September 19, 2024

After the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, a vast majority of the people polled told pollsters that Harris had won the debate. The margins were about 65-35. People heard crazy stuff from Trump about immigrants eating pets. They heard Trump’s tortured explanation about how Kamala Harris wasn’t black until she decided to be black. Trump ranted about crowd size, which may be his original sin, and once again doubled down on the big lie and all that entails. It was a tour de force that drove many Republicans into hiding, and Independents into thinking.

Subsequently, undecided voters were asked by pollsters about how they felt about the two candidates, and whether or not their feelings had changed. In many of the interviews, the responses were along the lines of “I am moving a little closer to Harris.” “The door is open, but I am not quite there yet.” “I have always voted Republican, and it would be difficult for me to vote for a Democrat.” These undecideds/Independents were obviously having difficulty processing the new information about Trump. What is going on here?

In the second half of the twentieth century, one of the most influential social psychologists of the time was Leon Festinger. Festinger was in a league with Harvard behavioral scientist B.F. Skinner, child development psychologist Jean Piaget, the founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud, and social psychologist Albert Bandura. Festinger originated the theory of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the psychological discomfort experienced when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, values, or attitudes simultaneously, or when their behavior conflicts with their beliefs. The theory suggests that people are motivated to reduce this discomfort by either changing their beliefs, justifying their behavior, or minimizing the significance of the inconsistency. For example, if someone values health but smokes, they might experience cognitive dissonance. To reduce the discomfort, they might quit smoking, justify it by downplaying the health risks, or tell themselves they will quit in the future.

Cognitive dissonance is highly relevant in politics, as individuals often encounter conflicting information that challenges their political beliefs or actions.

1. Partisan Loyalty vs. Contradictory Evidence: When people strongly identify with a political party or ideology, they may experience cognitive dissonance if presented with evidence that their party or leader acted against their principles. To reduce dissonance, they may dismiss or downplay the evidence, question its validity, or reinterpret the information to align with their beliefs. This is often seen in the way partisans handle scandals or policy failures involving their preferred party.

2. Voter Rationalization: Cognitive dissonance can explain why voters might continue supporting a politician despite behaviors or policies that contradict their own values. For instance, if someone votes for a candidate who later enacts policies they disagree with, they may rationalize their vote by focusing on the candidate’s other positive qualities or by minimizing the importance of the conflicting policies.

3. Echo Chambers and Media Consumption: To avoid cognitive dissonance, individuals may seek out news sources or social media communities that reinforce their existing beliefs, a phenomenon known as the “echo chamber” effect. By consuming information that confirms their worldview, they avoid the discomfort of confronting contradictory perspectives.

4. Policy Change and Belief Adjustment: Politicians themselves might experience cognitive dissonance when their actions (e.g., compromising on policies) conflict with their stated principles. To resolve this dissonance, they might publicly adjust their stance or justify their behavior in ways that realign with their personal or party’s ideology.

You can hear in the voices of the undecideds how difficult it is for them to do something that they have never done before, and something that generations of their family members before them had never done before. It is painful for them to vote for a Democrat when all of their neighbors and friends are Republicans. Hopefully, by November 5th, they can resolve their angst. As Geoff Duncan, former Republican Lieutenant Governor of Georgia said at the Democratic National Convention, “Voting for Kamala Harris doesn’t make you a Democrat. It makes you a patriot.” John F. Kennedy said that change is the law of life. Hopefully, voters who are in limbo are prepared to follow the law.

September 12, 2024

Recently, I had the great opportunity to get together with some old friends (are there any other kinds these days?) at the venerable Lenox Club in Lenox, MA. For you history buffs, the Lenox Club was founded in 1864 in The Berkshires, and then incorporated as a Reading Club for Gentlemen in 1874. As we sat on the veranda sipping our cocktails and lying to each other about how great we looked and how we hadn’t changed a bit, groups of similarly aged people started arriving, about forty in all. The Music Room, the Ladies’ Parlor, and the Gentlemen’s Library were set up for group discussions. I asked one of the attendees what was going on. He said it was just an ad hoc group of citizens concerned about age and term limits, and how they affected the three branches of the federal government.

As it related to Congress, the general consensus was that too many members lingered way too long in office. Incumbents had an unfair advantage bestowed on them by special interests funding their campaigns, which created obvious conflicts of interest. Many lose touch with younger voters. Term limits would reduce the influence of corporate lobbying, would decrease potential government corruption, and make representatives more responsive to their constituents.

