Debunking Bullshit Lies and Conspiracies – George H. W. Bush

01 Aug 2025 4 Comments

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

For the next nine days, I am going to wade into some lies and/or conspiracies that were spread to discredit, dishonor and destroy some upstanding people.  If you are tired of hearing about stuff like this, then turn me off for the next week or two.  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.

If instead, you feel like I do that the truth should out no matter how long ago these events happened, than repost, send, share or do whatever you can to help demolish some of these bullshit lies and conspiracies.  I am going to start with the oldest and work forward to end with the most recent.

In 1944, George H. W. Bush was a WW II pilot who caused the death of several of his crew members during a bombing mission. 

Yes, during World War II, George H. W. Bush — who would later become the 41st President of the United States — was involved in a bombing mission during which one of his crew members was killed. However, there’s no credible evidence that Bush caused the death or was at fault.

Background:

  • Date of Incident: September 2, 1944
  • Aircraft: TBM Avenger (a torpedo bomber)
  • Mission: Bombing a Japanese radio installation on Chichijima, a Japanese-held island in the Pacific.

What Happened:

Bush was the pilot of a three-man crew. During the bombing run:

  • His plane was hit by enemy anti-aircraft fire.
  • Despite flames in the engine, Bush completed his bombing run, then bailed out over the ocean.
  • His crew members did not survive. Their bodies were never recovered.

The two men aboard with him were:

  • Radioman Second Class John Delaney
  • Lieutenant Junior Grade William White

With his engine on fire, Bush flew several miles from the island, where he and two other crew members on the TBM Avenger bailed out of the aircraft.  However, one man’s chute did not open and he fell to his death.  The other crew member was never found.  Both Delaney and White were reported as killed in action.

Was Bush Responsible?

No. There is no evidence or suggestion from military investigations or historical accounts that George H. W. Bush did anything wrong. He followed procedure and attempted to save the mission and his crew. He was rescued by a U.S. Navy submarine (USS Finback) and later awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his actions on that mission.

Controversy:

Some conspiracy theories emerged later, largely without substantiation, suggesting Bush abandoned his crew. These claims are not supported by military records, official investigations, or reputable historians. Most experts regard Bush’s actions as courageous under fire.

In summary:
George H. W. Bush’s two crew members died during a combat mission in WWII, but their deaths were the tragic result of enemy action — not due to any wrongdoing or failure by Bush, who was widely credited with bravery during the incident.

What America May Be Like in the Year 2056

28 Jul 2025 5 Comments

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

freedom-is-slavery

The following is an imaginary story I wrote back in January of 2017.  I wrote it at the start of the first trump administration.  I was reflecting on what life would be like in about 40 years under a Republican dominated government.  I just happened to come upon this blog again a few days ago.  After rereading it, I was surprised by how many of these things seem to be coming to pass under the “NEW” trump administration.  I have decided to publish it in the original without making ANY changes at all.  Love to hear your comments and what you think.  

———————————————————————————————————

I live in Republicanville USA.  It is a small town of about 1,500 people in the rural Midwest.  Today in my town, all the women are barefoot and pregnant and all the men are stupid and misinformed.  It wasn’t always this way.  Things started to change about 75 years ago, when Ronald Reagan became President.  My town had always been very progressive and liberal but we started hearing more and more about how we were being taken advantage of by the poor, those on government handouts and those too lazy to work.  The Republicans who in our town had always been a minority began to grow in numbers.  The more we heard about welfare cheats and welfare freeloaders and those on drugs taking advantage of us, the more my town embraced a new concept of democracy.  It was more like “every man or woman for themselves” rather than “all for one and one for all.”

obey-jesus-or-perish

Our U.S. democracy which had always prided itself on a separation of church and state seemed to forget the reason for this partition.  Increasingly, a group called Evangelical Fundamentalists became more popular along with their criticism of many progressive institutions.  Republicanville USA moved more and more to the right.  The concept of unbridled capitalism became enshrined as a religion and many people began opposing “big” government and taxes.  The Republican Party preached that the marketplace could provide for all social, physical and economic needs of U.S. citizens.  My town moved even further to the right.

trump-state-of-the-unionThis conservative trend was already well underway when in 2017, a billionaire real-estate developer named Donald Trump became the 45th President of the United States of America.  In addition to the hard core conservative beliefs of many mainstream Republicans, Trump added the once discredited idea of American Isolationism.  We would now put America first, no matter what.  No more negotiations with other nations unless it was clear that we got the better of the deal.  We would build a big wall to keep Mexicans and other immigrants out and we would renege on our trade deals with China and Europe.  About the only country that Trump liked was Russia.   Eventually, he agreed to give Alaska and parts of Canada back to Russia.

Trump came through on his promises to the Evangelicals that he would make America White again and put women back in the bedroom where it would be okay to grab their pussies whenever you wanted to.  Minorities were targeted for deportation and women libbers promoting abortion or equal rights for women were arrested in wholesale sweeps and sent to special detention centers for chronic complainers and protesters.

I would like to describe in somewhat more detail what my town is like now in 2056.  Things are a lot different than when I was born in 2017.  I will divide my discussion of these changes into three areas:  Family, Education and Social Issues.

Family:

another-day-in-paradiseI am 39 years old and have two children.  I have never worked (at least outside of the home) as women have not been allowed to work since 2022 when they passed the “Women in the Home Law” as it was popularly called.  The Federal government passed the law and it was ratified by every state and municipality in the nation.  Some places tried to hold out but the government cut off all funding to them until they capitulated.  This law effectively outlawed women working.  It also barred women from the military.  Ten years later (2032) they passed the “Mandatory Birth Act.”  This bill proscribes that every woman (physically able to) must give birth to at least two children.  Any woman who reaches the age of 32 and still has not given birth to two children is forcibly removed to a National Birthing Center where she will be artificially impregnated and kept confined until she has had at least two healthy children.  Sickly or unhealthy children are sent to Disposal Camps where they are “recycled” per official government propaganda.  No one is quite sure what happens during recycling but the children are never seen again.

Many gay women resisted the Mandatory Birth Act and the National Suicide Rate went up dramatically.  The “Fathers” (as our political leaders are now called) made it very clear that the country would be better off without such deviates.  Since women were no longer allowed in politics, the leaders of the nation decreed that they would all be called “Fathers” instead of being referred to as politicians or legislators as they once were called.

My husband works at a local mill where they make t-shirts for Japan, China, Brazil and some of the more developed t-shirt-workersnations.  Since banning imports of such items, we have created millions of jobs making goods that were once made in low wage countries.  The demand for such goods has skyrocketed but now we are providing them.  Unfortunately, the wages and education needed for such work is still low.  My husband did not finish high school but most men in our town do not.  The Fathers have repeatedly stated that real men don’t need higher education.  (I will talk more about education later.)

When my husband is not working, he spends most of his time watching football, baseball, basketball, golf or hockey.  I ammen-watching-game not allowed in the living room when his sports are on except to bring in some beer or chips.  This does not really bother me much as I have plenty to do with the kids, housecleaning, cooking and all.  I have my own TV in my sewing room where I can watch any of the approved programs for women.  We have 30 different “Women Only” channels where I can learn more about cooking and cleaning and how to be a good wife. There are some good romances and family drama stories that are occasionally on.  I look forward to watching these when the kids are in bed.

Our two children, Mary and John are 12 and 15 respectively.  Mary is in a finishing school for girls where they are preparing her for being a mom and wife.  She takes subjects such as homemaking, cooking, cleaning and parenting.  She has one more year to go before finishing school.

When Mary turns 14, she will be eligible for marriage.  Her name will be put in a marriage registry.  If she is lucky enough and pretty enough, some up and coming town Father will select her for a wife.  Men who qualify due to income levels are allowed to have up to five wives.

woman-vacuum-cleaning

My son John is not in school any longer and he works part-time.  The Fathers decried that girls did not need schooling after the age of 13.  John hopes to get a job in the t-shirt plant where his dad works when he turns 16.  He quit school because we could not afford a private school for him.  Only the rich kids in town go on to education beyond the 10th grade.  Private schools are very expensive and the Fathers do not believe in funding education any more.  It has been emphasized that education is an elitist program that creates class divisions and makes some people feel more entitled than other people.   Most young men in our town will work in one of the mills or plants.

