The Destructive Power of Alternative Facts

There was a time when facts and evidence were all that were necessary to convince people of something. Most of you are willing to accept the fact that the Earth is round, more than 6,000 years old, and orbits the Sun, without objections. These facts don’t contradict any part of your identity, and they are not subject to the Dunning – Kruger effect. This is the idea that when we know a little about something, we believe we know all about it. We’re not smart enough to know we’re not smart enough to get it. Most of us know enough about astronomy to know we know very little.

An example of the Dunning – Kruger effect I saw recently involved a comparison between two photographers. One had just begun taking pictures. He believes he knows about 90% of what there is to know about photography, although he knows less than 20%. The other has been a photographer for 7 years. He has learned enough to realize there is much more to know about photography. He feels he knows about 70% of what there is to know, and his estimate is probably correct.

Those who don’t know enough to know there’s a lot more to know are difficult to persuade of any new ideas. They believe they already have it all worked out. If, for example, you honestly believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old, it’s unlikely that even an astronomer or geologist could convince you of the facts. The more one learns, the more one realizes how much more there really is TO learn.

Socrates said, “All I know is I know nothing.” That, for me, is the beginning of wisdom.

In The Information Age, where we can look up nearly any fact in only a few seconds using our phones, we can learn more quickly and easily than ever before. There’s certainly something on Google that will give you superficial answers, and if you dig more deeply, you can learn more. There are 200 million active websites in the world. One of them will have the information you seek.

Why is it that so many people believe things that are simply untrue?

I’ll give you an example from last week. There was yet another debate on the Facebook page of a friend of mine, this time concerning impeachment. One of my friends made the claim that the entire phone call that is the basis of the impeachment was a fake invented by Adam Schiff in order to attack the President.

The evidence of the authenticity of the President’s phone call to Ukraine is so easily found in a Google search that it’s almost impossible to miss. The White House released a transcript of the call. Whether it’s complete, or accurate, is certainly open to debate, but the fact that it occurred is something even Republicans and Trump, himself, admit. But, my friend had heard this from “someone,” and she believed it. I never convinced her otherwise. She doesn’t know enough, yet, to realize how much she doesn’t know. And her unwillingness to believe facts presented to her makes it almost certain she will never know more than she does now.

Education is man’s going forward from cocksure ignorance to thoughtful uncertainty.” – K. Johnson

Now, if this were just an isolated example, I could offer my sympathy, and I could let it go. But this is frighteningly common. I have any number of friends who are convinced that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election, even after that story has been debunked, repeatedly, and particularly by Fiona Hill, who knows much more about it than most people do. She’s an expert in the field, who tells us the story is Russian propaganda. My friends believe these things because they are repeated by Republicans, who we expect to tell the truth. The Republicans are lying, however, and even though the evidence is against them, they’ll repeat the lie so often that, in time, enough people will believe it to do them some good.

And now we come to the point. President Trump has been impeached.

Mitch McConnell recently announced that there is no way the President will be removed from office. As the Majority Leader in the Senate, he almost certainly has the power to ensure that outcome. Lindsey Graham has proudly proclaimed he has no interest in being a fair juror. He’s already made up his mind before the trial has begun. Neither of these men would be allowed to serve on any normal jury if they had made such public pronouncements. But, in 2019, in the United State Congress, it’s perfectly acceptable. Why?

The fact is that those who support Trump know only what they want to know. They easily brush away inconvenient facts by proclaiming them to be “fake news,” following the example of their cult leader. They see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil. And anything less than positive reported about the President is to be considered evil.

Many of my friends are Trump supporters. These are good and moral people. They care about my welfare, and the well-being of others. And now they are more than willing to overlook “Grab em by the pussy!” They can ignore the evidence of corruption found in his charity defrauding children suffering from cancer of millions of dollars. The fact that Trump admitted it in Court does nothing to convince them of the truth of the story, or they will simply ignore it. They tell me it was okay for President Trump to tell Representative Dingell’s wife that her late husband might well be burning in Hell. It was only a joke, they tell me.

