One is, on occasion, asked a naïve, or reductive question, such that, following his polite and patient response, leads him thereafter and unexpectedly, into more profound thought on the general subject. The derisible question, here, was, “Why don’t the different colors, in nature, clash?” This question, posed by an adult citizen is, strange, childish, and, upon contemplation, astoundingly, naïve. Man has developed in the ambiance of his natural surroundings, and has accommodated to its natural appearance and normative propriety. His sense of color is a phenomenon, based, as Edmund Burke would say, solely upon his “learned experience”. The colors that are presented in nature, do not clash, because we have, eternally associated them together, and not by some exercise of (arbitrary) design. Certain other colors may “clash” when used together, because they do not conform to our personally learned, or societally influenced, experience.

This highly unusual and naïve question, shortly thereafter, led us to a subject that interested us, viz., the existence of a need for color, in speech, to communicate information, feeling, thoughts and important messages, as an alternative to words. The simplest, and most widely recognized illustration, is seen in the common use of red and green traffic lights.

“The perception of color”, we are told, “derives from the stimulation of “cone cells” in the human eye by radiation within the visible spectrum.” We are not neuroscientists, and are more interested in the use of color, however generated, as a necessary communicative supplement, to the American-English lexicon.

We have developed in our day-to-day language, (excluding its metaphoric employment in poetics) the needed use of color, as an expression of descriptive or emotional nature. “It says it in black and white” (clearly), or he is playing a “blue” (sad) song. He was, “red hot” (very angry). She was, “green” (definitively) with envy; more recently, it is a “blue” (democratic) or “red” (republican) or purple (mixed) State. ”Green,” has also become  synonymous with, environmental responsibility, and on occasion, liberal politics.

Shall we continue, “white wash” (wrongfully excused),” green at the gills (Sickly) “yellow” (cowardly) “bronzed” (heavily suntanned), greenhorn (foreigner), situation “red” (emergency), “code blue” (hospital emergency), “in the red” (insolvent business), “in the black” (solvent), a “gray area” (undefined). Not to mention the many “colorful” expressions, such as, “white as a ghost,” she is a “colorful character” (exotic persona), he is the sports announcer who provides the “color” during the match, or, the designation, a “red light” district, which means the tenderloin.

We could continue, ad infinitum, and ad nauseam, to furnish additional illustrations of our use of words, borrowed from the interactive generation of our cones and rods with our retina, in the attempt to satisfactorily fulfill the need for satisfactory expression. The foregoing paragraphs were intended to show the extent of use of our strange word partnership with our natural sense of sight, as needed, to fortify a substantial weakness in our sense of speech. To be more precise, for the the failure of the Anglo-American lexicon, to avail a speaker, or writer, with a competent inventory of expressive adjectives and nouns, so that he can, with a feeling of relief, conclude that he has expressed his emotions or, feelings, fully and precisely.  The language of American English is quite suitable for expressing the language of bills and invoices, but shamefully, inadequate, in the case of words related to feelings and emotions. The Romance languages, apparently, are not thus handicapped. Even the modestly spoken, Yiddish, with which we have some passing familiarity, does not suffer from this handicap.

Take for example, the ubiquitous word, “love,” in English. One may be very hungry and say: “I’d love to have a slice of pizza,” or be wearing very uncomfortable shoes and say, “I’d love to take my shoes off, or being tired, I’d love to go to sleep now,” or to a grandchild, “I love you.” Even in the modest, retro and seldom used, language of Yiddish (as we are confident is true of many other languages) there is an appropriate word, or form of the word, “love,” for each relevant and applicable use; for a lover, for a spouse, for the uses mentioned. The American vocabulary is unforgivably impoverished, in its inventory of “feeling” words. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we inherited the language of the traditionally, phlegmatic English, and not the Portuguese or the Italian cultures.