Education:

anti_public_education_propaganda_by_8manderz8-d5xz1cj

I have already talked about some aspects of our education system today.  Basically, most people do not believe in higher education anymore.  It is only for the rich.  All funds for public education were cut in 2035 when they passed the “Private Education Act”.  Most folks now send their kids to private schools through the 8th grade and then find work for their children after that.  Girls will be shortly married so school is not thought to be that important for them anyway.  They can learn whatever they need to be a good wife on the “At Home Wives Channels.”

students-1920-1950-9_jpeg

Boys from families with lower incomes can opt to go to privately funded vocational schools to learn such trades as t-shirt making, sneaker making, jewelry making, gun repair, taxidermy, and many other skills that might be in demand.  There is still some funding for such programs that is available for lower income families.  All public colleges have been closed now.  As I noted earlier, such schools were decried to be elitist and the Fathers were unanimous in un-funding them.

Boys from wealthier families go to the more prestigious private schools where they will learn such skills as: Leadership, Accounting, Business Development, Entrepreneurship and Medicine.  Law was abolished as a field of study in 2030 with the passage of the “No More Lawyers Act.”  This act basically made lawsuits illegal thus dramatically decreasing the need for lawyers in the U.S.

Courtrooms abolished “adversarial” trial procedures with the “No More Lawyers Act” and replaced the old-fashioned method of two people arguing trials with modern Computerized Forensic Tomography.  Using CFT, a cross section of the case and evidence pro and con is presented to the jurors.  All the available facts and data are reviewed and jurors vote on the verdict.  Trials are much more efficient and there is no need for lawyers.

Anti EducationLibraries are now mostly museums.  With the passage of the “Books Only Lie Bill” in 2038, all funds to public libraries were cut.  The Fathers decried that books did nothing but cause trouble and stir up discontent.  Anything citizens really needed to know could be found on the “Citizens Channels” offered by the government Department of Public Wisdom.  There are over 100 of these channels which are available on public TV.  They are on 24/7 and offer many programs for good citizenship.  Some of the programs are:

  • Disciplining your children
  • How to take proper care of your guns
  • Disciplining your wife
  • Obeying your supervisor
  • Getting along with co-workers
  • Obeying authority
  • Keeping a clean house

Social Issues:

Social issues or problems (as some people thought of them) have been mostly eliminated in our town.  Our Fathers banned minorities in 2040 with the “America for Whites Act.”  Under this act, no immigrants or people of color can live in the same community as White people.  In 2041, they passed the “Christian Only Act” making Christianity the official Religion of the USA.  All other religions were banned along with atheism and agnosticism.  The “Mandatory Religion Act” in 2042 made it a felony crime not to attend a Christian church every Sunday.

In our town, there is only one church now.  It the Fundamental Evangelical Christian Church for Christ.  We have two pastors who are both well versed in Old Testament theology.  They are fond of saying that “Heaven is for the obedient, the disobedient will all go to hell.”  We are taught that Jesus will come again before the end of the century to judge the living and the dead.  The good folks will go to heaven and the bad will burn forever in the flames of hell.

We still have crime in our community but not very much.  It is severely punished with public floggings, beatings and hangings.  Criminals are banished to work rehabilitation camps for hard labor.  Drugs are still a major problem but the new “One Strike Act” passed in 2050 decried that anyone caught with an illegal substance would face a mandatory life sentence at a penal colony somewhere in the South China Sea.

immigration-reform

Gay men still can be found but homosexuality can be punished under the “2045 Purity of Purpose Bill” with mandatory castration.  Boys are encouraged to be manly and any evidence of femininity in our boys is severely dealt with.  Our town brought back “town stocks” a few years ago, to punish any boys or men caught in homosexual activities.  These punishments plus the threat of castration have decreased the rate of homosexuality considerably in our community.

Well, I could tell you a great deal more about life in our town in 2056, but I have cleaning and cooking to do.  Furthermore, if anyone knew I was writing this I would be in big trouble.  Under the “Against Propaganda Law” passed in 2041, no one may criticize the government, any Fathers or any laws without official authorization from the local town council.  I could be publicly flogged or worse for saying these things.  Thus, for now I will just hide this away.  I don’t mean to be either a coward or a complainer.  Our Fathers say this is the Golden Age of America and that we are living in the greatest Christian country in the world.  Who am I to argue?

Time for Questions:

Are you living the good life?  Do you live the life you dreamed of?  Do you think you have a right to your dreams?  Do you think other people also have a right to their dreams?  How much authority do you think a government should have over your dreams?  What kind of dreams do you have for your children?  What do you call progress?

Life is just beginning.

“No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal.  He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves.  But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”  ― George Orwell, Animal Farm

What Would Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams and Thomas Paine Say if They Were Alive Today?  Opinions Expressed by ChatGPT!

12 Jul 2025 12 Comments

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


I often wake up at night pondering the imponderable.  A few nights ago, I woke up wondering what my favorite Founding Father would think about things today if he were alive.  I refer to Thomas Jefferson who despite much of his hypocrisy, I still admire very much for his intellectual foundations of democracy.  Thus, I got out of bed and decided to see what ChatGPT would think about this question.  While I was at it, I included queries for Samuel Adams and Thomas Paine whom I also admire very much.  I put the following query to ChatGPT.

In 500 words or less, what would Thomas Jefferson have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

If Thomas Jefferson were to assess the present state of American politics, he would likely express both deep concern and guarded hope. As a champion of liberty, limited government, and the diffusion of power, Jefferson might be alarmed by the hyper-partisanship, concentration of wealth and influence, and erosion of civic virtue that marks much of today’s political climate.

Jefferson valued the free press and an informed citizenry as bulwarks against tyranny, but he would likely be troubled by the rise of misinformation and the deep polarization stoked by media echo chambers. He warned that a republic could only survive if its people were educated and vigilant. Seeing voter apathy, low civic trust, and widespread political cynicism, he might fear that the American experiment was straying from its foundational ideals.

He would likely criticize the influence of large corporations and special interests on lawmakers, calling it a form of “elective despotism” — where private power manipulates public policy. Jefferson was wary of centralized banking and would probably see today’s economic inequality as a threat to republican balance and self-rule.

On the other hand, Jefferson would also recognize the enduring strength of constitutional institutions, the resilience of democratic dissent, and the diversity of political participation as hopeful signs. He believed in the capacity for peaceful revolution and renewal. The activism of young people, the vibrancy of civil society, and ongoing debates about rights and justice might stir his belief that the republic can still be revitalized.

Ultimately, Jefferson would urge Americans to remember that liberty requires effort — that every generation must “refresh the tree of liberty” not with violence, but with active engagement, moral courage, and public service. He would remind citizens that they are not subjects but sovereigns, and that the preservation of democracy depends not on leaders alone, but on the people themselves.


In 500 words or less, what would Thomas Paine have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

If Thomas Paine were alive to witness the present state of American politics, his response would likely be fiery, uncompromising, and full of both indignation and inspiration. As the passionate voice behind Common Sense and The Rights of Man, Paine championed radical democracy, social justice, and the power of ordinary people to overthrow corrupt systems. He would likely view today’s political climate as a betrayal of the revolutionary ideals he once fought for.

Paine would be outraged by the degree of economic inequality and political influence held by the wealthy elite. He warned in his time about the dangers of monarchy and aristocracy—today, he might argue that America faces a modern version: oligarchy. The dominance of corporate money in elections and policymaking would, in his eyes, amount to tyranny in a new form.

He would be sharply critical of political parties that prioritize power over principle and create divisions that distract from the common good. Paine believed that government should serve the people, not entrench the power of a few. He would condemn the partisan gridlock, deliberate misinformation, and what he might see as cowardice among leaders unwilling to stand up for justice and truth.

Yet, Paine would not despair. He believed deeply in the ability of people to rise, to demand reform, and to create a more just society. He would likely praise movements for racial justice, labor rights, climate action, and economic fairness as modern heirs to the revolutionary spirit. He would call on Americans to shake off apathy, to recognize their power, and to demand a government that works for all, not just the privileged few.

In Paine’s words: “We have it in our power to begin the world over again.” He would challenge today’s citizens to do exactly that.

In 500 words or less, what would Samuel Adams have to say about the present state of politics in America today?

Samuel Adams, the fiery patriot and master organizer behind the American Revolution, would likely view the present state of American politics with a mix of alarm and rallying fervor. As someone who believed that liberty must be constantly defended against corruption, tyranny, and apathy, Adams would be deeply concerned by the erosion of civic trust, the rise of special interest power, and the complacency of citizens in the face of growing dysfunction.

Adams saw government as a sacred trust, meant to reflect the will and virtue of the people. Today, he would likely condemn the influence of money in politics as a betrayal of republican principles, calling out lobbyists, corporate donors, and elected officials who prioritize personal or partisan gain over the common good. He would regard political leaders who manipulate public opinion with lies or fear as dangerous enemies of liberty.

