Five Westerns and Five Moral Universes: What Old TV Shows Still Teach Us About America

09 Dec 2025 9 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

By John Persico (with a lot of help from Metis)

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, American television was overrun with cowboys.  Westerns galloped across nearly every network, each one promising a different angle on courage, justice, and the messy human struggle to build a society out of dust and gun smoke.  We tend to remember the big ones—Gunsmoke, Bonanza, The Rifleman—but tucked in that crowded landscape were several thoughtful, sometimes surprisingly philosophical shows that tried to answer deeper questions about right and wrong.

I have always loved cowboy shows.   My favorite cowboys when I was growing up were Hopalong Cassidy, the Lone Ranger and Roy Rogers.  Most of these men got their start in the 30’s but their shows migrated to the TV medium when it was first started.  Many episodes of Hopalong were taken from his early movies.  Later, TV started to develop its own cowboy series with weekly episodes of tall, dark and handsome heroes.  By this time in the late 50’s and early 60’s I was not watching TV anymore.  I was in my early teens and had better things to do than watch TV.  Thus, I never watched the five shows that I am going to talk about in this blog when I was young.

I only started to watch these old TV shows a few years ago.  I was rather amazed at the quality of the stories that they told.  They were nothing like many of the TV series that came around later characterized by many more shootouts and gun fights.  These early TV shows tried to convey a strong sense of morality and featured a more discreet and thoughtful use of gunplay.   Many of the heroes in these shows eschewed violence and attempted to use reason to end a fight rather than gunning down a villain.   

Five of these Westerns—The Tall Man, Wyatt Earp, The Restless Gun, Tombstone Territory, and The Texan—offer a fascinating window into how Americans of that era imagined moral life on the frontier.   Each operated in a different moral universe.  Together, they reveal a whole spectrum of values still relevant in 2025: authority vs.  independence, violence vs.  restraint, institutions vs.  personal codes, loyalty vs.  law.

Here’s what these shows have to teach us when we dust them off and look again.

The Tall Man: Tragedy, Friendship, and the Gray Zone of Morality

Among these Westerns, The Tall Man stands out for its dramatic complexity.  Rather than presenting the frontier as a struggle between clear-cut good and evil, the series explored the psychological and moral tensions between Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid—historical figures already steeped in myth.  The show emphasized the tragic inevitability of their relationship: Garrett, the reluctant lawman; Billy, the charming outlaw whose charisma repeatedly outpaced his judgment. These were not cardboard heroes and villains; they were complicated men bound together by loyalty and destiny.

The morality here is not a simple endorsement of law or rebellion.  Instead, it suggests that human loyalties are fragile, destiny is unforgiving, and justice often emerges from personal conflict rather than abstract principles.  It is a Western operating in shades of gray, reflecting an America grappling with Cold War dilemmas where allies and enemies were not always easy to distinguish.  Viewers recognized themselves in the struggle between duty and friendship, a theme uncommon among early Westerns.

The underlying message was that life often puts us in situations where justice isn’t neat.  Friendship can clash with duty.  Good intentions can slide into the wrong choices.  And sometimes the person you care about most becomes the person you eventually have to confront.

In that sense, The Tall Man feels strikingly modern.  It understands that real life doesn’t divide neatly into good guys and bad guys—something America in the Cold War era was just beginning to wrestle with.

Wyatt Earp: The Comfort of the Uncomplicated Hero

If The Tall Man reveled in moral ambiguity, Wyatt Earp offered the opposite: a mythologized portrait of the West’s greatest lawman, played with crisp, upright dignity by Hugh O’Brian.  This series promoted a worldview in which society advances only when firm, principled authority imposes order on chaos.  Earp serves as the archetype of the responsible American leader—a man who does not relish violence but accepts it as a necessary instrument of civilization.

Earp represented the belief that civilization requires firmness.  Order doesn’t grow on its own—it has to be imposed by strong, decent people who are willing to shoulder responsibility.  For postwar America, still anxious about the atomic age and the looming tensions with the Soviet Union, this moral clarity was reassuring.

The show’s moral message resonated with 1950s ideals of stability: strong institutions, disciplined citizenship, and faith in the ability of virtuous leaders to “keep the peace.” It aligned neatly with postwar values, especially the belief that social progress requires firmness rather than moral compromise. Earp rarely doubted himself, and the series rarely doubted him either.  Its clarity, even rigidity, provided reassurance during an era troubled by atomic anxieties and Cold War uncertainty.

Earp didn’t struggle with his conscience—he was the conscience.

The Restless Gun: Pacifism in a Violent Landscape

In sharp contrast to both Garrett and Earp stands Vint Bonner of The Restless Gun, one of the few early Western heroes who actively sought alternatives to violence.  Bonner modeled the idea that courage is not measured by willingness to kill but by the ability to resolve conflict through empathy, reason, and patience.  Yes, this was a Western.  Yes, he still ended up in gunfights.  But the moral direction of the show pointed firmly away from killing and toward understanding.

This places The Restless Gun closer to a moral philosophy of restorative justice than frontier retribution.  In many episodes, Bonner functioned as a mediator, teacher, or counselor.  The villains were not always evil; they were often misguided, desperate, misinformed, or trapped in circumstances they could not manage.  The show’s worldview subtly challenged the Western convention that justice flows from the barrel of a gun.  Instead, it argued that America’s future might depend more on understanding than dominance.

This made the series unusually modern, anticipating later Westerns such as Have Gun, Will Travel, which incorporated moral complexity into the traveling-gunman archetype. Though the show ended early, its worldview remains distinctive in the genre.

In a genre built on bullets, The Restless Gun dared to say: there is another way.

Tombstone Territory: Justice as a Public Responsibility

Tombstone Territory offered a more institutional perspective on frontier justice. Structured around the fictional Tombstone Epitaph newspaper, the show dramatized the challenges faced by Sheriff Clay Hollister in maintaining order within a volatile, fast-growing community.  Unlike Wyatt Earp, where the marshal’s authority was never questioned, Hollister constantly wrestled with public scrutiny, political pressure, and misinformation—issues that eerily foreshadow the modern news cycle.

The moral heart of the series lies in its quasi-documentary tone. Hollister must uphold the law not simply by enforcing it, but by navigating competing interests, calming mobs, and maintaining legitimacy.  Truth, evidence, and due process—rare elements in early Westerns—become central themes. The show’s structure echoes the belief that justice is not merely an individual virtue but a collective responsibility.  It encourages viewers to appreciate the difficulty of governing rather than merely celebrating the lone hero.

In many ways, Tombstone Territory anticipated the later rise of procedural dramas where law enforcement is portrayed as an institution rather than a personal crusade.

The show’s moral center was institutional: justice requires process, evidence, and the difficult work of maintaining legitimacy.  It wasn’t glamorous.  But it was honest.  In many ways, Tombstone Territory speaks more directly to our modern world than some of the bigger Westerns of its time.

The Texan: The Noble Drifter and the American Myth of Honor

Rory Calhoun’s The Texan returned to the classic Western figure of the noble wanderer—a man whose moral code is internal rather than institutional.  Bill Longley, a Confederate veteran, embodies the Western ethos of individual honor: help the vulnerable, confront injustice, and ride away when the dust settles.  The show foregrounds personal integrity over law, suggesting that character—not institutions—ultimately preserves the frontier’s fragile social fabric.

This worldview reflects an enduring American belief in self-reliance and moral autonomy. Longley’s wanderings represent not rootlessness but a spiritual quest to repair the world one town at a time.  His code is chivalric, almost knightly, and he stands as a corrective to the bureaucratic tensions seen in Tombstone Territory.  While he respects the law, he serves a higher standard—his own conscience.

Longley wasn’t defined by the law, nor by institutions.  His moral compass was internal.  He showed that a single person—armed only with decency and grit—could make things a little better wherever he went.

It is the Western as America likes to imagine itself: independent, honorable, and self-reliant.  Even if it rarely works that way in real life, the aspiration is part of our national DNA.