They point to all the good things he has done for the country. We have the lowest unemployment in many years. The GDP is up. These, they tell me, are good things. Never mind that many people are working two or three of these jobs in an effort to make ends meet. So what if 78% of the population is living paycheck to paycheck? What does it matter if life expectancy is falling? Children in cages are the responsibility of their horrible parents who put them in that position in the first place. They should have stayed in their own countries. They are welcome here, but they must come legally.

Many of these are statements made by low information voters. Contradictions to those statements are easily found on the internet on any number of reputable sites. And, that, of course, is the second problem.

The Love of Alternative Facts

We’ve decided that only sites we like are reputable. We’ve decided CNN and The Washington Post, MSNBC, The New York Times, and even the news divisions of CBS, NBC, and ABC are not to be believed. Even Fox News is becoming unacceptable from the point of view of a Trump supporter.

We must all recognize there is much we don’t know. We must know enough to know that. And then, we must put aside confirmation bias and the Dunning – Kruger effect, and find the facts. Why? Just because some liberal told you to? No.

Our country is teetering on the edge of dictatorship. That the President behaved unethically and immorally is beyond dispute. Even the Republicans don’t try to debate the facts. They are right there in the transcript released by the White House. Republicans complain about the process, but Democrats have granted their every request in the Impeachment Inquiry. The President has been invited to participate, but has both declined to do so, and said he’s being denied due process at the same time. That’s the sort of pretzel logic that Trump supporters are willing to accept because of their devotion to Dear Leader.

The President Must Be Removed

If we allow the President to involve a foreign country, in any way, in the outcome of our elections, the heart of democracy will have been cut out of the body politic. If our elections are not only for sale to the highest bidder, and if we’re allowing foreign countries to attend the auction, or worse, we extort their cooperation in seeking dirt on our opponents, we have no country left. We will become a dictatorship.

That’s not hysterical hyperbole; it’s a statement of fact.

The Republican Senate has already publicly proclaimed there will not be a fair trial. The question facing us now is simple. Are we willing to lie down quietly and watch our democracy evaporate? I, for one, am not.

If you believe it’s appropriate for the trial to be decided before it’s begun, then by all means, leave me a comment and explain your reasoning. I beseech you not to engage in Whataboutism. If your claim is that it’s okay because of the way the Democrats in The House handled the inquiry, you have no argument. Why not? One of two things is true.

  1. If they had a show trial, ignored evidence, and had decided the outcome before the inquiry began, and you believe that to be bad, then you can’t defend the Senate doing the same thing. If it was wrong for The House, it’s wrong for The Senate. Whataboutism doesn’t fly.

or….

2. If The House handled it properly, but the evidence is unconvincing, then a fair trial in the Senate is imperative. This means considering all the evidence, and that means allowing the Democrats to call witnesses who have direct knowledge of the events. It’s not that The House did sloppy work; it’s that they were denied witnesses and documents they subpoenaed.

In either case, a fair trial is necessary. Without it, we will have set the precedent that any President can do as he pleases so long as his party holds a majority in either The House of Representatives or The Senate. If you have The House, you’ll never be impeached in the first place. If you have The Senate, your impeachment can generate nothing more than a show trial, with a predetermined outcome.

If your argument is that we are ignoring the votes of 63 million Americans, I would remind you that the same Constitution that provides for impeachment also provides for the Electoral College that made it possible to ignore the votes of 66 million people who voted for his opponent.

My roommate and I attended an Impeachment Rally this week. It’s the little I can do to attempt to change the world. I hope these words help to make a tiny difference in the world, too.

I rarely ask my readers to do anything, but this is an exception. Please let your Senators know that a fair trial is of paramount importance to you. The survival of the last, best hope for a free world depends on it.

Without Firing a Single Shot

A Primer on Impeachment

As I write this, near the end of November, 2019, it is almost certain that President Trump is going to be impeached. It’s important to know when I’m writing this, because I would like it to live longer than this week. Its historic value, at least to me, is enhanced by understanding the context in which it was written.

For my readers who don’t follow the news closely, here is where we currently are.