On the other hand, it was acknowledged that term limits would deprive some voters of their choice of representation. Limits might prevent politicians from gaining policy expertise, and create more lame duck members.

The participants coalesced around proposing a maximum of three, six-year terms for Senators, and nine, two-year terms for Representatives. It should be noted that any change in term limits would require an amendment to the Constitution, which is highly unlikely. As background, James Madison, in Federalist Paper No. 62, defended six-year terms for Senators, insisting that they would have a stabilizing influence on the new government. Longer terms would reduce turnover, keep Senators independent, and force Senators to take responsibility for their actions.

Regarding the Supreme Court, it was mentioned that The Brennan Center for Justice endorses term limits for Supreme Court justices, in part because of “a regard for the evolving views and composition of the electorate.” It should be noted that almost every country limits the tenure of judges, imposing either a mandatory retirement age or a term of service.

As far as the participants were concerned, term limits would prevent Justices from shaping the law for multiple generations, as well as keep them more in tune with changing public values. Justices would also presumably be less likely to engage in unethical behavior. Most participants did not support age limits, but did support President Biden’s eighteen-year term limits. This would only require Congressional action.

The 22nd amendment already imposes a two term limit on Presidents so the only issue to be discussed was imposing an upper age limit on the Presidency. In general, the participants felt that with age comes experience and even wisdom. An age limit would again deprive voters of their choice. There is no consensus about the appropriate age would be, and it would require an amendment to the Constitution. The 25th amendment may effectively deal with age-related issues pertaining to competency, but the participants were not convinced that the Vice President and cabinet officers would ever move against the President that put them in office.

In conclusion, participants were divided in deciding whether to impose an age limit. Most were against it. They believed that this year’s election between two elderly men, before Biden dropped, was an aberration. The fact that Biden did, in fact, drop out was evidence of a self-correcting process.

What struck and impressed me about this entire exercise was that our fellow citizens were willing to come together in a congenial environment to cordially discuss some very contentious issues. They may have self-selected themselves as being of similar minds going into the discussions. Regardless, I think it is always useful to hear what your neighbors have to say on difficult topics.

August 25, 2024

At the Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton said “Don’t count the lies, count the I’s.” For 2024, the I’s, in my opinion, are Immigration, Inflation, and IVF. Abortion is one of the most important issues facing voters in the run up to November elections. There are 140 measures on the ballot in 41 states this November.

Because of the actions of some well-meaning people and the motivations of some not so well-meaning politicians, the issue of abortion has moved from the doctor’s office to the Oval Office. The Dobbs decision hobbled those who believed in a woman’s right to control her own body. The people who believe in pro-choice are not pro-death, which is what the pro-life people would have you believe. They believe that people can, in good faith, disagree about when life begins and should be protected. However, Supreme Courts at the state and federal levels continue to hear cases that will restrict abortion rights even further.

The issue of abortion can be very personal for many people. When I lived in Florida, a friend of mine invited to me his home for dinner, and to meet his wife, Sally Blackmun. The name should sound familiar. The walls of their home were covered with photos of Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun and his famous acquaintances. Justice Blackmun wrote the majority opinion fifty years ago in the Roe vs. Wade decision. For that, they had to suffer drive by shootings by Right to Lifers, which is exceedingly ironic and troubling.

Sally was a major supporter of Planned Parenthood. She was very open about her own experiences as a young woman, and how Planned Parenthood probably saved her life. Her story probably affected how Justice Blackmun approached the Roe case, and how abortion is a very private and painful decision that some women have to make. Justice Blackmun understood all too well the dangers that bans on abortions posed for the health of young women.

Are American views on abortion in anyway an outlier among other cultures and societies?  Anthropologists have looked at how the issue of abortion is addressed by various cultures and groups. The reality is that abortion and restrictions to abortion are practiced in different ways by virtually every one of the 350 cultural groups studied. Abortion laws and restrictions vary widely across countries and cultures. Religion is a major influence on beliefs regarding abortion. The Roman Catholic Church is well-known for its prohibition of abortion. Cultural norms and values can influence how abortion is perceived and whether it is accepted or not. Socioeconomic factors play a role. The role of gender and women’s rights can affect the availability and acceptability of abortions. Stigma associated with abortions can differ widely from one culture to another.

Even among less-developed cultures, attitudes about abortion run the gamut from groups where punishment for abortion is high to low or absent. Interestingly, abortion is punished 100% of the time in patrilineal cultures, but permitted in 71% of matrilineal cultures.