Five Shows, Five Moral Visions

When you line up these Westerns side by side, the moral variety is remarkable:

  • The Tall Man explores the tragedy of conflicting loyalties.
  • Wyatt Earp celebrates firm authority and disciplined leadership.
  • The Restless Gun champions compassion and restraint.
  • Tombstone Territory elevates due process and public trust.
  • The Texan extols personal conscience as the highest law.

Together, they show how deeply Americans were thinking—even through half-hour cowboy shows—about law, justice, violence, and the kind of people we wanted to be.

And perhaps that is the most interesting lesson of all: Westerns weren’t just entertainment.  They were moral storytelling, played out on horseback.

In dusting off these forgotten classics, we rediscover a whole range of ethical possibilities—some stern, some gentle, some tragic, some idealistic.  The frontier wasn’t just a place; it was a metaphor for the ongoing journey America has always been on: trying to figure out how to live decently in a world that is not always decent.

What Happened to These Shows and the Morality that They Tried to Convey?

  1. The Tall Man (1960–1962)

Why it was cancelled:

  • Ratings sagged as audiences drifted toward lighter, family-friendly Westerns and bigger stars.
  • NBC also faced increasing difficulty with script standards: portraying Billy the Kid sympathetically clashed with emerging TV violence guidelines.
  • Production costs were rising, and no strong sponsor stepped in to keep it going.
  1. The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp (1955–1961)

Why it was cancelled:

  • After six seasons, the formula grew repetitive, and the mythologized Earp no longer impressed audiences seeking the grittier realism of later Westerns.
  • Hugh O’Brian wanted to move on, and ABC saw declining ratings.
  • The Western market was oversaturated by 1961.
  1. The Restless Gun (1957–1959)

Why it was cancelled:

  • Despite solid ratings, Payne’s contract and salary demands increased, and NBC hesitated to renew at higher costs.
  • The show’s gentler tone was overshadowed by edgier Westerns.
  • Payne himself said he felt the stories were becoming repetitive.
  1. Tombstone Territory (1957–1960)

 Why it was cancelled:

  • Transition from ABC to syndication hurt the budget.
  • Stiff competition from higher-budget Westerns.
  • The semi-documentary framing was admired but not loved; viewers were shifting toward character-driven stories.
  1. The Texan (1958–1960)

Why it was cancelled:

  • It had strong early ratings but lost its time slot advantage to more modern “adult” Westerns.
  • Calhoun’s outside film commitments strained scheduling.
  • CBS was phasing out lower-budget half-hour Westerns in favor of hour-long dramas.

Each show ended for slightly different reasons, but the common story is:  the genre evolved faster than these earlier, simpler morality tales could adapt.  Americans wanted more “grit” more “violence” and yes even less morality.  The change from John Wayne to Clint Eastwood capped the change that we would see in Westerns from morality tales to tales of vengeance and retribution.  America was becoming more jaded.  We did not want heroes any more who were goody two-shoes.  We wanted anti-heroes and the studios offered them up in droves. 

Looking at American politics today, I often wonder where, when and how the decline in values, integrity and morality started.  Some would say it started with the decline in religion.  I don’t think religion has in the last 200 years in the USA been that big of an influence in terms of morality and integrity.  Karl Marx always believed that economics was the major driver of most social trends.  Many people who disagree with him nevertheless admit that the primary influence on voting behavior is the state of the economy.  In my opinion, this influence goes much deeper than voting behavior.  Capitalism thrives on avarice and stupidity.  It needs a large mass of people who want more and more stuff and too brainwashed to realize that the stuff they are buying is not going to bring them happiness. 

Madison Avenue became a major influencer with the advent of TV.  Go back and look at some of these early Westerns.  Smoking was de rigor.  Many of the heroes of these early Westerns died of lung cancer.  Legendary figures like John Wayne, Gary Cooper, and Chuck Connors, with numerous other actors, musicians, and public figures from that era also falling to the disease, highlighting smoking’s heavy toll in Hollywood.  But while these heroes were dying, Madison Avenue was perfecting the use of TV to sell all kinds of products. 

I always laugh at the fact that so many men have been conned into buying what I call “piss beer” from Budweiser, Miller and Coors.  Large macho football players posing in a bar with these watered down beers spent years on TV regaling their followers with the virtues of light beer.  Would be macho males stormed the liquor stores to buy their six pack of piss beer that they could swill down while watching their favorite football teams playing.  The average person is brainwashed by Madison Avenue on a daily basis.  Watch some of the old TV shows and see how much more sophisticated the ads are today.

I once asked all my MBA students if they thought that TV ads had much influence on their buying patterns.  The typical answer I received was “No, I make up my own mind when I go shopping.”  Most people do not even know that they are brainwashed.  The cigarette industry spent years lying to people about the medical effects of cigarettes.  Today, it is the liquor companies that are lying to consumers.  But all of Capitalism and advertising has one major motive when it comes to making a sales pitch.  That motive is too make you feel inferior.  To make you feel needy.  To make you feel inadequate.  Once you feel like you are somehow lacking something, they can pitch you their product.  Their pitch will always be that you will be better, smarter, faster or happier with their product or at least you will be better, smarter, faster and happier than your next-door neighbor who did not buy their product.

I believe the decline in morality and integrity in the USA can be directly linked to Madison Avenue and the brainwashing they conduct on consumers.  If you are on the producers side of the economic equation, you cannot have any qualms about what you are selling or the side effects or the unintended consequences of the use of your products or services.  If you are on the consumer side of the economic equation, your whole reason for being is to buy more and more stuff regardless of its impact on your health and sanity or the environment.  This callousness on both sides has resulted in a society that is unparalleled in terms of greed and avarice. 

The old Westerns were like some of the early fairy tales.  They had a motive beyond entertainment.  They existed to convey a morality that eventually seemed too simplistic and certainly too limiting.  Morality is a unique virtue in the sense that it not only asks you what you are doing for yourself, but it also asks what are you doing for others. Morality cannot coexist with Capitalism any more than Capitalism can coexist with Communism.  We need a new economic system based on principles of love, trust and compassion for ALL the people in world and not just our friends or relatives or the people in our own country. 

Have you forgotten the past?

30 Sep 2025 13 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , ,

Have you forgotten the past?

I happened to come across this short blog post that I wrote in July of 2010. A few of the comments seemed to be very prophetic. Of course, I was not much of a prophet since this trend towards fascism and authoritarianism has been happening much longer than most people realize in the USA. The comment by Santayana is as ever very relevant. It is also clear that it is seldom heeded. We keep doing the same thing. We keep fighting wars. We keep attacking other countries that might pose some economic competition for us. I was recently researching the first and second Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage. Two thousand and three hundred years ago, the world was fighting wars for the same reasons we are fighting them today.

Strategic Rivalry in the Mediterranean

  • Rome and Carthage were the two superpowers of the western Mediterranean.
  • Rome was expanding across Italy and into Sicily, while Carthage, a wealthy maritime empire, controlled much of North Africa, Spain, and important islands.
  • Both powers saw each other as threats to their dominance of trade, military influence, and political prestige.

Today, we can substitute China for Carthage and the USA for Rome. Our story for future generations might read:

Strategic Rivalry in the East

  • The USA and China were the two superpowers of the World.
  • The USA was expanding East across Asia and the Pacific, while China, a wealthy emerging empire, controlled much of of the trade in Africa, Eurasia and even Europe.
  • Both powers saw each other as threats to their dominance of trade, military influence, and political prestige.

Rome and Carthage fought for nearly 20 years because both were determined to control the Mediterranean, Hannibal’s genius kept Rome locked in a long struggle, and Rome’s stubbornness and resources kept the war going until they could finally break Carthage’s power.

Our leaders keep making the same mistake. We keep repeating the past and it is “We the People” who suffer for it. Is there no other solutions except to destroy the other country? Is there no way to use diplomacy to find a win-win solution? Is the only way to destroy the other country as Rome destroyed Carthage?

After winning the Third Punic War, Rome systematically destroyed the city of Carthage, burned its structures, sold its inhabitants into slavery, and turned its territories into the Roman province of Africa. Romans aimed to eliminate any future threat from their rival, Carthage, even salting the soil to prevent growth, though this act is likely apocryphal. This decisive victory marked Rome’s ascent to Mediterranean dominance and paved the way for the Roman Empire. 