On July 25, 2019, President Trump called the President of Ukraine. During that call, we know President Trump asked Ukrainian President Zelenskyy to investigate Trump’s Presidential Rival, Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter, to determine if they had committed corrupt acts. The entire call is in this link.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

The relevant parts of the conversation, quoted from the document Trump declassified on September 24, 2019, are these:

President Trump: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation … I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible…

Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor bf New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you ·can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.

This is clearly a request for the Ukrainian President to investigate Trump’s political opponent. The woman to whom Trump refers is Marie Yovanovitch. She later testified in front of Congress. She was a United States Ambassador under 3 different presidents, both Republican and Democrat, before she was smeared by several people and removed by the President. She is an expert on Ukraine.

At the same time that the President was asking Zelenskyy for help, Trump was holding up sending nearly $400 million of military funding to Ukraine.

The accusation, which began when an unidentified Whistle-blower reported the call, is that President Trump misused his Presidential power to gain a purely political benefit for himself, while disregarding what is best for the country. He was, in effect, bribing Ukraine to get dirt on his political opponent. This brought the Latin term “quid pro quo” to the forefront of the American lexicon for a couple of weeks. The term means, simply, “This for that.” Was the President holding up desperately needed money that Congress approved for Ukraine to fight its war with Russia until Ukraine announced it was investigating Biden and the possibility that it was Ukraine, and not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 election? The President has said repeatedly there was “no quid pro quo.” His Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, said publicly that there was, but it was a common technique used in foreign policy, and that everyone should “get over it.” Mulvaney walked that statement back a few hours later.

As of this writing, Congress has produced a dozen witnesses, including Ambassador Yovanovitch, testifying on national television about what happened. They corroborate the Whistle-blower’s account sufficiently that the Democrats are not calling him (or her) to testify. Republicans want to know who the Whistle-blower is. They want him or her to testify.

Preliminarily, Republicans attacked the process of the impeachment. They said it was unfair that it took place behind closed doors, and without Republican representation in the room. There were, however, more than 40 Republicans present in the closed door hearings, and the hearings subsequently were broadcast to the American people.

Mr Trump denies using US military aid as a bargaining chip with Mr Zelenskyy and has repeatedly insisted his call with Ukraine’s leader was “perfect.”

He has called the impeachment inquiry a “witch hunt” by Democrats and elements of the media.

The current Republican defense comes in three parts:

– Ukraine’s president said he felt no pressure

– The Ukrainians were unaware the aid was held back

– Us Military Aid was eventually released

The entire article from which the above was quoted appears here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39945744

It’s important, also, to understand that impeachment doesn’t necessarily mean the President will be removed from office. First, the House of Representatives must write Articles of Impeachment, in which they lay out the reasons they believe the President should be removed from office. Next, there must be a trial in the Senate, presided over by the Chief Justice of The Supreme Court, and 2/3 of the Senate (67 people) must vote to remove him from office. As this would require more than 20 Republican votes, it is unlikely, at this moment, that the President will be removed from office.

My Opinion

Whether a President should be impeached or not has nothing to do with how good the President is. The point of impeachment is to prevent any president from abusing the office. The same standards must apply to all Presidents. If JFK or FDR or any of my heroes, whose policies I liked, abused the power of their offices, I would still support impeaching them. If my current hero, Andrew Yang, were elected, and he fulfilled every one of his promises, and then he asked a foreign government to help him get reelected, I would want him impeached. It’s not whether we like the President. It’s whether his behavior warrants impeachment. There is debate on that issue. There are many different opinions. We’ll get to those next.

Opinions are not all equally valuable.

I would hope we can all agree on that. This doesn’t mean everyone is not entitled to one, but they’re not entitled to have me take it seriously. Let me explain.

If I woke up this morning, and went out to my car, and it failed to start, I could ask either my doctor or my mechanic for an opinion about this problem. My doctor is a very intelligent man. He knows much more than I do about many, many things. But, he isn’t really the person I want to ask. I would rather have the opinion of my mechanic. He knows more about cars than my doctor.

If, at the same time, I woke up feeling sick, I would value my doctor’s opinion much more than I would my mechanic’s on the issue of my health. I would think this would be obvious.

But, I’m expected to grant the same weight to the opinions of those who know nothing about climate science as I am to those who have studied it for a lifetime? I can’t do that. I won’t do that. I recognize there are a nearly infinite number of things I don’t know, but others do. I will listen to those in the best position to have an opinion. That will be those who know the most about it.