Cross-cultural studies of abortion help researchers and policymakers provide insight into the diversity of perspectives and approaches to this sensitive issue across different societies. It is a very complex issue, and does not lend itself to simple bromides and placards. Politicians who hold up photos of aborted fetuses dumb down the conversation in the same way that politicians holding up snowballs in summer to disprove global warming do.There are many legitimate beliefs about abortion, but none are universal.

There is no singular approach to abortion that all people and cultures agree on. There are more questions than answers. Abortion laws and restrictions are clearly the result of the machinations of man, and, thus, are fallible and fungible. If there are no absolute answers that everyone universally agrees on, we should be entitled to proceed in the manner each of us deems as appropriate and conscientious. If the pro-choice advocates are not forcing anyone to have an abortion, then the pro-life faction should not prevent anyone from having one. Not getting an abortion is your right. Imposing your belief system on others is not your right. It is a wrong.

July 29, 2024

The Washington Post had a recent article on the value of having the Democratic candidate for President, Kamala Harris, announce her cabinet picks all at once and before the election. It would be like the Justice League of America facing off against an evil, Magalomanic. “Research in organizational behavior and social psychology demonstrates that… teams are better at tackling complex problems. Groups bring diverse experiences.” A team would recast the conversation about age and vigor, and mitigate some of the candidate’s political disadvantages. She could select swing state all-stars. She could promote popular and effective Biden officials. She could introduce fresh faces.

That got me to thinking about a future Trump cabinet. Trump supposedly had adults in the room in his first term in office that put guardrails around him. They would either say no, or ignore his demands altogether, knowing that he had the attention span of a gnat. They are all gone. Here are some of my suggestions for a Trump cabinet.

State: Paul Manafort. He is 75 years of age, and in his prime as defined by Trump. The convicted and pardoned felon has very important and influential contacts in Ukraine and Russia, which got him convicted. Manafort was charged with various financial crimes including tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering. There were 18 criminal charges including 5 falsifications of income tax returns, 4 failures to file foreign bank account reports, 4 counts of bank fraud, and 5 counts of bank fraud conspiracy.

Defense: Donald Trump. In a historic decision, Donald Trump appoints himself because he alone can fix it. He has said he knows more than his generals. He can now position troops all over the country to quell domestic disturbances. Who is more qualified than the draft-dodging man with bone spurs; the guy who criticized John McCain for being a prisoner of war; the guy who attacked gold star families; the guy who called soldiers losers and suckers; the guy who would not visit the graves of the fallen because it was raining; and the guy who asked “What’s in it for them?”

Agriculture: Snoop Dogg. Marijuana is a cash crop after all.

Transportation: Elon Musk. He seems to be doing the job already. He slogan will be “A chicken in every pot, and a Tesla in every garage.”

Education: Deleted.

Energy: Charles Koch. Former Secretary of State and CEO of Exxon, Rex Tillerson, took himself out of contention when he called Trump an “effing moron.”

Treasury: Peter Thiel. He has a lot of money unlike Trump. He is a childless, gay man, which could be a problem for J.D. Vance.

Commerce: Nobody really cares. Insert the name of any member of Mar-a- Lago, who is expendable after Trump ruins the economy by blowing up the deficit, again, imposing tariffs on all things Chinese, and sending half of our labor force back to the sh@#hole countries they came from.

Health and Human Resources: Dr. Anthony Fauci. Just kidding. This job goes to Dr. Ronny Jackson, who called Trump a medical miracle. During a screed about “acing” his cognitive test, Trump referred to his personal, White House physician as Ronny Johnson. I am guessing that not even another four years would make Jackson memorable.

Homeland Security: Enrique Tarrio of The Proud Boys. He obviously uncovered vulnerabilities in our security set up at The Capitol. Brilliant. We need that kind of thinking in Washington. He is a convicted American seditionist, which makes him eminently qualified in Trump world. Stand back and stand by.

Housing and Urban Development: Eric and Donald Trump, Jr. They can carry on the Trump family tradition of endorsing discriminatory behavior in housing while trying to put a Trump Tower in every, deplorable major city. Maybe we will finally have a golf course in Central Park, which would be totally cool.

Inferior: This is a toss up between Senators Cruz, Hawley and Rubio. They have distinguished themselves by being virtually indistinguishable from each other in their attempts to kiss Trump’s derrière. What…it’s not the Department of Inferior? Oh well.

