, however, was in syndication.  It has been shown all over the world and, in fact, can still be found on tv.  In addition, it has spawned spin-offs, variety shows, movies, and cartoons.  It is safe to say that more people have seen Henderson as “Carol Brady” than in all of her other roles combined.

Florence was born on February 14, 1934 (Valentine’s Day, for you trivia buffs) in Dale, Indiana.  She was the youngest of ten children.  Her father was a sharecropper; her mother was a homemaker.  Basically, Florence went directly from the cradle to performing.  Her mother taught her to sing as soon as she could talk (at age 2).  By 12 years old she was singing at local stores in town.

Upon graduating high school she enrolled in the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in NYC.  Within a couple of years she had landed small parts in touring companies of hit musicals.  Then in 1954 she got her big break as the lead in Fanny (creating the role as well).  She was a rousing success, and she was on her way.

CONCLUSION

Henderson was married twice.  She had four children, all with her first husband, Ira Bernstein, whom she divorced.  Her second husband, Dr. John Kappas, died in 2002.  She also had five grandchildren.

Henderson passed away on November 24, 2016 at the age of 82 of heart failure.  It was unexpected.  She had been in good health.  In fact, just three days prior to her death she had attended a live taping of DWTS.

Rest in peace Florence.  We will miss you.

No, not that one.  This blog is not about the Battles of Lexington and Concord, which ushered in the American Revolutionary War.  It is about the pitcher who gave up what many believe to have been the most famous/infamous homerun in baseball history and how he dealt with its aftermath.  Even you non-baseball fans will appreciate this story.

Ralph Theodore Joseph Branca was born in Mt. Vernon, NY on January 6, 1926, the 15th of 17 children.  (That’s not a typo, folks.)   His Italian father was a trolley car conductor; his mother was Jewish, but Ralph was raised in the Catholic faith.

Ralph was a two-sport athlete.  He was good enough to play varsity baseball and basketball for NYU.  Then, he signed with the Dodgers as a pitcher.  Even though most baseball fans only remember him for giving up the famous/infamous homerun, he pitched in the majors for 12 seasons (1944-1956) , won 88 games, and was a three-time all-star.

In addition, he was an early and fervent supporter of Jackie Robinson’s.  For example, when the players took the field for Jackie’s first game Ralph made a point of standing next to him during the pre-game introductions as a show of solidarity. Rachel Robinson was always appreciative of Ralph’s support and would often recall that Jackie “liked and admired him as a friend, even after Ralph left the Dodgers.”  When Jackie died Ralph was one of the pallbearers at his funeral.  Unfortunately, Ralph’s career was derailed by a freak back injury sustained in Spring Training in 1952, although he played until 1956.

An integral part of this story is the fierce rivalry between the Brooklyn Dodgers and the NY Giants.  It began in the late 19th Century, and it has been the one of the most fierce rivalries in sports for over 100 years.  Think Yankees-Red Sox, Duke-North Carolina basketball, or any famous other rivalry times 10.

It was not just among the fans.  The 19th Century team owners hated each other.  The players hated each other.  There were frequent fights and “beanings,” and there have been instances in which players have refused to accept a trade from one team to the other.  For example, Jackie Robinson retired rather than accept a trade to the Giants in 1958, and Willie Mays refused a trade to the Dodgers in 1972.

Even the cities, themselves, were fierce rivals.  Brooklyn was a separate city until 1898 when it was incorporated into a borough of NYC.  Brooklyn was known as the blue collar, working class borough; Manhattan was the snooty, corporate, button-down white collar borough.  This class warfare manifested itself on the playing field.  Remember, in those days, baseball was truly the National Pastime.   Fans lived and died with their team year round.  They identified with them more than today.  Most of the players did not earn much more than the fans.  Moreover, many of the players lived in the neighborhood and worked there in the off-season.  The fans might see them in the grocery store.  Their kids might go to school with the players’ kids.  Mays often played stickball with the kids in his Harlem neighborhood.   Players and fans were intertwined.

This was the backdrop in 1951 when the Dodgers and Giants engaged in one of the most dramatic and entertaining pennant races ever.  The Dodgers had a 13 1/2 game lead over the Giants as late as August 11, and it looked as though they would win the pennant easily.  But, the Giants, led by sensational rookie, Willie Mays, got hot and caught them, forcing a three-game playoff.  They split the first two games and the Dodgers had a 4-1 lead entering the bottom of the ninth at the Polo Grounds.