Are we going to keep fighting wars so that we can sell more stuff, buy more stuff, have more stuff and shop till we drop? Who benefits from a rapacious economy that knows no limits except to allow the rich to get richer and the poor to suffer the results of wars designed to keep the oligarchs rich? How many people really believe in the Trickle Down theory?

There are some other ideas in this 15 year old blog that still resonate with what is happening in America today. Remember this blog was written six years or so before most people ever heard of Donald Trump. The comments about fascism are more poignant today than they were back then. Could no one see what was coming? Leave your thoughts and comments please. What can we do to stop going down the path of war and more war?

Go back to the beginning and click on the link to this blog that I wrote 15 years ago. Seems like only yesterday. https://agingcapriciously.com/2010/07/23/have-you-forgotten-the-past/

Who and What is Really Running America Now?

04 Sep 2025 11 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Since the beginning of the Trump phenomenon (around about 2014), I have been wondering how anyone like Trump could have garnered so much support from his many fans, from Republicans, from sycophantic politicians, from rich oligarchs and from all spectrums of American demographics including young, middle aged, old, and even minorities.  How could a person who is so shallow, callous, bigoted and uninformed be leading a movement to destroy Democracy in America.  A man aided by millions of others willing to help him overthrow the ideas, beliefs and institutions that this country was founded upon.  It is question that has perplexed me for many sleepless nights.  I decided to use the power of AI to delve deeper into the issue.  I wrote and then submitted the following query to ChatGPT 5.0

Here is a difficult issue. America is obviously very polarized between those who seem bent on rolling back the clock and canceling many programs and benefits that seemed to help and those people who want to keep these programs. The CDC is one agency that has been targeted for cuts as well as the FDA and EPA. All organizations with programs designed to protect people. It appears as though these changes all come from the White House and the Republican Party. Some people say they are using plan 2025 as a blueprint for the changes being made. Frankly, I have a hard time believing that any politician or political groups are solely responsible for these changes. It looks to me like there must be more than the Heritage Foundation or Hudson Institute behind these plans. Can you find any major influencers in the USA who are bent on destroying democracy in favor of an autocracy? Or who want to do away with rule by the majority in favor of rule by an elite. I would like to know who are the major drivers and brains behind the changes going on and being made since the start of Trumpism?”

The following is the answer I received from AI in response to the above query. 

ChatGPT 5.0

You’re absolutely right to question the notion that any major shift—especially those threatening democratic norms—could be driven solely by one think tank or political party. While the Republican Party and its allies in the White House may be the most visible agents of change, scholars, journalists, and watchdogs have traced much of the intellectual fuel behind these transformations to a broader network of elite actors, think tanks, strategists, and influential theorists.

Here’s a breakdown of key players and ideas shaping the push toward autocratic‑leaning governance in the U.S.:

Think Tanks & Strategic Blueprints

Project 2025 (The Heritage Foundation and Allies)

  • Origin & Scope: Published in April 2023 by the Heritage Foundation, Project 2025 (or the “2025 Presidential Transition Project”) is a 920‑page policy and personnel blueprint aimed at consolidating executive power, gutting checks and balances, restructuring or eliminating federal agencies like CDC, FDA, and more Wikipedia+6Wikipedia+6Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren+6.
  • Impact on Agencies: It proposes splitting and weakening agencies like the CDC, altering FDA procedures, shifting funding away from NIH, and conditioning federal support on political loyalty American Public Health AssociationCongresswoman Zoe Lofgren.
  • Public Opposition: Advocates such as the ACLU and organizations like Democracy Forward warn the plan is extremist and risks dismantling democratic safeguards Democracy Forward+1.

Kevin Roberts – Chief Architect

  • Often referred to as the “mastermind” behind Project 2025, Kevin Roberts serves as its chief strategist. Critics argue the initiative would effectively enable an imperial presidency by dismantling institutional checks American Civil Liberties Union+4Wikipedia+4Wikipedia+4.

Intellectual Influencers: Philosophers of Autocracy

Curtis Yarvin (aka “Mencius Moldbug”)

  • Ideas: Yarvin advocates replacing democracy with a corporate-style autocracy—think CEO-monarch—governed by a “board.” He coined “The Cathedral” to critique media and academia’s role in upholding liberal norms The New Yorker+2The Times of India+2.
  • Influence: His views have influenced high-profile tech magnates and political figures, including J.D. Vance, Michael Anton, and possibly Steve Bannon. He was even an informal guest of honor at Trump’s 2025 inaugural gala Wikipedia+1.
  • Public Profile: The New Yorker and The Guardian have highlighted his elevated role in mainstreaming authoritarian ideas The GuardianThe New YorkerThe Times of India.

Corporate and Mega-Donor Backing

  • Claremont Institute: Far from the lone voice, this think tank has become a central ideological hub for the movement, backed by mega-donors such as the DeVos family, Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and Sarah Scaife Foundation. Their fellows and affiliates—like John Eastman—were involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election Monthly Review.
  • Tech Powers: Billionaires like Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy are described as the “masters of the universe” supporting the broader political project. Thiel, notably, has said he no longer believes freedom and democracy are compatible Monthly Review.

Autocracy Across Borders

  • Viktor Orbán’s Influence: Hungary’s populist‑authoritarian leader has become a model for some American conservatives. His strategy parallels Project 2025 in structure and aims, and Hungarian think tanks and institutes are reportedly helping shape U.S. right-wing thinking Le Monde.fr.

Summary of Key Drivers

Role Key Figures & Entities
Think Tank / Blueprint Heritage Foundation (Project 2025), Kevin Roberts
Ideological Advisers Curtis Yarvin (Mencius Moldbug), Claremont Institute thinkers
Financial Backers DeVos family, Bradley Foundation, Scaife Foundation, Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, etc.
Transatlantic Influences Viktor Orbán and related Hungarian institutions

These forces are intertwined: think tanks craft the blueprint (Project 2025), ideological influencers provide theoretical cover (Yarvin), mega-donors fund and amplify (DeVos, Thiel), and foreign models inspire strategy (Orbán).

Broader Implications

  • Beyond a Single Party: While the GOP and Trump administration may be enacting these changes, the intellectual and financial network behind the shift is vast—cross-sector and multi-layered.
  • Threats to Governance: Experts warn that this structure—centralizing power, dismantling agencies, appointing loyalists—poses a real risk to democratic norms and the balance of powers Wikipedia+4Wikipedia+4AFGE+4Monthly Review+4The New Yorker+4The Times of India+4Monthly Review.
  • What’s at Stake: Independent institutions like CDC and FDA are vulnerable to both funding cuts and structural reorganization, which activists say imperils public health and democracy alike.

Conclusions:

I shared the above with a good friend and he was astounded.  It was hard for him to believe that anyone brought up on the American Dream could support an anti-democratic president and his sycophantic followers.  Indeed, thousands of people perhaps more like millions of people in America do not believe in the goals and ideals of our Founding Fathers.  The truth is that there has always been a fascist anti-intellectual and anti-democratic core of people in this country who have no dream of a democracy.  People who would substitute an autocratic and even fascist leader to run the country.  A leader (now in office) who even as I write this is bending to the whims of the men and women who want to destroy the dreams that made America great.

There is no “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.”  This motto is a lie designed to deceive Americans.  The goal is to destroy the dream of a society where Truth and Justice and Equality would prevail for all people.  The people behind this effort do not believe in democracy for the simple reason that they think you and I and millions of other Americans are too stupid to run this country.  They want an oligarchy of the rich and powerful to rule.  The job for the rest of us will be to work ourselves to death to make money to buy the crap that they sell on Madison Avenue, TV, Radio and mainstream newspapers.  Crap that every day they work to shove down our throats.  The more stuff you buy, the richer our Lords will be.  The elitist rulers of America will have the box seats to everything in life while you and I will get to hold the door open for them to enter.