Labor: Jerry Falwell. As a fervent and visible anti-abortionist, Falwell has strived to control all aspects of a women’s reproductive health. He will now be able to control labor.

Veterans Affairs: General Michael Flynn. In December 2017, Flynn formalized a deal with the Special Council’s office to plead guilty to a felony count of “willfully and knowingly making false statements to the FBI about his communications with Russia, Russia, Russia. His stint as National Security Advisor was the shortest in history. He was eventually pardoned by Trump. I am seeing a trend here.

Justice: Clarence Thomas. In order to avoid censure and/or impeachment as a sitting Supreme Court Justice, Thomas moves over to the Department of Justice as Attorney General where he can wage a holy war against his antagonists. His wife, Ginny, will serve as Assistant Attorney General in charge of domestic violence. He’s been called paranoid, but it’s not paranoia if everyone does hate you.

July 24, 2024

Republicans called for Joe Biden to step down, but, once he did, he was accused by Republicans of disenfranchising 14 million Democratic primary voters. These are the same Republicans, who had no problem ignoring the 80 million voters who cast their ballots for Joe Biden in 2020.

Republicans have accused Kamala Harris and others of a massive cover up of Biden’s mental condition. As part of the cover up, it was a stroke of genius to put a supposed mentally-impaired candidate for President in front of 50 million or more voters in a prime time, televised debate.

Kamala Harris has quickly found her punch lines. “Donald Trump, I know your type,” and “We are not going back” are powerful lines. “If he has something to say to me, he should say it to my face.” Oh, snap. The presidential race is being framed as “The Prosecutor vs. The Perpetrator.” It sounds like something right out of the WWE , and something Trump wished he had thought of.

Tim Walz had his own stinger. “Mind your own damn business.”

J.D. Vance did the Dew, but everybody knows that nobody likes Mountain Dew.

Speaking for myself, I prefer candidates who haven’t been shot, not candidates who have been shot. After all, Trump said of John McCain, “He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”

Republicans and Donald Trump are throwing spaghetti against the wall to see which attacks lines against Kamala Harris are going to stick. I am offended not as a Democrat, but as an Italian-American.

Secret Service Director, Kimberly Cheatle, was forced out by Republicans, and Democrats, for the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. Benjamin Netanyahu was responsible for the deaths of 1,139 Israelis on October 7th, and he was welcomed with open arms by Republicans, and Democrats, in the House.

I have been vacillating between Josh Shapiro, Governor of Pennsylvania, and Mark Kelly, Senator from Arizona, for Vice President. I have changed my mind. It’s going to be Mayor Pete because I can’t spell Buttigieg. He’s smart, he’s young, he’s prepared, he’s from the Midwest, and he is vetted. He’s everywhere on TV and YouTube. Is America ready?

I am going to change my mind again. It’s Mark Kelly. He will provide a great contrast to Kamala Harris. Age 60, Navy officer, astronaut, U.S. Senator, bald.

Oops! I got it wrong. Hopefully, Gov. Tim Walz will be the man of 10,000 likes.

Even though Muhammad Ali had changed his name to Cassius Clay two years earlier, Ernie Terrell refused to use it. In 1967, Ali punished Terrell for 15 rounds, yelling “What’s my name,” and winning a unanimous decision. Trump refuses to pronounce Kamala Harris’ name correctly. Trump is going down, or, to paraphrase the words of legendary broadcaster Howard Cossell, “Down goes Trump. Down goes Trump.”

Donald Trump claimed that he would have gotten the American political prisoners back from Putin’s Russia without giving up anything…except Ukraine.

I look forward to the day when we don’t need fact checkers.

Donald Trump is making the Presidential race about race. Kamala Harris is make the Presidential race a race.

The first question I would like to hear in the September 10th Presidential debate. “Mr. Trump, you have repeatedly called Vice President Kamala Harris dumb. You said she was dumber than Joe Biden. She has said “Donald, if you have something to say, say it to my face.” Are you prepared right now to call your opponent dumb to her face?”

I can’t wait for the Vice Presidential debate October 1st between the Coach and the Couch. Or the Crack Shot vs. The Crack Pot.

I led a spin class today, and only one person knew how many ounces were in a quart. And these people presumably vote.

If Kamala Harris has slept her way to the top, then Donald Trump has done a great job of sleeping to the bottom.