In any event, it clearly evidences an unmistakable admission, of the paucity of our Nation’s language, when one is necessarily obliged, to supplement his desire for satisfactory, personal communication, with words, more appropriately representing electronic-light impulses occurring at the retina.




Blogpost # 393   VOX POP a/k/a “PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES”

In an earlier essay, we expressed our concern and criticism regarding today’s unusually large number of Democratic candidates for Presidential nomination. The contestants, all from an identical party, institutionally, share most points of view in common, with the unfortunate result that irrelevant, populist standards may become the sole remaining determinants of one’s choice. Knowledge, gravitas, experience, transparent candor, are among the significantly proper and relevant qualities; certainly not, irrelevant qualities such as perceived charm, eloquence, apparent confidence, aggressiveness and other ostensibly, populist, “winning” characteristics. The previous election proved to be an effective primer, on the profound error of any selection, based on populist and superficial standards. We have declared in a past essay, that an overlarge number of proposed candidates, all from the same party, factually eliminates the occasion for debate on the relevant issues, leaving only cosmetic differences, (voice, appearance, sense of humor and celebrity) as the remaining, irrelevant, and improper, bases for choice. The candidate’s “performance” has been, disappointingly, the prime subject of discussion in the media; not the candidate’s perceived gravitas and potential fitness for the Office. It is of crucial importance, that the consequential, historical significance, of choosing a Presidential candidate, from one of the (only) two national political parties, ought not be seen as a replication of a Miss America contest.

The celebrated, intensely awaited event, is universally known as, the “Presidential Debates.” We are troubled by that misleading reference. A “debate” involves a formal and contested discussion (arguments) on (one) a particular, previously selected topic, in which each of two opposing sides puts forward opposing viewpoints. The upcoming “second debate,” like the first, will not be a “debate” in any respect. It is, instead a species of classic vox- populi, an expression of citizen, (man-in-the street) repetition, of well- known party memes, articulated in the respective style of the performer-candidate’s nuanced persona; responsive to various timely issues, (debates have only one issue) presented by attractive, celebrity, interrogators. One might assume that some television producer (or gifted intern) could assign a more applicable name, to this television tour de force.

As a related addendum to the above critique, we feel obliged to comment on the stated aspiration, daily communicated by the Democratic Party, that the most imperative criterion, is the selection of “a candidate that can defeat Donald Trump.” In view of Trump’s public performance, demonstrating his profound incapability, as well as his plethora of improprieties, professional and social, to such extent that, the historically, rare and extreme procedure, of Presidential Impeachment (for “high crimes and misdemeanors”) is under serious consideration, such insecure and limited aspiration, demonstrates a disrespect for the intelligence of the American voter.

An aspirant to the Democratic nomination, should, suitably, discuss the factors that, traditionally, have been his party’s hallmark themes which have made it successful, such as, healthcare, tax reform, fair wages and working conditions, employment, government safety and health regulations, official food and drug standards, civil liberties, women’s rights, as well as climate change and a reasonable and compassionate policy concerning immigration.

It has been almost three years, and we have, definitively, had more than our fill, of (tawdry) political entertainment.



Post # 392 REFRESHING 1954

A predicate consideration to the theme of this essay, would be (our consistent declaration) that the most valuable, natural resource of a nation, is its people. Neither plentiful natural sources of fuel or minerals, great manufacturing capability, self-sustaining agriculture nor the presence of adequate water resources, is of comparable importance.  We have written on this specific point, utilizing 20th Century Germany, as our historic illustration. Germany, a small to medium- size country, during the early period of that Century, came close to actually, conquering the entire world. This was not because of its geopolitical location, or its natural resources, but rather, due to the nature and quality of its population. The German people at the time, (and at present) were educated, capable and easily mobilized. This historically painful observation of the salient criteria affording existential strength and durability to a Nation State, would appear to have universal and eternal application.

If in principle, an educated and easily mobilized citizenry, is the key to a successful and self-sustaining nation-state, the necessary corollary to that principle, is that an adequate educational system must be consistently maintained and enjoyed  by its people. The latter admonition is of existential significance; inarguably more so, than the development of new and more efficient, armaments.