My roommate showed me an article on Facebook last week about a family that had the difficult problem of a child who was born male but desperately needed to be female. The family did what I would do in such a case. They sought the informed opinions of experts on the issue. Is this just a phase? Is this something out of which the child will grow? Is it a serious issue? How do I know? They sought the answers to these, and a host of other equally important questions, from those who know more than they do. No one knows their child better than they do, but they may certainly know more about the child’s condition. The information is available. It’s a matter of finding it, and from a reliable source.

And now we come to the point:

H.G. Wells

Civilization is in a race between education and catastrophe.” –H.G. Wells

Our bizarre idea that all opinions are to be treated equally is putting us way behind in the race.

The Impeachment Inquires, and the reactions of people to them, have brought this fact into stark relief. Fiona Hill, an Ambassador with decades of experience, who has studied Russia most of her life, and who has written a book about Putin told us, “Based on questions and statements I have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country — and that perhaps, somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did. This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

And yet, we are to reject her analysis of the situation as “just her opinion,” and take equally seriously the idea that Ukraine interfered with our elections because the President and Republicans have said they did. There is no credible evidence backing this claim. The Soviet Union has perpetrated this fraud on the American public, and Americans are helping it along.

We have all of our Intelligence Agencies telling us that Russia is responsible. We have experts telling us as much. And, because of ideology, many reject the opinions of experts. And this is dangerous.

We can’t know everything. We can, however, as a collective, listen to those who know more than we do. The opinions of Fiona Hill and the United States Intelligence Community are more reliable than unverified claims made by those who have a significant reason to lie to us. This isn’t a question of liberal bias. It’s a question of recognizing our own limitations, and then seeking to fill the gaps in our knowledge in the most reasonable ways.

I am beginning to believe we are no longer going to be America.

I believe we may already have been defeated by Putin, and he did it without ever firing a shot. He got a stooge in office, and he has used him to continue to divide the country, making us weaker all the time. A house divided cannot stand. I have made an extraordinary claim. I must, therefore, provide extraordinary evidence.

First, the Ukraine Scandal benefits Russia.

As Dr. Hill told us:

“The goal of the Russians was really to put whoever became the president, by trying to tip their hands on one side of the scale, under a cloud. So if secretary, former first lady, former senator Clinton had been elected as president, as indeed many expected in the run-up to the election in 2016, she too would have had major questions about her legitimacy. And I think that what we’re seeing here as a result of all these narratives, this is exactly what the Russian government was hoping for.”

Next, we have at least 2 dozen examples of Trump being irrationally friendly to Russia. Here are just 7 of them.

  • We know the Russians interfered in our elections in order to get the President elected. Whether President Trump invited their help is open to question. He undoubtedly benefited from it.
  • He stood next to Putin and told the world that, even though the United States Intelligence Community said Russia interfered, he couldn’t see why it would be Russia.
  • Trump hired Paul Manafort, who has worked on behalf of pro-Russia politicians, to be his campaign manager.
  • President Trump blocked language in the GOP Campaign Platform that included sending lethal aid to Ukraine in their battle against Russia. He did, however, wind up giving the aid to Ukraine.
  • Trump has defended Putin for being a killer, asking if the reporter questioning him believed America was so innocent of killings. (This is called Whataboutism.)
  • Trump repeats Russian misinformation, or lies, about what happened in 2016.
  • Pulling out of Syria gave Putin an advantage. Turkey could move freely, and Putin took control of our military bases without any effort. He didn’t ever offer to pay rent.

The rest can be found here:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/17/politics/trump-soft-on-russia/index.html

What is there, still, that Putin could want in order to be in control of our country? He has a President who does what Putin asks.

Does anyone need to reminded that Russia is the enemy? Do we need to remember that Putin kills journalists and others who are in his way? Is there a reason we need to cozy up to them? Don’t they represent everything America opposes? I thought we all agreed Communism was a bad idea. I know that Russia is technically a Republic, but a Republic is not led by a dictator. Putin is a dictator. It was less than 70 years ago that the Republicans led the charge against anyone even suspected of being connected to Russia. What happened?? (Yes… they were way over the top during McCarthy, but that’s not really the point.)