It looks like the Kamala Krash that Donald Trump has been talking about is now a Kamala Krush i.e. the stock market is killing it. Fifty five years ago today, the only stock I was interested in was Woodstock.

Quotes from the Road:

“I am not against a woman being President of the United States. I am just against this one.”

“It’s been well-documented that Kamala Harris has slept her way to the top.”

“Blacks account for 13% of the population, and 60% of all crimes.”

From Geoff Duncan, former Lieutenant Governor of Georgia. “If you vote for Kamala Harris for President, that doesn’t make you a Democrat. That makes you a Patriot.”

July 23, 2024

We have a new Democratic candidate for President of the United States, Kamala Harris. She is the first African- American and the first Asian American to be Vice President of the United States. She is the daughter of a Black father and an Indian mother. The racist, Republican attack dogs are already salivating about going after a candidate of color. They haven’t had this much fun since Barack Obama. She has been accused of being a DEI candidate by a member of Congress, who would have difficulty spelling DEI. She has been told by J.D. (I’m not an attorney) Vance that she should be more grateful to be an American, and know her place. He accused her of doing nothing but collect a government check for twenty years, which is just one degree of separation from Ronald Reagan’s “welfare queens.” Someone called her “colored.” Trump called her stupid. The only thing missing in this debate is a birth certificate. The not so subtle dog whistles all have one thing in common. They are designed to remind people that Kamala Harris is Black. But is she?

Barack Obama is considered to be our first black President even though his mother was white. Tiger Woods is considered to be a black golfer even though his mother is from Thailand. What is going here? The perception that biracial people with African backgrounds are considered Black stems from our tortured history with race and racism. There are several reasons for this.

Historically, the “one-drop rule” in the United States stated that any person with even one ancestor of Black ancestry was considered black. This rule was a legal principle of racial classification that was used to enforce racial segregation, and the disenfranchisement of Black people. The men in power, who had no trouble fathering children with their own Black slaves, had no trouble kicking those same children to the back of the bus.

People are influenced by social perceptions. Society often categorizes individuals based on physical appearances and cultural markers. If someone has features commonly associated with Black people, they may be socially perceived and treated as black.

Some biracial individuals may identify more with one part of their heritage than the other. For many, identifying as Black can be a source of pride and connection to a rich cultural history and community.

In many societies, racial categories are often simplified. A biracial person may be seen as Black because racial dynamics can be binary or limited in scope, not fully acknowledging the complexity of mixed heritage.

As it turns out, calling a biracial person Black is as much a matter of choice as biology. Barack Obama could just as easily be labeled White, Tiger Woods labeled Thai, and Kamala Harris labeled Indian. They all could just as easily be labeled American. However, detractors will choose to play the race card. I can already hear the Conservative chatter about Kamala Harris. “There is just something about her I don’t like.” “ I don’t like her laugh.” “I don’t like the fact that she is from California.” “I don’t like her pant suits.” Yes, there is something about her that they don’t like, and it’s not her experience as a prosecutor, as an Attorney General, as a U.S. Senator, or as a Vice President.

We live in a multiracial society. The White population remains the largest ethnicity group in the United States with 204.3 million people identifying as White alone. However, the White alone population has decreased by 8.6% since 2010. The Multiracial population was measured at 9 million people in 2010, but is now 33.8 million people, a 276% increase. It was inevitable that we would get a Kamala Harris as a candidate for President. As she said in her first rally in Wisconsin, which may become her campaign’s mantra, “We’re not going back.”

July 16, 2024

I should have written this column in time for Flag Day, but I got busy. That’s on me. The summer flies by with golf, baseball, beach excursions, barbecues, family visits, get-togethers with friends, and so on. Before you know it, it’s Labor Day, and you know what comes after that. Anyway, back to flags. Growing up, I never really thought about the American flag very much. It was something we pledged allegiance to every day in grade school. We sang the National Anthem to the flag “whose broad stripes and bright stars…were so gallantly streaming.” My father-in-law, a WWII veteran, would raise the Stars and Stripes every morning, and take it down every night. And then, Vietnam happened.

All of a sudden, protestors started burning the flag along with their draft cards in reaction to the war. The protestors would say, with some justification, that they weren’t protesting against the United States and its flag, but against a corrupt administration that got us into an unnecessary conflict. Regardless, the flag became a divisive symbol rather than a unifying one. The flag took on political overtones. If you flew the flag, some people took it to mean that you were supporting one party over another. The damage had been done.

