December 17, 2024 - Another Letter Published, Shakespeare on Gender, EV Tax Credit, and Another Shooting

My Letter Gets Printed … But 

One of the reasons that Jackspotpourri is no longer stressing politics is that solid, fact-based, arguments are continually being disregarded by too many Americans who are sufficiently disconnected from reality, and hence, willingly susceptible to being conned into using their democratic rights to destroy democracy itself. (Wow! That sentence contains 46 words!)

This is the ‘Achilles Heel’ of democracy that Jackspotpourri has occasionally pointed out. Defenders of democracy seem to be protesting this in an ‘echo chamber,’ talking mostly to themselves. 

If you disagree, just look at what has happened to many State legislatures and school boards, and even the Federal government. Eventually, people will ‘wise up’ and put an end to their ignorance and their political indolence but it might take a century or so to undo the damage their democratic rights have permitted them to carry out. 

Meanwhile everyone should be doing their part to hasten that day. With that in mind, and escaping from that ‘echo chamber,’ here is a letter from me published in the Palm Beach Post on December 14: 

 "To the Editor: ‘A recent 'Your Turn' opinion column started by saying 'Lately, I have been thinking about the incoming Trump administration's policy proposals ... ' and went on to point out the effect they might have on women. Well, 'Lately' was not the proper time to think about them. Concerned voters should have thought about them before November 5." 

When was the last time you wrote a letter to a newspaper? Try exiting the ‘echo chamber’ and get your thoughts out to others who might think differently from the way you do.

 JL

                                                             * * * 

Shakespeare and Gender Issues

I am no Shakespearian scholar. When I start to look at the work of philosophers and critics like the late Harold Bloom, who had a fascination with Shakespeare, I am soon lost in the quicksand of criticism, even with his ‘Shakespeare, the Invention of the Human,’ intended for the general reader. But that shouldn’t stop me from commenting, within my limitations, about William Shakespeare and one of his plays on a less sophisticated level than a real ‘professional’ critic might. 

William Shakespeare

A good place to start is Shakespeare’s ‘As You Like It.’ That play is about an exiled Duke, his daughter Rosalind, and assorted romances that all turn out well. It’s one of his ‘comedies,’ a genre loosely definable by the protagonists not having died by the final curtain. (His plays are usually divided into three categories: Tragedies, Comedies, and Histories.) 

Gender issues have come into their own during the past century, but William Shakespeare was well aware of them a little over four hundred years ago and mockingly addressed them in ‘As You Like It.’  He would easily fit in today with what was once called ‘off-Broadway’ theatre and is now practically ‘mainstream.’ 

In Shakespeare’s time, all the parts in English plays were played by males, even the female roles. So the heroine in ‘As You Like It,’ Rosalind, was played by a young male actor. 

Now this Rosalind, a wise and intelligent girl, was seriously interested in a guy named Orlando who was to say the least, shy.  A ‘second son,’ he didn’t inherit any money but made a few bucks as a wrestler. So Rosalind took it upon herself (remember she is being played by a male) to disguise her sex, becoming Orlando’s supposedly male mentor and confidant in affairs of the heart. 

The demands on the male actor playing Rosalind who was now imitating a male buddy of Orlando were stretched even further when she proposed that to help him, ‘he’ would pretend to be a female, specifically the play’s Rosalind, whom she actually was. 

Now stop and think for a second. We have a male actor who is playing the role of a female, who pretends to be a male, and who in turn imitates a female. No wonder the audience roared with laughter, being presented with a play entitled ‘As You Like It,’ which included the kind of stuff audiences really like. And oh, yes … Rosalind also was involved in a suggested relationship with her cousin Celia that went beyond the level of affection expected between two young women, not uncommon in today’s theatre. 

If you don’t read the play (try the Folger edition), I can assure you that Rosalind gets her man, straightens everything out, the Duke gets restored, and everybody lives happily ever after. 

The play has its serious moments as well, when the exiled Duke’s house philosopher tries unsuccessfully to reassure him with his words of advice, starting with the famous lines ‘All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances. And one man in his time plays many parts … etc.‘  In ‘As You Like It,’ they certainly do that, although in another sense. 

                                                             * * 

I believe that William Shakespeare was a strong advocate of women’s rights in an age when they didn’t have any. That’s why he painted Rosalind (as well as Portia in ‘The Merchant of Venice,’ Viola in ‘Twelfth Night,’ and other female characters) very favorably despite having them pretend to be male in his plays in order to get some respect. With a woman on the English throne, Queen Elizabeth I, it was not a great risk for him to do so. 

But when the ‘Puritans,’ led by Oliver Cromwell, who styled himself as the nation’s ‘Lord Protector,’ took over the English government from 1642 until 1660, they shut down the theatres as immoral and plays were not performed legally during that dark period. (By that time Shakespeare was dead.) Censorship was not good then any more than it is today, and of course, beware of any leader who claims to be a ‘protector.’ Usually the person claiming to be a ‘protector’ is the one against whom ‘protection’ is needed! 