From the time of its inception, this Nation has been exclusively populated by people, who were born elsewhere, and their succeeding progeny. The great and enduring success, of the Founder’s 19th Century experimental Democratic Republic, is large part, due to the policy, represented by its national motto, “E Pluribus Unum,” from many (peoples, nations, and races) one, indivisible Nation. We have written, elsewhere, that the draconian immigration policy, of the current Presidential administration, turns a blind eye, to our historically profitable and empathic, policy, regarding, “want to be” American immigrants.  However, this writing relates to universal citizen education, and not to immigration.

Following the end of the shameful period of America’s enslavement of black people, a long and arduous journey was undertaken, by the government and its citizens, seeking to rectify that past evil.  (Judge Taney of SCOTUS, in the Dred Scott case, had once ruled, that a black person was, merely, “agricultural equipment”). To seek to rectify the many decades of proclaimed systemic evil of inequality, previously practiced by its white population against black America, virtually every aspect and venue of American life, required adjustment and reconfiguration. The most profound change, of course, was the long overdue recognition of the equality, dignity and worth of all citizens, regardless of color. As a practical, and necessary, concomitant to such newly recognized, legal and social status of black people, innumerable changes were required, regarding public as well as private life, which included, elimination of segregation from, water fountains, bathroom facilities, lunch counters, restaurants, busses, trains, employment, residency and military service. Significantly, all Americans have been recognized as sharing the franchise, to cast an equal vote, and, thereby, be a full participant in our Democracy. [Const. Amendment XV, (1870)]

A crucial predicate to restoring equal rights in the Nation, was that of equal education for all Americans, regardless of race or ethnicity. Schools, like water fountains and residency, had traditionally been segregated, so that white and black students attended separate facilities. This state of affairs had been determined to be acceptable and legal, by (SCOTUS), provided the educational facilities were, “Separate but Equal”. Objective studies, however, revealed that the facilities, as well as the general quality of education, in black schools, were, demonstrably, below the level of white schools. Finally, in 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the landmark decision, Brown v. Board of Education, in an empirically determined ruling, held that “Separate is not equal,” and that all school segregation is unconstitutional.

During the many decades since the Brown case, there have been alleged instances of arguable segregation in the schools, whether apparent, or claimed existing, by indirect effect. The issue has, at times, been the subject of considerable legal contention. The bright lines drawn by the Brown decision, proved to be somewhat more difficult in their application, than in their clear intention and meritorious purpose.

A complicating factor in any effort to avoid segregated schools, can have its origin, in various contexts; often in demonstrated economic disparity. Statistics reveal far higher earnings and accumulated wealth among the white, as compared to black citizens. We do not care to hazard a sociological analysis of the causative factors (such as, starting late, viz., only after rescue from the servile condition of slavery, suffering decades of societal repression, educationally, or otherwise), however, there seems to be no demonstrable argument, disproving the existence of such general economic disparity. District school taxes, a vital source of revenue for suburban schools, are levied in the same manner as real estate taxes, viz., calculated upon the valuation (assessed, or market) of the real estate, in the respective community. As a consequence, it does not take a great leap of faith to deduce, that in the white and, generally, more affluent areas, containing more expensive houses, more revenue is paid into school taxes than in the less affluent areas. This, as a practical matter, results in better school facilities, teacher salaries and  materials, in  more affluent school districts, as compared to areas which are poorer, and, as reported, generally inhabited by minorities. We are tempted to presume, that this problem is a frequently occurring one, andto  conclude, that such prevalent economic inequality results in a predictable, but unintended existence of unequal education, as outlawed by SCOTUS in the Brown case. In such instances, apparently, economics, and not racial prejudice, is responsible for the resultant, illegal segregation of education.