“I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but inform their discretion.”
—Thomas Jefferson, 1820

 

Follow the Money: The Hidden Economic Roots of War

28 Aug 2025 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , ,

 

Wars are often explained in terms of politics, religion, or the defense of territory.  Leaders tell their people that the cause is noble, the fight is about freedom, or that God demands it.  Yet when we peel back the rhetoric, the story of war is very often a story about economics.

From the Babylonians and Assyrians battling for control of fertile land and trade routes, to the Greeks and Trojans fighting over the Dardanelles, history shows us that wars usually erupt where money, resources, or trade are at stake.  Even the Crusades—wrapped in religious fervor—opened up profitable routes for merchants and enriched nobles who returned with land, loot, and leverage.


The modern world is no different.  World War I was fueled not only by nationalism and alliances, but by industrial competition and the scramble for colonies.  World War II saw Hitler’s quest for “living space” tied to food, oil, and raw materials.  The Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union pitted two economic systems against one another just as much as two political ideologies.  And today, tensions between the United States and China are framed as political and military, but beneath the surface lies a battle for trade dominance, technological leadership, and control of global supply chains.

Of course, not every war is about economics.  Some are sparked by religion, fear, or pride.  But even then, economics often lies in the background, quietly shaping decisions and sustaining conflict.  Armies march on stomachs, empires thrive on resources, and nations survive by controlling the means of wealth.

The question really becomes: if economics is so often the root, how do we prevent future wars driven by it?  History suggests a few answers:

  • Trade Interdependence: Nations that rely on each other for prosperity are less likely to destroy that relationship with war. Europe after 1945 is a powerful example.
  • Resource Diversification: Reducing dependence on scarce resources—whether oil, rare earths, or water—lowers the pressure points that can lead to conflict.
  • Shared Institutions: Agreements and organizations that mediate disputes can channel economic competition into negotiation rather than violence.
  • Managing Power Transitions: Perhaps the greatest challenge today lies in handling the U.S.–China rivalry. Avoiding a clash may depend on diplomacy that tempers fear and builds cooperation around shared global issues like climate change.

In the end, human beings fight wars not just for ideals, but for survival and advantage.  If we are serious about preventing future wars, we must look beneath the banners of politics and religion and ask: “Who benefits economically, and at what cost?”

Perhaps the oldest lesson of history is also the most enduring: if you want to understand war, follow the money.  Here are the costs for the wars that we have been involved in since and including Vietnam.  Where do you think this money comes from?  Who do you think really benefits from the money spent?

Vietnam (1965–1975)

Iraq (2003–present, incl. ISIS war in Iraq & Syria)

  • Spent to date (through 2023) on operations, reconstruction, etc.: ~$1.79T.
  • Plus veterans’ care obligations through 2050: ~$1.1T.
  • Total (spent + obligated for vets): ~$2.89T. Watson Institute
  • (Context: across all post-9/11 wars, total appropriations + long-term obligations are ~$8T through FY2022 when you also count interest, VA, DHS, and base-budget war uplifts.) Watson Institute

Afghanistan (2001–2021)

  • Spent to date (operations in Afghanistan/Pakistan, reconstruction, VA to date, some interest, base-budget war uplifts): ~$2.313T. (Excludes future veteran care and future interest.) Watson Institute
  • (Same post-9/11 context as above applies.) Watson Institute

Ukraine (2022–present)

  • U.S. military/security assistance to Ukraine (weapons, training, USAI, FMF, etc.): ~$66.9B committed as of Jan 2025 (State Dept.). State Department
  • Broader U.S. Ukraine response (appropriations for military aid, replenishing U.S. stocks, U.S. force posture in Europe, economic & humanitarian aid, oversight, etc.): ~$185–187B appropriated cumulatively (through mid-2025); about $153B obligated and $94B disbursed by June 30, 2025. U.S. Department of Defense+1Ukraine Oversight+1

Gaza/Israel war (Oct 2023–present)

  • Congressional military aid to Israel during the Gaza war (FY2024 acts):
    FMF $6.8B + missile defense $4.5B + Iron Beam $1.2B + other DoD items $0.11B = ~$12.61B. Congress.gov
  • Wider tally including related U.S. operations in the region (e.g., Red Sea/Houthi strikes) through Sept 30, 2024: at least $22.76B total ($17.9B in U.S. support to Israel’s military ops + $4.86B in related U.S. regional operations). (Conservative estimate; excludes non-military/humanitarian spending.) Watson Institute

Remember the famous message from President Eisenhower during his farewell address in 1961.  President Eisenhower is famous for his warning about the danger of the “military-industrial complex”.  He stated,

“We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.  The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Conclusions:

  • Most wars are waged for economic reasons
  • The major beneficiaries are the companies making war profits by selling the tools and equipment to fight the wars
  • The public on both sides of the war pay with blood, bodies, sweat, tears and years of pending financial obligations
  • All to often major recessions follow a war as the countries have to pay down the war costs
  • War is sold to the people by pretentious explanations of defending lies and myths such as the Domino Theory and other bullshit explanations of why we must destroy the chosen enemy

 

Why Democrats Lost — and What They Must Do Next

24 Aug 2025 15 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Robert Reich and I have at least one thing in common.  He hates bullies and so do I.  In his most recent book, “Coming Up Short”, he talks about how he had to deal with bullies because he was so short.  My dad was 6’4” tall and could often be a bully.  I had enough abuse from him growing up that I also came to hate bullies.  I had many fights when I was younger where I defended either myself or equally often other people physically against bullies.  Robert Reich points out that one major reason for Trump’s popularity is that he is a Bullie’s Bully.   Millions of Americans who have been bullied by an unjust system of economics, education, justice, health care and government see Trump as their protector or even savior.  Reich notes:

“A large portion of America has felt bullied and harassed for decades. They’ve worked their asses off but haven’t gotten anywhere. Employers have fired them without cause or notice, made them into contract workers without any security or rights, spied on them during working hours, and otherwise treated them like children.

They’ve been bullied by landlords who keep hiking their rent. By banks that keep adding large fees to whatever they owe. By health insurers and hospitals that charge them an arm and a leg. By corporate grocery monopolies that push up food prices.

Many of them voted for Trump because he promised he’d be their bully. He blamed others — immigrants, people of color, transgender people, foreign traders — for what they endured. He thereby found scapegoats for their deep feelings of powerlessness, vulnerability, and shame. It’s one of the oldest of demagogic tricks.

Democrats could have put the blame where it belonged — on monopolistic corporations and billionaires that abused their wealth and power by taking over our politics.

Democrats could have demanded higher taxes on big corporations and the wealthy to pay for childcare and eldercare. Tougher antitrust laws to break up monopolies. Labor law reforms that made it easier for workers to form unions and gain bargaining power. Universal health care. Strict regulation of big banks so they couldn’t shaft average people. And an end to big money in our politics.

But they have not — not loudly, not with one voice, not with the clarity the people need to hear.” — Robert Reich 8/24/25

The 2024 election is already being dissected in books and think-tank reports, but the clearest story is this: Democrats misread the electorate as well as deserted the electorate.  Caught up in arguments over gender identify, abortion rights and WOKE manifestos, the Democrats preached to a crowd with more important concerns on their minds.  Jefferson said that Democracy was a rule of the majority with a concern for the minority.  Democrats have reversed his message.  They now practice a rule for the minority with little or no concern for the majority. 

They believed that campaigning on democracy and abortion rights would be enough to hold the White House.  Those are vital issues, but voters were telling pollsters something else — they were worried most about the price of groceries, rent, and gas.  In swing districts, immigration and border control loomed even larger.  By downplaying those concerns, Democrats left the playing field wide open for Republicans.

Validated voter studies show that turnout favored 2020 Trump voters.  Younger and non-white men — groups Democrats once counted on — swung toward Republicans in significant numbers.  Many of these voters wanted practical answers on wages, security, and fairness.  They didn’t get them.

So, what must Democrats do if they hope to regain the House, Senate, or Presidency?  Three steps stand out.  