He’d also take issue with the widespread civic disengagement and low voter turnout. Adams believed that public virtue—active, informed participation in the republic—was the cornerstone of freedom. He would likely warn Americans that rights not actively defended are rights easily lost, and that freedom requires both vigilance and sacrifice.

Yet, ever the agitator for liberty, Adams would not retreat into pessimism. He would find hope in grassroots activism, community organizing, and movements that hold the powerful accountable. He would see in these efforts the spirit of the Sons of Liberty reborn.

Adams might close his remarks with a challenge: “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” That time, he would say, is now. And he would call on Americans to rise—peacefully but boldly—to restore the republic.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I was very impressed by the above observations.  They mirror what I thought each of these great men would have said.  However, as I lean towards pessimism and given the present state of America, I tend to be very pessimistic, I would have totally overlooked some of the positive attitudes that each of these men expressed as well as some of the optimism they spoke of.  I am very grateful to ChatGPT and Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams for their ideas.  I only wish I could share these thoughts with all Americans today.

Is there any possibility, these ideas would make any difference to at least some of the followers of our erstwhile King and Dictator? 

The Hypocrisy of Paywalls and Political Campaign Contributions

01 Jul 2025 8 Comments

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

If you are reading this blog, you will note two aspects of my blog that might be salient.  They will only be evident if you look closely.  First, there is no Paywall.  I charge nothing for my ideas.  Indeed, I encourage you to repost or use my ideas in any way that you think will help others.  Second, there are no advertisements.  I take no money from anyone.  I am beholden to no companies or corporations for endorsements or financial remuneration.  If anyone does not like what I say, that is their problem.  I am free and unencumbered to say it and you are free and unencumbered to read it.  No sixty second sound bites from anyone before you can plow ahead.  The only thing standing between you and my blog are the bits and bytes of your computer and the speed of your Internet provider.

I point the above out because it seems that what is obvious to me is not obvious to others.  Most of us know that the USA and its government is seriously broken.  It is dysfunctional, immoral and often now illegal and unconstitutional.  What is the biggest reason for this?  Simple.  Money and greed and the power that money begets.  Ergo, if money is as they say, “The Root of All Evil,” than how can asking for more money fix the problem.  Imagine if there were a fire burning in your house and you tried to put it out by throwing money on it?  Well, that is what too many people are trying to do. 

Many bloggers are now asking for money before you can read their blogs.  How do they think this will make the world a better place to live?  “Just give me money and I will share my wonderful ideas with you.”  In other words, I am no different than the other greedy people who would sell their souls for a few dollars.  I will sell my soul for a few bucks that I might make on Substack or some other place that allows Paywalls and advertisements.

If you think advertisements are benign and harmless, you are delusional.  Madison Avenue and the corporate advertising machine are the number one brainwashers in America.  They are the primary reason that people keep spending and spending.  Madison Avenue exists to convince you that you are inadequate and that if you only buy product X, it will make you feel better and bestow happiness on your life.  Than, you only have to keep buying more to stay happy.  Think of the junk that you see every day trying to be sold to suckers to make their lives better.  Not a prophet in history preached that you can have a better life by having more things.  If you support advertising, you support this evil concept.  The foundation of this concept is Greed that pervades Corporate America. 

Next we have politicians whose every message ends with “SEND MONEY” or “DONATE TO MY CAMPAIGN.”  I cannot think of a campaign or revolution in history from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon or Lenin to Toussaint Louverture or Simon Bolivar or Gandhi or Martin Luther King, where they sent out advertising brochures or flyers asking for money.  They might have solicited soldiers or workers but people not money were their primary objectives.  You of course can argue that some of these individuals had the power and resources of the state to fund their campaigns.  I concede that this is true.  However, it is equally true that without people, their campaigns and revolutions would have failed. 

I see too many politicians who seem to believe that if they can only get enough money, they will then be able to buy enough advertising to convince you to vote for them.  Nothing could be more stupid.  Harris spent nearly a ¼ billion dollars more than trump during the last election and obviously lost.  All of her money did her no good.  Nor did her celebrity endorsements.  The day after the elections, the DNC asked for more money to defeat trump’s policies.  [By the way, the CEO of ActBlue, the major fundraiser for the Democrats has a gross salary of approximately $500,000 dollars a year and many of the senior executives of this organization make well over $100,000 dollars a year.  This should dispel any notion you have that fundraisers for the Democrats are benevolent donors of their time and energy.] 

The other point about advertising’s power to convince anyone to vote concerns the voters themselves.  How many trump supporters do you think changed their mind because they listened to or watched a Harris ad?  How many Harris supporters do you think changed their mind because they watched a trump ad?  And what of the thirty-three percent of the people who did not vote?  A percentage that has remained roughly the same since the first voting in this country for George Washington.  Nearly every election a third of Americans DO NOT vote.  How many of these non-voters do you think changed their mind to vote for either Harris or trump because of some cute and slick campaign ad?  Madison Avenue is laughing their asses off every time an election comes around because they are the real winners.  As the famous pianist Liberace once said, “I am laughing my way all the way to the bank.” 

Einstein once made the following two profound statements, “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking we used when we created them” and “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”  We are insane if we think that we are going to change a system based on greed and money by simply donating more money to fund this system.  What could be more preposterous than this idea?

Let me tell you a little story that I experienced in the 2024 election.  A friend of ours from church decided to run for state representative.  I believe that she supported many if not most of the same policies that I do.  However, I told her as well as others that I knew that I was no longer donating money to any campaigns.  We discussed some ideas at church one day and she was very pro-education, and she thought that we needed to do some things differently.  I gave her my personal card and said that I would be happy to discuss some of my ideas on education.  Ideas that come from teaching for over fifty years now.  A short time later,  she sent me a notice that she was hosting a campaign fund raiser.  I was somewhat surprised since I thought I made it clear that I would not donate money to anyone for a campaign effort.  I was also perplexed since I believed in her ideas, and I admired her personally.  Nevertheless, I decided to stick with my convictions about money.  Instead, I sent her an email saying that “I would not make campaign donations, but I would help her with phone calls, signs or going door to door.” 

Weeks went by.  She never called to set up a time to talk to me about my theories of changing education nor did she ever call to ask me to help physically in any way with her campaign.  Come the election, she lost to her opposition by a 56 to 44 margin.  Would my help have made any difference, or would my money have made any difference?  I have no way of knowing.

During the last election, being a guest on Podcasts has emerged as a new political tool and strategy.  Judging by the election results, it might be a better strategy than the money wasted on advertising.  Some data concerning the visibility that trump gained versus Harris gained on podcasts are as follows:

Trump’s Appearances/Mentions: Trump has been mentioned in or appeared on a significantly larger number of podcasts, with nearly 70,000 instances, according to Brookings, citing Ivy, a podcast discovery service.

Harris’s Appearances/Mentions: Kamala Harris has been mentioned in or appeared on a little over 12,000 podcasts.

This data suggests that while Trump had more individual podcast appearances, he also received substantially more mentions or coverage across a wider range of podcasts compared to Harris.

A friend of mine recently called me up to tell me that I should watch Pete Buttigieg on a Podcast called Flagrant with a guy named Andrew Schulz.  Four other young males of various ethnicities all casually dressed flanked Shultz and Buttigieg as they engaged in a casual banter about life and politics.  

This podcast and others of the same ilk have nothing in common with the traditional sit-down interviews that politicians used to have on shows such as Face the Nation and 60 minutes.  Podcasts like Flagrant are like sitting in your buddies living room or Arizona Room and slurping a beer while casually discussing the latest news.  Not a woman was present in the room with Buttigieg and Schulz.  A more or less macho image pervaded the discussions.  It seem macho has become the new norm in politics today.  Women can stay in the kitchen while the men hide out in their man caves and solve the problems of the world. 