Fast forward to today. We are well beyond the days when everyone was wearing a U.S. flag lapel pin in support of the victims of September 11th, and our efforts to fight international terrorism. The U.S. flag has once again become a cudgel against imagined enemies.

Flags have taken on a life of their own. During the January 6th insurrection at the nation’s Capitol, insurrectionists brandished American flags like weapons. Some in the crowd sharpened the ends of their flags so they could be used as spears. Some on the steps of the Capitol flew the flag upside down in protest, which became a symbol of the “Stop the Steal” movement. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito actually had the flag flying upside down at his home in support of the insurrectionists. Alito’s only explanation was that his wife had a penchant for flags. Trump supporters drive around in their pick up trucks defiantly flying the flag from every window. They are not saying let’s rally around the flag as a united nation. What they are saying is that this is my country, love it or leave it, and we would be happier if you just left it. Trump grotesquely and creepily hugged the flag at his rallies. That’s an image you can never unsee. He proudly features a recording of the J6 Choir at his rallies, who did their own rendition of the National Anthem. People feel free to fly the Confederate flag in Trump’s America. People hang “Trump 2024” flags from flagpoles once reserved only for the American flag. Flags from the American Revolution have been appropriated by MAGA Republicans to symbolize the holy war they imagine they are waging. The “Don’t Tread On Me” flag designed by Colonel Christopher Gadsden in 1775 as a warning to the British of what would happen if the Crown tried to take away the Colony’s rights is such a flag.

Right-wingers bristle at the multi-colored, Pride rainbow flag used by the LGBTQ+ community. This flag isn’t saying that this is my America, and you have no place in it. What it is saying is that this is an America that belongs to all of us, and we just want to be a part of it. It’s a flag of inclusion, not exclusion. It’s not a threat. It’s a peace offering.

The next election will determine, for now, which flag we will be flying, saluting, and pledging allegiance to. Will we be honoring the flag the our Olympic athletes will be wrapping themselves in? Will we be saluting the only flag at the Olympics that bows to no one? Or will we be facing a flag the demands fealty to a would-be autocrat, who plans on destroying everything that it stands for as he kowtows to the Putin’s of the world, seeks redemption and retribution on his enemies, bends the mechanisms of government to his will, and unleashes undemocratic forces on the country we all know and love. The next time you see the American flag, remember what it really stands for…”ONE nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for ALL.

July, 6, 2024

The Summer Olympic Games is a major, international, multi-sport event held every four years. The first Games took place in 1896 in Athens, Greece, and the most recent Games were held in 2021 in Tokyo, Japan. The next Games will be held in Paris starting July 26th. My first recollection of the Summer Olympics was watching the 1960 games from Rome on a tiny, black and white TV. The pseudo-amateurs of the Soviet Union won the medal count, which was a huge issue at the height of the Cold War. Sputnik had been launched just three years earlier. The Cuban Missile Crisis would come two years later. The 1960 Olympics are remembered for Wilma Rudolph, a Tennessee A&M track star, who won three gold medals after battling childhood polio. Abebe Bikele from Ethiopia won the marathon running barefoot. German Armen Hary upset the American favorite and world number one, Ray Norton, in the 100 meters. Boston University’s own, John Thomas, was upset by Russian Valeriy Brumel in the high jump. The original, gold medal-winning, dream team of 1960 had Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, Jerry Lucas, and Walt Bellamy among others. Apologies to Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, and Magic Johnson. And who can forget, if you were actually alive, the decathlon duel between Rafer Johnson of the U.S. and C.K. Yang of Taiwan?

Recently, I have been watching the Olympic trials in swimming from Indianapolis, IN, diving from Knoxville, TN, and track and field from Eugene, OR. The human stories are almost as compelling as the athletic ones. There are stories of athletes who gave up on themselves, but came back because the people around them did not. There are women who recently went through child birth. There have been upsets. There is the thrill of victory epitomized by Ana Hall in the Heptathlon, and the agony of defeat as Athing Mu, the 2021 gold medalist in the 800 meters, tripped and fell in the finals. Fourteen year olds are competing in their first trials, and forty-seven year olds in their last. You have men racing against high school boys, one of whom qualified for the 4X400 relay team, and women swimming against high school girls. You have the abject fear of diving off of a ten meter, three story platform, or launching yourself nineteen to twenty feet into the air on a fiberglass pole.