Experience seems to show that solutions to economic issues, are more easily and satisfactorily attained, than age-old issues of prevailing, acculturate bigotry. In the absence of a more cogent solution, we would suggest a program of properly calculated and monitored, supplemental payments (perhaps by the Federal Government) to economically challenged school districts, to effect a general equalization of the quality of their education, with the more fortunate ones.

The above policy would refresh and update the legal and moral intent, as well as the continuance of the principle of the 1954 Brown case, and additionally, (in keeping with our initial observations) aid in the maintenance of a high level of strength, durability and quality, of the American Nation.




In this essay, we are concerned with the fundamental concept of (human) life, and it may be useful to define it simply, in a non-medical and non-anthropological context. Life, as we see it, (with apologies to the experts) is the distinction between physical entities, that possess self- sustaining, biological processes, from those who do not. In the case of human beings, such characteristics are fortuitously inclusive, of the capacity for advanced reason and self-determination. The latter, fundamental observation, is highly relevant and contextually useful, to the intended purposes of this writing.

Mainstream humanity has sadly, and by definitive degrees, apparently, for reasons of mere convenience, surrendered the many gifts afforded to it by the generosity of Natural Evolution. It has voluntarily and foolishly, facilitated and promoted its own sad and perverse decline, from a uniquely equipped, capable and sensitive, practitioner of reason and cognitive behavior, to a mere cog in robotic electronic processing. For ephemeral convenience, it has surrendered persona and lifestyle to his own fabricated electronics; together with much of his natural and unique capabilities; degraded himself, functionally, to merely an initiating step (an “on-off” switch) in a robotic existence. Mankind has ignored the symbolic meaning of the myth of Adam and Eve, and created his own superseding Genesis, a new and electronically dependent, version of Adam.

In the vital area of interactive communication, man has foolishly perpetrated the costly social sacrifice, of familiar human interaction, in favor of a cold, robotic transmission to the communicant’s screen, of data-like electronic symbols, in lieu of human speech. This phenomenon has been often observed, by us in earlier writings. It appears, that personal, warm, familiar, and meaningful conversation has, startlingly, become obsolete.

The rather small, hand held, “phones” have, by popular use, become an electronic, robot-like, bodily extension for most members of society. It has been relied upon to the extent that it has become ubiquitously indispensable, as a substitute, for information gathering, scholastic research, computational thinking, directional advice, photographic and musical activities, fact checking and, in general, an informational resource. Traditional telephone calls have become “retro,” in favor of the prevailing practice of electronic e-mails and “texting.” Most of the younger generation, would not remember activities such as, person to person telephone conversations; the exchange of social correspondence (letters) has become, without doubt, completely foreign to these younger robotic, electronic mutants.

It was only recently, that the activity of “window shopping,” and purchases from attractively decorated, department stores, were normal and pleasant phenomena. The mechanical, absentee, use of on-line e-commerce has been directly responsible for many of the traditionally known and successful department stores’ financially decline, or,  close. The sociably pleasant, practice of shopping, with friends (and then lunch, or drinks) has become only a faint memory. It is truly difficult, for us, to comprehend the dynamics of these many impersonal, robotic, incursions into pleasant, interactive societal and commercial life.

We have often referred to Evolution’s greatest gift to homo sapiens of an advanced brain, capable of reason and understanding. It is absolutely frightening, as well asmost disheartening, that the electronically assisted, robotization of mankind, has led him to bypass and abandon his aptitudes and Evolutionary capability for reason, in favor of the practice of lazy (and ultimately harmful) consultation with his “smart phone,” for the programmed, electronically generated answer. We have previously written of our fear, that, due to its popularly practiced non-use, the brain could, conceivably, degrade to  a vestigial organ, like the appendix. In addition to the danger to his advancement, continuance and development, we are embarrassed by mankind’s shameful ingratitude, in failing to exploit Nature’s generous gift of reason, in favor of a robot-like inquiry into an electronic appliance,

We should not omit the influence of television, as an effective device, in the pernicious robotization of our society. Books, so vital to the development of understanding and human perspective, have, in so many quarters, become a mere artifact of the past. The Pied-Piper appeal of cheap, easily accessible, ephemeral diversion, has, disappointingly, become the popular choice, in lieu of life activities, that tend to increase knowledge or appeal to proper aesthetic taste.