The Giants rallied to make it 4-2 and had two men on base when the Dodgers went to the bullpen.  They had two relievers warming up, Carl Erskine and Ralph Branca.  The story goes that Erskine had been bouncing his signature curve ball, so the manager brought in Branca to face Bobby Thomson.  Such are the vagaries of life.  Thomson took strike one, then hit the next pitch into the left field bleachers.

There was shock and bedlam depending on which team you rooted for.  Russ Hodges, the Giants radio announcer, was shouting the “call” of his life:  “The Giants Win the Pennant!”  The Giants Win the Pennant! ” over and over.  Giants players were ecstatic.  And Ralph Branca was devastated.  He felt personally responsible for losing the game and the pennant.

Incidentally, there are four interesting, little known footnotes to this story.

1. In that era of primitive communication there was no official recording of the game.  The only reason that a record of Hodges’ call exists at all is that a Dodgers fan, certain the Dodgers would win, recorded it because he wanted to revel in Hodges’ misery after the Giants lost.

2.  Jackie Robinson, one of the most fierce competitors ever to play, did not leave the field immediately. He stood among the celebrating players and fans watching until Thomson touched home plate.

3.  Probably one of the most relieved Giants players was the on-deck hitter, who revealed later he was “scared to death” that he would have to hit with the pennant on the line.  This was none other than Willie Mays, a rookie that year, who would go on to become, in my opinion, the best player of his time and one of the best clutch hitters ever.

4.  Years later, a story circulated that the Giants were stealing signs during the game.  This is in some dispute, but it entirely possible that Thomson knew a fastball was coming when hit the famous/infamous homer.

CONCLUSION

A lesser man would have been “broken” by that one pitch.  Instead, Ralph embraced the event and went on to lead a productive life.  In fact, it is safe to say that were it not for that one pitch, few people would have ever heard of him.  Instead, the homerun was only the tip of the iceberg of his life.

1.  He married and raised a family.  In fact, his wife, whom he met in the parking lot after the game, was a member of the family that owned the Dodgers.  Furthermore, his daughter married a future major league ballplayer, manager and announcer named Bobby Valentine.
2. Thomson and he became friends and often appeared together at card shows, sporting events and other baseball functions.  They made a career out of telling and retelling the story of the homerun.
3. Ralph won audiences over with his grace and good humor.  He often said “A guy commits murder and gets pardoned after 20 years.  I didn’t get pardoned.”  Former baseball commissioner Rob Manfred called him” a true gentleman who earned universal respect in the game he loved and served so well.”
4. Ralph became a sports commentator, best known for doing the pre-game and post-game shows for Mets’ games (alongside a “newbie” named Howard Cosell).
5. He became an executive with Baseball Assistance Team, aka BAT, which provided financial aid to down-and-out baseball figures.

Ralph passed away on November 23.  He should be remembered, not merely as the pitcher who served up the most famous/infamous homerun in baseball history, but also as a true gentlemen and a stand-up guy.

Today, November 24, most of us will celebrate Thanksgiving. It is a paid federal holiday. All government offices and financial markets are closed. We will gather together with family and friends, eat turkey and other traditional foods, watch football games on TV, and enjoy a day off from work.

Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday. I love the food, the football, and the four-day weekend.  What I don’t like is the traffic, but you can’t have everything.

Few of us will stop to think of the origins and meaning of the holiday. What is its meaning? What are its origins? Why is it celebrated at this time of the year? Read on for the answers.

Thanksgiving is a national holiday celebrated to give thanks for the year’s harvest. It has strong religious and cultural roots. Most people are aware that Thanksgiving is celebrated in the US (4th Thursday in November) and Canada (2nd Monday in October), but few of us are aware that variations of it are observed in other countries as well. In these other countries the holiday has a different meaning and purpose. For example, in Grenada it is celebrated on October 25, and it marks the date on which the US invaded the island in 1983 in response to the deposition and execution of Grenada’s then Prime Minister, Maurice Bishop. Liberia celebrates the holiday on the first Thursday of November, a tradition that was originated by freed American slaves that were transported there. In the Netherlands a Thanksgiving Day service is held on the morning of the US holiday. Its purpose is to commemorate the traditions of the Pilgrims, who resided in the city of Leiden for several years prior to their emigration to the New World. Japan celebrates a “Labor Thanksgiving Day” on November 23 to commemorate labor and production. It has its roots from the period of American occupation after WWII.

Like many of our traditions, Thanksgiving is rooted in English tradition. These date from the English Reformation in the 16th century and the reign of King Henry VIII. Apparently, the Protestant clergy had determined that events of misfortune or good fortune were attributable to God. Thus, unexpected disasters, such as droughts, floods or plagues, were followed by “Days of Fasting.” On the other hand, fortuitous events, such as a good harvest or the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588, which was largely attributable to storms off the English coast, were to be celebrated by “giving thanks” to Him.