My friend had asked me what I thought of Buttigieg?  I wondered if Pete attending all the macho podcasts was a strategy to set him up for the next election cycle.  I have a strong belief  that is what his advisors are endorsing.  Perhaps this is being pragmatic and simply making maxim use of the new media.  Or perhaps it is targeting the same demographic that trump targeted so successfully.  I queried ChatGPT to get the results on trump’s election demographics.  They were as follows:

| White voters (overall) | ~80–82% | Largest core group |

| White evangelical Protestants | ~82% (South); 43% of R base | Bedrock core |

| Latino voters | 46–48% | Historically high support |

| Latino men | ~54–55% | Key swing within Latino support |

| Asian Americans | ~40% | +10-point gain since 2020 |

| Black voters | ~15% (esp. young men) | Doubled since 2020 |

| Young men | ~55–56% | Social media & influencer effect |

A reasonable estimate for men aged 25–45 is around 50–52% of Trump voters.  This is a majority of his voting demographic.  Watch some of the podcasts like Joe Rogan and Flagrant and you tell me what demographic you think they are appealing to.  Rogan averages 11 million views on Spotify and Flagrant (numbers are not public) is estimated to be in the millions with specific episodes passing ten million viewers.  With these numbers and the type of audience watching, millions of dollars on traditional advertising is a waste of time and money. 

Conclusions:

  • If you want change in this country, do not send another dime to a politician.
  • If you must fund any politician, look at how many PACs they subscribe to or how many lobbyists they get funding from. Stay away from any with PACs hiding under aliases like Patriots for Freedom or Americans for Liberty.
  • Donate your time and talent to anyone running for public office before you donate any money.
  • Encourage your choice for office to get out there and talk to people. Consider people for office who can really relate to the people who are going to elect them.  Any lawyer that went to a private high school and then graduated Summa Cum Laude from Harvard and never served a day in the military or put in an honest days work is not likely to know the problems of the common people. 
  • Think before you send any money to anyone. What are they going to use your money for? 
  • If you have a printing press in your house or a tree that grows money, than by all means, send all the money you want. While you are at it, could you send me a few thousand dollars? 

P.S. 

Before I could even get this blog up, I get an email from the new “Hero” of the Democratic Party telling me the following and three times asking for donations in the same email.

“We will need to run the largest and most effective campaign in history for the next five months to win the general election. The same billionaires whose money could not stop us before, are throwing everything they have to crush us. And the reality is that they are going to go after any candidate in any part of the country who dares to champion working people.”

“What we will achieve together sends a message across America — and throughout the world.

The people can topple political dynasties. The people can build coalitions. The people can win.

So join our movement and lets bring forward a new generation of leadership.

In solidarity,”

Zohran Mamdani

Donate »

Donate »

ChatGPT Political Analysis of the Next Three Weeks Following the US Bombing of Iran

21 Jun 2025 11 Comments

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

Here is a realistic 3-week scenario following a U.S. (or Israeli/U.S.-backed) bombing of Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites. This projection assumes a limited strike—targeting key facilities like Natanz, Fordow, or Isfahan—rather than a full-scale war. It also assumes no immediate regime change in Tehran.

🔥 Week 1: Shock, Assessment, and Initial Response

Day 1–3: Aftermath of the Strike

  • Iran confirms the bombing, accuses the U.S. (and possibly Israel), and vows retaliation.
  • Images of destroyed facilities emerge. The regime uses this to unify internal dissent and condemn “Western aggression.”
  • Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the IRGC declare that Iran will “respond at a time and place of its choosing.”
  • Oil prices spike sharply (10–20%) due to fears of escalation and threats to the Strait of Hormuz.

Day 4–7: Iran Responds Indirectly

  • Proxy attacks begin:
    • Rockets fired at U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria.
    • Possible drone attacks on Gulf infrastructure (e.g., Aramco facilities in Saudi Arabia).
  • Cyberattacks ramp up—U.S. financial institutions, oil pipelines, or water utilities may be hit.
  • Hezbollah increases alert status in southern Lebanon; Israel prepares for possible northern front flare-up.

🔥🔥 Week 2: Retaliation and Global Response

Day 8–14: Asymmetric Escalation

  • Strait of Hormuz Incident:
    • Iran attempts to seize or disable an oil tanker or mines a portion of the sea lane. U.S. Navy increases patrols.
    • Insurance rates for shipping skyrocket; some companies suspend traffic through the Gulf.
  • Missile or drone attacks on Israel may occur via proxies in Lebanon or Syria.
  • Iran announces its withdrawal from the NPT and ends cooperation with the IAEA.
  • U.S. embassies in the region face protests or limited violence. Evacuations begin in unstable areas (e.g., Iraq, Lebanon).

Global Diplomatic Reaction

  • U.N. Security Council convenes emergency meetings, but permanent members (Russia, China) back Iran’s right to respond.
  • European allies urge restraint but face domestic protests over perceived U.S. recklessness.
  • China and Russia increase energy imports from Iran, attempting to buffer sanctions.

🔥🔥🔥 Week 3: Brinkmanship or Stabilization

Day 15–21: Critical Crossroads

Two scenarios could unfold:

Scenario A: De-escalation (40% chance)

  • Backchannel diplomacy via Qatar, Oman, or Switzerland opens dialogue.
  • Iran agrees to “limited retaliation” in exchange for no further U.S. strikes.
  • The U.S. and EU explore a new diplomatic framework—one that includes regional actors like Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
  • A global coalition calls for a new nuclear deal—but it may be even harder to achieve than the JCPOA.

Scenario B: Continued Escalation (60% chance)

  • A U.S. base suffers major casualties from a proxy missile barrage.
  • Israel launches strikes on Hezbollah or targets IRGC units in Syria.
  • Iran threatens all-out war if attacked again. Military activity intensifies around Hormuz.
  • Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain) enter high alert, and the U.S. begins moving naval strike groups into the region.
  • A wider regional war becomes a real possibility—though all sides remain cautious of going “over the edge.”

🧭 Strategic Implications

  • Iran may emerge stronger in domestic politics, despite the strike, by unifying nationalist sentiment.
  • The global economy suffers, with energy markets roiled and major supply chain uncertainty.
  • Diplomacy is damaged for years; no near-term nuclear agreement will be politically possible in Iran.
  • The risk of miscalculation is extremely high—especially if any party overestimates their deterrence or underestimates their adversary’s resolve.

It will be very interesting to follow this AI analysis and see how closely it approximates events in the next three weeks. Let us all pray that it does not result in a third world war.

Defying tyranny: Maria Ressa on journalism under authoritarian rule

04 May 2025 9 Comments

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

I heard this interview with Maria Ressa on Arizona Public Radio the other morning.  Her experiences in the Philippines with another would be dictator point the way the USA under Trump and his fascist thugs and sycophantic Republican cohorts has us headed.  This is one of the most interesting and insightful interviews I have heard in the past ten years.

Journalist Maria Ressa, the co-founder of the Filipino investigative news site Rappler, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the author of “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” speaks with The World’s Carolyn Beeler. They discuss how the slide toward authoritarianism Ressa experienced firsthand in the Philippines is eerily similar to what she’s seeing today in the US. — “The World,”  May 1, 2025, By Joy Hackel

When journalist Maria Ressa, the co-founder of the Filipino investigative news site Rappler, looks around America, she sees something all too familiar.

Ressa, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the author of “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” spent much of her career working as a journalist in the Philippines — and she was arrested several times during the reign of the authoritarian leader Rodrigo Duterte for the outlet’s reporting, often calling out corruption under his regime.

“I’ve learned through the six years of Rodrigo Duterte that you have to hold the line,” Ressa said. “You have to fight for your rights, because every day you do not, you lose more.”

Ressa said that Duterte tried shutting down Rappler in 2018 and 2019. And then, something shifted for the author.

“I had 10 arrest warrants in a little over a year,” she said. “Those cases have continued until today.”

Ressa has won eight of the 10 cases against her, with two more trials to go. And she’s not the only one awaiting trial.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa of the Philippines gestures as she speaks during the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony at Oslo City Hall, Norway on Dec. 10, 2021. A Philippine tax court on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2023 cleared Ressa and her online news company of tax evasion charges she said were part of a slew of legal cases used by former President Rodrigo Duterte to muzzle critical reporting.

“So, Rodrigo Duterte is gone,” she said. “This president was the first social media president elected with Facebook’s help. But he was just arrested in March on an ICC arrest warrant for crimes against humanity, and he is in prison in The Hague. My president — who tried to jail me — is in jail, waiting trial.”

Ressa joined The World’s Host Carolyn Beeler to discuss what aspects of her experience she found most relevant to understanding how a free press can come under attack.

Carolyn Beeler: How does it feel to know that he is in jail and you are still free? And do you reflect on the role that you may or may not have played in that?