When I watch these athletes from all over the country, I don’t see an America in decline. I don’t see American carnage. I don’t see an America infested with vermin that’s rotting from within. Eugene, OR is not a hellscape. I don’t see athletes who think that everything is rigged, and demand recounts if they lose. Politics is not involved. If you perform, you make the team. I see winners, and not losers. I see athletes whose parents have come from the four corners of the world. Parents came here to give their children a better opportunity as parents have done for generations. One female athlete sought political asylum from Eritrea. There are white, black, Hispanic, and Asian athletes. There are gay athletes. Nikki Hiltz, the trans and non-binary runner, thrilled the crowd in the 1500 meters. The American dream is alive in all of them. You can’t tell them that America is an awful place to live. When they win their events, they wrap themselves up in the American flag, and pose proudly for all to see. They are filled with the satisfaction of a job well done, and the belief of a better future. Rather than bad-mouthing our way of life, we should be celebrating it. For all our faults, we are still the most formidable athletic powerhouse in the world. There are no red athletes, and there are no blue athletes. There are just red, white and blue athletes. China and Russia may tug on our sweatsuits, but we are still number one, which is not too bad for a country that is, according to some, riddled with uncontrollable crime, and saddled with an abysmal economy. Athletes regularly thank their parents, their teammates, their coaches, their country, and God for their success. I don’t see godlessness. I see godliness.

Paul Chiampa

June 19, 2024

It’s a great time of year, and not just because the Boston Celtics are the champions of the National Basketball Association again for the eighteenth time. It’s a great time of year because major news outlets like the New York Times and The Atlantic are rolling out their summer reading lists, and book groups around the country are deciding on which books they are going to read starting in the fall. We are all on pins and needles waiting to see what the President of the United States is going to read on vacation. Presidents Clinton and Obama would famously depart for Martha’s Vineyard with an arm full of books. The media would salivate over the names, and attempt to psychoanalyze each President about the books selected. Aides would hustle to the book store to make sure they were reading what the boss was reading. I am sure that Donald Trump will curl up with his gold-leafed version of the Holy Bible at Mar-a-Lago while he curates a WWIII reading list.

I belong to an online book group that started in March, 2020, just in time for COVID when many were pondering their own mortality. The theme of the book group is “Aging Athletes.” We are made up of mostly college classmates, who were former athletes, and are currently involved in athletics as active participants and/or coaches, and are aging. We have an Olympic rower, two football players, a wrestler, two track athletes, a cyclist, and me. One of our participants, who was also an Olympic rower and physician from Northampton, sadly passed away about a year ago. We read, review, and discuss books that help people like ourselves deal with the inevitable decline of physical and mental skills. Here is our reading list to date.

Sports Gene, David Epstein

Endure, Alex Hutchinson

Play On, Jeff Bercovici

Right Call, Sally Jenkins

Remember, Lisa Genova

Open, Andre Agassi

Exercise is Medicine, Judy Foreman

Keep Sharp, Sanjay Gupta

Peak, Mark Bubbs

The Body, Bill Bryson

Sweat, Bill Hayes

Exercised, Daniel Lieberman

Younger Next Year, Crowley & Lodge

Fast After Fifty, Joel Friel

Thanks to Jon Gorham of Woodbridge, CT for starting the group, leading the discussions, and taking on the hopeless task of keeping us focused. He has gleaned many chestnuts since we began from the books we have read. Here are some of the concepts that I believe are worth considering no matter what your age.

1. Exercise is its own reward. Youth isn’t about distancing yourself from death. It’s about the opportunity to challenge yourself to grow, to feel like a beginner with much room from improvement.

2. Exercise will grow you younger. Caring about others will grow you happier. In order to walk the road to altruism, you need the three C’s: Connect, Care, Commit.

3. Fitness is the ability to do a task. Health is your overall well-being. Exercise can turn on your smart genes, support emotional stability and stave off depression and dementia.

4. The future of human performance is unlocking the power of the brain. Mindfulness is the gateway to that potential.

5. Five keys to brain resiliency: 1) exercise and movement, 2) having a sense of purpose, 3) sleep and relaxation, 4) nutrition, 5) social connection

6. Of all the things that your brain can do, memory is king. Memory gives you your sense of who you are, and who you have been.

7. Good practice is purposeful, detailed, and prioritized. Self-discipline is a form of freedom, freedom from laziness and lethargy, and freedom from expectations.

8. Endurance exercise can boost mitochondria. High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) can’t be beat for the biggest gains in the shortest amount of time.