Television has also, in its commercially motivated, and tactically, idealized representations of the acceptable physical form, has reportedly led many women, young and old, to disrespect their bodies, as too fat, too thin, or, not shapely enough. The actresses and models which regularly appear on television, are not the norm, and to the discerning television viewer, often resemble mannequins rather than realistic, attractive women. The unwarranted influence of television, has portrayed many fantasies to the insecure male and female, regarding acceptable physical appearance, the dire need for advertised medication, weight loss programs, and many other sales promotional, information and advice. Viewers should exercise their personal perceptions, and not respond, in robot-like fashion, to an enterprise that is concerned, solely and exclusively, for market sales.

Each of us should, appreciatively and personally, enjoy the exercise of our individual persona, and properly value our independently derived perceptions of reality. We are wise to practice our own, personal discernment, and not to robotically replicate, other people’s actions, or versions of reality, in order to attain their approval. Mechanical, electronic, Robot-like behavior is costly, from the human perspective, and can be seen as fittingly relegated, only to those who have completely lost confidence in their own personal determinations.

We have resolved to persist in looking forward to a time, when people will, beneficially, put down their cell phones, and resume the age-old, natural practice of talking with each other; when mankind will, on a confident, independent and individual basis, resume the confident and natural, exercise of its unique capacity for reason, discernment and action.



There is too little said or written, notably, in the sport pages of the daily newspapers, or on sports television, concerning athletic performance, in the compelling and challenging area of literature. Reading literature is a silent, albeit, popularly participated in and followed sport, which, akin to football and arm wrestling, can be appropriately catalogued as a contact sport. It’s rare appearance in the sports pages, may conceivably be due to the absence of motivated crowds, or, as equally possible, the dearth of reported physical injuries.

In the subject sport, the first physical contact, occurs at the very start of the event, when the newly purchased, hard-cover novel is brought home from the bookstore. When emancipated from its Barnes & Noble paper wrapping, it is athletically, suggested to turn the book around a few times, to admire the attractive book jacket, confirm the new acquisition for your home library, re-read the name of the auspicious novelist, and the title of the book, both as artistically presented on the book cover and its binding.

We strongly recommend, for reasons of safety and comfort, sitting in a comfortable chair, one that you have broken- in previously, as most suitable to optimum performance. Sitting down and adjusting your equilibrium for a few moments, is a crucial, meditative, warm-up. Then, determinatively and confidently, click in the reading lamp, and ergonomically and strategically, place your body in such a position as will insure your safest, most efficient, and comfortable performance. The book should now be turned over to an upright position for the “kick-off” or commencement of the activity. Caution: in the event of a protective wrap protecting the book-cover, the same is to be, strategically, removed and carefully inserted, in an appropriate receptacle; always bearing in mind, that the light-weight, fly-away material of such plastic protective covers, can easily by-pass the intended target (often due to a residential draft).

The next step is especially crucial to any acceptable performance of the sport; it involves the slow opening of the volume, at about half-way (empirically, the most effective point) and subtly, and very gently, inhaling the very faint, but pleasant, scent of the new book (in large part, freshly printed paper) and listening to that slight click of the new binding. We recommend that these latter two, fore-play activities be performed in private, in order to avoid the potential of a possibly puzzled reaction on the part of any sports spectators. The next recommended stage of the sport, will require some manual dexterity. As often is the case with this athletic endeavor, there may be one or two pages [still] stuck together, from its manufacture. Here, contact is to be effectuated with empathic surgical dexterity. Should you be equipped with long fingernails, a very careful slitting of the stuck pages may be accomplished with success and without damage. Should the fates be such, that the player’s fingernails be too short, a thin letter opener may be employed, but with appropriate surgical care.