Maria Ressa: We kept doing our jobs, which is our investigative reports, chronicling, putting faces to the countless people who have died in a brutal drug war. This is now being used as evidence. Our reporter, who worked on the drug war, wrote a book that became a New York Times bestseller. It’s called “Some People Need Killing.” That’s a phrase that one of the vigilantes told her. The president, like this US president, makes the attack very personal, but I think what I learned is — and I’m an old-style journalist in this sense — I treated the office with respect. And I just had to have faith that doing the right thing is the right thing; that you hold on to the line, that you do not compromise. There are many, many instances, and business will lead the way. We were not the first news organization attacked. We were the third. The first was the top newspaper, the second [was] a top television station. The top newspaper, within two weeks, said it would sell to a friend of President Duterte. It ultimately did not. But the top broadcasters, a news group I managed for six years, tried to negotiate with President Duterte, and they lost their license to operate. And even though Duterte is out of power, they cannot broadcast anymore.

So, there’s still damage done to the free press, even though he is sitting in jail?

It’s not even that there’s still damage. It’s that the damage that is done will not go away without tremendous effort. So, the largest broadcaster doesn’t have a license, a franchise to operate today. And those licenses, those franchises were given to the friends of Duterte. It is creating an oligarchy. Really, it’s leading to kleptocracy. I think the two things — and this is actually very similar here — you need to look at the level of corruption. You need to look at who benefits from this. You know, you look today at what’s happening in America, not many news groups covered the pausing of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which is essentially the US government saying in order to be competitive, go be corrupt.”

You’ve been drawing these comparisons about what happened in the Philippines and what is happening now, it sounds like, in the US. But I’m wondering, to what extent is it really fair to compare those two very different countries?

Two very different countries, but we have a constitution that is patterned after the United States. Three co-equal branches of government, a bill of rights that’s almost exactly like the United States. And what happened in the Philippines — tell me if this sounds familiar — is a very strong executive that pushed it and co-opted the Legislature, so he gained tremendous power, and the judiciary that ultimately, in the end, crumbled. Well, I can’t say things like that publicly, let’s just say that’s someone else’s analysis. But look, if the checks and balances don’t work, and what you realize is that checks and balances of institutions depend on the men and women who will carry those out. And when a president — and I can again say from the Philippines, President Duterte appointed 6,000-plus people to top positions — when they are both ignorant and arrogant and use their power to kill the checks and balances, use their power [to get] more power, then you have nothing stopping this. And we watched our history change in front of our eyes. It’s déjà vu.

Duterte was a very popular leader. What was it like battling such a popular leader when you were so often up against him?

Look, in Cambridge Analytica, the country that had the most-compromised accounts was America. The country with the second-most number of compromised accounts was the Philippines. The Cambridge Analytica whistleblower said that they tested tactics of mass manipulation in our country, and when it worked, they used it in [the US]. So, popularity is manipulated. When you have a design of a platform, when it’s designed for maximum profit to keep you scrolling, what they found out is — and they have this data — when lies spread six times faster — that’s an MIT study from 2018, this is on social media — when lies spread six times faster at least, and then in our data, we saw that if you lace it with fear, anger and hate … it spreads virally. That’s part of the reason our values are upside down. We are rewarding the worst behavior of people. So, popularity, I guess, what I’m saying here is I think a lot of this is manipulated.

But was Duterte able to do what he was able to do because of his popularity? How did that play into his ability to control and take so much power?

He wouldn’t be able to do all that if we didn’t have a behavior modification system at his disposal [social media]. Data is gold. Data is how we’re manipulated. And data privacy with the new technology — and I’m not just talking about social media AI, but also generative AI — with this new technology, is a myth. This is how control happens. And this is part of the reason, look … The technology companies have figured out how to hack our biology, to hack the way we feel, which changes the way we think, which then changes the way we act in the real world and ultimately, changes the way we vote. So, back to your question … he’s really popular. Really, really popular? Why? How? Were our fears manipulated to make it that way? Were we given false promises? Was democracy crushed in that popularity?

Based on your experience, what do you see as the most-effective ways to tackle the attack on data privacy, this onslaught of misinformation that may or may not be manipulating our feelings about our government or our leaders?

I’ll step back to say what we did. We survived six years of Duterte. Our lawyers told me, you know, “You’re crazy,” in some of the things that we did. But, I think you just, you hold the line, right? Because by coming at you through taxes, through business ends … the businesses themselves and news organizations are under attack anyway. So, I think the first is that when you hold the line, you get out of the virtual world. In 2012, when Rappler was first formed, my elevator pitch getting there was [that] we build communities of action and the food we feed our communities is journalism. So, we moved into the physical world. And what we found was that our communities are there. Fear is real. And in the Philippines, there were an average of eight dead bodies dumped every night in Metro Manila. One team going out every night, and we would just have this. It’s meant to instill fear. And we saw that when people are afraid, that fear spreads, but so does courage. And so, every time I got arrested, and another arrest warrant, every time, we’d get a spike of crowdfunding, and I was just telling my sales team who was celebrating, I was like, “This is not a sustainable business model, right?” But what I learned is this: form these communities, number one. Number two: it’s got to be laws. This is not a speech issue or a freedom of the press issue. This is a safety issue. It’s like you’ve put poison in the water system, and you have to make sure people on these platforms have agency. And frankly, the biggest question in the world today is whether rule of law still exists, right? Whether it’s in the physical world, where you have attacks against sovereign nations, invasions. Uh, yeah, Putin? Hello. And then you have the virtual world, where you have impunity happening as well.

You’ve said that you’re feeling déjà vu here in the US. You’re teaching at Columbia right now. How would you characterize the civil society response to the changes the Trump administration has made in its first 100 days?

Like deer in headlights. Not enough, although I would say the court system is kicking back now, and then what did we see last Friday? A judge was arrested in Milwaukee. Again, these are intimidation tactics. In “How to Stand Up to a Dictator,” the question I asked is a really simple one, because the tech has allowed individual targeting. So, the question there is, “Individually, what are you willing to sacrifice for the truth?” Without facts, you can’t have truth. Without truth, you cannot have trust. The only government that exists without trust is a dictatorship, right? But if you don’t have these three, we have no shared reality. So, everything hinges on us living in the same shared reality, and I think this chilling effect is here. And in the past, I used to say, in the Philippines, it was Siberia.

Hello, Americans.  Where are you?

End of Interview

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I could add my two cents to this interview, but I could not do justice to the comments that Nobel Laureate Ressa makes.  Perhaps, the most striking thoughts I gleaned from this interview are as follows:

  • “The only government that exists without trust is a dictatorship.”
  • “You have to fight for your rights, because every day you do not, you lose more.”
  • “What you realize is that checks and balances of institutions depend on the men and women who will carry those out.”

Here is a bonus for my blog readers today.  I heard this sickening suck up speech to trump on the anniversary of his first 100 days in office.  This will either have you laughing your butt off or running to the toilet to barf.   Imagine the difference between Bondi and Ressa?  

Celebrating Easter with a trump Protest Rally

20 Apr 2025 13 Comments

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

Woke up this Saturday (April 19th) morning and got dressed to head to Casa Grande for a trump protest rally.  It seemed like something worthwhile doing on Holy Saturday.  The rally was to be held at the corner of Florence and Colorado streets.  It was slated to start at 9:30 AM and continue until 11:AM or whenever.  I arrived early at 8:15 AM and was the first one there.  Fortunately, there was a Dunkin Donuts near the same corner.  I went in and ordered an extra-large pistachio iced coffee and my favorite Old-Fashioned Donut.  Coffee and donut came to $7 dollars and about 800 calories.  This would have made Dr. Petra my PA very unhappy.  She said that I needed to cut down on my sugar carbs since my LDL levels were very elevated.

Ate my donut while watching the street outside.  I could finally see that people were coming to the corner.  Many had signs and some had chairs.  People were taking up positions on both sides of the street.  I grabbed my coffee and went out to join the other protesters.  I regret that I did not have a sign, but I had worn my USAF hat and a protest shirt that you can see from the picture below.  I soon met several people that I knew from Karen’s church.  This finding pleasantly surprised me.  I jokingly said that we had a church contingency there from First Presbyterian.

Over the course of the next two hours, the protestors grew almost in pace with the street traffic.  Florence is the main drag in Casa Grande and there are four lanes of traffic going down the street.  Many people waved at us.  Many honked.  We wanted to believe that their honking was a form of approval.  Some threw the finger.  Others gunned their cars and roared by us.  These later two efforts were clearly not signs of approval.  I walked up and down the street talking to other protestors and taking pictures of the signs that many people were carrying.  I have included pictures of these signs below.  They tell the story better than words ever could.