9. You can grow old gracefully with joy.

10. George Bernard Shaw said, “We don’t stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing.”

May 21, 2024

Two men strike up a conversation at a bar.

First man asks: “Where did you go to school?”

Second man responds: “Florida Atlantic University.”

First man then asks: “Where is Florida Atlantic University?

The second man responds: “Florida Atlantic is in Boca Raton.”

The second man follows up: “Where did you go to school?

The first man responds: “I went to Harvard.”

The second man inquires: “Where is Harvard at?”

The first man replies: Harvard is in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and, my good man, you should never end a sentence with a preposition.”

After giving it some thought, the second man rephrases his question: “Where is Harvard at, a#*hole?”

Language is a complicated thing with all sorts of rules and taboos. You can’t end a sentence with a preposition, or can you? You shouldn’t split infinitives. God forbid your modifier is dangling. How do you feel about double negatives? Do you use apostrophes, hyphens, and semicolons correctly? Do you adhere to the Oxford comma? (Refer to the last sentence for an example of such.) As it turns out, grammar and grammar usage is a living and breathing organism that is continually adapting and evolving over time. Constructs that we take for granted or as immutable today were often (Is it pronounced off-ten or off-in?) very different years ago. For example, “yours” wasn’t always spelled that way. Once, it was spelt “your’s.” There are hundreds of examples like this that drive grammar scolds crazy, and are highlighted in Anne Curzan’s book, “Says Who,” or is it “Who Says?” It’s “Says Who.” She is a Professor of English at the University of Michigan.

Grammar is important. Comedian Norm McDonald once reported on Saturday Night Live’s Weekend Update, “Yippee, Jerry Rubin is dead,” which is what you get when you add a comma to “Yippie Jerry Rubin is dead.” Commas can kill. The biggest word geek of all time may have been our own Noah Webster. In 1831, George and Charles Merriam founded Merriam-Webster as the G & C Merriam Co. in Springfield, Massachusetts. In 1843, after Noah Webster died, the company bought the rights to An American Dictionary of the English Language from Webster’s estate. All Merriam-Webster dictionaries trace their lineage to this source. My wife and daughter can also trace their lineage to Noah Webster. Me, not so much. Anne Curzan coined a word that better describes the inner word nerd in all of us; the inner word nerd, who screams when they hear the word “less” when it should be “fewer.” Hmmm…shouldn’t the word “they” in the previous sentence be singular? Anyway, her word is “grammando.” As in, when he heard someone use the word “good” as an adverb, he went full grammando.

Politics is not immune to discussions over language. For years, William Safire, an American author, columnist, journalist, and presidential speechwriter wrote the “On Language” column in The New York Times Magazine about popular etymology, new or unusual usages, and other language-related topics. Today, we have heated discussions over what is called political correctness. Locally, the Easthampton School Committee was embroiled in a controversy over an e-mail sent by the leading candidate for the Superintendent’s position that used the word “ladies,” which was considered a microaggression, which is a word that actually appears in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

The PC debate revolves around two key questions according to Curzan.

“What is actually involved in using language that is inclusive and not known to be offensive?”

“Do these efforts to promote inclusive language inappropriately curb our freedom of speech and even silence people?”

First off, we need to put aside the term “political correctness” because it makes many people go crazy. There are good grammarians on both sides after all. The famous basketball player, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, simply defined it as “a relatively benign combination of good old-fashioned manners and simple sensitivity.” But (Is it okay to start a sentence with the word “but”? Yes.) debates about language are almost always about more than just language. As Curzan goes on to write, “…debates about inclusive and sensitive language are about who has the power to call the linguistic shots about what language is and isn’t inclusive.” Language has never been neutral. Anyone who is Italian, Irish, Polish, Jewish, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Asian, African, or gay can tell you that. (There’s that Oxford comma again.) As these groups gained more power, the derogatory terms used against them became taboo. Some words we can’t even say. Preferred terms for groups do change over time, thus the controversy over using the term “ladies” versus women. Unfortunately, in an attempt to be more inclusive, we sometimes overshoot the mark. I thought Harvard overshot in 2016 when it changed the title of the heads of its residential Houses from Master to Faculty Dean. Harvard didn’t intend for the title “Master” to be hurtful because its roots are from centuries-old European terms for a teacher or a head of a household, but some took it that way. Clearly, some of us need to be more aware of how certain language, whether intentional or not, has the power to hurt, and some of us need to chill out about the slightest of linguistic infractions.