We affirmatively encourage the reading of the book jacket for the purposes indicated above, and, as well, the preface, since the latter, often relates the intention of the author. For the purpose of properly engaging in this serious sport, however, we would discourage the reading of the “Introduction,” before reading the book, for several reasons. The most obvious reason for this admonition, is that many introductory statements, prematurely, reveal the action and outcome of the novel’s plot. An even more compelling reason is to assure the original, independent understanding of the work by the reader, without any previous influence. We do recommend reading the Introduction, but, only after the completion of the book; good books generally have erudite analyses authored by knowledgeable people, and such reading is interesting, and often illuminating. The sensitive and experienced reader may also enjoy comparing his personal perceptions and analysis, of the book, with that contained in its scholastically written, Introduction.

In the physical participation in the actual, physical, activity, or sport, of reading, we recommend that, all pages be turned from the top edge of the next succeeding page, that there be no simultaneous eating or drinking  (in order to protect the pristine appearance of the pages), that only a flat bookmark be used, to indicate the place last read, that the book, when not being read, be kept on a flat surface, or a bookshelf, and that, absolutely, no pen or pencil markings or notations be made therein (these are annoying and mar the page’s appearance). An available pad and writing implement, for any impulsive notation, should always be closely accessible.

The completed book should be granted its well- deserved respite on a selected bookshelf, with care, not to wedge it into a very tight space, in order to preserve the book jacket and the book itself. When painstakingly seeking the optimum venue for the book, especial care should be taken, to avoid stepping on the cat.

As is prudent in cases of all athletic activities, generally, participants should have regular medical check-ups, eat a nutritious diet, and get adequate sleep.


Post # 389  IN ONE ERA, AND OUT THE OTHER 2 (Lament)

We have, on an earlier occasion, lamented the apparent wide-spread general degradation of the American population, in terms of literacy and aesthetic standards.  Too many citizens prefer ephemeral, surface-depth diversion to life-enriching pursuits, such as literature, dramatic presentations, musical concerts and the like. The elevation of an embarrassing and inept President of the United States, may have been an indirect result of this sad and disappointing, phenomenon. Many citizens, however, have held on to their hope for a return to the recent past, where reading a good book did not depend upon assurances that it is short, or funny. There was an era when people attended public lectures, pursued subjects of extra-curricular interest, wrote letters to each other, spoke directly to friends (as opposed to transmitting electronic images to their screen) regularly read newspapers and debated politics in a friendly and sociable manner. We have just previously, lamented on this sea-change in society, but unfortunately observe great disappointment, as well, with our American institutions, formerly the protectors of our Republican Democracy.

We see no need to again discuss the present state of the Executive Branch of government. We have, more than sufficiently described our frustration and despair at the present degradation of the Office. We are also of the opinion, that most Americans, who pay attention, have observed that the Legislative Branch of Government, appears to be largely composed of individuals who are generally, concerned more about their re-election to office, than the responsible duties of their office.

We had, however, maintained our respect, and our hopes regarding the third branch of our Republic, the Judiciary. This institution, has also, recently, dashed our determined hope for the return to the Nation, as depicted in the better periods of our history.

Despite a long and consistent history of observing the black letter law, that no case will be accepted for adjudication, by SCOTUS, which is at all political, {because of the Constitutional Separation of Powers} the high Court accepted [and shamefully decided] Bush v. Gore, and the Democracy damaging, Citizens United case, the latter permitting corporate interests, by the determined right to inject unlimited funds into an election, dilute and outweigh the (democratic) vote of the American citizen.

We have also, unhappily, lost faith in the application of the law, by the [now, apparently politically driven] U.S. Justice Department. We would inquire of that August and infallible, legal institution, as to the following two questions, (1) How can the President be granted the authority to pardon criminals, for crimes in which he has been shown to be complicit?  (2) How can the “Justice Department Rule” (unwritten) against indicting a sitting President, be applicable to the crimes which put him in that office, in the first place? [What, in the name of Yogi Berra, is going on?]