My Opinion

I don’t expect anyone to pay attention to my opinions. I have no particular expertise. All I can do is read, listen, and pay attention. I can fact check. I’m not concerned with you agreeing with my opinion. I’m concerned with you considering your own.

I base my ideas on the opinions of those in the best position to be well informed. I want to find those whose motivation to lie is minimal, and who have spent more time learning from experience than from reading Breitbart. There’s nothing evil about actually learning something. A degree doesn’t make you an elitist. It makes you someone who has opened a book.

In these times, the myth that all opinions are equal is actually dangerous. We are on the brink of being effectively taken over by a dictator. Our own politicians are spreading lies perpetrated by Russia in order to keep power. If we choose to believe that it’s as likely as not that Ukraine interfered instead of Russia, we’re likely to make dangerous decisions.

I don’t know the Earth is round from my personal experience. I’ve never left the planet to be able to see it for myself. I do, however, know the Earth is round because people who have studied it have shown that to be true repeatedly for the last couple of millennia. My opinion about the shape of the Earth is based upon the best information available.

My opinion that we are being, or have been, conquered by Russia is also based on the best information available. I’m hearing from experts that Russia, not Ukraine, interfered in our elections. I know this because 17 US Intelligence Agencies have told me so. I know because Fiona Hill told me so.

The Danger of Propaganda

A propaganda poster from the Soviet Union in the 1920s

When people continue the myth that it was Ukraine, they are doing the Russians’ work for them. Foreign powers interfering in our elections is bad enough; getting assistance from our leaders is intolerable. When we pretend that all opinions are of equal value, we forfeit our ability to decide anything intelligently. Jim Jordan and Devin Nunes repeat the Ukrainian Interference Myth as though it were a mantra. A Republican Senator, John Kennedy (no, not the President… he’s actually dead… I also know this, thank you), said that nobody knows whether it was Russia or Ukraine who interfered.

“I don’t know, nor do you, nor do any of us,” Kennedy said. “Ms. Hill is entitled to her opinion.”

No! We have facts. Facts lead us to conclusions. We sacrifice our judgment at the price of our freedom. This will not do.

America is facing an existential crisis unlike any we have ever considered. We are being overthrown by our own voters who are being deceived by leaders who repeat what they know to be Russian lies.

We can stop that from happening, or not. If we choose not to do so, we will have lost the race between education and catastrophe. We will lose the Freedom that is at the heart of being American. If we agree on nothing else, can we at least agree that Freedom is worth defending with our votes, if not our very lives?

We Cannot Escape History

“Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history.”

Abraham Lincoln

We live in the most divided country that The United States has been since The Civil War. People hold strong opposing opinions about issues of great importance. Climate Change, Abortion, Vaccinations, Immigration, and the conduct of the government are just a few. I don’t want to downplay the importance of any of these issues, but there is one that seems to me to override all others. Is it right, or necessary, to impeach the President?

I understand that, again, there is great debate over this topic. There are those who believe the President is doing the best he possibly can, given the circumstances. He is as hated as he is loved, he is constantly attacked in the news media, he is being investigated over and over again, and his every word comes under scrutiny. For all of that, though, his supporters point to the excellent economy, and they tell us Mr. Trump is responsible for those numbers. They will tell us that he doesn’t behave like other politicians, and this is to be admired. Other politicians are frequently obfuscating in every word that escapes their lips. Their words are so measured that they become meaningless. This President doesn’t measure his words; he says what he feels, and many people share his feelings. They approve of his aberrant behavior. They applaud it enthusiastically.

There are others who despise the President. They point to the 10,000 documented lies he has told. They talk about the caging and tear gassing of children. They talk about the government shutdown he proudly said he would, and subsequently did, cause. They object to his payments to porn stars and Playboy bunnies, his promised, but failed, Muslim ban, his Wall, and his broken promises concerning healthcare. They’re appalled at his choices for The Supreme Court, and they believe his latest Attorney General to be a fraud. They boo him enthusiastically.