We are going to continue massive protests in this country.  It was heartwarming to see so many other people out there willing to give up a part of their day to signal their distaste for the immoral and unethical individual that now claims to be POTUS.  Some people have asked if we are going to make a difference.  My response is that I do not know.  I think the odds are against us.  However, when you buy a lottery ticket, the odds are also against you.  You do not know whether or not you are going to win.  Only one thing is certain; if you do not buy a ticket you have absolutely NO chance to win.  I am buying a ticket every chance I get to unseat or at least prevent trump from getting away with destroying the country that I was born in and that I fought for.  America is not exceptional to me.  Neither is it the greatest country in the world.  America has always offered me a chance and a promise to try to be better.  I have not always taken her up on this.  As Martin Luther King so famously said,

“In a sense we have come to our Nation’s Capital to cash a check.  When the architects of our great republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.

This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned.  Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given its colored people a bad check, a check that has come back marked “insufficient funds.”

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt.  We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation.  So we have come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and security of justice.”

Those of us who are marching or walking or writing are not coming to make “America Great Again.”  We are coming to help restore the promise of a check to immigrants, minorities, women, disabled, LGBTQ+, Veterans, poor people, lonely people, hungry people, middle class people and even rich people.  We are coming to restore the ideas of the Founders of this country.  To restore their dreams and hopes that they laid out 250 years ago.  To restore an America that all of us believed it could and should be.  To make an America that is always getting better and better.  The dreams of a democracy which prides itself upon uplifting people and not destroying people.  We have had too many battles in this world where no one wins.  We need to foster a belief in WIN-WIN where both sides come out ahead and there are no losers.  We need an America that walks hand in hand with other people across the globe to make “The World Great” and not just America great.

No Supplication to the Democratic Party

06 Mar 2025 Leave a comment

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

A supplicant is a person who asks for something from someone in a humble or respectful way. For example, a supplicant might pray to God for help or ask a powerful person for a favor.  A supplicant goes to the Godfather on bent knee, kissing his ring and tearfully requesting some action or effort to address a problem.

There are many of us over the years who have gone on bent knees to the Democratic Party and pleaded with them to help us out.  They have been oblivious to our supplications.  Our requests have been ignored.  They have turned a deaf ear to our entreaties.  Now they are complaining that they are getting too many requests from voters to have a spine.

“Meanwhile, Democratic congressional leaders held an internal “gripe-fest” last week. Not griping about Trump’s authoritarian assault – but about their own grassroots constituents inundating them with calls and emails demanding that they grow spines and start fighting the rising oligarchy.” — Jim Hightower, “The Lowdown”

I confess.  Mea Culpa.  I have voted for Obama, Hillary, Biden and Harris.  I too have thought the Democrats were the answer to the right-wing madness taking over the country.  I might as well have exhorted a lamb to go fight it out with a wolf or cougar.  The stalwarts of the Democratic Party have grown up placating so many people, they no more have the ability to tackle trump, than I have of wresting with a grizzly bear.

I listened to NPR today when they were interviewing some big shot from the Democratic Party about the trump speech.  They asked him what he thought of the speech.  He replied, “I think there were a lot of “Mischaracterizations” in his talk.”  WTF is a “mischaracterization?”  Did he mean that every other fucking sentence trump speaks is a lie?  The lamb thinks it is standing up to the wolf when it runs in the other direction.  Steven Colbert held up a sign on his nightly broadcast urging Democrats to “Do Something.”  The Democrats really showed trump during his excretory diatribe that they would thwart him by doing nothing and saying nothing.  Funny how this would work?  Very few people in history have accomplished anything by doing and saying nothing except holding up a few unreadable signs.

Let me get to the point.  Forget pleading with the Democratic Party to get a spine.  You are wasting your breath.  There are only three positions to take with the Democratic Party.  They are as follows:

  1. Some of the Democratic Party members might be helpful but most are too much a part of the system to ever risk a major change.
  2. The more time you spend supplicating the Democratic Party leadership to stand up and be counted, the more effort you waste that is fruitless. Forget helping the Democratic Party to find a “new direction.”  They could not find a new direction if they had a Genie in a lamp to guide them.
  3. We need to build a mass movement with our own leadership first and foremost. Any assistance from the Democratic Party would be “icing on the cake.”  The change is going to come from the people like you and me who owe nothing to the Democratic Party.

We need to start communications between all the anti-trump movements in the entire country.  We need boots on the ground and willing hearts and minds.  We need to take a different path than the fundraising path that so many organizations take.  Time is money and if we can get people who are not rich but who will devote time and effort, we won’t need billions of advertising dollars to defeat trump.

If you think I am being too harsh in my criticism of the Democratic Party and you need more proof of what I am saying, then regard the following Democratic responses to the rather bold move by Rep Al Green to speak out against trump.  The Democrats are subsequently considering joining an effort by the Republican Party to censure Rep Al Green.  You might expect this kind of behavior from the Republicans, but it is from the Democrats themselves who are willing to censure Rep Green for his behavior.  They should be giving him a medal.

“What [Green] did was inappropriate — and he became the story, not the price of eggs,” a centrist House Democrat said.

Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Don Davis (D-N.C.) said they are undecided about censuring Green.

Rep. George Latimer (D-N.Y.) said he felt the disruptions were “inappropriate.”  He said, “When a president — my president, your president — is speaking, we don’t interrupt, we don’t pull those stunts.” 

How many Republicans have ever been willing to censure Bobick or Green for their antics during Biden’s presidency?  How many people spoke out against Adolf Hitler when he was speaking?

A give you a part of Patrick Henry’s “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” speech which rings in my ears.  I am taking the liberty to paraphrase it here:

“Trump is destroying our democracy and plans to set up a dictatorship.  And what have we to oppose to him?   Shall we try argument?  We have been trying that for the last ten years with his followers.  Have we anything new to offer upon the subject?  Nothing.  We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain.  Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication?  What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted?”  

“Let us not, I beseech you, deceive ourselves.  We have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on.  We have sued, we have brought felony charges,  we have demonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before friends and relatives and have implored their good intentions to arrest the tyrannical hands of trump and his sycophants.  Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt by trump and his followers.”

“In vain, after these things, there are still those who believe trump is bluffing and does not really mean to do what he says in plan 2025.  There are those who indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation between opposing political positions.  I say that there is no longer any room for hope.  If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate our democracy and its tolerance for the poor, the needy, the minorities and the weak — for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble virtues in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon — we must fight!  I repeat it, we must fight!  Mass resistance is our only avenue, our only means and our only path to destroy this plague which has descended upon our country.”  (My apologies to Patrick Henry)

Only by joining together with all people who believe in morals, ethics, democracy and integrity can we triumph over this scourge which threatens all of humanity.  As Benjamin Franklin so wisely said “Either we all hang together, or we all hang separately.”   

For more information on organizing to prevent an autocratic takeover, see the following document:

“Pro-democracy Organizing against Autocracy in the United States: A Strategic Assessment & Recommendations” — Harvard Kennedy School, Faculty Research Working Paper Series by Erica Chenoweth and Zoe Marks

You also might want to call any of the following if they are leaders in your state.

 

Why Americans Hate the Government!

25 Feb 2025 12 Comments

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

I sit here in my car driving the speed limit of 75 mph on the interstate and being passed by multitudes of cars doing at least 85 mph or maybe 90 mph.  It feels like I am standing still.  I watch as cars pass on the right, left and in-between in their hurry to get somewhere really important.  Speed limits and stop signs seem to be only ideologies obeyed at the discretion or whim of the drivers on the roads today.

Americans have always said that they want less government.  Today, it seems that they want NO government.  People clamor for their rights at every mention of some law or other injunction that they do not feel applies to them.  Hardly any American cannot find some law that they find unfair and unjust.

Edmund Burke said that the “Government that governs best is the government that governs least.”  Abraham Lincoln said that “If all men were just, there still would be some, though not so much, need of government.”  Many Anarchists would agree with these sentiments.  In the past, Americans have treated Anarchists as terrorists and revolutionaries.  Anarchists are despised by most Americans.  Yet, few Americans understand that many Anarchists share their same belief in “eliminating the government.” The January 6th attacks on the Congress of the USA could have been a picture-perfect representation of an Anarchist attack.  Unfortunately, for such simple depictions of Anarchists many are not violent revolutionaries.  One definition of an Anarchist given by the FBI is as follows:

“Anarchism is a belief that society should have no government, laws, police, or any other authority.  Having that belief is perfectly legal, and the majority of anarchists in the U.S. advocate change through non-violent, non-criminal means.” — FBI. Gov

The implications of this definition are profound.  Consider that “The majority of anarchists are non-violent” whereas the majority of those storming the US Capital on January 6th were engaged in violent criminal attacks.  How many of the people attacking the Capital would agree that they were engaged in the same type of criminal activities that they ascribe to Anarchists?  Nevertheless, both groups share a dislike for government.