As we breakfast this morning, we do not seem to feel our usual Sunday morning, cheery optimism, and although, generally, while we try to avoid negativity, find that attempt, at this moment, challenging. [Oops, we just spilled our coffee.]



One may wonder, at the actual degree of faith in the optimistic expectation, of the revered Founding Fathers, experienced politicians, literati and philosophers, that their newly created Democratic Republic, actually would realize their famously articulated, optimistic prognostications. As we read the founding history, Thomas Jefferson instructively and perhaps, warningly, declared that for a democracy to be successful, it requires an informed and literate society. Based upon such expectation, the founders assumed that that members of the new American Society, would, in good faith, engage in debates regarding subjects of controversy; the results of which would inform the legislators, thus effecting the idealistic goal of “a government by and for the people.” It boggles the mind, to speculate that these wise prognosticators completely overlooked the eternal nature and proclivities of the perverse human persona.

It requires no especial competency or discernment to observe the recent, tragic death of civic amity, manifested by   the disappointing behavior of citizens of divergent political persuasion. Those who differ in opinion are considered by others, to be arch enemies; forming insular groups, the members of which are people of like opinion, and effectively waging propaganda -like war against like groups of divergent views. This disappointing phenomenon has resulted in a fractured and deeply divided nation; hardly the vibrant, cooperatively run and dedicated democratic republic envisioned by our idealistic, “pie-in-the-sky”, founders.

In disappointing contrast to the envisioned democratic Nation, consisting of well-informed, literate and involved citizens, the insular, divided society that developed, in large part, disparages learning and scholastic pursuits, in favor of ephemeral, common and cheap diversion. Consistent with such pronounced downgrading of education and the pursuit of knowledge, it has elected, and elevated to the Oval Office, an ignorant, incapable, criminal and bigoted, former television game show host. As a result, we are fearful that national leaders will, precedentially, no longer come from the Nation’s universities or its established institutions of government, but from the tawdry pits of populist afternoon television. It may well be the case, that a great many Trump supporters value the cheap entertainment furnished by his caricatured behavior, over our nation’s proper governance and destiny.

As a part of our Nation’s largely, reductionist-populist mode, we are confronted with a popular denial of the findings of world-class scientists concerning man-made climate change. This display of ignorance may, by degrees, eventuate, so that our (still) verdant planet is, eventually, degraded to the replication of the lifeless, rocky Moon. It is dangerous and revealing, that considerable numbers of uneducated, populist, flat- earth people have been tactically, and successfully, manipulated, in this area, by big- time, entrepreneurial polluters who greedily and psychopathically, value short term profits, over human life.

It is only such poorly informed  and demagogically pliable citizens, that could have been such a significantly important factor, in the elevation to the Oval Office, of a disgraceful, incapable and embarrassing persona like Donald J. Trump; evidently, a completely ignorant, hopelessly inept, attention seeking adolescent, who has, improperly and shamelessly, turned the Oval Office into a shopping mall for the profit of his family, and his elected position, into a profitable vehicle for the blatant violation of our Constitution’s Emolument Clause. To add fuel to the fire, he is also an outspoken bigot and a perpetrator of serial mendacity. Do we need more?  He is a woman abuser, a critic of our established media, a friend to despotic rulers and an enemy of our historic friends. The list is too full for any patient delineation.

We are disturbed, that the Democratic Party has been, expressly and insecurely, concentrating its efforts on seeking a “Candidate who can defeat Trump” (albeit, a complete failure as President, with an obnoxious persona), rather than a Candidate with the traditional American values and citizen empathy, the Democratic Party’s historic and appropriate mantra. Is this a confirmation and acceptance, of the steep decline in the estimation of the quality of the American citizen? Heaven or Mother Nature, help us!!