But, for me, the Heart of The Issue is whether his behavior is what we want from our President, not only now, but for all the Presidents to come. The behavior that I’m discussing is his overt efforts to stop Congress from fulfilling their constitutional duty to oversee the Presidency and provide checks and balances to keep it from becoming a dictatorship.

If the Democrats begin impeachment proceedings, they will almost certainly fail. The Republicans are the majority of the Senate, and it is wildly unlikely they will vote to uphold the impeachment. The political risk is that this will empower the President’s base, and it will help him to get re-elected. The Democrats, obviously, don’t want that outcome, so impeachment seems like a foolish idea. They accomplish none of their immediate goals. Not only does the President finish his first term, but he gets elected for a second one. The politics are very bad for Democrats.

But, we must look beyond present day politics, and consider the future. The last time we were this divided, a better President said this:


The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise — with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.

Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation… We — even we here — hold the power, and bear the responsibility.

Abraham Lincoln

The day may come when Americans look to 2019, and they decide that our country either stood up for itself, or laid down and let the oligarchy in which we’re living slide into dictatorship. If, as our Attorney General suggests, “That’s not a crime… To be obstruction of justice the lie has to be tied to impairing the evidence in a particular proceeding… If the President is being falsely accused… and he felt this investigation was unfair, propelled by his political opponents, and was hampering his ability to govern, that is not a corrupt motive for replacing an Independent Counsel.”

What does that mean for future generations? The next President, perhaps a Democrat, or an Independent, or, for all I know, an Anarchist, a Socialist, or a Nazi, can decide he can obstruct an investigation into his behavior (or hers), because he believes he has been falsely accused.

Even an ardent Trump supporter would, I think, recognize the danger in that. Whomever your Least Favorite President is, whether it’s Trump or Obama, or Carter, or Kennedy, or anyone named Bush, or even Lincoln, imagine that person, or someone much like him, being elected in 2024, or 2028…. or in your grandchildren’s lifetimes. This President can now do things you loathe with absolute impunity. Anyone who tries to investigate this President can be legally obstructed because this President believes the accusations against him (or her) are lies. In other words, the entire system of Checks and Balances will collapse. Without it, there is nothing defending us from a ruthless dictator, of any party or ideology.

I had concerns about writing this. I find myself, even now, reluctant to publish it. Just as the politics of impeachment are bad for Democrats, the politics of publishing are bad for me.

First, I have friends whose anger I’m all but inviting. I’m trying my best to stay open and objective, and sticking only to the facts, but I am certain someone who matters to me will object. I don’t care to lose friends. I have only a few, and each of them matters to me. I have friends whose opinions of my writing carry immense weight with me, and I have no idea what their political persuasions may be. I would be more than sad if they decided that we can no longer be friends because we disagree about this.

Second, I’m just stepping into the world of writing for strangers. I’ve shown my work, all my life, only to my friends. When a play of mine was performed, strangers saw it, but the script, itself, was seen only by those who know me. I’m not in a position that I can afford to alienate strangers who enjoy my work. I want them to return and read more of what I write. Losing them would also disappoint me deeply.

So, why publish this at all?

I’m publishing because, as a friend reminded me earlier this week, “The internet is forever.” I am living, as are you, through an important moment in history. My power to control what is happening in my government is all but nonexistent. I can vote. And, I can raise my voice, and share my thoughts with others in hopes of either reinforcing their beliefs, or getting them to consider new ones.

There are many writers who are both better and more knowledgeable than I who can, have, and will write better about this than I have just done. I’m perhaps half a drop of water in the Pacific Ocean of Pundits. My personal insignificance, however, will no more spare me than it did those who lived during the Lincoln administration.

I want to be able to say that, at this moment in history, I acted in the only way open to me. I’m too old to protest. The last time I tried I passed out from heat stroke. It was nearly another hospital trip for me. I can’t knock on doors; people scare the hell out of me. But, what I can do is write. And I can find the courage to share my thoughts, even at some small peril to myself.

I may lose friends and readers, but I will also be able to say I did what pathetically little I could to save the country I love.

Our leaders have the power to do much more. I’m hopeful they’ll disenthrall themselves, and then they shall save our country.