“Break It Down!”

If one were to take a ride in the Wayback Time Machine, to August 17, 1998, one might read about or hear the President of the United States say: “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. … Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.” – Bill Clinton, August 17, 1998

Nearly three decades ago, that slick wordplay was the source of countless jokes. It was the handiwork or a former Rhodes Scholar attempting to use his presumed superior intellect to filibuster his way out of a potentially existential (to his presidency) jam. Suffice it to say, aside from generating comic relief among the masses, it didn’t work. He went on to be impeached four months later. Some would argue that such an ego-driven word salad warranted that impeachment. Of course there was more to his getting impeached, than his testing the elasticity of the word is, but I digress.

Saturday night I read that Donald Trump, President of the United States, and Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s military, after a surprise, and I might add, successful “Operation Midnight Hammer” attack on three Iran nuclear facilities (Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz), said, and I quote, “Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”

As to be expected, TrumpWorld, led by his cabinet, rallied, at least initially, to echo, subtweet, and hit the news shows with the intent of seeing how often, how loud, and how enthusiastically they could say the word Obliterated.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said, “Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been obliterated.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on ABC, “We are confident, yes, that Iran’s nuclear sites were completely and totally obliterated, as the president said in his address to the nation on Saturday night.”

On Sunday, Trump doubled down on the assertion, writing on Truth Social, “Monumental Damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term! The white structure shown is deeply imbedded into the rock, with its roof well below ground level, and completely shielded from flame. The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!”

I’m not a nuclear scientist, I’m not a reporter, I’m not a soldier, but even I know…minutes, or even hours after such a strike, successful though it were, the notion of the obliteration of the facilities, and especially the ambitions of the so-called number one state sponsor of terrorism is but hyperbole. When Trump first made the claim, there had not been nearly enough time to conduct a review thorough enough to confirm such a boastful assertion. Moreover, there are 18 intelligence agencies…not a chance such a determination had been made, and or, agreed upon. 

Of course, let’s not ignore the elephant in the room. Trump is engaged in a perpetual campaign to role back the legislative successes of his Democratic predecessors, Obama and Biden, and to one-up them both, at every opportunity. To wit, going all the way back to his first term in office, Trump has cast himself as worthy of a Nobel Peace! Prize (which President Obama won). What better way to burnish and cement his bona fides for the award, than to orchestrate an end to what he has deemed “The 12-Day War?” 

Let’s be clear. From what we know so far, the plan was bold, and its execution, flawless. That, in and of itself, should have been enough to tout. But just as with the “Big Beautiful Bill,” Trump loves and needs the razzle-dazzle. It wasn’t enough to be proficient and precise, he desperately needed to floss, as the kids say. So, he did.

When Clinton was flummoxed by his inane word choice, he was trying to stay a step ahead of Ken Starr’s posse. It didn’t work. But, from a technocrat’s view, he won the rhetorical argument. There is indeed a distinction between is and was. Unfortunately, Clinton was on the wrong side of both of them. 

In Trump’s case, the definition of obliterate is to eradicate, erase, abolish, destroy, annihilate, or expunge. To put it bluntly, to un-exist something. That simply did not happen. First and foremost, it’s questionable whether that was even the objective. Iran has thirty nuclear sites. This operation attacked only three of them. If they had nuclear ambitions before the mission, they almost certainly still do; and after an attack, they may be even more motivated. “Operation Midnight Hammer” was a spectacular military success. If only Mr. Trump had stopped there, he’d have remained on solid ground. Alas, he just couldn’t leave well enough alone. It simply wasn’t a total obliteration of Iran’s key nuclear facilities, to say nothing of their ambitions. “Trump’s Nobel Quest: Why His ‘Obliterated” Is Not The Contemporary Equivalent of Clinton’s “Is!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime.

A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the links below:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/1998/09/bill-clinton-and-the-meaning-of-is.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/23/donald-trump-calls-obliteration-an-accurate-description-of-damage-to-irans-nuclear-facilities.html

“Break It Down!”

Generally, people tend to think of funerals as sad affairs. And, regardless of your religious bent, or your spiritual inclination, there is usually some degree of lamentation. As a PK, I understand the Christian principle, that to be absent the body, is to be present with the Lord. Still, as mortals, we, the survivors, are frequently, if not usually, sad. But not always!

I attended a funeral yesterday. The deceased lived 97 years. By all accounts, and there were many, he didn’t just exist on this planet for 97 years, he lived! He lived to serve, and he served for the duration of his life.

In our community, funerals are often referred to as Homegoing Services. Yesterday, that euphemism seemed apt. More than half a dozen speakers from different arenas of the decedent’s life paid tribute to him, and they not only appeared glad to be there, but they left me with the impression that they wouldn’t have considered not being there, or being there and not speaking about the life of the dearly departed, and the many ways he impacted both his community in general, and themelves in particular.

The Eulogist understood the assignment. Moreover, he deftly incorporated the comments of the litany of speakers to present his subject in a manner that was elegant; yet also underscored by simplicity. After citing his own personal examples of being tutored in life lessons by the man whose funeral he was preaching, he circled back to demonstrate the art of beginning with the end in mind. He had established as his subject: Amen. He concluded by defining Amen as, I agree, or so be it, or it is so. Then in reference to the entirety of comments, including the homily, he implored those assembled, “Let the church say Amen.” And the church said…”Amen!”  

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime.

A new post is published each Wednesday.

Break It Down!

In his novel, “Requiem for a Nun,” William Faulkner wrote, “The past is never dead. It’s not even past. All of us labor in webs spun long before we were born, webs of heredity and environment, of desire and consequence, of history and eternity.” The story has been described as a haunting exploration of the past on the present. Born near the end of the 19^th century Faulkner grew up in Oxford…Mississippi, listening to and being influenced by stories told by his elders — stories that incorporated the Civil War, slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Faulkner family. Stipulating those facts, it’s easy enough to see how Faulkner’s world view could be predicated on powerful elements that unfolded a generation or two before he was born.

Having said all that, let me be clear, this post is in no way related to Faulkner. Rather, it’s about contemporary culture warriors, unable, or unwilling, or both, to divest themselves from the past. A past they never wanted to relinquish, and one they brought back, at the first available opportunity.

So, in case you haven’t heard, Donald Trump, while visiting Fort Bragg yesterday, announced, “We are going to be restoring the names to Fort Pickett, Fort Hood, Fort Gordon, Fort Rucker, Fort Polk, Fort A.P. Hill, and Fort Robert E. Lee. We won a lot of battles out of those forts. It’s no time to change.”  In March, Pete Hegseth changed back the name Fort Liberty, the nation’s largest Army base, to Fort Bragg. In April, he changed Fort Moore back to Fort Benning.

Looked at on its face, this grand renaming scheme boils down to a game of juvenile legerdemain. In 2023, the Biden administration changed the name of several military installations that had be named in honor of Confederate icons. When one considers the Confederacy was composed of states that not only seceded from America, but fought America in a war, to do so, opting not to honor heroes of your vanquished enemy seems like a reasonable and logical thing to do.

Of course, adhering to policy prescriptions based on reasonableness and logic could never prevail in this regime. One might even consider it a telling matter that this administration would expend so much time, energy, and money to reclaim base appellations with the surnames of Confederates. Alas, there was one little sticking point. Congress, in its infinite wisdom, had approved ditching the Confederate connection. In order to give the installations their old name, they had to scrub the services to find other individuals with those last names. For example, instead of Confederate General Braxton Bragg, Fort Bragg is now, so we are told, named for Roland L. Bragg, a World War II paratrooper and Silver Star recipient from Maine.

And so it goes. There’s a similar story supporting each of the renamed-to-their-old-name military installations. This is yet another example of the lengths this regime and its supporters will go to retain its connection to a racist and bigoted past. William Faulkner would certainly understand, if not appreciate, this compulsion to go “Back To The Future!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime.

A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the links below.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/10/politics/army-restore-confederate-names-military-bases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Faulkner

Break It Down!

Last week I posted while at sea. That was a piece of cake, compared to today, when I’m posting after a day that for me, has already lasted way past 24 hours. I know what you’re thinking. There are only 24 hours in a day. You’re right, of course. But I began my Tuesday in a city six time zones east of here, at 5:00 a.m., which translates to 11:00 p.m. Monday here in Charlotte. After 2 flights covering 10 hours in the air, and nearly 4,500 miles, and another 10 hours in 3 airports, I returned home to reclaim my life: retrieving mail from a neighbor, getting in 90-minutes on a recumbent bike, taking a shower, unpacking. You know, normal non-vacation life things. Now for the blog. 

It was tempting to reprise an old post. But after nearly two weeks abroad, there was just too much happening not to explore a contemporary topic. I chose one to speak on, ever so briefly. 

The peculiar, and often tricky thing about bosom buddies is, while the individual parties may grow apart, and their interests diverge…life goes on. Often this re-centering of personal priorities goes unnoticed. However, when the two principals are the current President of the United States, who, at least according to The Atlantic, has said, “I run the country and the world,” and the world’s richest man, who until recently, served as a special government employee, there are going to be ripples, and the world, the portion of it occupied by the United States anyway, is going to notice.

During last year’s Presidential Campaign, Elon Musk aligned himself with Donald Trump and the Right. Some would argue, more with Trump than the Right. Over the course of the campaign, multiple media sources reported that Musk infused Republican campaigns with more than $270 million. If you’re checking to see if the math is mathing, that equates to a $million or more for each Electoral College vote. 

As a result of Musk’s windfall investment, he instantly became a favorite of conservatives, after having been considered just another wealthy, but kooky liberal, Simultaneously, he was widely castigated by liberals. Some even attacked Tesla showrooms and service centers, as well as individual owners and their vehicles.

After his warm generosity, and key assistance in helping Trump regain the White House, Mr. Trump rewarded him by making him the Co-Leader of the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE), along with Vivek Ramaswamy. According to numerous news reports, Ramaswamy clashed with Musk, and soon quit. He is said to be considering a run for Ohio Governor.

Musk spent a controversial stint as a special government employee. He gutted the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and substantially hampered Health and Human Services, the Social Security Administration, the Department of Education, and the General Services Administration…news reports say. He promised to cut $2 trillion dollars from the budget. More recent estimates from DOGE put the number around $150 billion, which some experts say is still improbable. If you’re still tracking the math, that’s a fraction of what was promised.

After a chaotic experience in government, plus an unsustainable pushback at Tesla, both internal and external, Musk announced he would be exiting his role as a special employee; a position that current rules limit to 130 days within any 365-day period. Of course, there is a perception of a “rules are made to be broken” governing philosophy in the Trump administration, based on Trump and Company frequently challenging the rules, almost no matter what.

Yesterday, in the face of his departure, and Trump’s lobbying Congress to pass his Big, Beautiful Bill, which the House has done, with the slimmest of margins, Musk pointedly pushed back, challenging the efficacy of the bill. He had previously expressed disappointment about the bill but escalated considerably the tone and tenor of his disagreement, when he wrote on X, “I’m sorry, but I just can’t take it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.”

He added in a subsequent post: “Congress is making America bankrupt.”

In yet another post, he said: “In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people.”

There’s more that could be said, but after having only “airplane sleep” in the last 27 hours, I’m calling it a wrap. ““A Disgusting Abomination,” Oh My!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime.

A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the link below.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/03/politics/elon-musk-trump-republican-bill