A closer reading of Lincoln and Burke though does not show an advocacy for NO government, only less government.  What are the primary purposes of a government than and how can it reconcile achieving these purposes while at the same time not becoming a burden on the everyday lives of its citizens?   Here are the five most important functions of a government:

The five most important functions of a government typically include: (From ChatGPT)

  1. Maintaining Order and Security:

Enforcing laws, protecting citizens from crime, and ensuring national defense against external threats.

  1. Providing Public Services:

Offering essential services like education, healthcare, infrastructure (roads, bridges), and utilities that individuals or private businesses might not adequately provide.

  1. Protecting Individual Rights and Freedoms:

Upholding constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech, religion, and equal protection under the law.

  1. Economic Management:

Regulating trade, managing taxes and public spending, and addressing unemployment and inflation to foster a stable economy.

  1. Formulating and Enforcing Laws:

Creating legislation that reflects societal values and ensures justice, while maintaining systems to fairly enforce these laws.  (End of ChatGPT) 

Few people would disagree with any of these functions.  But if God lies in the details (or the Devil some might say), than our disputes are more around “what exactly will be done and how will it be done.”

Any one of these five functions can illustrate the problem that people have with the government.  For instance, what Public Services will be provided?  We accepted education many years ago as a public service, but now some want to privatize education.  Other people want childcare as a public service while there are people who disagree with the idea.

But the question of what services and what laws to provide are not the only problem people have with the government.  A bigger problem lies in the “how” of government.  By how, I refer to the efficiency of government.  The government has long been lambasted for its lack of efficiency.  Several years ago, Senator William Proxmire of Wisconsin created his “Golden Fleece Award.”  Periodically a government agency would receive this award for an egregious offense of efficiency.  Some of these became famous even if they might have been a gross exaggeration.  One that comes readily to my mind was the “Golden Toilet” bowls case.  Allegedly, a government office ordered gold-plated toilet bowls.  Whether this is an urban myth or not, there are indeed countless stories of government bureaucracy creating inefficiency.

When I worked as a principal strategic planner for the Metropolitan Council in Minnesota, I saw so many examples of government waste and stupidity that I often came home complaining to my spouse that, “If only the citizens of this state could see the waste and inefficiency that I am trying to deal with, they would grab guns, knives and even pitch forks and march on city hall.”

That was over twenty-five years ago, and people have finally marched (if not on city hall) on the Capital of the USA.  Unfortunately, as is the case with much anger, it is often misplaced and misguided.  It is not only the Federal Government that is inefficient, but also most state governments, county governments and city governments that are inefficient as well.  When I was teaching the concepts of quality and process improvement to companies, I would use a conceptual framework based on two key economic concepts to explain how a company could improve its operations.

There are two key economic concepts that every organization must be concerned with.  The first key concept is Effectiveness.  Effectiveness can be defined as “Doing the right things.”  The second key concept is Efficiency.  Efficiency can be defined as “Doing things right.”  In order for any organization to maximize productivity it must be both efficient and effective.  It does not matter if you do the right things, but you don’t do them right.  Vice versa, if you do the wrong things but you do them right, that is nonproductive as well.  We can summarize these maxims simply by the following idea:  Your clients and customers expect that you will give them “What they want or need at a price that they can afford.”  Price reflects the efficiency of an operation, while giving customers what they want or need reflects the effectiveness of the operation.

In my experience, both as a business teacher and a management consultant, business organizations focus more on efficiency than effectiveness.  There are countless examples of products and services that are neither needed nor wanted by people, but advertising can always be effective in convincing consumers otherwise.  I am thinking of cigarettes and carbon-based products as two such examples.

On the other hand, the government typically focuses more on effectiveness (that is giving people needed services) and much less on efficiency.  The government tries to reduce the waste and garbage that comes from industry as a direct offshoot of their so-called efficiency. The most noted example is the environmental degradation caused by many business products.  Today we face a world where climate change is destroying our lives and our environment.  If the trends noted today keep growing, we will eventually inhabit a planet where human life can no longer exist.  Much of this climate change could have been prevented.  However, companies and politicians in the pocket of big oil have spent billions of dollars in efforts to deny that climate change is taking place due to carbon-based fuels.

The secret of sustainability (a dirty word to some people) on a global scale is to have businesses and governments that are both effective and efficient.  Unfortunately for most governments, they get the worst of the publicity.  There is much less criticism of the ineffectiveness of big business to provide products that are compatible with a clean environment than there are criticisms of the government for inefficiently trying to regulate this business waste.  It is easy to see why that is the case.  As my friend Dick always said, “Follow the money.”

The government spends very little money trying to convince you that the climate is changing, or that too much production of carbon fuels is destroying our environment.  Big business has dozens of lobbyists padding the campaign budgets of politicians to convince them to ignore the effects of global warming and to deny that it exists.

Big business also spends billions of dollars trying to convince you that they can provide government services more efficiently than the government.  The last few years have seen ongoing attempts to privatize education, prisons, waste treatment plants and many other public services where big business think they can make a profit.  In addition, big business has been at the forefront of efforts to deregulate organizations such as banks, public utilities and airlines in order for them to manage these organizations without restrictions.  Having no restrictions, gives them free rein to make as much profit as they like. Yes, you may get these services cheaper and thus more efficiently than the government would provide them, but you will pay a hidden cost.  There are no free lunches in the world.  The Great Recession of 2007 followed the issuing of loans and mortgages that had too little collateral and too high interest rates leading to a catastrophic failure of banks and homeowners.

IF you want further corroboration regarding my above analysis of the 2007 recession, you can read the following from ChatGPT:

“The 2006 recession was actually part of a broader economic crisis that led into the Great Recession (which officially spanned from late 2007 to 2009), but the roots of the downturn started around 2006.

The major cause was the housing market crash. Here’s a quick breakdown of what happened:

Subprime Mortgage Lending: Banks and lenders gave out risky loans (subprime mortgages) to people with poor credit histories. These loans often had adjustable interest rates that started low but later spiked, making it hard for borrowers to keep up with payments.

Housing Bubble Burst: Housing prices had been soaring due to speculation and easy credit, but by 2006, home prices peaked and started to fall. As prices dropped, homeowners who couldn’t sell their homes or refinance their loans began defaulting.

Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS): Banks bundled these risky mortgages into financial products called MBS and sold them to investors. When homeowners started defaulting, the value of these securities collapsed, causing massive losses for banks and financial institutions.

Foreclosures and Bank Failures: Foreclosures skyrocketed, and big financial players like Lehman Brothers collapsed or needed bailouts, which deepened the economic panic.

The domino effect triggered a credit crunch — banks stopped lending, businesses cut jobs, and consumer spending shrank, all of which pushed the economy into a full-blown recession by late 2007.”

Consumers and the American public paid a big price for the greed and stupidity of the banking industry.  A greed which was supported by Government deregulation which in turn was pushed by greedy politicians ignoring the need for regulation.  Behind all the politicians are legions of lobbyists for the banking industry.

Major insights I want to leave you with:

  1. People want a free lunch when it does not exist.
  2.  Politicians (first and MOST) represent those from whom they get the most gold. He who has the gold makes the rules.
  3.  Businesses and citizens will never regulate themselves without some help from a government to set norms that everyone must abide by.  Witness, the amount of gun violence, air pollution, water pollution, road rage and senseless speeding that exists today.  There are too many people and too many organizations which will not police themselves.
  4.  Efficiency and Effectiveness are the fundamental building blocks for any sustainable economic system that is going to deliver ongoing value to society.
  5.  We need a government that is fair, nonpartisan, educated and responsible to the citizens and not the lobbyists. We do not have that now. 

 Some Solutions I Would Like to Suggest:

  1.  Make lobbying illegal.  Lobbying is bribery.  Ban all lobbyists from congress.
  2.  Overturn Citizens United Ruling:  Corporations are not people and should not be allowed a vote.  Just as we separated Church and State, we must have a constitutional amendment to separate Corporations and State.
  3.  Term limits for all politicians. I recommend one six-year term for all elected positions.  Furthermore, once an elected politician leaves an office, they cannot hold another government position in any office for ten years. 
  4. Have Vouchers for Campaign Contributions: Every year, each eligible voting citizen of the USA would get a monetary voucher for 500 dollars to fund as many campaigns as they want to contribute to.  The voucher money could only be used to fund political campaigns.   The maximum that any citizen could contribute to political campaigns in a year would be 1000 dollars.   No PAC money, no corporate funds, no other funds except funds from individual registered voters would be allowed.
  5. Supreme Court Justices: Supreme Court Justices should serve a maximum of 15 years.  New justices should be selected by the following practice:  A bipartisan committee of judges nominates a total of 6 candidates.  The final candidate is selected at random from the pool of six.