First, make the economy the front page of their campaigns, with plain talk about jobs, housing, and cost of living.  Find people who can speak the language of the average American and not in a voice only understood by Ph.D. graduates.  I am often bewildered by the terminology that some of the Democrats throw out.  Yesterday, I learned that the new vocabulary for “homeless” people is now “unhoused” people.  Do the Democrats really think this is going to make a difference to the people living in cardboard boxes throughout America? 

When I look at the new head of the Democratic National Committee (Ken Martin), I see a man who exemplifies everything that is wrong with the Democrats.  If his bio on Wikipedia is to be believed, Ken never did a day’s physical labor in his life (At least not in any paid position.) What makes this an even more grievous fact, is that he was given this position after Harris’s loss to Trump.  I doubt a guy with his background has any clue about the problems of the working class in America.  By the way, I am sure Ken is a nice guy, a good husband and a good father.  But that is not going to get Democrats elected.

Second, develop a credible immigration strategy that pairs border security with fair reforms.  Like it or not, immigration has been a major issue for Americans because as Reich noted, both parties have demonized immigrants as vulgar, uncouth, criminals who only want to take jobs away from legal Americans.  This is not an unusual state of affairs.  Even Benjamin Franklin had his biases when it came to immigrants.  Many of these changed over time as Ben observed the habits and ethics of other immigrant groups to the colonies. 

I have said we need a “fair immigration policy” and not an “anti-immigration policy.”  A number of years ago (at least seven) I wrote a series of blogs on the subject of immigration as I could witness it down here in Arizona.  You might say that we are on the front lines of immigration and have a long history of immigration.  The land I now live on was once part of Mexico until the Gadsden Purchase in 1853.  Some of my neighbors have history going back to Mexico over two hundred years.  See my blogs:

Third, speak in everyday language.  Too often Democrats rely on insider jargon that alienates working families.  Like it or not, most Democrats have become associated with the idea of PC or political correctness.  I am no enemy of using terminology that minorities and others find more respectful and less insulting.  However, some of the PC efforts have become ludicrous and only help to make the Democrats laughing stocks and open to scorn from the very people they need to help support them.  Here are a few examples:

  1. The use of “people experiencing food insecurity”

In May 2025, a debate over language use within the Democratic party was highlighted by the Washington Post.  One specific example given was referring to individuals as “people experiencing food insecurity” instead of the more direct phrase “people going hungry” or maybe even people “starving to death”!

  1. The replacement of gendered terms like “spokesman”

The movement towards gender-neutral language has led to the replacement of many words to avoid implying a specific gender, regardless of the individual’s identity.  For instance, the term “spokesperson” is often used instead of “spokesman” or “spokeswoman.”  I have a problem remembering which words to use.  Should I say fireman or fireperson?  Should I say postman or postperson?  Should I say fisherman or fisherperson?  Of course I do not want to offend anybody, so the only answer is to say nothing?  Or should I check with each fisherperson first to see what they prefer?  How do you say fisherperson in Spanish?

  1. “Person of color” (POC) instead of “minority”

Some find the term “POC” to be an overly broad and imprecise label that lumps together many distinct racial and ethnic groups, despite its progressive origins.  I am concerned about this label since I have always thought that being a White person I had some color.  I realize that many people see White people as more pink hued than white, but pink is still a color even if I do not like the idea of being a Pink person. 

In Conclusion:

Democrats do not need to abandon values of equality and freedom.  They need to marry those values to tangible solutions that the average people can feel in their daily lives.  They need to drop some of the bullshit that makes everyone think of them as WIMPS.  They need to fight and not keep talking about “hands” across the aisle.  When someone punches me in the face, I do not hand them a rose.  If Democrats want a path back to governing majorities they are going to have to:

  • Walk like the majority
  • Talk like the majority
  • Act like the majority

As long as Democrats insist on being isolated people who live in expensive mansions and go to exclusive Ivy League colleges,  they will not have a chance to get back into power.  Don’t tell me about their good intentions.  As the saying goes “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” — Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153)

 

In Defense of Buffy Sainte-Marie

20 Aug 2025 4 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

What I am going to say will be very controversial.  Many people reading this blog will take umbrage at my opinions.  The good thing is that you will not be charged any fees for my opinions.  You are free to take them or leave them.

Perhaps if I were a Native American or a member of a Federally Recognized Tribe my words would carry more weight.  However, I am not an Indigenous person.  As far as I know, I have no Indian relatives and no Indian blood in me.  I do not claim to have an Indian Chief in my ancestry or a relative who was an Indian Princess.  I also must issue the following caveats.  I am a fan of Buffy Sainte-Marie.  I not only respect her, but I admire her.  I will tell you why in a little while.

Now I understand the charges against her quite well.  I have talked about cultural appropriation as an evil done by either stupid or misaligned people.  I do not believe that America ever did right by the people that we stole this land from by genocide, fake treaties, and scams.  As a resident of Arizona, I still see tribal people being taken advantage of when it comes to mining, drilling and water rights.  If an Indian might make some money on something worth selling, there will be a bunch of rich fat White people who want to screw them out of it.  I hear White people say, “It’s a shame we broke all those treaties with the Indians.”  These well-meaning people should get their heads out of their asses.  We are still breaking treaties made many years ago with the Indians.  When it comes to profit, there is no limit to the perfidy of some White people.  I think it was Sitting Bull who said, “I believe in Christianity, but I do not see many White People practicing it.”  I think the same can be said of many so-called Christians today.

But lets return to the subject of this blog.  Buffy Sainte-Marie passed herself off for many years as a Native American.  She has now been outed by relatives and others who seem to take great delight in maligning her.  I am going to try to offer a defense for her in this blog.  I have already said that I am a fan of hers.  I bought all of her albums back in the sixties and seventies.  I went to a tent concert she did up in Northern Wisconsin a few years ago put on by reservation people.  I have never personally met Ms. Sainte-Marie, nor have I ever corresponded with her.  I am not getting paid one penny for the viewpoints I am offering.  I have already confessed to being White so you can accuse me of bias if you like.  I prefer to think that I have always stood up for the underdogs in my life.

Let’s look at the three of the main charges against her in more perspective.

  1. She is not a real Indian
  2. She took awards that could have gone to real Indians
  3. She sang songs and agitated for Indian rights when she is really not an Indian.

 1.  She Is not a Real Indian:

There is an old adage which says, “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.”  In my eyes anyway, Buffy Sainte-Marie looks like an Indian, acts like an Indian and sings Indian like songs.  What’s missing here is Buffy does not have the right set of genes.  Genes or no genes, she is more of an assimilated Indian than many Indians I have known who live off Reservations.  Years ago, we assumed that an Indian could be assimilated by going to an Indian School, wearing White clothes and forsaking their native language.  They could then be accepted as a White person by the larger White community.  At least this was the logic following the Indian wars and the ongoing efforts by White communities of both the USA and Canada to assimilate the Indigenous peoples.

Well, Buffy Sainte-Marie did a reverse assimilation.  She assimilated herself into the Indigenous culture in Canada and was even accepted by a Canadian Tribe.  Records show that she was adopted by a Piapot First Nation family in accordance with Cree law and traditions.  Members of the Piapot family have supported her claims.  Whether she was accepted or adopted into the tribe, she is an assimilated Indian by any stretch of the imagination.

2.  She took awards that could have gone to real Indians:

I am not quite sure I understand this criticism.  Buffy Sainte-Marie did take awards that were earmarked for native accomplishments both socially and culturally.  Specific awards and honors received by Buffy Sainte-Marie that were designated for Indigenous people include:

  • Four Canadian Aboriginal Music Awards: She received these awards at a time when they were specifically designated for Indigenous musicians.
  • Two Aboriginal Peoples’ Choice Music Awards: These awards were also designed to recognize Indigenous artists.
  • Four Juno Awards intended for Indigenous people: For example, she won the Juno for Indigenous Music Album of the Year in 2018 for “Medicine Songs”.
  • Four Indigenous lifetime achievement awards.

Many of these awards for Buffy have since been revoked by  the authorities issuing them.  Most of the awards concern her musical skills.  I hear the claim that a Real Indian could have won these.  This rings hollow to me.  During the sixties, Buffy is the only folk singer that I knew or ever heard who sang “pro-Indian” songs.  Her “My Country Tis of Thy People Your Dying” and “Now that the Buffaloes Gone” made as much impact on my awareness of Native American issues as did Dee Brown’s book “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.”  Dee Brown was also not Native American.  He was a White author from the American South.  He was born in Louisiana and raised in Arkansas.  His best-known work, “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee,” detailed the history of American expansionism and its impact on Indigenous peoples.  Should we take Dee’s book off the shelf?  More’s the pity if you do folks since I never heard one peep during my high school history classes on how much shit we did to Native Americans.  Buffy’s songs and Dee’s book were some of the first major influences upon my White life in terms of the real truth about Indian history.

In March 2025, CARAS announced that it was revoking Sainte-Marie’s Juno Awards and her induction into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame based on the finding that she is not a Canadian citizen and therefore doesn’t meet the eligibility criteria, according to Variety.

3.  She sang songs and agitated for Indian rights when she is really not an Indian.

Here  I would like to judge Buffy Sainte-Marie on the basis of the good that she did for Native American causes and not the bad that she did.  Yes, she lied about her genes and her lineage.  Yes, she continued to insist that she was a true Native American.  She had either brain-washed herself or she really came to believe that she was an Indian.  I certainly do not know the answer to which motive guided her.  I know some of her relatives accused her of trying to smother the truth of her ancestry even by threatening them with a lawsuit.  Shame on Sainte-Marie for this.  Should she have been quicker to apologize?  Yes, I think so.  But does this make Buffy evil?  Does she deserve to be stripped of awards that she earned not by being Native American but because of the songs that she wrote and the messages that these songs sent.

 From “Now that the Buffaloes Gone” by Buffy Sainte-Marie

Oh, it’s all in the past you can say

But it’s still going on here today

The government now want the Iroquois land

That of the Seneca and the Cheyenne

It’s here and it’s now you can help us dear man

Now that the buffalo’s gone.

From “My Country Tis of Thy People Your Dying” by Buffy Sainte-Marie

When Columbus set sail out of Europe, then stress

That the nation of leeches that conquered this land

Are the biggest and bravest and boldest and best

And yet where in your history books is the tale

Of the genocide basic to this country’s birth

Not many people would have the courage to pin such lyrics whether Indian or White.  In my neighborhood, it is dangerous to put up a Democrat for office sign.  Many American “Heroes” have said that the “Only good Indian is a dead Indian.”  What exactly besides sing has St. Marie done for Indigenous people?  I asked ChatGPT this question and received the following reply:

Major Contributions Beyond Music

  1. Trailblazer on Sesame Street
  • From 1976 to 1981, she became the first regular Indigenous presence on Sesame Street, aiming to teach children that “Indians still exist.” Native News Online+12Wikipedia+12Teen Vogue+12
  • In a landmark moment for representation, she famously breastfed her son on air in 1977—likely the first such instance ever shown on television. Teen Vogue
  1. Educational Advocacy & Philanthropy
  1. Pioneering Electronic and Multimedia Art
  • Her 1969 album Illuminations was groundbreaking—using Buchla synthesizers and quadraphonic technology to forge a new sonic frontier. It’s now seen as a pioneering work in electronic and experimental music. Pitchfork+2Vogue+2
  • She also embraced early computer technology—using Apple II and Macintosh systems in the early 1980s to record music and produce visual art. Wikipedia
  1. Media Representation & Hollywood Influence
  • In 1968, Buffy insisted that all Indigenous roles in her episode of The Virginian be filled by Indigenous actors—a first in Hollywood. She held firm despite managers’ objections and succeeded. Teen Vogue (Teen Vogue interview referenced in images)
  1. Humanitarian Voice & Global Activism
  • As a vocal participant in the Red Power movement, she provided a platform for Indigenous concerns through grassroots concerts tied to the American Indian Movement. PBS+5Teen Vogue+5Teen Vogue+5Native News Online+1
  • Her humanitarian spirit led to widespread recognition, including an Oscar, Golden Globe, and honorary doctorates for her work spanning activism and arts. PBS+13Wikipedia+13Teen Vogue+13
  • Through media such as the documentary Buffy Sainte-Marie: Carry It On, she continued advocating for Indigenous rights, touring, and raising awareness well past her prime—into her 80s. muskratmagazine.com+11PBS+11Wikipedia+11

In Summary

Buffy Sainte-Marie’s legacy encompasses far more than her powerful protest songs.  She broke new ground in television, revolutionized arts and education, fought for authentic Indigenous representation, and used her influence to empower Indigenous voices globally.  Her initiatives—from Sesame Street to the Cradleboard curriculum—continue to shape conversations around identity, learning, and equity.

John’s Conclusions: 

Go ahead.  Say “so what.”  Say “who gives a damn.”  Tell me she is a liar and a hypocrite.  Tell me all her good works should be erased because she wanted you to believe that she was an Indian.  Tell me she is not really an Indian and that someone else would have done all the stuff that she did anyway.  Tell me that you can cast the first stone at her for lying because you have never lied in your life.

That’s all I have to say folks.  A courageous humane person made a big mistake but the good that she did and still does should not be forgotten.  If you want to tell me how bad a person she is, tell me what you have done lately for the benefits of our Native brethren.  I don’t think all the awards and recognition that she received should be given back to her.  That is the past.  What I do believe is that she should be given a special award for White people who have contributed to Native American Causes.  Like the Jewish people have their “Yad Vashem” to recognize non-Jews who helped save or give their lives for Jews, perhaps we need a similar hall in our country for people who helped Native American causes or even gave their lives to protect Native Americans.  Here are two examples in case you are wondering if such people ever existed.

  1. Samuel Worcester (1798–1859)
  • A Christian missionary from Vermont who worked among the Cherokee.
  • He defied Georgia state laws aimed at forcing the Cherokee off their lands and was arrested in 1831.
  • His case, Worcester v. Georgia (1832), went to the Supreme Court, which sided with him and affirmed Cherokee sovereignty.
  • Although he survived prison and lived out his life, he endured years of hardship and persecution for standing with the Cherokee at great personal risk.
  1. Edmund D. Pepperman (1901–1930)
  • A white civil rights attorney in Oklahoma who represented Native clients against oil companies and corrupt guardianship schemes during the allotment era.
  • He was murdered in 1930 while investigating abuses connected to Osage oil wealth.
  • His death highlighted the dangers faced by allies who tried to expose exploitation of Indigenous communities.

Buffy’s Song – A Poem by ChatGPT and John P. 

She sang not only with a voice,
but with the marrow of her bones—
a cry against forgetting,
a hymn for nations silenced.

In ballads of resistance,
she wove the stories hidden
beneath the treaties broken,
beneath the trails of tears.

Her guitar became a council fire,
her words—sharp arrows of truth,
piercing the walls of power,
lifting the dreams of the young.

She stood for the water,
for the mothers and the missing,
for children stolen by schools
that tried to burn away their tongues.

Scholar, warrior, poet,
she gave her strength to voices
that history tried to hush,
but could never erase.

Buffy sang of survival,
not as a whisper of sorrow,
but as a thundercloud rising,
a promise of dawn.

And still her song endures—
a river that refuses to dry,
a drum that will not fall silent,
a flame carried in countless hands.

For every child who learns their language,
for every elder whose story returns,
for every Indian standing proud—
her music lives,
a sovereign heartbeat,
forever strong.

What is Behind All These Bullshit Lies and Conspiracy Theories?

11 Aug 2025 5 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In previous blog posts, I discussed two men whose lives had been damaged by false claims.  The claims misrepresented the truth and attempted to replace truth with slander designed for one purpose.  That purpose in both John Kerry’s case and John McCain’s case was to impugn them because of political positions they had taken on certain issues.  The truth did not matter.  The heroism of both men did not matter.  The damage to them personally did not matter.  The only thing that mattered to the propagators of these insults and lies was whether or not they could successfully destroy the reputation of two men and minimize their political influence.

In the case of Kerry, the lies were intended to prevent his run for the presidency.  In the case of John McCain, the lies were spread to nullify his influence in the Senate and as a revenge for his taking positions that were deemed inimical to his parties preferred interests.

I sent the following query to ChatGPT concerning these attacks.  I am going to post my query and show you the information that this AI engine gave.  Keep in mind, this is a non-partisan reply not attached to any efforts to extort money for any reason.

“What were the motives for the attacks against Kerry and McCain?”

The motives behind the attacks on John Kerry and John McCain—both decorated Vietnam veterans—stemmed from a mix of political, personal, and ideological factors. Despite their military service, both men became targets for smear campaigns, often by fellow veterans or political opponents. Here’s a breakdown of the key motives for each:

🎯 Motives for Attacks on John Kerry

  1. Political Opposition (2004 Presidential Election)
  • Kerry ran against incumbent President George W. Bush in 2004. As a decorated Vietnam veteran, Kerry’s service was central to his campaign.
  • Bush supporters sought to neutralize Kerry’s military advantage, particularly since Bush himself had avoided combat in the Texas Air National Guard.
  • The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth aimed to undermine Kerry’s credibility and patriotism, casting doubt on his war record and medals.
  1. Ideological Resentment (Anti-War Testimony)
  • After returning from Vietnam, Kerry became a prominent anti-war activist, famously testifying before the Senate in 1971.
  • He accused U.S. troops of war crimes—a stance that many veterans found deeply offensive and betraying.
  • Several of his attackers served in Vietnam but not with Kerry, and harbored long-standing anger toward his anti-war activism, not just his candidacy.
  1. Personal Animosity
  • Some individuals in the Swift Boat group had personal disagreements with Kerry going back to the Vietnam era.
  • The group’s leader, John O’Neill, was recruited by the Nixon administration in the 1970s to publicly rebut Kerry’s anti-war testimony—making it a decades-old ideological feud.

🎯 Motives for Attacks on John McCain

  1. Political Intra-Party Conflict
  • McCain frequently clashed with the Republican Party base and right-wing activists.
  • During his 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns, McCain was seen as a “maverick” who criticized party orthodoxy, making him a target for hardline conservatives.
  • Activists like Ted Sampley accused him of being untrustworthy and disloyal to conservative causes.
  1. Ideological Extremism
  • Groups like Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain promoted conspiracy theories claiming McCain was a “Manchurian Candidate” or communist collaborator—a narrative entirely without evidence.
  • These were often fueled by Cold War-style paranoia and deep distrust of the U.S. government, especially among fringe veteran groups.
  1. Retaliation for POW/MIA Reform
  • As a senator, McCain worked to normalize relations with Vietnam and debunked myths that American POWs were still alive there.
  • This angered POW/MIA advocacy groups, some of whom believed the U.S. government was covering up the existence of missing soldiers.
  • McCain’s efforts were seen by these activists as a betrayal of the POW/MIA cause, despite his own 5½ years as a prisoner of war.

🧾 Comparison of Kerry vs. McCain Attacks

Category John Kerry John McCain
Primary Political Motive Undermine 2004 campaign Undermine Republican campaigns in 2000 & 2008
Core Smear Falsified war record, dishonorable discharge Collaborated with enemy, “Manchurian candidate”
Main Accusers Swift Boat Vets (not same unit) Fringe veterans (Sampley, Kiley)
Real Underlying Motive Anger over anti-war activism Resentment over POW/MIA policies and intra-party clashes
Impact Damaged public perception, coined “swiftboating” Less impact, largely discredited

✅ Final Insight

The attacks on both men were rooted in a combination of politics, personal vendettas, and ideological warfare.  What’s ironic is that both Kerry and McCain were legitimate war heroes, yet were attacked not for what they did in combat, but for what they did afterward—one by opposing the war, the other by seeking reconciliation and compromise.

These smears illustrate how military valor doesn’t shield someone from political weaponization, especially in the age of media spin and partisan polarization.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Conclusions:

Over the last 100 years, the USA has witnessed a decline in morality and ethics.  Greed while always a pervasive influence in the world has become a hideous monster that lurks behind every deal and transaction that is now made.  An entire Congress, Supreme Court and Presidency is run by greed and self-interest.  A so-called Christian nation, Jesus would not recognize many of his followers.  Men and women who want to return the country to a state where money and economics are the raison d’etre for being.  The United States has been coopted by a lust for power and money.  The Shining City on the Hill no longer shines because of its Virtue.  It shines because of the reflection of the sun on its cheap gold plating.

The lack of virtue and morality in the country is amplified and reflected by a media that has one purpose:  Make as much money as it can for its corporate sponsors.  Congress exists for the same reason.  Politicians are guided by the rule as well.  Make as much money as they can for their corporate sponsors.  The man sitting on the throne whom we call a President knows he must also direct the country towards making as much money as he can for his corporate sponsors.  Courts, military, and every legislature in the country are guided by the same rule:  “Make as much money as they can for their corporate sponsors.”

Friends of mine inevitably bring up these questions:  “Can we do anything about it?  Is there any way to get the train back on its track?  What is possible in the face of so much corruption and greed?  What if we keep going in the same direction?  Are we witnessing the end of the American Dream?”

I want to say that hope only disappears when we become hopeless.  Where there is hope, there is possibility.  Regardless of how dismal and dark things are, they can only become darker if we give up all hope.  These are more than, “The times that try men’s souls”.  These are horrible times that destroy hope.  I wonder what history will say in 50 or 100 years about the terrible things America is doing to the world in the name of Exceptionalism and National Pride.

In truth our actions are based on the same evil that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.  The same evil that built the Golden Calf.  The same evil that has forever driven the wars and desecrations that infect civilization.  It is a disease that we have never found a vaccination for.  A disease that has gone from a minor infection to a pandemic.  It is a disease for more and more and more.  And the remedy that those infected with it find lies in more money, more things, more power, more and more and more.  And the media spreads the virus and disease with every kernel of its existence.  From text, to video, to radio, to the internet, the one constant is the media beating the drum for more and more and more.  Buy more and you will be happy and successful.  More is the secret for salvation. You will only go to heaven if you have more stuff than your neighbors.

So, buy now and don’t wait. 

Who are the Forgotten People in America?   

07 Aug 2025 3 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

I am Sick of Oscars, Emmys, Gold Medals, Silver Medals, and all the other rewards that the high and mighty give to each other.  I am sick of the celebrity roasts where the super stars tell each other how wonderful they are.  We all bow down at the stars implanted in the Hollywood Walk of Fame.  We eulogize someone who runs the 100-meter dash in under 9 seconds.  We drool over singers who have voices that would make angels weep.  We fantasize life with a gorgeous actor or actress whose beauty makes us look positively bland.  The celebrities of America have replaced the nobility of old Europe and Ancient Egypt.

I don’t deny that these people have talent or that they have worked hard at developing that talent.  But many of these people are simply born with genes that the rest of us can only marvel at.  No amount of practice in the world would be enough for Usain Bolt to become the fastest man alive.  No amount of practice would be enough to make Pavarotti one of the greatest tenors who ever lived or Lise Davidsen one of the best sopranos in the world today.  Many of our stars are so beautiful that it is incomprehensible to those of us with NORMAL genes that anyone could have the genes that Sydney Sweeney has ☹.  There is a considerable amount of success simply built into the genes one has as well as the people you know.  Who do you know that is on the 100 list of invitees to the Inaugural Ball?  When was the last time you were invited to the Oscars or the Country Music Awards?

But what really burns me up is not the self-congratulatory escapades of the “Rich and Famous” or the masses worshipping at their altars.  It is the total disdain and ignorance of the heroism and incredible feats of discipline and fortitude that most of us ignore because we are so blinded by the Broadway lights that flash on others.  Let me give you one example of an unheralded human being to make what I am talking about more obvious.

A few years ago, the old Veteran Center in Eloy Arizona had a full-time director and coordinator.  Her name was Sonnette Cherry.  Sonnette was a dynamo.  She organized events each month for the local veterans.  She wrote grants to keep the center open.  She found funding to take several disabled veterans to visit the Wall in Washington D.C.  She liaised with other veteran centers in the area to insure that all vets had access to important information.  She arranged for people from the VA in Tucson to come up regularly to talk about benefits and she scheduled Veteran Service officers to regularly help disabled veterans file for disability benefits.

In addition, she was always there if a veteran needed help either physically, emotionally or financially.  Big Deal, you might say “She was only doing her job.”  Yes that is true doing a job with low pay and long hours.  However, in addition Sonnette was working on her Master’s degree at the University of Arizona and taking care of her 13 children.  Could you manage that, or would you want to manage that?  Sonnette never got a medal or an Oscar for doing her job though she certainly deserved one.

Now I point out this woman, not only because she is a friend but because she works hard (as many of you do) but like you will never get a medal or pin or celebrity honor for her work.  She will get no star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame now will they have a special dinner in her honor at the White House.  There are many other unheralded and unsung people like Sonnette out there doing a job that Usain Bolt or Sydney Sweeney would not touch in a million years.

I would like to see a People’s Award that every city would give regularly to people like Sonnette and YOU who work their butts off for other people and rarely get a mention.  It would not be based on competition but simply given for doing good deeds.  Sure, we see posters for Teachers and Doctors and Firefighters as “Hero’s” but those are generalizations.  The vast majority of teachers (I have been one for 50 years now) will never be “Teacher of the Year” or receive any kind of an award.

The best awards I have ever received in my teaching career came from a few letters that I later received from students telling me what a difference I made in their lives.  Believe me, these letters did not only make my day, but they also made my year.  Nevertheless, I have wondered why I never received a single award or honor in my fifty years of public education.  I have no doubt that this is true for the vast majority of those “Heroes” whose posters we put up on billboards.

It is high time, well beyond high time in fact, that we do more to honor people like Sonnette who have accomplished more than anyone scaling Mt. Everest or running the New York Marathon ever did.  We are looking in the wrong direction for stars.  Many of the stars are standing in our midst but we are so blinded by the aura of the stars manufactured by TV and the Media (We now have Internet Super-Stars) that we fail to see the stars in our own galaxy.

Look for a star today.  I have named one that is in my orbit.  I could have told you stories of many others, but you would have gotten bored or wondered if I was taking bribes 😊.  I assure you that you know someone who goes above and beyond helping others all the while doing tasks that even Hercules would have run away from.  Here are a few of my other “Heros” that I did not talk about.  In reverse alphabetical order

  • Evelia Zajac
  • Darlene Tervo
  • Louis Schultz
  • Carol Salvatore
  • K. Rice
  • Karen Persico (My hard working and very caring wife)
  • Gary McLean
  • Socorro Luna Galusha

I could keep going through the entire alphabet, but this blog is already too long.  Maybe you can start filling in where I left off.

Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – Barack H. Obama

05 Aug 2025 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

For the next several days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some outstanding people.  If you are tired of hearing about stuff like this, than turn me off for the next week or two.  My intention is to publish one of these stories every few days.  I was motivated to do these stories by some discussions with Trump supporters.  I was amazed at the number of conspiracy theories they believed in that I knew were false.

I am not sure why more information never gets made public to debunk such lies.  It seems the mainstream media does nothing to help dispel the vicious slander and conspiracy theories that are spread about men and women.  People who have the courage to attack a corrupt system or withhold their support for a corrupt system.

Was Obama a US Citizen legally able to run for president?  What was behind the “birther” controversy?

Barack Obama was a U.S. citizen and legally eligible to run for president. He was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii, which had become a U.S. state in 1959—two years before his birth. Therefore, he was a natural-born U.S. citizen, which meets the constitutional requirement to serve as President.

What Was the “Birther” Controversy?

The “birther” movement was a conspiracy theory that falsely claimed Obama was not born in the United States and thus was ineligible to be president. Here’s a breakdown of the controversy:

  1. Origins

It began during Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Some of the earliest claims came from fringe political activists and chain emails.

The theory suggested he was born in Kenya, his father’s homeland, and not Hawaii.

  1. Claims and Misinformation

Critics demanded Obama release his long-form birth certificate (he had already released a short-form certificate in 2008).

Despite this, the theory persisted, fueled by blogs, talk radio, and later Donald Trump, who became the most prominent figure promoting the claim from around 2011 onward.  Sadly, the mainstream media ate this bullshit up and helped spread it.  Trump rode the wave of crap to become a media celebrity with a vast number of supporters who were racist and xenophobid and wanted to believe this crap.  Almost all major studies showed that in the first trump election, racism played a major role in trump’s victory.  Some have said “MAGA” was a metaphor for make America White again.

  1. Proof and Rebuttal

In April 2011, Obama released his long-form birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health, confirming his Honolulu birth.

Multiple fact-checking organizations (e.g., FactCheck.org, Snopes, PolitiFact) and Hawaii officials confirmed its authenticity.

  1. Underlying Motivations

While it may have appeared to be a legal challenge, many observers and scholars argue the movement was racially and politically motivated:

It played on xenophobic and racist fears, implying that a Black man with a non-Anglo name was somehow “foreign.”

It undermined Obama’s legitimacy and authority, even after he was elected and serving.

Conclusions

The “birther” controversy was thoroughly debunked, but it had lasting effects. It sowed mistrust, polarized political discourse, and elevated conspiracy-based rhetoric in American politics. Barack Obama was and always has been a natural-born U.S. citizen and legally eligible to be President of the United States.

Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – John F. Kerry

02 Aug 2025 30 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

For the next several days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some upstanding people.  My intention is to publish one of these stories each day.  I am not sure why more information never came out or at least why I was not more aware of the lies concerning these people.  It seems the mainstream media did nothing to help dispel the vicious slander and lies that were spread about these men and women.  Even today, the for-profit media does nothing to discredit the numerous lies and conspiracy theories spread by the current administration.  The following is a another man who was targeted for such lies.

John F. Kerry served with distinction when he was in Vietnam in 1966.  Many people say his war record was faked, and that he did not deserve his medals.  Was he a hero or a fake?

The allegations against John Kerry regarding his service in Vietnam have been the subject of significant political controversy, particularly during his 2004 presidential campaign.  To answer the question—Was John Kerry a hero or a fake?—we need to separate verified facts from politically motivated accusations.

Documented Facts About Kerry’s Vietnam Service

Military Record:

  • Kerry served in the U.S. Navy from 1966 to 1970.
  • He commanded a Swift Boat (PCF-94) in the Mekong Delta in 1968–69.
  • He received five medals:
  • Silver Star (for gallantry)
  • Bronze Star
  • Three Purple Hearts (for wounds in combat)

After the War:

Kerry became a prominent anti-war activist, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971, and criticizing U.S. actions in Vietnam.

His speeches included claims that some U.S. troops had committed war crimes—statements that drew strong reactions both then and decades later.

The 2004 “Swift Boat” Allegations

  • During his 2004 campaign, a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) launched a media campaign accusing Kerry of:
    • Exaggerating or fabricating his military service
    • Not deserving some of his medals
    • Lying about his actions during combat

Analysis of the Allegations:

The SBVT claims were refuted by official Navy records and many of Kerry’s fellow crewmates, who supported his version of events.

Multiple independent fact-checkers (FactCheck.org, the Washington Post, and others) concluded that the SBVT campaign was misleading or false.

The campaign is now widely seen as an early and powerful example of a politically motivated smear, giving rise to the term “swift boating” as a synonym for dishonest political attacks.

Bottom Line: Hero or Fake?

Hero: According to military records, eyewitness accounts, and official commendations, John Kerry served with distinction, was wounded in action, and showed bravery.

Not a Fake: The allegations of fraud or exaggeration have been widely discredited and were part of a partisan effort to undermine his credibility in a political campaign.

Controversial: Kerry’s anti-war activism, including his Senate testimony, was divisive and remains controversial—but that does not negate his military service.  Even today when I attend some activities at Veteran Centers throughout Pinal County, I find veterans who suggest that we should have won the Vietnam War but we were “stabbed” in the back by hippies, liberals and war protestors.  Of course, then as now most war protestors are labeled as communist sympathizers or simply cowards.  

 

 

Previous Older Entries