For more information on female characters in Shakespeare’s plays who masqueraded as males, read ‘Shakespeare’s Disguised Heroines,’ from the website of a British theatre company, by copying and pasting this on your browser line: https://medium.com/lantern-theater-company-searchlight/conceal-me-what-i-am-shakespeares-disguised-heroines-670c661eba26#:~:text=Rosalind%20becomes%20Ganymede%20for%20her,lovers%20in%20far%2Doff%20lands or simply CLICK HERE.

JL 

                                                          * * * 

Get Your Electric Vehicle Before the Tax Credit Disappears 

Coming along with the purchase of an ‘electric vehicle' is a tax credit not available to purchasers of gas-powered cars. It is intended to lessen pollution by reducing the number of gas-powered vehicles on our highways. It also benefits Billionaire Elon Musk, owner of the company producing Tesla electric automobiles, which benefits from those who buy its cars and who are getting that sizable tax credit, often running into thousands of dollars.  But Musk is also bosom buddies with the incoming president who favors increased digging for petroleum, the continuance of gas-powered vehicles, and the end of that tax credit. Am I the only person seeing a contradiction there? 

 JL

                                                        * * *

Just Another Predictable School Shooting 

I won’t comment in detail on the latest school shooting other than to once again point out that the Second Amendment contains 27 words, despite the Supreme Court’s horrid decision in 2008 (DC vs Heller) that its first thirteen words, clearly stating the reason for its second fourteen words, can be ignored. 

Without its first thirteen words, there would not even have been a need for a Second Amendment to sanctify the existing right of people to keep and to bear arms. 

(Hey, while you're online, check out the language of the Second Amendment.  A simple 'google search' will get you there.)   

JL 

                                                         * * * 

Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri 

Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them. 

There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting. 

Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com. Again, I urge you to forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it. 

 JL 

                                                        * * *

December 13, 2024 - "Old-Timey' College Football, Third Chapter of 'About Democracy,' The Health Insurance Killer, and a New Direction for Jackspotpourri

College Football Now a Business 

Here’s a link to a recent New Yorker magazine article on college football. Just copy and paste this on your browser line:  https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/army-navy-and-that-old-timey-football or CLICK HERE to get to it.

The Army-Navy football classic takes place this year on Saturday, December 14.  If you watch it on TV, keep the New Yorker article in mind.  

Permit me to add that in watching the local college football team (Florida Atlantic University) play at its Boca Raton stadium, I noticed that the gridiron’s decorations, in addition to the school’s ‘owl’ emblem and the naming of the venue after the late Howard Schnellenberger, there also was a plug there for a link to FAU’s own ‘Paradise NIL (rewards for use of an athlete’s Name, Image, or Likeness) associated website. Complete with a palm tree, it suggested the lure of playing ‘in paradise’ to potential transfers from other schools, as well as soliciting donors. 

Really, that is nothing to be proud of for an aspiring educational institution. It’s just another nail in the coffin of the ‘old timey football’ written about in the New Yorker article. 

Major college athletics, like football and basketball, have taken on a role that is the equivalent of baseball’s minor league system. Just look at the number of college football and basketball players whose resume includes moving through two or three institutions via the ‘transfer portal’ seeking greater opportunity for themselves, not to mention these institutions’ efforts to build winning teams, ignoring what their primary purpose is supposed to be. Education, maybe? Will the day ever be reached when cheerleaders and marching band members can enter a ‘transfer portal’ of their own? 

I find it hard to believe that members of football or basketball teams at major colleges such as those in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12, and even those conferences one level lower, can find any time to pursue a normal college course of study. Their team activities are a full-time job involving daily practices, travel, and the games themselves. Whom are we kidding? 

‘NIL’ and the ‘transfer portal,’ fueled by significant TV revenue for the colleges, and combined with the increasing availability of online gambling to anyone with access to a computer, a credit card, or even just a cell phone, have not only turned big time college sports into a business, but set the scene for an inevitable scandal that will afflict all college sports, and bring about some kind of reform, including the end of many football coaches being paid far more than University presidents, and perhaps the return of that old-timey-football. 

A day at work for a 'student athlete' in the College Football business

It’s just a matter of time. Here’s the link to that article again. https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/army-navy-and-that-old-timey-football.   Find time to read it. CLICK HERE to get to it.

JL 

                                                           * * * 

About Democracy ... Number 3 

Because of the great difficulty in passing Constitutional Amendments, don’t look for solutions in our Constitution itself for our ‘undemocratic’ Senate problem written about here in earlier postings. 

Rather, look instead to reforms the Senate can bring about on its own, as it is presently constituted, reforms that can be effected by Congress WITHOUT an Amendment. 

                                                         *  *

Let’s start with our federal courts. The Constitution left the basic structure of the American justice system to Congress which quickly passed their first Judiciary Act in 1789. Since then, there have been many subsequent Judiciary Acts which govern the way our federal court system operates, keeping up with the needs of the times, but not challenging the operation of the Supreme Court which sits at the head of the Constitution’s Judicial branch. 

Where the Constitution does not provide for something, like the specific number of SCOTUS Justices, for example, a Judiciary Act can address such issues. It has done so in the past. 

Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the president and confirmed by a Senate majority without any mention of term limits. That cannot be changed without a Constitutional Amendment. Similarly, right now, the SCOTUS’ ethics can only be monitored by the SCOTUS itself. But everything else in our system of justice is governed by Congress’ Judiciary Acts. Such an Act in 1891, for example, relieved SCOTUS Justices from having to travel around,‘riding circuit,’ hearing cases when it abolished Circuit Courts and replaced them with Courts of Appeal. 

I can see a conflict developing between Congress and the SCOTUS regarding the extent to which Congress can, through Judiciary Acts, bring about changes in the Supreme Court. 

Therefore, It seems clear that the remedy for this kind of problem rests with the voters who elect Representatives and Senators, the ones who pass laws such as the Judiciary Acts. Local (or Statewide for the Senate) politics determine who runs for Congress, confirming the late Tip O’Neil’s saying that ‘all politics are local.’ 

The rules establishing the composition of our undemocratic Senate may not be changed, but the actions of the Senators we do elect can provide solutions. And of course, the Senate has the role of confirming those appointed to the SCOTUS and other federal judgeships. 

That’s where dealing with our undemocratic Senate starts, with the voters electing Congresses where laws, including Judiciary Acts, are legislated. Even with the unfair manner through which the Senate is constituted, change can be brought about by voters electing House and Senate candidates who support changes. 

                                                            *  *

Another area where our undemocratic Senate hampers democracy is the Electoral College, through which our president is chosen. How that can be remedied without a Constitutional Amendment which would take many, many, decades to pass is a difficult question to answer! 

Right now, each State gets one electoral vote for each of their House Representatives and one for each of their Senators, regardless of the State’s population. That’s where the undemocratic nature of the Senate, with its overrepresentation of States with small populations, determines who becomes president. 

With rare exceptions (Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes ‘proportionately’), all a State’s electoral votes usually go to the candidate who wins that State. To resolve that problem without a decades-long Constitutional Amendment process, something called the ‘National Popular Vote Interstate Compact’ has been developed. That calls for State legislatures to approve a measure whereby all a State’s electoral votes would be cast for the candidate who wins a majority of the nation’s popular vote. It would require, for it to go into effect, that there be States with at least 270 electoral votes signed on to this ‘Compact.’ Then the Electoral College would have no other choice but to choose the voters’ popular choice! 

But what if no candidate achieves a national popular majority, which the ‘Compact’ requires! Possibly the ballots in all States might provide for ‘ranked choice voting,’ providing for the elimination of minor candidates with no chance of winning, whose votes would then go to a ‘second choice’ originally selected by the voter, until there actually is a national popular vote majority candidate chosen to whom a State can pledge its votes as structured in the ‘Compact.’ 

Gettting all the States to agree to ‘ranked choice voting’ would be one of the obstacles the ‘Compact’ faces. As for the 'Compact' itself, right now 270 electoral votes are needed to elect a president, and advocates of this ‘Compact’ can claim only 207 electoral votes being available from States that have agreed to it. It has been stuck at that number for several years now. 

Furthermore, State legislatures can change their minds, and there are several legal questions about the ‘Compact’ that must be resolved, so don’t hold your breath. But this is a way, if it ever comes to fruition, and legal challenges to it are somehow resolved, of getting rid of the present influence of our undemocratic Senate on the Electoral College, and in turn, on the presidency.

This might be an appropriate place to add that at present, if no presidential candidate can get the majority of electoral votes (270) needed to put them in the White House, the Constitution assigns the task to the House of Representatives with each State having one vote. That’s about as undemocratic as possible, considering the wide discrepancies in the populations of our 50 States, but that’s what the Constitution provides. 

Yes, there’s a lot wrong with our Constitution and the representative democratic government it establishes, but it has worked for 235 years, so we should not jump to trading it in for some other system. With a population that understands what government is all about, it can survive indefinitely with reforms made within its framework.  

There are some people who advocate convening a new ‘constitutional convention’ to solve such problems.  I feel that should be discouraged because no one really knows what such a convention, if held today, would produce! My thoughts always go back to our 16th president who believed in government of the people, by the people, and for the people, words spoken by him at a time when many Americans had given up believing in those ideas. They should not give up on them now either. 

JL 

                                                     * * * 

United Health Care CEO Murderer Collared 

It looks like the killer of the United Health Care CEO has been caught. 

It will possibly turn out that his motivation was either his personal health (UHC claims he never was a policyholder), an antipathy to the private health insurance industry in general, or an undiagnosed psychological problem, which his behavior, withdrawing inwardly from society over the past months, suggests.  No one has the right to commit an act of murder to justify their personal opinion as to what is right or wrong. Doing so is a kind of insanity. (That might be his defense in court.) Regardless of whatever specific action an insurance company, if any were involved, might have taken, right or wrong, a normal person doesn’t respond with murder to make their point. The killer should not be made a ‘poster boy’ for health insurance reform. 

But it cannot be ignored that this tragic incident points up an inadequacy in our health care system whereby people sometimes choose inadequate insurance plans based on what they can afford and on insurance company advertising rather than on their family’s real healthcare needs. 

The accused killer (or his family) could well afford the best of health care, so it remains puzzling why he directed his anger at insurance companies, rather than at whatever physician had treated his 'back' problem. 

Misguided as the killer was, his act causes some to rethink the argument for ultimately removing most healthcare from the private sector, as has been done in many western nations. That might have been his intention. The choice of doctors and hospitals, and the care a patient receives, should not be determined by the bottom lines of companies existing in a market-based economy. 

Medicare for Seniors, Medicaid for those with low incomes, the Affordable Care Act for other Americans, and similar legislation need to be expanded in order to meet that need. 

 JL 

                                                          * * * 

A Change in Jackspotpourri

Throughout history there has been disagreement between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’ leading to conflicts over what kind of governments and economic systems countries, or tribes, or whatever, should have. From lawless anarchy to iron-fisted dictators, from family-based monarchies to populist democracies, and everything in between, that struggle has gone on, sometimes with words and sometimes with weapons. 

The cavemen, early tribal groups, the Greeks, the Romans, their many predecessors and many successors all engaged in such disagreement and conflict through the centuries on up to where we are today. The labels may change (Fascists, Socialists, religious leaders, terrorists, Democrats, Republicans, conservative, radicals, etc., etc.) but disagreement and conflict seem to be the way of the world. There is no reason to believe that will ever change, despite individual and collective efforts and compromises. Throughout history, they have ultimately failed. 

The best an individual can do is to try to be as ‘informed’ as possible, perhaps adjusting their lives to this condition, but that solves nothing. With this in mind, look for Jackspotpourri to back off a bit from politics and spend more time looking in other worthwhile directions where human civilization has traveled.  Who knows?  To quote Steven Sondheim’s lyrics, ‘someday, somehow, somewhere,’ we might find the answers that presently elude us.

JL                                                    

                                                              * * *

Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri

Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them. There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though!  

Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. 

Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting. 

Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com. 

Again, I urge you to forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it.

 

JL 

                                                 * * *

December 8, 2024 - Online Reading Suggestions, George Soros, NYC Shooting, and More

 

Reading Suggestions 

If you had difficulty reaching the article from the ‘The Free Press’ that I referenced in the preceding Jackspotpourri, you can find it at https://www.thefp.com/p/poetic-justice-for-jay-bhattacharya or try CLICKING HERE. (I find that providing a link to ‘The Free Press’ content is difficult on Jackspotpourri.) I do not agree with the article, but that doesn’t keep me from passing it on. Making up your mind requires exposure to different views. Here are some reading assignments for you to try to fit into your week ahead.

Heather Cox Richardson doesn’t hesitate to clearly state her views in her ‘Letters from an American’ dated December 4. Check it out at https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ or CLICK HERE. … and don’t miss her December 6 posting commemorating the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. outlining the struggle between democracy and fascism. As I just wrote, making up your mind requires exposure to different views.

Professor Timothy Snyder, who has written a lot about tyranny and about freedom wrote about dictatorships (Dictators for a Day) in his December 4 ‘Thinking About … ‘ posting regarding the attempted coup in South Korea. Check it out at https://snyder.substack.com/ or CLICK HERE.  And while you’re there, read his December 7 savaging of the prospect of Tulsi Gabbard being made CIA chief. 

And finally, to help you make up your mind is this December 5 opinion piece from the New York Times by Carlos Lovada. Check it out at https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/06/opinion/trump-wins-harris-loses.html or just CLICK HERE.  The piece’s title ‘Stop Pretending Trump Is Not Who We Are’ almost gives its content away. 

JL 

                                                   * * * 

George Soros, a Target of Antisemitism

Here’s a ‘Your Turn’ piece from the Palm Beach Post’s Opinion page on December 4. It’s about time someone wrote about this. 

Attacks on George Soros Pander to Antisemitism 

Contributor - Roger Buckwalter (a retired Jupiter journalist) 

“Let’s take a look at George Soros. He’s a 94-year-old American businessman and philanthropist who was born in Hungary. His net worth is said to be $9 billion, and with that wealth he supports numerous liberal candidates and causes. Soros created the Open Society Foundations, which fund international civic groups that promote justice, education, public health and a free press. He backs progressive criminal law reforms and programs for underprivileged children. He donates to many candidates seeking office, from district attorney to president, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. In the 2022 midterm elections, he gave more than $128 million to the Democrats. 

And one more thing: Soros is Jewish. 

George Soros

That last attribute, coupled with his activism, has made him a reviled object, a dark manipulative figure for antisemites and other unscrupulous opportunists who have wielded his name as a cudgel in political campaigns and at other times. An email from Donald Trump depicted Soros in front of a communist flag as a puppeteer pulling strings on Biden, who says “I take more orders than I ever did.” It’s similar to a 1940s Hungarian cartoon showing a Jewish puppeteer holding the strings on European royalty and other satraps.

Reactionary provocateur Glenn Beck also used the puppeteer image, calling Soros a “puppet master.” Trump slammed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who secured indictments of the former president, as “hand-picked and backed by George Soros.” Saying a politician is “Soros-backed” has become a familiar right-wing slur – inferring that Soros’s donations are more significant and malevolent than other large, unpilloried contributions to those politicians. After one of Trump’s social media postings about Soros, a respondent declared that “Trump named the immigrant Jew.” Rudolph Guiliani and others have called Soros the “antichrist” and cartoons show him with exaggerated stereotypical “Jewish features.” Former Trump staffer Fiona Hill testified at a Trump impeachment hearing that Soros antipathy is the “new Protocols of the Elders of Zion” – referring to an infamous antisemitic forgery that purported to show a Jewish plot for world domination. Tycoon and Trump minion Elon Musk compared Soros to a Jewish comic book villain as “the man behind the curtain” and claimed that “Soros hates humanity.”

And on and on. All these vile defamations echo longstanding antisemitic canards that Jews, especially wealthy ones, are part of a hidden international conspiracy to control global economics and politics – that from the shadows they pull the strings which determine what their non-Jewish puppets must do. It’s a longtime staple of the far right – setting the stage for persecutions from “restricted” neighborhoods to pogroms to the Holocaust. 

Any public figure who’s heavily involved in politics and other causes, which Soros is, can be legitimately criticized – and for Jewish figures that’s not automatically antisemitic (or racist, homophobic or misogynist, depending on the target). But when the criticism, as it is in Soros’s case, follows age-old calumnies of antisemitism, then that familiar bigotry is clearly raising its ugly head. 

In criticizing Soros-funded candidates or causes, why is Soros singled out as a devil when those recipients are surely also funded, often heavily, by other, non-Jewish unvilified donors? Why is there an implication that something intrinsic about the trait of one particular donor irredeemably taints a candidate, official or movement? The answer is plain: Soros is a prominent Jew, whereas other, ignored donors are not. It’s the same old prejudice, the same appeal to dark impulses by those who – if they’re not overt antisemites – know or care nothing about history and are amorally willing to grab any expedient to further their interests. 

Soros should be commended for funding worthwhile candidates and causes that foster progressive values. And he should not reduce those efforts. We need more people like him. The thinly veiled antisemitic attacks are not just tough political rhetoric. They’re virulent expressions of hate that have no place in any civilized society, especially one that purports to uphold egalitarian ideals. They discredit not Soros but everyone who hurls them and accepts them. They should be loudly denounced by every decent person who believes in our ideals, who truly believes in America.” 

                                                         * * * 

Newspapers ... YES!

Followers of Jackspotpourri should know that I feel that too many Americans are dependent on TV and the internet for information, ignoring the crucial role our disappearing printed newspapers have played throughout our history.

The column appearing above is a fine example of what newspapers can include, that you might not find elsewhere. I hope its content motivates you to pass it on. I won’t burden Florida readers with links to them, but this particular Opinion section (December 4 issue) in the Palm Beach Post (They have an Opinion Section daily, except on Mondays and Tuesdays) also contained three thoughtful ‘Letters to the Editor,’ dealing with theocracy in Texas, equal justice for all, and Pam Bondi, besides syndicated columns by Robert Reich, Jonah Goldberg (both via the Tribune Content Agency) and the Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell.  All three are well worth your reading and you can ‘google’ their authors’ name to find links to what they are writing for newspapers. 

Read a newspaper every day, either in its printed form or its online version, rather than depend on ‘internet only’ or TV news sources. Without doing so, you are incomplete, and really, unable to fairly make up your mind about the issues challenging the world around you. 

JL 

                                                      * * * 

Murder in NYC

While anything I post about the murder of the United Health Care CEO in Manhattan will be stale by the time you are reading it, here are my thoughts from what I have seen on the news, in newspapers, on TV, and online. (I prepared this particular item on 12/5/24 at about 1:00 p.m.) 

1. The words ‘delay’ and ‘deny’ reportedly written on the shell casings found at the murder’s site seem to indicate the assassin was not a hired hitman, but someone who personally felt that the company treated him or a relative unfairly. These words tentatively rule out that the killer was a dissatisfied company shareholder, or any hired killer. A ‘pro’ wouldn’t bother with that. 

2. By now the police should be comparing records of those individuals with denied or delayed UHC claims with nationwide data of those licensed to own firearms. The killer might be in that category, and his documented fumbling with the weapon’s silencer, suggests that his skills were not as professional as those of a paid hitman would be. 

3. Documentation that the killer had stayed in an inexpensive hostel suggests he was not a wealthy person, and not a New Yorker, and probably someone who arrived in New York by bus. They probably are now looking at videos taken at Port Authority Bus terminals along with gun license records and denied claims. 

 I am a UHC policyholder, having a costly Medicare Supplement policy with them, not one of their much less expensive and more restrictive Medicare Advantage (Part C) policies, which might offer them a greater opportunity to ‘delay’ or ‘deny’ claims. That is where investigators are probably now looking, examining all recent contested claim decisions.) 

JL 

                                                        * * * 

Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri 

Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them. 

There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting. 

Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com.

Again, I urge you to forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it. 

JL

                                                         * * *

Brain Rot, Making Up Minds, Health Info for Floridians, and More 'About Democracy'

Brain Rot 

The Oxford English Dictionary, considered by many to be the most authoritative arbiter of the words English-speaking (and writing) people use today, has named its ‘Word of the Year.’ It’s ‘brain rot’ and here’s a short item defining and explaining it from the New York Times. Just copy and paste https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/01/arts/brain-rot-oxford-word.html on your browser line or JUST CLICK HERE. 

Although we try to avoid ‘slop,’ as mentioned in the article, avoiding the sometimes-unwanted assistance of Artificial Intelligence in publishing Jackspotpourri is nearly impossible because of the way it has invaded the internet. 

JL 

                                                       * * * 

Making Up Your Mind 

Heather Cox Richardson’s Dec. 1 posting on ‘Letters from an American’ touches more bases than there are on a baseball diamond. Check out her posting at https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ or by CLICKING HERE.  It is well worth reading. 

But many Americans think differently from Professor Richardson. To see what they might believe, check out Bari Weiss’ ‘Free Press’ at bariweiss@substack.com (CLICK HERE) where on December 2, author and commenter Joe Nocera heaped praise upon many whom others fear and condemn. 

And another favorite of mine, Yale professor Timothy Snyder turns it all into a mind-bending historical exercise which can include many outcomes, in his ‘Thinking About’ piece dated November 30, entitled ‘Trumpomuskovia.’ Check it out at https://snyder.substack.com/ along with his ‘Decapitation Strike’ posted on December 1. (CLICK HERE)

Much of what all three post about is accurate. But some may not be or even be contradictory. There’s a lot out there for Americans to chew on, spitting out some, but digesting most of it each day to come up with an answer that will perhaps, just maybe, keep our representative democracy alive and healthy. If it doesn’t, our great experiment might just be slipping away. (Spitting something out is preferable to vomiting it up later.) 

JL 

                                                      * * * 

Thomas Friedman’s Optimism Dismissed 

A recent column by the New York Times’ Thomas Friedman recalled that despite his anticipated appointment of ‘one-stater’ religious zealot Mike Huckabee to be ambassador to Israel, president-elect Trump’s history includes his efforts during his earlier administration to bring about a ‘two-state’ solution recognizing Palestinian rights! 

Friedman suggests that he might somehow pivot back to that position. If this occurs, it would be another example of Trump’s playing one side against the other, using them to serve his own objectives, which might include having something positive for history to record about him along with all the documented garbage and slime amidst which he dwells. Friedman’s idea is no more than wishful thinking. 

JL 

                                                        * * * 

 A while back I had promised future postings ‘About Democracy.’ The initial posting chronicled the events leading to the formation of the United States with its Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, Here is ‘number two’ in that series, stressing the Constitution and its great shortcoming, the United States Senate. 

                                                                         * * 

 About Democracy (#2) – Making it Work 

 After the War of Independence, it became evident that the Articles of Confederation were inadequate to manage the new nation. To remedy the situation, twelve States selected delegates to a Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia to draft a document to replace them. 

After they finally surmounted an initial hurdle by agreeing that there would be two legislative bodies, a House of Representatives (a ‘people’s house) whose numbers were based on the population of the States (slave holding States got to count non-voting slaves as 3/5 of a person), and a Senate where each State would have two Senators, making each State equal to each other State, the tradeoff began as to what would be the powers of each house of those dual legislatures, of an executive branch, and of a judicial branch. 

The intention was that these three branches would serve as brakes on one another. Much of this horse trading was resolved by agreeing that there would be a Bill of Rights comprising the first ten Amendments to the new Constitution, guaranteeing certain basic rights to individuals, and in effect to States as well, mollifying the initial reluctance of some States to ratify the proposed Constitution. 

Those ten Amendments were finally passed by December of 1791 by the State Legislatures to which the new Congress, as required by the new Constitution, had forwarded them. They were not officially passed until over three years after the Constitution’s ratification! 

They were: 

Amendment I - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

Amendment II - A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. 

Amendment III - No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 

Amendment IV - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 

Amendment V - No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. 

Amendment VI - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. 

Amendment VII - In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. 

Amendment VIII - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 

Amendment IX - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. 

Someone must have then stood up (Maybe James Madison) and shouted ‘Now, is everybody happy?

                                                         * * 

(One important delegate to that Convention who was not happy at all was Massachusetts’ Elbridge Gerry. He would have preferred that the Bill of Rights be in the Constitution itself. We remember him as the proponent of the practice of States altering Congressional District borders to best serve the interests of one party. We call it ‘Gerrymandering.’) Undoubtedly a great patriot and one of the Founding Fathers, he was one of the three attendees at the Constitutional Convention who refused to sign the Constitution because originally it did not include a Bill of Rights. Even after having a Bill of Rights was agreed to, he withheld his signature from the Constitution’s ratification, because those first ten Amendments had not yet been passed. He had wanted them in the Constitution before ratification. A man of great principles, Gerry was elected to the first House of Representatives and became President Madison’s vice-president.)                                                                 

                                                    * * 

Nevertheless, the ratification by nine of the thirteen new States’ delegations to the Constitutional Convention, required to make the Constitution legal, was eventually secured in this order. 

• Delaware: December 7, 1787 

• Pennsylvania: December 12, 1787 

• New Jersey: December 18, 1787 

• Georgia: January 2, 1788 

• Connecticut: January 9, 1788 

• Massachusetts: February 6, 1788 

• Maryland: April 28, 1788 

• South Carolina: May 23, 1788 

• New Hampshire: June 21, 1788 (With this state’s ratification, the Constitution became legal.) 

• Virginia: June 25, 1788 

• New York: July 26, 1788 

• North Carolina: November 21, 1789 

• Rhode Island: May 29, 1790 (Rhode Island did not hold a State constitutional convention to choose delegates as did the other twelve.) 

After the relatively rapid approval of those first ten Amendments by 1791, looking to the Constitution’s Amendment process to make future changes to make our democracy work more effectively turned out to be a difficult route. It requires a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress, and ratification by three quarters of the nation’s 50 State legislatures. 

The Constitution was a great improvement over the Articles of Confederation, but it has left us with several problems, most of which stem from the undemocratic structure of the Senate, where each State names two Senators, regardless of its population. Originally, this was the responsibility of the State legislatures, but the 17th Amendment (1913) provided that they be elected by a State’s voters. (There also was a ‘thumb on the scale’ in the House of Representatives as well where non-voting slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person in calculating the size of a State’s House delegation.) 

The thirteen original States were reluctant to totally give up their independence. That is why States were given great influence in the Senate, regardless of their population. This was understandable at that time since ‘the elephant in the room’ was slavery, and its preservation required an undemocratically formed Senate. In effect, the Bill of Rights ‘bought’ the ratification of the Constitution by slave-holding States. 

That affected the presidency as well, because each State has a presidential electoral vote for each of their Representatives in the House of Representative and one for each of its Senators. This extended the Senate’s undemocratic basis to the Electoral College, which chooses for our president. That same undemocratic Senate also confirms Supreme Court appointees, approves treaties, and serves as a jury if the House of Representatives impeaches a president. The undemocratic rules determining the composition of the Senate lie at the heart of the problems with which our 1788 Constitution has left us. 

Besides the decades-long Amendment process, it also includes the Tenth Amendment, one of the goodies which convinced those reluctant to ratify the Constitution to sign it, reading ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’ (‘People’ were not defined.) 

All of this word-juggling was because of that ‘elephant in the room,’ slavery, which slaveholding States feared might be the subject of pressure from the Federal government. That was also the real reason for the Second Amendment, if Federal military force became involved, or if there were a ‘slave rebellion.' 

This is the setting that we find ourselves in today, still trying to make our democracy work effectively. Change does not come easily, but today is neither 1788 nor the 1860s. Standing still as time moves on may be the same as moving backwards. Stay tuned to Jackspotpourri for suggested remedies.

                                                       * * 

Something more to think about: Would it have been better if the Constitution had not been ratified, leaving the new nation stuck with the unmanageable Articles of Confederation, or if the Brits succeeded in taking us back, as they tried to do in 1812, when they got as far as burning the Capitol? 

In London, Parliament ended slavery in the entire British Empire effective in 1834, and that would have included their North American colonies, which except for Canada and some islands, are now the United States of America! If history had flowed in that direction, we would not have had a Civil War when we tried to end slavery in the 1860s. That was what the Civil War was all about although some still maintain it was about the Rights of States, a more respectable basis for argument than the slavery such rights permitted. 

Or would we have had our Civil War thirty years earlier in 1834 as a reaction to any British effort to enforce Parliament’s Slavery Abolition Act here? 

JL 

                                                       * * * 

Cancer Centers and Other Hospitals 

(Of particular interest to those living in Florida) 

Just because a hospital calls itself a ‘comprehensive cancer center’ doesn’t mean it is one of the 57 institutions nationwide given that specific designation by the government’s National Cancer Institute. In the State of Florida, there are only two hospitals meeting the criteria required to be given that designation: the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, and the Mayo Clinic’s branch in Jacksonville. (The Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, has several such branches, one in Jacksonville and two others in Arizona.) 

In addition to these two institutions, there are two additional hospitals in Florida included in its listing of ‘NCI Designated Cancer Centers.’ which the National Cancer Institute lists as meeting the criteria to be included as ‘clinical cancer centers,' specifically the Sylvester *Comprehensive Cancer Center in Miami and the cancer center at the University of Florida’s Shands Hospital in Gainesville. (*The use of the word ‘comprehensive’ in this case seems to be Sylvester’s choice and not the designation assigned to it by the NCI). 

It appears to me that the difference between these two ‘NCI Designated Cancer Center’ categories has to do with the type and level of research carried on there. As for excellent treatment of and care for cancer patients, there does not appear to be any difference between them. 

                                                    * * 

Despite the great number of physicians in the Palm Beach County area, some major northern hospitals (some of which are NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers themselves) are opening satellite offices here, sometimes staffed with local physicians and sometimes staffed by physicians from their northern facilities. Most of these northern institutions, however, have not yet built hospitals here or become directly affiliated with local hospitals. 

You might notice an increasing number of advertisements for Tampa General Hospital, about a three-hour drive and 200 miles away, on TV and in local newspapers. The efforts of this highly rated hospital, whose Palm Beach County efforts are partnered with Boston’s Massachusetts General Hospital, are in addition to New York’s Langone Medical Center. Hospital for Special Surgery, and Mt. Sinai Hospital all of which seem to recognize a vacuum in Palm Beach County that they hope to fill, despite the many competent physicians, including oncologists and surgeons, already practicing here.

Some of these physicians practice independently and many are affiliated with established institutions such as the Baptist Health group (locally, Boca Raton Regional, and Bethesda East and West Hospitals), Jupiter Medical Center and those affiliated with the Cleveland Clinic’s nearby Florida branches. The Cleveland Clinic has a full hospital in nearby Weston in Broward County, and is rumored to be planning on building one in Palm Beach County where it also has a satellite office.

Many of these institutions carry the NCI designation of being a comprehensive cancer center. But while it is clear that the leading cancer centers in the United States are the M.D. Anderson Hospital in Houston, Memorial Sloan Kettering in New York City, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, the Dana Farber Cancer Instituter in Boston, and Johns Hopkins University Hospital in Baltimore, as well as several in California, that does not mean that excellent cancer care is not available elsewhere, including in Florida and specifically in the Palm Beach County area. 

Perhaps the presence of the winter White House at Mar-a-Lago and Vanderbilt University’s planned graduate business school in West Palm Beach will result in the residents they bring here wanting to see an upgrading of local medical facilities at least to the level found in Washington and Nashville (home of Vanderbilt). 

Right now, the Palm Beach County residents are very fortunate in being relatively close to the NCI-designated ‘clinical cancer center’ at the Sylvester Cancer Center in Miami at the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine.  Excellent care and treatment are available there and it is an institution deserving of our support.  And it is about 140 miles closer to Palm Beach County than Tampa, site of the Moffitt Comprehensive Cancer Center (at the University of South Florida’s Morisani School of Medicine) or even Tampa General Hospital. 

(All of the institutions mentioned above fall into the category of ‘being not-for-profit’ while others may be parts of hospital chains which are publicly traded such as Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) or Tenet Healthcare. Local examples of such publicly traded hospitals are Delray Medical Center and JFK Hospital. While excellent care may be available in such hospitals, they usually are not connected with medical schools or involved in research.

Given the choice, I feel that one should always prefer a not-for-profit hospital over one that keeps an eye on the interests of its owners or shareholders.

Remember that decision-making regarding all medical issues should always include discussion with one’s primary caregiver. 

(Note: Above mention of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the government’s National Institutes of Health (NHI), may become obsolete in view of the president-elect’s choice of a believer in hoaxes and conspiracies as the cabinet member or official in charge of those agencies, appointments that will lead to the premature deaths of many Americans, among other serious inconveniences.) 

 JL 

                                                   * * * 

Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri 

Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them. 

There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting. 

Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com. 

Again, I urge you to forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it. JL * * *