These changes would be only a first step in bringing true democracy back to America.  There are many changes needed to make the Government bureaucracies throughout America more efficient and effective.  The ideas I have given above are only a start.  We need to bring efficiency and effectiveness to our Education, Health Care, Justice, Military, Social Services, Immigration and Diplomatic systems.  In several other blogs, I have suggested ideas on how to go about dealing with some of these systems.  However, nothing is more important than getting the corruption out of Government fostered by our present system of electing candidates to office.

What is a lobbyist?

Lobbyists are professionals hired by a special interest group to represent their interests to Congress.

The term “lobbyist” harkens back to the days when people hung around in lobbies waiting to get a word in with legislators heading to vote.

All kinds of groups hire lobbyists — from corporations and private companies to nonprofits and unions — to try to persuade the government to pass legislation that’s favorable to them.

“Try Honey Before Vinegar” – Lessons on Leadership from Abraham Lincoln

06 Feb 2025 1 Comment

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

America has lost the “Art of Leadership.”  We no longer develop men and women with integrity or selflessness.  Instead of Statesmen, we have political hacks only concerned with getting reelected.  Politicians with no backbones or the courage to stand up against injustice.  We have a Congress of sycophants willing to do whatever they are told to do regardless of how unethical or immoral it may be.  We have thousands of lawyers who do not uphold justice but find arguments to support an amorality that meets the letter of the law but ignores the significance of decency, goodness, honesty, conscience and fairness.

In this blog and the ones to follow,  I will write about insights regarding leadership from one of the greatest American leaders and Presidents of all time.  I found a compilation of these in an old collectors edition of “Civil War Times” published in Winter, 2013. There are 41 in total, and I have already covered the first in a previous blog.  I would like for you to hear the words of Abraham Lincoln and what he had to say about leadership.  I will include some of my own experiences from my years of working with senior management in over 32 organizations.  Some of the men and women I worked with were incredible leaders.  Most of them wanted to be better leaders and that is where I brought the teachings and thoughts of W. E. Deming to my consulting practice.  Dr. Deming achieved extraordinary results in business by tapping the knowledge, skills and abilities of ordinary people.  Senator Hubert Humprey famously said that “Democracy is a system that achieves extraordinary results with ordinary people.”

Insight # 2 – Try Honey Before Vinegar: 

Lincoln said, “If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend.”  Springfield, Illinois, 2/22/1842

This seems to be a principle or idea that is not very well understood by many people today.  I constantly hear people tell me that if you want to change people’s ideas about things, you must “empathize with them.”  “You must really listen to them.”  To these admonitions, I say “Bullshit.”  You can listen to some fanatics all you want to, and they will still totally ignore anything you say that does not fit in with their preconceptions or ideology.

A good woman friend of mine and I were arguing about Trump and his supporters.  Repeatedly in every argument, she would say “John, you just have to really listen to them.”  I finally got tired of hearing this refrain and one day I challenged her.  I said, “Tell me one, only one, Trump supporter you have listened to who has changed their mind.”  She was dumbfounded.  She was stumped.  She was bewildered.  She could not think of one.  Months went by.  I would occasionally rub salt into the wound, “Did you change the minds of any Trump supporters today?”

You can listen to others all you want.  You can listen to hell freezes over.  You will not change a fanatic or zealot’s ideas by listening.  But Lincoln was smarter than all the psychologists we have today put together.  He knew that it would take more than listening to get others to think differently or to appreciate your ideas after you have heard theirs.  It takes believing and feeling that you are a “Sincere” friend.  Not just a Facebook friend or some online friend, but a “Sincere” friend.  Plato talked about the various types of friends, but he said nothing about a “Sincere” friend.  So, what is a “Sincere” friend and what does it take to make someone believe that you really and truly are a “Sincere” friend?  Let’s first define the meaning of “Sincere.”

An online dictionary defines “Sincere” as:

“Free from pretense or deceit; proceeding from genuine feelings.”

Wikipedia defines the virtue of Sincerity as follows:

“Sincerity is the virtue of one who communicates and acts in accordance with the entirety of their feelings, beliefs, thoughts, and desires in a manner that is honest and genuine.  Sincerity in one’s actions (as opposed to one’s communications) may be called ‘earnestness”’.

I think the word “Sincere” has a lot to do with integrity, honesty, trustworthiness and truthfulness.  The Jewish have a word for a person who is sincere and honest called a Mensch.  In Yiddish, a Mensch roughly means “a good person”.  The word has migrated as a word into American English with a Mensch being a particularly good person, similar to a “stand-up guy”.  A Mensch is a person with the qualities that one would hope for in a friend or trusted colleague.

I think we can now answer the question, “What does it take to impact someone’s ideas and ideology?”  The answer is very simple.  If you want to have someone listen to your ideas, you must be a Mensch or at least a very “Sincere” friend.  When I think about the people we elect to political leadership, I am struck by the lack of Menschs in either Congress or the Legislature.

In fact, I would argue that we have the exact opposite.  We have people you would not trust with a nickel.  People who we know will change their mind at the drop of a lobbyist’s donations.  Congresspeople, who continually lie to cover their malfeasance and incompetence.  Ask anyone of them what they do all day long and they will deny that they spend about 80 percent of their time fundraising for their next election campaign.

Try to suggest some new ideas to them as I have done countless times, and you will get the following answer, “I am very busy but send me something and I will look at it.”  Don’t hold your breath my friend.  You will die of asphyxiation before any of them, Democrat or Republican will ever get back to you.  However, mention that you are thinking of a large campaign contribution and doors will open in a New York minute.

Let us think of a scenario wherein a Trump supporter meets a Trump opponent.  We will call Mary the Trump supporter and Joe the Trump opponent.   Neither of them have ever met before and do not know each other.   The talk between them soon turns to politics.

Mary:  I think Trump is doing a great job.  He is really shaking the government up.  Just what we need.

Joe:  You think tariffs, job cuts and threatening our allies are what we need?  Are you crazy?

Mary:  He is already getting results.  Mexico and Canada have agreed to send more troops to the border.

Joe:  These are our allies.  What if I threatened you, how would you feel about me?  I am sure that long-term you would be looking for some way to get even.

Mary:  Well, I have to go.

Joe:  Yeah, so do I. Bye

If the above scenario had gone down between two long-term “Sincere” friends, how do you think it would have turned out?  I am betting both sides would have heard some value in the other sides position.  Furthermore, they might have  finished the discussion and gone out together to have a bite to eat or at least agreed on another time to get together.

Old Abe Lincoln knew a lot about leadership and the role that friendship played in it.

“On the contrary, assume to dictate to his judgment, or to command his action, or to mark him as one to be shunned and despised, and he will retreat within himself, close all the avenues to his head and his heart; and though your cause be naked truth itself, transformed to the heaviest lance, harder than steel, and sharper than steel can be made, and though you throw it with more than Herculean force and precision, you shall no more be able to pierce him, than to penetrate the hard shell of a tortoise with a rye straw.” — Lincoln, Address to Washington Temperance Society (February 22, 1842)

I have heard many conversations between Trump supporters and Trump opponents.  We attack each other.  We condemn each other for stupidity.  We assail each other for taking the Kool-Aide.  Then we retreat to the other sides of the room full of hate and disgust.  We ask ourselves, “How could anyone think like they do?”  “What is wrong with them?”  “They must be either, stupid, uneducated, brainwashed, racist or something else.”

If we are going to break down the walls and barriers that now separate us in the USA , we are going to have to do more than just listen to our opposition.  We are going to have to find ways of befriending each other.  Not just casual friendships but real “Sincere” friendships.  Friends who can accept and support mutual honesty and truthfulness with each other.

Too much of what I have seen in the media supports a narrative that my side is intelligent and smart, and the other side is dumb and uneducated.  I confess to having shared some of this narrative in my own writings.  It is now time to move past these simplistic and detrimental stereotypes and develop empathy and understanding that surpasses mere listening.  The way to do this is through “Sincere” friendship and not by demonizing the other side.

How do we fight an “Uncivil War”?  Insight # 3 from Old Abe has more valuable thoughts to help us in this struggle.  I will share these in my next blog.

 

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries