A Father’s Prayer

In memory of the untimely death of Rupert Wyard (d. 6/25/18)                                

May he rest in peace

My son, my son, I leave you now.

It was not my choice to say good-bye

when you are still so young  and now

must face alone the greatest choices of your life –

of schooling, jobs and love and marriage.

 

I, your father, will never see you as a man,

as grown to the fullness of your strength

with beard and back and standing tall

amidst the storms and joys of years and all.

I will not be there as you walk

the paths of times to come.

But I leave to you the joys

and lessons of the times we shared

and ask that you carry on

my burdens and my cares

while I lay at rest as

my soul cries out to God above

to take my place as your  shield from harm

and lead you through the life I cannot follow,

for I today have left you now to walk alone.

                                     Lawrence J. Fedewa

                                     June 25, 2018

 

 

 

US Politics: Alternative Realities

by Lawrence J. Fedewa (June 23,2018) 

The most striking feature of American politics today may well be the completely different perceptions held by various groups of what “facts” each considers to be truth. It’s like they are living in different worlds. While there are some cynical “realists” who knowingly fashion “fake news”,  many partisans sincerely believe their views to be correct. So much so that they feel moral indignation and outrage at the other side.

At the root of these reactions is fear. All are afraid, in varying degrees, that their way of life is threatened by the other actors on the political stage. It is fear which drives people to irrational conclusions and closes their ears and minds to dialog with those who disagree with them. When logic is thrown out the window, all that remains is instinct. Imagination can be formed  by logic, but fear obscures all but the  most dangerous fantasies.                                  Keep Reading

Timetable of Highlights in the 2016 election cycle

 

Here is a timeline of the highlights: The chronology is useful valuable because it shows the flow of events, including some possible cause and effect sequences. (Note bold entries)

________________________________________________________________

2001-2013 Appointed by President George W. Bush and retained by President Obama, Robert Mueller served 2nd longest period in US history as FBI Director

September 4, 2013 James Comey appointed Director, FBI by President Barack Obama

March 2015  A series of events, including Congressional subpoena for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails as Secretary of State regarding the Benghazi murders, lead to public discovery of irregularities in Clinton’s use of emails as Secretary of State. DOS begins inquiry of her emails on an unauthorized server. Clinton holds press conference stating her conduct was proper.

April 12, 2015  Hillary Rodham Clinton announces her candidacy for President of the United States of America.

July 10, 2015  FBI opens an investigation of Clinton emails

July 16, 2015  Donald J. Trump announces his candidacy for President of the United States of America

September 2015  FBI Director James Comey testifies before Congress on Clinton email investigation, revealing that there is an investigation but no conclusions

March 2016  WikiLeaks publishes first Podesta emails

June 30, 2016  Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s private meeting with Bill Clinton – soon discovered by press

July 5, 2016  FBI Director Comey announces that Clinton will not be prosecuted

July 19, 2016  Trump wins Republican nomination

July 26, 2016  Clinton wins Democrat nomination

July 2016  FBI begins investigation of possible collusion between Trump campaign and Russia

October 28, 2016  Comey sends letter to Congress stating that FBI investigation resumed on discovery of Clinton emails on former Congressman Anthony Weiner’s computer

November 6, 2016 Comey sends 2nd letter to Congress announcing that the Weiner evidence irrelevant and Clinton investigation closed.

November 8, 2016  Donald J. Trump elected 45th President of the United States of America

January 20, 2017 Inauguration of Donald Trump as 45th President

May 9, 2016 President trump dismisses James Comey as Director , FBI

May 2017  Associate Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate Russian collusion with Trump campaign, using same FBI investigators who had been on the case since July. 2016.

 

© Richfield Press, 2018 (All rights reserved)

 

 

DOJ Mess: Connecting the Dots

With the publication of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General’s long-awaited report on Thursday, June 14, 2018 the complicated tale of FBI involvement in the 2016-17 presidential election got even more confusing.  Considering all the public information available, the following is a likely scenario of the events.

The Beginnings

Apparently,  the FBI involvement in this entire episode was originally triggered by the obvious questions about Hillary Clinton’s use of private emails. Obama’s FBI Director James Comey realized that the situation posed a potentially fatal threat to her eligibility to run for president. He believed it was his responsibility to neutralize that threat, possibly on orders from President Obama, perhaps through Attorney General Loretta Lunch. Accordingly, he initiated an FBI investigation, but kept control in his own office, using a hand-picked group of investigators, who were known to Comey as sympathetic to Clinton/Obama. Keep Reading

Big Weekend: Quebec, Singapore, Qingdao

 

Quebec: the G7

The G7 and the Singapore meetings both have their roots in the 20th century. The G-7 is an organization designed to promote dialog among the largest economies of the “free world” – as defined by the Cold War — namely, France, Italy, United Kingdom and Spain from Europe, Japan from Asia, and The US and Canada from North America. Russia was also included in this group until it was expelled as an expression of protest against its forced annexation of Crimea in 2014.

As everyone knows, the American President, Donald J. Trump, is following his demand that NATO partners pay their fair share of the cost of their defense, with a demand that these trading partners lower their tariffs on American imports to the same level as American tariffs on their exports to the USA. In fact, on Sunday. Mr. Trump suggested that all G7 countries should eliminate ALL tariffs.

These folks object strongly to losing their gravy train, but their dependence on the USA as the largest market in the world for trade as well as defense suggests that they will reluctantly negotiate this equalization of tariffs as they have defense costs – which is moving in the right direction, if slowly. Keep Reading

A Bloodless Coup d’ Etat?

 

 

by Lawrence J. Fedewa (June 1, 2018)

Numerous conspiracy theories are being expounded by recent books, starting perhaps with the works of David Horowitz, and currently with Jerome Corsi’s Killing the Deep State (Humanix, 2018) among many others. At first, I was very skeptical that these portraits of the “never-Trumpers” could possibly be true. The individual actions were not hard to believe, even at the beginning. We had only to listen to Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O’Donnell or Chris Matthews or The View for a few minutes to understand that there are Trump haters making outrageous accusations and creating fake news against the President.

What was difficult to believe was that the dissenters had actually been organized and deployed with a goal of overturning the 2016 election. After all, such acts are treason. But the accumulation of evidence is truly staggering. It seems that the FBI, the Obama Justice Department, and the CIA in cooperation with the Director of National Intelligence not only tried in vain to prevent the election of Donald Trump but conspired to overthrow his presidency at any cost.  This plot to place or replace the elected President with the candidate of their choice is becoming more and more visible as documents are unveiled. It seems increasingly likely that the bureaucrats joined the Obama zealots and eventually the entire Democrat Party in an attempt to overthrow the President of the United States. Not since Aaron Burr’s alleged conspiracy in 1806 have we heard of such an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government.

Without the bureaucrats, the plot had no chance of maturing, let alone succeeding. It is hard to believe that these hard-nosed professionals were motivated by the quixotic fantasies of the politicians. Sentimental they are not. For the most part, their jobs were safe under any administration. So, why did they care?

The best guess lies with the basis of all bureaucratic ambition – power. The opportunity to control the presidency must have been the deadly elixir – the Kool- Aid – that Lynch, Brennan, Mueller, Comey, Clapper and the rest were drinking. True, Trump campaigned on reducing regulations (the mother’s milk of bureaucratic power), but so have many other candidates. What was it that motivated them to sign on to treason?

We may never know. Initially, they may have been intrigued by the prospect of serving under a President Hillary Clinton, who had turned her position as Secretary of State into a money machine, and who was likely to share the next step up with the chosen few who had helped her along the way. But that fantasy vanished with the election. Why continue? Why set up a mechanism by which they could get the Trump Administration to actually pay for the agent of its own destruction?  Ingenious yes, but why? Only they know that answer.

The scenario which is slowly coming to light sounds strikingly similar to the conspiracy theories which surrounded the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. And, even earlier, the assassination of the populist Huey Long ended his challenge to President Roosevelt. Are today’s conspirators thinking along similar lines as their current plot unravels?

The terrible truth is that this cabal has not yet been defeated! It is possible that they may still succeed in their campaign to mount a bloodless coup d’ etat! The Democrat Party — one of the only two major political parties  in America — has joined their cause and threatens to conclude this treasonous exercise if they win sufficient seats in the next Congress. Even then, intentionally gullible as they seem to be, it is unlikely that they can actually produce a conviction. But, if the House succeeds in approving  articles of impeachment, you never know what might happen.

The most pernicious act in American history is still a possibility!

 

© Richfield Press, 2018 (All rights reserved)

 

Race in America: 2018

                                                                                       

by Lawrence J. Fedewa (May 26, 2018)

Just when white America reckoned that the election of a black President had finally signaled that racial equality in America had been achieved, it has become obvious that the distance between the races may be greater than ever, at least for large groups of both races.  There have always been two different channels of communication between the races, the “business” channel and the “personal” channel.

The business channel is used when there are people of all races present, e.g., in business settings, or in public, media, or written communications. This channel for whites traditionally ignored black sensibilities entirely. It seems justified to say that there has been improvement in this channel. As black concerns have become better known to whites, these conversations have become more “politically correct”. Certain terms, such as, “nigger”, and “whitey”, and many others are now rarely used in polite society.     Keep Reading

Response to The Federalist’s John Daniel Davidson re: Jonah Goldberg’s “Suicide of the West”

[Author’s Note: This essay is not in my usual sandbox, perhaps too philosophical for some. But I just couldn’t resist!!]

By Lawrence J. Fedewa

John Daniel Davidson’s critique of Jonah Goldberg’s “Suicide of the West” (The Federalist, May 14, 2018) is as thought-provoking as the book he is analyzing. However, there is an alternative view that undermines all the theories of liberal democratic capitalism’s life support – including those of C.S. Lewis and Patrick Deneen. The basic argument of all these theories is that liberal democratic capitalism must have an anchor to maintain its connection to reality.  The anchor might be religion, science, culture, or something else. Without a viable anchor, we are faced with contemplating what a very wise colleague of mine used to say, “The Enlightenment is an interesting experiment; I wonder how it will end.”

The possibility of its death becomes more imminent, it seems, not because of its suicide or of its self-inflicted wounds. Liberal democratic capitalism needs an anchor which is recognizable by the millions of those who are living, consciously or unconsciously, under its spell, i.e. its world view. The reason the anchors of the past do not work for the people of today is that these anchors are put forth in a language that they do not understand.

The scientific patois of the Enlightenment finds it hard to understand a God who is omnipresent but invisible, just as it stumbles when confronting all the choices we must make with no clear scientifically established criteria to rely on. The fundamental dilemma of modernity is that it has produced scientific miracles by rejecting appearances in favor of tangible evidence, but, in the process, it has also eliminated certainty. Yet some level of certainty is necessary in order for us to have confidence in our life decisions. It is here that we reach the limitations of a scientific world view. The scientific method has not produced enough reliable knowledge to guide human ethics. Keep Reading

POPE FRANCIS I’s “REJOICE AND BE GLAD” — an American Catholic Response

 

By Lawrence J. Fedewa, May 12, 2018

Pope Francis I released his third papal letter on April 9, 2018. (dated March 19, 2018). Its cheerful title in English means “Rejoice and be glad”. American reactions have been mixed, more or less along predictable lines. That is, his conservative critics found his view of contemporary holiness too flexible and too elastic; and the “official” Catholics thought it was just great. This reader found it to be too long, too confusing, and, unfortunately, largely irrelevant.

This is unfortunate because religion in general and Christianity as an institution sorely needs an interpretation of its beliefs and its morality which demonstrates not only its relevance but its importance to modern life and to the unavoidable decisions we all must make.

During the early days of his papacy, Francis I appeared to many as the messenger sent from God to help us through these troubled times. His personal charisma, his humble demeanor and his wit and charm were much on display during his historic visit to the United States in 2015 and he gained a great following.

Luckily, few of those millions of admirers will read this 12,000-word exhortation, and the images he created during that visit will remain their view of him. Among the more curious followers of his papacy, however, he has become very controversial. The basis for these reactions tends to be his writings rather than his actions, such as his visits to Israel, Palestine, and many other lands. This document illustrates some of the common objections to his teachings.            Keep Reading

WAS THE CIVIL WAR A MISTAKE?

Could diplomacy have worked?

By Lawrence J. Fedewa, May 4, 2018 — The 50th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. celebrated his life, his death, and his legacy.  The occasion also brought to mind the strategy he embodied in his quest for equal rights, namely, non-violent civil disobedience. He became the conscience of the nation, a beacon of righteousness in the darkness of an evil stain on America’s dogma of “the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. And finally, a martyr to the cause of non-violent conflict. Yet, even in death, he accomplished a volcanic shift in America’s understanding of our failings and our need to change.

The civil rights era of the 1960’s occurred 100 years after the last major civil rights conflict, the Civil War. The contrast between the two events could hardly be more profound. The most obvious difference is in the cost of the violent confrontation. It is estimated that there were 650,000 casualties between 1861 and 1865. Between 1960 and 1968 the most notable casualty was Dr. King himself.

What was accomplished?

Keep Reading