The origin of the Canadian holiday is uncertain, but it is most commonly attributed to the English explorer Martin Frobisher. He had been exploring Northern Canada seeking the infamous and elusive Northwest Passage to Asia. He wanted to give thanks for his party having survived the numerous storms and icebergs it had encountered on the long journey from England. Today, Thanksgiving is celebrated as a statutory holiday in most jurisdictions of Canada.

Most people trace the American Thanksgiving holiday to 1621 in present-day Massachusetts (although some claim that there were earlier celebrations by the Spaniards in present-day Florida circa 1565 and in the colony of Virginia circa 1610). The Pilgrims and Puritans living there had enjoyed a bountiful harvest that year and wanted to give thanks. Their harvest had been partly attributable to assistance from Native Americans, so they invited them to share in their celebration. Records indicate that there were 90 Native Americans and 25 colonists in attendance. The actual date is uncertain, but it is believed to have been between September 21 and November 11.

Prior to 1942, Thanksgiving was not celebrated as an official national holiday. Rather, it was celebrated periodically by proclamation. For example, during the Revolutionary War the Continental Congress established days of “prayer, humiliation and thanksgiving” each year. In 1777 George Washington proclaimed a day of Thanksgiving to celebrate the colonists’ victory at Saratoga. Following independence, various Presidents continued the practice of issuing proclamations periodically.

In 1863 President Lincoln proclaimed a national “Thanksgiving Day” to be celebrated on the last Thursday of November. Historians believe that his action was prompted by a series of editorials written by Sarah Josepha Hale, a writer and editor of some renown. (She wrote the popular nursery rhyme, “Mary Had a Little Lamb.”) The practice of annual Presidential Proclamations continued until 1939. That year, FDR broke the tradition. November had five Thursdays that year instead of the usual four. FDR figured that if the holiday were celebrated on the 4th Thursday it would provide a much-needed boost to the economy by enabling merchants to sell more goods before Christmas. (Even then, Thanksgiving was the unofficial start of the Christmas holiday shopping season.) Typically, this action precipitated a spat between the GOP and Dems in Congress. GOP congressmen viewed it as an insult to President Lincoln and continued to consider the last Thursday to be the holiday, so there were two Thanksgiving celebrations in 1939, 1940 and 1941, a “Democratic” one on the 4th Thursday and a “Republican” one on the last Thursday. The individual states split the dates (only in America!). Finally, in 1941 everyone got in sync. On December 26, 1941 FDR signed a bill into law that decreed that Thanksgiving would be celebrated on the 4th Thursday of November, a practice that has continued to this day.

Beginning in 1947, the National Turkey Federation has presented a live turkey to the President. Over the years it became customary for the President to grant a “pardon” to the turkey.

CONCLUSION

Many businesses are closed on Friday as well, which has had the effect of expanding the holiday into a four-day weekend. This weekend is one of the busiest travel days of the year, as anyone who has been on the roads or at the airports during this time can attest. The Friday after the holiday is known as “Black Friday.” It is one of the busiest shopping days of the year and signals the beginning of the Christmas shopping season. Many retail stores open early and offer sales. Some shoppers love this and camp out overnight; others deride it as a “fool’s errand.”

Saturday is known as “Small Business Saturday,” which is an attempt to encourage patronage of small businesses. The Monday after the holiday is known as “Cyber Monday,” which encourages shopping on-line. The Tuesday after is called “Giving Tuesday” to encourage donations to the needy. The holiday is a prime time for charity. Many communities have food and clothing drives to collect items for distribution to the poor.

Many cities hold parades. The NYC “Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade” is a longstanding tradition. Many families have attended this every year for generations. It features floats with specific themes, such as Broadway shows, cartoon characters, celebrities and high school marching bands. The last float is traditionally one of Santa Claus, which symbolizes the beginning of the Christmas season. Other examples of cities that hold parades are Detroit, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Plymouth, MA, and Houston.

Many of us watch football. High schools and colleges play traditional games against their chief rivals. The NFL has staged a football game on Thanksgiving Day every year since 1934. At first, there was only one that was hosted by the Detroit Lions. Currently, there are three. Even basketball has gotten into the act. There are college tournaments and NBA games. For non-sports fans there are a plethora of TV specials with a Thanksgiving or Christmas theme.

So, now that you are “experts” on Thanksgiving, relax and enjoy the holiday.  In particular, take a minute to give thanks that through a fortuitous twist of fate, you were born in this country.